Nikkor Z 20mm f/1.8S vs Sony 20mm f/1.8G

[armand]

Yes, the Sony appears overall to be the better lens.

I would assume that the chief designer of the 20mm is probably not their most talented designer.

Still, I have not seen any softness in corners at typical landscape apertures.

Cheers,
Bernard

For “landscape apertures” why not use the 14-30? What does the 20 F1.8 bring at apertures smaller than F4, because there’s plenty that’s not bringing?

[BernardLanguillier]

For “landscape apertures” why not use the 14-30? What does the 20 F1.8 bring at apertures smaller than F4, because there’s plenty that’s not bringing?

The 14-30mm f4 is an excellent choice for landscape.

Cheers,
Bernard

[scooby70]

I'm a Sony user still on an original A7 and recently bought the Sony 20mm f1.8. We're all isolating so all I can do is test and use the lens about the house and garden but so far all I can say is that this lens looks just about perfect to me. Performance throughout the frame from wide open seems outstanding. One criticism some seem to be making is that it's susceptible to flare but I can't say that I've found that yet.

I bought the lens with a few uses in mind and to be honest I'd have been happy if it had only equalled the old Sigma 20mm f1.8 I had for my Canon DSLR's but of course this new Sony lens is vastly better.

So, I now have these Sony lenses, 28-70mm f3.5-5.6, 20, 35, 55 and 85mm f1.8's. The 35, 55 and 85mm lenses all have weakness I can point at and nit pick but overall I think they're excellent and this latest 20mm even more so. I also have the Voigtlander 35mm f1.4, 40mm f1.2 and 50mm f2 pro lanthar. These modern lenses have pushed my film era primes out and I haven't used them for a while now but I don't know if I can bring myself to sell them.

PS.
When I did a decentering check at f1.8 I couldn't believe the performance of the 20mm f1.8. Performance throughout the frame is IMO incredible.