Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 review: APSC heaven!
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 06. 2024
- My in-depth review of the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 DC DN - the best zoom for APSC mirrorless?
Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 DC DN at B&H: bhpho.to/3G17zje // WEX UK: tidd.ly/3G38Kyw
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs
Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/camerala...
Gordon’s retro gear channel: / dinobytes
Equipment used for producing my videos
Sony A6400: amzn.to/3hul53c
Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk
Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp
Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo
Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY
Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE
Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF
MacBook Pro 13in (16GB / 512GB): amzn.to/3hrwMYD
00:00 - intro
01:57 - design and controls
03:36 - focus performance
04:26 - coverage vs 16-50
05:23 - distortion and lens correction
06:05 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 landscape quality
09:38 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 portrait quality
10:32 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 bokeh quality
11:28 - sunstars
11:37 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 macro quality
11:58 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 video quality
12:45 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 focus breathing
14:15 - Sigma 18-50 samples and verdict
Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases - Věda a technologie
My in-depth review of the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 DC DN - the best zoom for APSC mirrorless?
Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 DC DN at B&H: bhpho.to/3G17zje // WEX UK: tidd.ly/3G38Kyw
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs
Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop
Gordon’s retro gear channel: czcams.com/users/dinobytes
Equipment used for producing my videos
Sony A6400: amzn.to/3hul53c
Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk
Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp
Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo
Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY
Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE
Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF
MacBook Pro 13in (16GB / 512GB): amzn.to/3hrwMYD
00:00 - intro
01:57 - design and controls
03:36 - focus performance
04:26 - coverage vs 16-50
05:23 - distortion and lens correction
06:05 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 landscape quality
09:38 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 portrait quality
10:32 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 bokeh quality
11:28 - sunstars
11:37 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 macro quality
11:58 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 video quality
12:45 - Sigma 18-50 vs Sony 16-50 focus breathing
14:15 - Sigma 18-50 samples and verdict
Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
You got your starting point wrong. Where you need to compare this, is the sigma contemporary prime trio (16f14, 30f14, 56f56) vs this lens. That is the real challenge. Or at least compare it to Tamron and Sony equivalents. Comparing to kitlens is too easy, it gives nothing honestly, because ofcourse it is going to be better than kit lens.
@@eedesign878 I explained why I made my choice, so it's not wrong, in fact it's relevant to a larger number of people, it's just not what you wanted to see.
What do u think compared to the Original Kit 18-55mm Fuji? Still beast for me..but still your review shakes my opinion
@@farizs3769 if you have it, don't change
I went for the sigma due to size and price. I have learned that if the glass is too big, a6000 will sit in bag more than not.
Just another time Gordon proves himself as an awesome reviewer who knows to choose the right rival to compare with! You are the only one who have chosen to compare this lovely tiny sigma lens with the poor tinniest kit lens which I think is the most useful comparison for the majority of the people in the market of this lens. And the answer is if you can live with the corner softness or have no problem stopping down to f8 then enjoy your wider, lighter and cheaper kit lens which has stabilization also. But if you want the "heaven" both for your camera and your photography then do yourself a favor and buy this lovely tiny Sigma F2.8 zoom lens and enjoy the ride as a proud apsc camera owner!
Thank-you!
Ooooh yes! Gonna get this for my Leica CL! Been waiting for a good, small, fast crop sensor zoom like this.
Dear Gordon,
thank you for this amazing review!
I have just subscribed and I also own your book - it was offered to me by my BFF and it is the best photography book I have ever read, I have loved each and every page, picture and description!
I own the famous 16-50 kit as well as a Sigma 56mm f1.4, a Samyang 75mm f1.8 and the 18-105G.
I have watched your review with deep attention. I was really tempted to buy the Sigma 18-50 as an upgrade for my 16-50. In conclusion, I think the 16-50 + Sigma 56mm prime is a better choice!
For landscape photography it is not a problem for me to go to f8 with the 16-50 and I am glad it matches somehow the Sigma in the centre of the picture. I will always use some light tripod or flat surface if needed, I do not need the extra speed or bokeh for landscape.
Same for the casual portrait during family vacation on a sunny day, 50mm f8 is ok to get nice details in the eyes in spite of lacking a smooth bokeh. If I need the best bokeh, I would bring the extra light 56mm or 75mm prime with me.
The real value of the 16-50 in my opinion is the optical steady shot, your comparison in the handheld video test is incredible.
In conclusion, I am not ditching the 16-50 kit, it is so flexible and versatile for my use cases!
I feel like this lens was made for the a6600 and its built in stabilization. I may have to pick one of these up to use for video indoors and travel photography.
Thanks for the review, pure quality as usual
You're welcome!
Hyped for the vs Tamron vs Sony review you mentioned!
Great review...will get that book.... I learn a lot from Gordon.... top reviewer for sure!
Thanks!
Thanks for the great review!
So effectively you could buy this zoom and the sigma trio of primes for the same price as the Sony G zoom.
Yeah, pretty much, but if I had the primes, I wouldn't bother with the zoom.
@@cameralabs
Unless you want one lens on a hike. Or a quick wedding lens without stopping and changing unwieldy lenses. I have a dozen primes but a standard zoom just makes so much sense.
Meanwhile one can find the Sony 2.8/16-55mm G lens ca 950 € new or 600 € used. That's a different proposition and it really is a 'bag of primes'.. But I might want the Sigma too just for its tininess..
Your math doesn't work out. The trio for Sony E, when bought separately or as a bundle, is currently $1,117.00 from B&H. The Sony E 2.8/16-55 G is only $181 more expensive, at $1,298. (Unless you're talking about the older 2.8 trio?)
@@keystonebrotherb Can confirm, I have the 1.4 trio and they each have their own uses, but I was tired of switching lenses during times I really shouldn't have been. Definitely not selling the primes, as they still have their purpose. Especially that 56mm, could never get rid of that beast...
Thanks for this review. This year I got an a6600 to replace my good old a6000, and am rediscovering the fun of APS-C. I'm tempted by this lens .The older I get the less I want to tote around with me - and I've long since learned that when I'm feet-on-the-ground exploring an interesting place either near home or far away, I do not want to be changing lenses - just no. There are some nice lens options for APS-C lately - and the light weight of this one is a big plus in my calculations. Hmm. OTOH I have the Fuji X100V for low light shooting with a focal length right in the middle of this lens's range. (Let's don't talk about the A7R3 and its.nice collection of Tamron 2.8 zooms that's been sitting at home neglected while I'm out and about with the a6600 and the X100V. Let it be our little secret . . . ) So despite temptation, I'll probably flirt with this one but save my money for something else. Your reviews are so helpful!
Thanks! It's a great combo with the A6600 - I wish I had the IBIS on my A6400...
I know how you feel. once i got my Sony a6000 and a6500 bodies i don't shoot with my canon dslrs any more. Love the small but powerful packages. Have two first Place images taken with my small Sony APS-C cameras. Since you have IBIS in your a6600 this lens would be great and you don't have to worry about it not having oss/is on the lens. It's best if you have both lens and camera IS/OSS to work together but as long as you have one have it is great.
@@cameralabs wanna buy my a6500 with IBIS ? ;P
Didn't have any reason to buy this lens in the first place for Fuji, but recently was doing some casual outdoors macro photography with the X100V, which was really nice except couldn't get close enough to many subjects. I researched the Fuji Macro Extenders, but those are only useful for Macro and seems can't take normal photos, and I don't want to change lenses while hiking. The Fuji Macro lenses are very expensive primes that will seldom be used. Now this Sigma seems like a really cost effective, versatile and light lens for these purposes.
Plus, it's looks like a very good carry around replacement for 5 small primes (i.e. XF16 F2.8, XF23 F2, XF27F2, XF35F2 and XF50F2) while loosing only 1 stop of light. Definitely will consider when it comes out given these considerations.
Good review. Many Thanks. Will buy the SIgma for my Leica CL.
very helpful comparison, thanks for this !👌
Glad you liked it!
thank you for the informative review
I love your videos, really good explanation.
Thanks!
Great review Gordon. Love the unique way of demonstrating corner sharpness ie: rotating the image to fit the corner. I have your book. I have learnt so much from it - cheers. I am / maybe in the market for the Sony 18-135mm (longer reach & 0SS) however now going to hang fire to see if some comparisons come out between the Sony & Sigma 18-50mm. I guess the 18-135 is well better than the Sony 16-50mm for general sharpness. As for comparing this new lens to the famous trio. I have the poor mans version (or as close as) - Samyang 12 F.2, Kamlan 28mm F1.4 & Kamlan 50mm F1.1. Love them to bits, but there are times when a one lens solution is better suited. Thus use a smaller bag and shaving about 900gms from the equation can't be bad either.✊
I have a 18-135 for sale if you're still interested. practically brand new!
@@akayy12 Thanks Austin. I have just received one today from Amazon on a Black friday deal. Thanks for asking all the same.
some of the best content on youtube. thanks!
You're welcome!
Thanks. Wondering how this would look on my a7IV when shooting 4K60. It shoots in Super 35 mode, so I was thinking I might as well look for an APS-C lens. Smaller, lighter and cheaper.
great video, I would love to start to see some comparison now versus other zoom lenses; in fact, even though I know this lens to be more of a wide zoom it would be great to see a video against the TAMRON 11-20MM F/2.8. Thanks and keep up the great work.
I have the 11-20mm Tamron but I find the 18-50mm Sigma o be more of an all around lens.
A 28-75mm F4 equivalent for aps-c not bad! Hope it comes out for X mount
Great review - as usual.
Thanks! Have you seen my video about the new 10-18?
I'm excited for the XF mount! They're gonna make a better 18-35/50-100 too.
I was about to ask if there is any adapter for Fuji X Mount for this lens ? 🤷🏻♂️ Sigma is going to make new lenses for Fuji as well ?
We don't have guaranteed news about a new mirrorless 18-35 and 50-100 right?
@@professionalpotato4764 There are 0 rumors or any hints that Sigma is even interested to release 18-35 and/or 50-100 for mirrorless APS-C.
Great review, thanks.
You're welcome!
Great review and comparison! The image stabilization was a great addition, thanks!
Finally, great constant max aperture aps c with great price!
I had the earlier EF-S version of this focal length for DSLRs, and swore by it. If I was still investing in that arena, I’d be very intrigued by this release.
I have that EF-S 17-50 f2.8 lens as well and use my metabones smart iv adapter to mount it on my Sony bodies.
Great value! 😊
Great review I’m of to prauge next month and might buy this for my a6400 and just take sigma 16m f1/4 for night time
That'd be a nice combo, although sadly none of it stabilised.
@@cameralabs maybe Sony 50m as well but will be taking tripod so hopefully not to bad
Excellent Review ! You should have named the video as "Comparison between the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 & Sony 16-50mm Kit lens"
My thought process prior to a small family gathering. Should I bring the Sigma 16 which will allow me to capture the whole family? Well no that is a fixed focal lens so doesn't offer a closeup which might not be possible. I need a little more reach. Plus with a wide angle if I get too close it will distort faces. How about the Sony 35 f/1.8? Nice but I'd have to switch lenses for wide angle shots. Then the 18-50 2.8 might be best. It has a good focal range covering my wide angle needs as well as a bit of reach, and it's good for low light. Is it sharp enough; well yes for sure.
I end up making this decision over and over. It seems like the Sigma 18-50 is going to be on my camera at least 80% of the time.
After watching the video I don’t see this gain much traction in X-mount. But I do agree It would do really well on Nikon, Canon and Sony mirrorless.
The reason being the XF 18-55mm F2.8-4
It’s probably smaller judging by the footage. It has OIS but lacks a single stop at the long end.
Optical performance seems very similar with the same barrel distortion flaw at 18mm.
But every Fuji shooter that wants such a lens had it coupled in a bundle.
Yeah. I have it, and the only major problem I have with it is that 18 feels too tight about 5% of the time, even though a constant F/2.8 would be nice. I'd still pick it over the other zooms Fuji makes though.
This video also vindicated my decision to buy the Fujifilm X-T30 over the Sony a6400 back in June 2019, just for the kit lens quality, as I knew I wouldn't be able to afford another lens for quite some time. More than 2 years later, it is the only lens I own
@@_shreyash_anand For me it goes back further but the same outcome.
I bought the X-E2 with the 18-55 instead of the A6000 just because of the lens. Yet completely aware that for what i used the fuji The Sony body would've been better.
Because i'd photograph sports as well as family shots photo shoots and holidays.
In sports the X-E2 was hit and miss. More miss then hit actually. The autofocus even with the X-T10 AF upgrade it got. was iffy in the best of days. Useless in other days.
In the end still the right call due to the lenses. And the analog button layout. Which in my opinion makes studio shooting so much more intuitive.
Want more ambient light? dial up the shutterspeed. Want more strobe? just rotate the aperture.
Upgraded it to an X-T20 and recently an X-T3. The X-T20 upgrade ironically made the biggest difference in the real world.
Because despite being affordable and small it can do everything you'd ever need. I still have it as back-up. But the shuttercount has become quiet substantial. The X-E2 has been converted to IR. Which honestly is the easiest camera to convert.
A bit of background... I shot for many years with Canon crop sensor cameras (from the 30D to the 7D2) and the two lenses that I used for travel with a pair of Canon cameras were the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and the 70-200mm f/4L IS. I was quite pleased with this combination and carried it all over the world. However, I now shoot Sony crop cameras and I have grown old (82 at my last birthday) and have had back and knee surgeries.
I will be traveling to Washington DC on an Honor Flight for military veterans. The trip will include a lot of walking and standing around. I needed a lightweight lens for my Sony A6600 that will provide decent imagery and a decent focal range and I have decided to order a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8. The A6600 with Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 lens weighs 793 grams or 1.74 pounds while my Canon 7D with 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens weighs a whopping 322 grams or 3.22 pounds - almost twice the weight of the Sony combination.
The Sigma is quite close to the focal range of the Canon 17-55mm (one mm longer at the wide end and five mm shorter at the long end). The Sigma doesn't have any image stabilization but, my A6600 has IBIS. Both the Sigma and Canon have a constant f/2.8 aperture which is fine for my needs.
I am looking forward to receiving the lens soon and testing it out before I travel to Washington.
I think you've made a solid choice. Hope your trip goes well.
@@cameralabs I have been shooting with the Sigma 18-50mm for a few weeks now and I love it. The image quality is great and it is hard to believe that image quality comes from such a small and lightweight lens.
I wish however, that Sony/Sigma/Tamron would come out with a relatively short focal range zoom lens (like a 100-150mm) with a constant f/4 for APSC cameras. This would be lightweight and a nice combination to carry with the Sigma 18-50mm. I have both the Sony 70-350mm but would trade the extra focal range for a constant f/4 aperture. I also have the Sony 70-200mm f/4 lens but would trade the extra focal range and full-frame capability for a much lighter APSC tele zoom lens.
I am torn between this and the Tamron 17-70mm. I have the sigma 16mm 1.4 already. I mainly do live streaming and wants to incorporate the versatility of Zoom lenses. Tamron has 20mm longer range advantage compared to Sigma.Please advise.
Thanks !
If sigma makes this lens for Fuji x mount,it would be awesome!
Compare the size and weight of Fuji 16-55 2.8,this one blows it out of the water!
Yes, please let us fuji user happy
PLEASE MAKE AN EF-M VERSION EVEN IF THEY DON'T HAVE IS
Great review Gordon. Definitely on my watch list. I mainly shoot with my sigma primes but when i want qm1 lens only this would be great. Since I have a a65000 with IBIS the lack of OSS / IS won't be an issue (Only would on a6000 and NEX7) and OSS would make it more expensive and heavier and larger in size so it's always a trade off. Sigma is the best for any Sony user.
Will this sigma 18-50 on my a6100 be better than the latest iPhone camera?
THIS is beautiful 😍
God I wish we could get a full frame version of this. It would be glorious.
well there is one - tamron 28-75
You will have to buy a big beefy full frame lens.
@@pow9606 Thank you captain obvious.
Say what you want about that kit 16-50, it's better than older DSLR kit lenses. Or at least, the example that came with my NEX-6 was really good. It's impressive how quickly it focuses, given it was introduced before on-sensor phase detect cameras had been released.
Thanks for showing the Sigma with distortion corrections turned off. the Sony 16-55mm 2.8G definitely also has some distortion and vignetting on the 16mm end, but you're definitely getting a bokeh and LoCA advantage with the extra cost.
I woudn't say that compared to Canon and Nikon 18-55mm lenses of a decade ago as I've shot them side-by-side. The super compact 16-50 Sony is just smeary in corners and everything but the plane of focus. I just use it on a gimbal on a monopod when weight is the most important thing.
@@rsmith02 Hmm, maybe I just a particularly good copy? The thing that almost always catches my eye about the Canon 18-55 is the massive color fringing. To me, that stands out more than lack of sharpness, when viewing photos at normal size. The Nikon isn't nearly as bad as the Canon, iirc, but I haven't seen as much from it so I can't compare as well.
That’s a beautiful mural of Sean Lock and Charlie Watts by Hugh Whitaker, nice shot, just looked it up. RIP.
As for the lens, I’m personally quite excited for the L mount version, as it makes a welcome alternative to the Leica 18-56mm and seems a lovely option to pair with a TL2, for instance.
Thanks and well-spotted. There's a third portrait of Keith Flint in the series, but my composition can normally get one or two of them at a time!
Just found this useful review Gordon - is there any reason you never posted the sample photos on your website review?
Ah I think that's a problem with my website gallery generator from a few years ago. They're all available on my Flickr account
Hi Gordon, newbie here looking to upgrade the kit lens. I'm tossing up between the Tamron and the sigma and was wondering if stabilisation makes that much of a difference on the a6400?
Planning to run and gun and video so I'm guessing I should take the extra weight on the Tamron?
Depends if the size and weight of the Tamron makes up for it. You'll get way better stabilisation from a small gimbal..
Thanks
Thanks, much appreciated!
Can't wait for this one for the EF-M!
Agreed. This would be the quality standard zoom lens that I've been begging for for years on the EF-M platform. While the EF-M 15-45mm is just about acceptable in good light and if you're lucky with a good copy, it really didn't do the platform justice!
It could really transform EF-M's usefulness, but I fear it won't happen.
@@cameralabs I fear you may be correct. When even Canon themselves are not developing EF-M any further, I can't see any reason why any third party would dedicate a lens to the mount.
@@hyttennis it's such a shame if they don't as I'm sure it would become the best general-zoom for EFM.
@@cameralabs I think it would be a huge seller on EF-M, considering there is nothing else like it for that system. Seems like it would be worth the investment even if Sigma doesn't trust the long-term future of the mount. Maybe it will happen eventually.
At last a proper kit lens, quality&pricewise, for the aps-c line of Sony cameras.
Thanks for the great informative video. Does the active steady shot in zv-e10 only work with an OSS lens or it's unrelated?
It's unrelated and will work on any lens
@@cameralabs Thank you.
Sigma vs tamron 17 70 covering whether image stabilization makes. Difference and to what extent ! ( on a non ibis body plss )
TOO GOOD VIDEO SIR
I hope this lens will come to Fuji X soon and that you will make a comparison video with the Fuji XF 18-55 f/2.8-4, just like you did here with the Sony 16-50. This Sigma could be a great alternative to the XF 18-55, especially for IBIS cameras like the X-S10.
Would be awesome to get this on Fuji! Edit: nvm, I take it back. I assumed that it has image stabilization.
It surely would since the the latest Fujis already have IBIS.
It would be nice to see ANY lenses for Fuji from Sigma or Tamron. But unless something has change, Fuji is not interested.
I see a new Gordon video, I click.
Thanks!
I want to pair this with my zfc but who knows when : /
To be completely honest, looking at the sample photos, I'm not convinced this justifies the upgrade. The only plus I see is a bit more light, and corner sharpness. But you get larger lens without OS. I don't know man, can't say for certain that the quest gor a new kit lens is over
Yes the lack of IS is a problem
Feel the same, needs to be 16mm at the wide end to get me interested, I use the kit zoom on the A5100 for a truly pocketable close quarter street cam at 16mm. Served me well for years. People fixate too much on corner sharpness when subject matter should be your main concern.
It was made for those with the a6500 and a6600 which had IBIS. those who want/ need a constant f2.8 lens are advanced amateurs and would most likely have the top of the line Sony APSC bodies like the a6500/a66600 :(
The more i think about such a fast "universal zoom" and see the prices, the more i find myself just staying at 16-35 2.8 adapted EF, a RF 50mm 1.8 prime and 70-200 2.8 once more adapted EF.
Hi Gordon, between this and the old Zeiss 16-70 f4, both have similar size and weight and the Zeiss more expensive, which one would you prefer?
I've tested the old Zeiss and was never impressed for the price. I really wanted it to perform better but it always disappointed me. Maybe I had bad copies, but if not, i'd go for thjs Sigma. It also has the benefit of much newer lens manufacturing and materials.
I was all hyped up. Until: "It has no IBIS..." which absolutely kills it for use on my A6300. Feels like I´m stuck with the 16-50mm for ages!
it is frustrating, but I used it on my A6400 which isn't stabilised either...
@@cameralabs Is it ok on the A6400, A6300 etc?
@@Buhacaka all the tests I show you were on my A6400, and yes, I missed IS for video and some stills, but it is what it is.
That's a really valid point. I'm still rocking an A6000 until I go for either A6600 or something newer (come on Sony). I think as long as you use a shutter speed to match the focal length or x 1.5 in the case of APS-C then shouldn't be an issue for photos. 👍
Sigma primes are my best friends and should be yours too
With a6400+sigma 18-50f2.8 and low light, how many iso is it make noise
Please make a Fuji X Mount 😣
I guess it’s the perfect lense for my 6600 I’m combination with the ronin sc 😍
I've the 18-70 Tammy and I like it a lot. I've the 6600 too like you.
I have the sigma trio but absolutely hate swapping out lenses for shoots. Should I sell the trio and buy this? I know I’ll be dealing a with a tad different focal ranges, but in your opinion will there be any loss of quality for photos?
I haven't compared them side by side, but yes I would say the primes should be a little better in quality, plus of course two stops brighter too. I'd personally prefer the primes, but if you prefer the convenience of a zoom, go for it!
There will be a loss of quality when compared to the primes, definitely.. but whether or not the difference is big enough to you depends on what kind of shooting you normally do.
If you don’t normally shoot in lowlight (handheld), landscapes, interiors, or architecture, I’d say the difference won’t be that obvious. Of course, this is a general statement at best, because the zoom at 50mm f2.8 won’t ever yield the same look as the 56mm at f1.4..
Do you think this lens can perform as well as the sigma 56mm 1.4 f for portraits? at the 50mm?
It's two stops slower, so there'll be much less blur if that's important to you. And din't you ask a similar question earlier that i've already replied to?
would be nice to compare field of view of this at 18mm vs tamron's 17-70 at 17mm. dpr tv has shown the sony 16-55 is noticeably wider at 16 than the tamron at 17 (duh).
Yes, especially when the numbers don't always deliver what you'd expect. It's also important to say whether lens corrections are on or not as they will crop the image.
I wait and wait before I purchase a lens hoping aps-c lenses are released but I always miss the mark by a couple of months. I purchased the Tamron 17-70 f2.8 a few months ago, I love the lens but I would have loved this lighter and smaller lens instead. The Tamron lets me shoot as slow as 1/4 of a second. The VC is unbelievably good. I have compared it to my other lenses and none of them come close to it. I have the Sony the e 50mm f/1.8, 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 and the 70-350 f/4.5-6.3 all of which are great lenses but their stabilization leaves something to be desired. Still, given the weight and size of the Sigma, I think I might just get it. I would make for a great fast video setup with my A6400 and Zhiyun Weebill Lab gimbal.
So the stabilization of the Tamron works really well? I'm struggling with that lens or this sigma. I use the a6400 and I'm used to lenses without stabilization, (i use mainly primes), but if it makes a big difference, I'm leaning toward the Tamron.
@@RockWILK I purchased the Sigma and I use it on my Gimbal with the a6400 for video recording. It allows me to use the follow focus motor for zooming. I was not able to do that with the Tamron because the zoom ring is too stiff and the follow focus teeth would skip. I am keeping them both. If you don’t need to shoot hand held at low speeds, you will be fine with the Sigma. I can manage 1/80 ss on the sigma zoomed all the way in, 1/15 if I am leaning on something and use the view finder.
@@osvaldoverduzco3900 ahh… thanks so much for the reply. I’m a filmmaker, I don’t really do any still photography, and I use a Weebill S, so I think the Tamron would be fine for me, but I really like the idea of this being so small and light. I’m always shooting at one 1/50, 24 fps, so I just have to really think about it. :-) Thanks so much.
@@osvaldoverduzco3900 Hi, I have A6300 , is it take Sigma 1850 + Zhiyun Gimbal for video shooting or just take Tamron 1770? I want extra 20mm focal length to shoot , But it out of budget too expensive for me😕 Hard to decision to make
I have used both the 18-50 with Weebill Lab and 17-70 hand held but I prefer the 18-50 and Weebill Lab combo for longer shoots that require that I move around such as my son’s football games.
We need this for the M50.
Definitely
Hi! I believe you took the pictures with the Sony a6400. Did you miss the stabilization? Did you took the pictures handheld or with a tripod? Thanks.
The sample images were all handheld. The test shots were on a tripod. Yes I'd have preferred IS, but I still liked the size and weight.
@@cameralabs Thank you very much for your fast reply. I’m in doubt between this lens and the Tamron 17-70mm… My Sony doesn’t have ibis, but the size of the Sigma is perfect to pair with it…
@@americosequeira8670 that's the thing! The Tamron has it all, but for me it's too big for the smaller APSC bodies like the A6400.
@@cameralabs I bought the Sony ZV e10, that as many similarities, from what I saw, to the A6400, including being on the small side. From your experience with the lens, do you think that it's perfectly capable of taking nice, steady, sharp handheld photos? Thanks again!
@@americosequeira8670 it is if you can hold it steady, or use a sufficiently fast shutter speed.
I still hope there will be an successor to the 18-35mm F1.8 because (except for focal range and size), it is superior to even the Sony G 16-55mm F2.8
I thought maybe the target group for such a lense is missing, because people who invest >1000$ most likelly use full-frame anyway, but the Sony G 16-55 shows that there seem to be enough customers who want high quality glass for APS-C
The 18-50mm F2.8 is a very nice addition, but a smaller/lighter 18-35mm F1.8 is still what i want
1.8 is a very big difference, I highly doubt that will ever be that compact
Thanks Gordon!!
I think it makes a lot of sense to compare the kit lens with this Sigma. How I wish the Sigma was 16mm though ☹️
I’m actually willing to forego a lot of range at the long end to gain that 2mm at the wide end. Something like a 16-35mm f2.8, but with slightly better image quality. A bit of increase in weight and girth is fine too.
Is this lens fully compatible with a Sony A6500 for photography as well as video?
yes
13:21 - I love that Gordon's reviews are very thoro... SQUIRREL!
Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 aps-c heaven? Almost! Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 VC aps-c heaven? Yes!
The Tamron is a great spec, but it's too large and heavy for me, on that size camera.
This baby would easily replace my aging but still amazing, albeit heavy 17-50 2.8.
I wonder how image quality compares.
I hope sigma uses this small design to do a lens with even longer range, i.e. a rival to sony f4 18-105mm. I want a truly universal carry around zoom, but the sony is just too large for that.
tamrong 18-300
finally with rf mount
Yes, it's good news, isn't it?
@cameralabs yes, can't waiting
There is rumor canon will release an aspc vlog machine with IBIS
There is a tamron 17-70mm f2.8 which has same aperture and more range with OSS as well so why do you think this lens would be the best if there is the same one that gives you more versatility! I just wanna hear ur opinion because im already trading my lens to get that tamron so plz lmk it its worth or not getting it.
Thank you🙏
Have you watched the video?
@@cameralabs yeah it was mostly all about comparing the sigma to Sony, but would u ever recommend me getting the tamron 17-70mm f2.8? It has more reach, low aperture and OSS and its price is fair for me so i wanna hear ur opinion 🤷🏼♂️
@@shathan.10 I think it boils down to size and weight. I love the range and OSS of the Tamron, but I wouldn't want to carry it around on an APSC body. I prefer smaller lenses for that system, but it's a personal choice. if size and weight isn't an issue and you have a body without IBIS, then get the Tamron.
I still feel tamron is worth the extra money for the extra focal length and stabilisation. What do you think?
It's worth the money but is it worth the size and especially the weight?
I returned the Tamron because it’s huge! Kept the Sony 18-135 for travel, but this might be a great replacement with the constant aperture. How is the vignetting at 18mm? Seems like loose a mm on the 18-135 at 18.
@@jasons8104 there is some darkening, but not too bad and easily corrected if desired.
I’ve never found any kit-zoom disappointing. No offence, but I think it’s just a habit among reviewers to put them down. Maybe it started because not every reviewer is independent, or even if they’re not paid by the manufacturers, some of them represent a shop that has a clear financial interest in convincing people to buy an “upgrade”. And along the way a bit of snobbery was added to the brew until it became like a must to put down kit lenses. Mostly it no longer makes me frown, but only smile. It goes without saying that most of the time you get what you pay for, but I personally think you nearly always get the best bang for the buck with the kit lens. I own and love Sigma’s wonderful 18-35 F1.8 Art, but when there’s plenty of light, I nearly always prefer my Canon 18-55 F3.5-5.6 IS STM, because of its greater zoom range and lighter weight, and because in good light the image quality is absolutely fine.
By the way It’s very interesting to see the differences between your review and Christopher Frost’s. He seems to be much less impressed by the corner sharpness below F11.
Kit zooms do of course vary hugely. I find the Micro Four Thirds ones can be really good, but Sony's 16-50 can be a horror and this is aimed as a replacement for it really. Either way I would always recommend buying a camera with the kit zoom, so you have a low-cost spare and or something to help resell the camera later.
The Sony is uniquely bad (I have some respect for the Canon and Nikon DSLR kit lenses after editing photos taken with them). I don't use it with my a6600- except on a gimbal on a monopod.
So, what would you choose if you had to choose between this Sigma and Tamron 17-70?
The Tamron has the longest range and IS BUT is too big for me on the small bodies. SO I'd probably go Sigma unless I really wanted IS.
I need FUJI X Mount version.
We all do!
No OSS is a bummer !
Sigma needs to make one for nikon z50
After watching this i wanna go buy kit lens... difference is not so big, especially at 50mm which is most important to me, and kit lens is so small and cute ;D
Turning up at a professional shoot with the kit lens is an image killer. Looks like you're having a laugh actually. And 2 extra stops of light at 50mm is huge! Means the iso can be kept low, and of course there's the lovely bokeh everybody loves.
What is the barrel distortion like Gordon?
I talk about distortion in the review.
@@cameralabs I have notice these compact mirrorless lenses have horrendous distortion and rely on lens correction. A pretty big compromise. I consider it a design flaw. Others may disagree.
Basically they are building poor optics to save weight and size.
@@photocraigo9474 no, they can build distortion-free lenses, but they're way bigger, heavier and more expensive. Most companies offer both types so you get to choose. For me the important thing is the end result, I'm finding myself caring less about how a lens gets there so long as the result meets my expectations.
@@cameralabs Yes, the compact ones have horrendous distortion and it is good that reviewers like yourself point this out. The average punter would have no idea. Maybe that is not a bad thing but the lens manufacturers should not get a free pass to build inferior optics.
@@photocraigo9474 To me, as long as the distortion doesn’t affect the end result too negatively, I’d welcome it over having a bigger heavier lens. The sigma 56mm, for example, has quite strong distortions. After correction is applied the edges of the frame is sharp and very usable to me.
I do think however, that this particular sigma zoom seems to lean too much to the side of weight/ size saving that the balance compared to image quality is a bit off. It’s priced accordingly, though..
does this lens have any stabilization on it ?
Have you watched the video?
@@cameralabs To be honest I watched specific chapters based on your timeline, not all the video
is it better to sell sigma 30 1.4 to buy this zoom lens?
depends which one you prefer!
needs to be at least 16 wide.
There needs to be apsc equivalent of olympus 8-25
That would be an 11-35mm F4 or F4.5 ish.
The closest thing we have is the Fujinon 10-24mm F4.
But it's rather stellar UW performance drops a bit beyond 18mm.
So yeah for a 1 lens walk arround solution there isn't anything quiet like it.
So the only real alternative is a A7 with a 16-35mm F4.
Since you can always crop in to 50mm equiv. on a fullframe sensor without losing in terms of image quality compared to the Olympus.
Obviously this is a heavier and more expensive set-up.
After all these years, there is finally some move..SQUIRREL! (@13:28)...sorry, easily distracted. After so many years, there's finally options for Sony APS-C. But I still think the whole system is not competitive with only the top of the line camera body offering stabilization and almost all good lenses in the system being non-stabilized. You can get full-frame IBIS bodies for less than the A6600, at least in Germany.
Yes, the A6600 needs to be cheaper. Or the A7 needs to be more expensive!
Hey Gordon, thanks for the review - im trying to decide between two combos: 1. Sigma 56mm 1.4 + Sony 35mm 1.8 vs 2. Sigma 56mm 1.4 + Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 - which one do you think makes the most practical and versatile sense?
Weeeeell the zoom option gives you more flexibility BUT I find primes more inspirational
Sigma 56mm 1.4 + Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 + Sigma 16mm f1.4
For me this 3 is the best combo.
Would like to see this on the Canon M mount. Please sigma 🙏🙏
Don't we all!
is this compatible to EOS APS-C?
no
I think I'd prefer THIS tiny lens to replace my 15-45mm f3.5-5.6 canon lens 😭🙏🏽 ❤️ hopefully 💯
Exactly
Canon EF-M please!!!!
Tamron is still my choice
I carry my zv e10 and a6000 in my pocket while I'm using 16-50... So this lens is definetely not for me :))
I have different lenses such as sigma 30mm, sony 55 210, Sony 50 oss... But as for me, in day light, I don't need wide aperture zoom lens. Anyway, thanks to Sigma for this lens...
Bigger pockets perhaps?
@@cameralabs :))) Your sharpness test is amazing... I'm watching still... This is a good lens, who is looking for sharpness. I like to shoot mostly close objects and portraits... I still don't need this :))
If I have bigger pockets, I'd carry a trigger and a speedlight in it, rather than bigger lenses :)))
Less than 300gms?!! Wow!
im confused what about the 18-35 f1:8?
That's for dslr's and is quite hefty.
Brother please tell me it is better than sony Zeiss 16 70 reply soon brother I have Sony Zeiss 16 70
I think it is, but maybe I saw bad copies of the zeiss