Great review. This adds so much value to the APS-C line. If they complete the trinity it'd be crazy carrying the entire set in a small lens bag. Pair with the 16 and 56 1.4 and it'd cover pretty much every need. Thank you Sigma!
Outstanding images and review. Always a pleasure. I was excited to replace my a6400 kit lens with this when it was announced but I'm really not sure whether it's worth it without image stabilization. :/
@@DustinAbbottTWI so you would recommend it for taking photos of / documenting for e.g. video production and also when not photoshooting use as streaming lens in studio?
I think if you really want to do videos, you would need a gimbal anyaway. IBIS or built in OS in lens is not enough for professional videos, it is more helpful to eliminate handshaking only.
This lens will fly on a crane m2 gimbal! I was in the mark of a a good 23-24 prime lens and I feel so spoiled with this lens! 24mm result is fantastic and not shy from a prime! Also at 18 and more importantly 50 it is so acceptable....What else do we want? A great tiny lens to match the tiny size of apsc bodies. This will be easily the sigma's best seller lens in a couple of years.
just got one in a $550 bundle. I wish it had oss but i really liked the compactness. I have accepted that if it is not compact, my a6000 will just sit more than not. I really like the size, it is perfect.
Sigma explained their choice to leave out os in their release video. They prioritized small size and os would have worked against that goal. I wonder if all that correction impacts the quality of the image corners. A nice review and amazing how early you got it so you could time the review with the official announcement.
@@Zunidrap How can it be an excuse? It is reality. You add os and you increase the size and weight of a lens. Since they want to minimize size and weight, dropping os is only logical. They have certainly calculated the positive implications for sales vs. the negative. I think it will do just fine. Lots of folks want small, light, fast, and relatively inexpensive.
@@lsaideOK It's an excuse for the fact they can't do a compact image stabilization solution. Have you seen how tiny and light the kit zoom lens is? Yeah, Sony managed to squeeze OSS in there. It's possible.
@@Zunidrap Sigma is not making any excuses. They made a design choice. Pretty simple. I have no money in the game but think the lens will sell quite well. If you want a stabilized lens of similar quality and range get the Tamron or Sony. It's a free market. Just not so free to jump to one of those models.
Another typically thorough review of a lens that will have major market appeal given the very, very large number of Sony a6series bodies in the real world. A lens that has very broad appeal. Lack of image stabilisation is not an issue for me as I rarely shoot video. Have already ordered this lens. Now have a 6400, was content with my a6000, still have it, however the IAF on the 6400 is just soooh useful. Sony really owe Sigma a huge vote of thanks in, some years' ago, and even now, filling in the gaps in Sony's very limited native glass. I don't pixel peep, or pore over MTF graphs and this is all the lens I need + my Sigma trio- the 56 1.4 is just superb. I trust that you and your family enjoy the Festive Season and that 2022 is less challenging ,on many fronts, than this year.
Hi Dustin...thank you so much for taking the time to answer all of these and other questions. You are really the only reviewer that I have confidence in...! Quick question about image quality of this lens vs the Sony 18-135 and the Tamron 17-70. I am a full frame user but relay upon my A6000 for travel and more casual photos.
I got the Tamron 18-70 mainly on the strength of your excellent review and i have been very pleased with it -indeed and still am. HOWEVER i quite agree that it is a heavy lump and since i do a lot of hiking and only sometimes take a monopod think i will purchase this lens as well for travelling or, as you say, as a 'pick up' combination on my A6400. I should say that i already have and use the 'magic Sigma 3' but thats just too many to pack on many trips!
Its very interesting how sigma is now designing with mirrorless and form factor in mind. Also the compact size is perhaps also in line with their FP/L camera line wherein one could use the lens in super 35 just as with the higher res sony FF cameras which give a good aps-c mode - so it also becomes a very compact video lens. And with the new a7iv in crop mode one has such a compact lens for 4k 60 with ibis & extra software stabilization. Also closer MFD is not meant to give a macro like resolution but can bring out more texture. So in such a minimal package a lot of density and versatility! And as usual a highly nuanced multi dimensional review
Nice review, like the unabashed Ontario setting. I think Dustin said it at the very beginning... Where was this lens 5-7 years ago? I have the Sony 16-55 (which costs $1100US in Canada). It's twice the price but it is a fantastic lens in everything it does and includes that value extra few millimentres at the wide end. The Sigma is a compelling lens, a small, f2.8. It's nice for new E-mount users who have the choice. Keep us the good work Dustin. Do you think a 50-135 f2.8 is next - that would break some truly new ground!
So glad I found your channel! The sheer amount of information and attention to detail included in your reviews are very impressive. Thank you for all your hard work. I'm migrating from Nikon (anyone remember Nikon?) and trying to decide between the Fuji and Sony APS-C ecosystems. For camera bodies, I'm thinking of The Fuji XT-3 vs Sony a6400. For lenses, I'm trying to decide between the Fuji Fujinon XF 16-55mm f/ 2.8 R LM WR or the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN. I'll be shooting mostly product photography and fashion indoors. The XT-3 has superior video capabilities but the Sony has better auto focus/eye detect, so it's pretty even for the bodies. I'll only have the budget for one lens, so that is going to be the major deciding factor for me. Which lens do you think is superior?
If compactness is a priority to you, then the Sony/Sigma combination is an easy win. I do like the XF 16-55mm, and it gives you a little more flexibility in focal length, though your Fuji package would cost you about 50% more. I would personally probably go with the Sony package and use that extra money to add another lens to augment your work, or perhaps move up to the a6600 and get stabilization in the body along with the Sigma. Another option (if you go Sony), is to get the Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 instead, as it has a bigger zoom range along with lens stabilization. That would allow you to stick with the a6400
Im so glad I clicked on this review. It was really good and helpful and you even inclduded astro photogrpahy samples ! May I ask which bortle ratio you had were you shot the picture ?
The distortion is corrected automatically, when "lens compensation" is put to "auto" in camera menue. Also works with RAW files, no need to do the correction in post process!
@@DustinAbbottTWI That's what I wanted to say ;-). Maybe there is a misunderstandig, Capture One Pro has no lens profile yet for the SIGMA 18-50mm 2,8, but automatically correccts the distortion when importing the RAW files, so no need to do any settings in C1. However distortion in the camera viewer of my alpha 6300 indeed is still visible.
I am torn between this 18-50 2.8 vs sony 18105 and 18135 for when I want to travel or hiking light. 135 will give you more range and a used copy will allow me to buy another fast 1.8 or 1.4 prime. 18-50 2.8 will allow me to take indoor restaurant or food photos. Any recommendation?
You can really only make that decision for yourself, as you know your needs. The Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 might actually be the happy medium for you if you don't mind a slightly larger lens.
I love all of your reviews; very detailed. The folks over at DPreview when reviewing this lens, noticed.a bit of Longitudinal Chromatic Aberration. Maybe I missed if you mentioned it. Was it an issue during your review?
Hi Dustin, Maybe this is a odd question, but If I have to choose one from Tamron 11-20mm f2.8 vs Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8, which one should I go for ? My requirements are travel photography, portraits of my daughter/wife and landscapes like mountains/ponds. Also I visit to cities in night so I take pics of architecture buildings that are glowed in night.
Those are the same requirement i have(except for daughter and wife part, instead of them, portraits of random people, family etc). Thank you for asking this question 🌟
The real question for me is this… While shooting I honestly hate switching between my sigma trio lenses. I know the focal lengths are different between the trio and this zoom, but for all intents and purposes will this suffice as a one and done for photo and video without too much loss of quality?
Obviously you have a loss of maximum aperture options, but I would say images will still be good. Biggest weakness optically probably will be the 50mm vs 56mm, as that lens was incredible sharp.
Thank you Dustin for this superb work. All relevant informations are there for all to use to make a clever choice. Another great content, thank you for your investment. Bravo !
Great review! Just bought this lens with the A6700. Love it! So sharp, so fast af, great towards the sun, ok "sun star" actually, and great bokeh at this price point! 🙂
Hello, Lars, I have the exact camera body and I'm researching this lens. Does it now have raw in-camera correction? How do you like the lens after spending some time with it?
Nice review and what do you think is this Sigma 18-50 better buy than Fuji 18-55 2.8-4 or 16-80mm f4 or maybe even 16-55 2.8 (of course for Fuji release end of year but will be the same like for Sony). From pictures that I see (Sigma 18-50) on some reviews the sharpness and IQ looks amazing even at corners. Bokeh is also not bad. Maybe is even better than heavy 16-55 2.8 ?
Is anyone else totally on the fence with this lens? The 6600 has IBIS, so that is my game. But there is just someting about this lens that makes me reluctant to pull the trigger. This could be a lens for everything in my work - street, documentary-style, journalism - but what is it that makes me hesitate? Opinions and suggestions, please. And this Dustin Abbot fellow it pretty sweet.
Maybe it's "fear of missing out" on focal lengths provided by the Sony G, and the Tamron? Or is it "that small, that light, that relatively inexpensive, it can't be good"? The latter was my concern when specs leaked first. I already have the Sigma 16mm & 56mm f1.4, so the missing wide/tele lengths don't really matter to me. Yes, it feels a good deal less premium compared to those primes, and it's not for manual focus aficionados due to the flimsy focus ring. That said, I own it since a month now, and I love it for all the other great aspects: optical quality, close focusing, size & weight.
@@jhirse3547 THank you for your reply. I love those sigma trio lenses . Amazing for the price. I just bought the zoom anyway. Might as well have at least one zoom.
Currently I'm saving for Sony 16-55 f2.8. For me it is important the lens is compact. I expect the image quality of sony is little bit better but also more expensive. Which one would you recommend?
Hi Justin. I am very new to this. Just brought first camera a used Sony A6000, as I would like to try out first before putting too much money. Now the time to choose first lens. Which one you recommend I am thinking of Sony 18-135, Sigma 18-50, Sigma 30, and Sigma 56, but to start with I only have budget to buy maximum 2 lenses. Could you please give me advise if I can only pick up one, which one to start? If I can pick up 2 of them, which ones? Thanks a lot for your help!
If you are going to have just one lens, then the 18-135 makes a lot of sense. It allows you to cover most all types of photography with just one lens. You can then compliment it with a fast prime or two for specific things (like the 56mm F1.4 for shallow depth of field shots and portraits)
Hi Dustin, thank you for this really informative review. I am a FujiX shooter and I am currently using the Fuji 16-55 f2.8 (your review of this lens was also really helpful). Any thoughts on how this Sigma 18-50 would compare with the Fuji 16-55 in terms of image quality? I am more than happy with the images I get from the 16-55, but size and price of the Sigma are definitely appealing (I heard that this little zoom from Sigma coulb be available on the Fuji X mount by the end of the year...). Thanks!
I think the 16-55 probably has a slight edge in some ways optically, but there's no question that the Sigma is much more appealing from a size perspective and is very good optically.
Hello Dustin, I'm buying my first ever camera next month and i was(still am) so confused about the sigma 18-50, sigma trio and tamron 17-70. I am a complete beginner and i want to buy this 18-50 but the distortion part is not sitting quite right with me. Can you please tell me if that would be much of a problem during travels(landscape photography) and moderate portrait photography? Your insight is very valuable for me
Better to go with the 3 prime lenses Sigma has had, or switch to this new lens instead? Right now I only have 1/3 of the Sigma trio lenses being the Sigma 16mm 1.4.
Same situation here. I'm planning to get this instead of the other 2 primes to go with Sigma 16 since I really like shooting wide. At 35/56mm I'm hardly motivated enough to swap my zoom lens to take them anyway;)
@@DustinAbbottTWI I recently dusted off my 18-135 and forgot what a great shooting experience it is to use a compact zoom that keeps the whole system small and light.
Thanks for the video Dustin very nice. I have a question for you I just bought ZV E10 and I need to buy 3 lenses for going on holidays to Europe, I am struggling with the choosing, since I want to take photos of landscape and cities, also on people, day and night. So between tamron 11-20 f 2.8, Sony 11 mm f1.8, Sigma 16 mm f1.4, Sigma 18-50 f 2,8, Tamron 17-70 f2.8 and Tamron 18-300 F3.5 -6.3, which 3 lenses would you pick for the trip( theses are my first lenses) Thanks a lot for your help
Hmmm, I see a lot of potential for redundancy in your proposed lenses. I would say the Tamron 11-20mm for the wide end, the Tamron 18-300mm for longer distance and when you want a one lens solution, but then a lens like the Sigma 56mm F1.4 as a portrait/wide aperture choice.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks a lot, yes basically on the wide part I need to choose between Tamron 11-20 or the Sony 11, on the middle range between Sima 18-50 or the Tamron 17-70, and on tele Tamron 18-300 or Sony 70-350 mm, and it is true maybe with tamron 11-20mm and the Tamron 18-300 I am all covered and spend less money. Thanks for your advice and time
Any thoughts on how this might compare to 28-70mm 2.8 DG DN Sigma? I know different formats, but just in terms of OOF smoothness, build quality, focusing speed and overall impressions.
Do the Sony APS-C cameras allow to focus bracketing? Because that combined with the 18mm macro this lens provide without breathing would be extremely interesting.
Hi Dustin, thank you for another beautiful review. What's the difference between a fully vs partial splash and dust protected lens in terms of sensor dust problems? Can dust reach the sensor on a partial tropicalized lens as well? Thanks
I would say the gasket at the lens mount is the most important for protecting the sensor. The other seals are more for keeping dust or moisture out of the lens itself.
Hi Dustin! Great review as always. One question tho. I have sony fx30 and i dont have any lens right now. I am in between to get sigma 1.4 16mm plus tamron 28-75 g2 or i can get only this lens and call the day! I am looking for video shooting mostly(like ancient ruins, zoo, jungle, hiking, church, streets animals) and some photos here and there. I am also going to shoot talking head videos in door. Do you think this lens is good enough for all of these or i should go for 2 lens combo? (Or if you have better suggestions) I am also planning to use 4k 120fps option in Fx30 which has 1.5 more crop on top of apsc crop! Thanks for reply in advance!
I think this lens is a logical start. The FX30 is a compact body, and this lens is a great match in size. If you find that you don't get as wide as what you would like, there are some good options (The Sony 11mm F1.8 comes to mind) to compliment it.
Awesome review..if you have SONY a6600 IBIS, which one u wish to buy? Tamron 17-70mm or Sigma 18-55mm? Not so important about focal length difference..
If you don't care about the focal length different and want to travel small, the Sigma is probably a good option. Slightly nicer bokeh but not quite as sharp as the Tamron.
@@DustinAbbottTWI would you say that the bokeh at 50mm 2.8 is comparable to the 30mm 1.4? Does the 75mm equivalent reach compensate for the lack of aperture size?
Better? That's a difficult question, as the two lenses don't even cover the same focal length. The zoom is more versatile, but the prime has the advantage of being wider and having a larger maximum aperture. Which lens is right for you depends on what you want to do with it and what other lenses you have.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I use Sony A 6400 whit sony Gmaster 35 mm 1.4 and Sigma 16 mm 1.4 Unfortunately sigma 16 mm has distortion in photography; I have a lense similar whit 16 mm 1.4 but whit less distortion .
Lol I am also looking literally at these two XD for streaming and photo things lol. I have ff but its video focused and obviously don't want to use it for twitch as aps-c is more than enough for streaming (almost too much)
The 17-50 2.8 with stabilization was better. Also because you the 17 mm! At this point who cares about the weight? It is better the tamron 17-70...as its weight is barely thre same to the old sigma 17-50 2.8 OS HSM
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
Great review. This adds so much value to the APS-C line. If they complete the trinity it'd be crazy carrying the entire set in a small lens bag. Pair with the 16 and 56 1.4 and it'd cover pretty much every need. Thank you Sigma!
I would definitely welcome more lenses in the lineup.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Dustin, you've given us another fantastic review!
I just received this lens today. Is superb and very very sharp. 100% recommended. Perfect match with the a6600
Exactly. You get the benefit of the IBIS along with the small size and excellent optics.
we are slowly getting to the 10-300 f/1.2 pancake.
LOL - I'd say we have a ways to go ;)
We have to appreciate that Dustin is replying every comments to give suggestion
Thanks!
Just got mine today and sold my sigma 16mm next could be my sigma 30mm but I will keep one of my top favorite lenses the 56mm
The 56mm is still a good compliment for this lens because of the much larger maximum aperture. And yes, it is amazing optically
Outstanding images and review. Always a pleasure.
I was excited to replace my a6400 kit lens with this when it was announced but I'm really not sure whether it's worth it without image stabilization. :/
If video isn't a priority for you, then I would definitely say yes.
@@DustinAbbottTWI so you would recommend it for taking photos of / documenting for e.g. video production and also when not photoshooting use as streaming lens in studio?
I think if you really want to do videos, you would need a gimbal anyaway. IBIS or built in OS in lens is not enough for professional videos, it is more helpful to eliminate handshaking only.
This lens will fly on a crane m2 gimbal! I was in the mark of a a good 23-24 prime lens and I feel so spoiled with this lens! 24mm result is fantastic and not shy from a prime! Also at 18 and more importantly 50 it is so acceptable....What else do we want? A great tiny lens to match the tiny size of apsc bodies. This will be easily the sigma's best seller lens in a couple of years.
I do think this lens will do well for them.
No plans of buying this lens since I'm keeping my Sony 16-55 but I'm still watching this because this is a Dustin Abbott video.
That's pretty kind!
just got one in a $550 bundle. I wish it had oss but i really liked the compactness. I have accepted that if it is not compact, my a6000 will just sit more than not. I really like the size, it is perfect.
The size is great!
Sigma explained their choice to leave out os in their release video. They prioritized small size and os would have worked against that goal. I wonder if all that correction impacts the quality of the image corners. A nice review and amazing how early you got it so you could time the review with the official announcement.
Sounds like excuses. It will also work against their goal of selling these.
@@Zunidrap How can it be an excuse? It is reality. You add os and you increase the size and weight of a lens. Since they want to minimize size and weight, dropping os is only logical. They have certainly calculated the positive implications for sales vs. the negative. I think it will do just fine. Lots of folks want small, light, fast, and relatively inexpensive.
I understand the decision, but there are obviously consequences. That's the tension of lens design.
@@lsaideOK It's an excuse for the fact they can't do a compact image stabilization solution. Have you seen how tiny and light the kit zoom lens is? Yeah, Sony managed to squeeze OSS in there. It's possible.
@@Zunidrap Sigma is not making any excuses. They made a design choice. Pretty simple. I have no money in the game but think the lens will sell quite well. If you want a stabilized lens of similar quality and range get the Tamron or Sony. It's a free market. Just not so free to jump to one of those models.
Your reviews are brilliant in the real world sense as well as the studio test scenarios, thank you 🙏
Thank you very much
Another typically thorough review of a lens that will have major market appeal given the very, very large number of Sony a6series bodies in the real world.
A lens that has very broad appeal. Lack of image stabilisation is not an issue for me as I rarely shoot video.
Have already ordered this lens. Now have a 6400, was content with my a6000, still have it, however the IAF on the 6400 is just soooh useful.
Sony really owe Sigma a huge vote of thanks in, some years' ago, and even now, filling in the gaps in Sony's very limited native glass.
I don't pixel peep, or pore over MTF graphs and this is all the lens I need + my Sigma trio- the 56 1.4 is just superb.
I trust that you and your family enjoy the Festive Season and that 2022 is less challenging ,on many fronts, than this year.
Agreed. I think this is a lens that should be very successful
Hi Dustin...thank you so much for taking the time to answer all of these and other questions. You are really the only reviewer that I have confidence in...! Quick question about image quality of this lens vs the Sony 18-135 and the Tamron 17-70. I am a full frame user but relay upon my A6000 for travel and more casual photos.
The Tamron 17-70 is the sharpest of the bunch. It's also the largest and heaviest. The Sigma's edge is the compact size and bokeh is nicer.
Thanks Dustin for this no nonsense and eloquent review with real world application!
My pleasure!
I got the Tamron 18-70 mainly on the strength of your excellent review and i have been very pleased with it -indeed and still am. HOWEVER i quite agree that it is a heavy lump and since i do a lot of hiking and only sometimes take a monopod think i will purchase this lens as well for travelling or, as you say, as a 'pick up' combination on my A6400. I should say that i already have and use the 'magic Sigma 3' but thats just too many to pack on many trips!
This is definitely a nice choice if you want to travel light...but quality.
Its very interesting how sigma is now designing with mirrorless and form factor in mind. Also the compact size is perhaps also in line with their FP/L camera line wherein one could use the lens in super 35 just as with the higher res sony FF cameras which give a good aps-c mode - so it also becomes a very compact video lens. And with the new a7iv in crop mode one has such a compact lens for 4k 60 with ibis & extra software stabilization. Also closer MFD is not meant to give a macro like resolution but can bring out more texture. So in such a minimal package a lot of density and versatility! And as usual a highly nuanced multi dimensional review
Very good points all around.
Hit a quick like on my way to work. I already know the results of this review. Thanks Dustin in advance. Catch the rest at lunch time.
Thanks!
Nice review, like the unabashed Ontario setting. I think Dustin said it at the very beginning... Where was this lens 5-7 years ago? I have the Sony 16-55 (which costs $1100US in Canada). It's twice the price but it is a fantastic lens in everything it does and includes that value extra few millimentres at the wide end. The Sigma is a compelling lens, a small, f2.8. It's nice for new E-mount users who have the choice. Keep us the good work Dustin. Do you think a 50-135 f2.8 is next - that would break some truly new ground!
That would be an intriguing lens, for sure.
So glad I found your channel! The sheer amount of information and attention to detail included in your reviews are very impressive. Thank you for all your hard work. I'm migrating from Nikon (anyone remember Nikon?) and trying to decide between the Fuji and Sony APS-C ecosystems. For camera bodies, I'm thinking of The Fuji XT-3 vs Sony a6400. For lenses, I'm trying to decide between the Fuji Fujinon XF 16-55mm f/ 2.8 R LM WR or the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN. I'll be shooting mostly product photography and fashion indoors. The XT-3 has superior video capabilities but the Sony has better auto focus/eye detect, so it's pretty even for the bodies. I'll only have the budget for one lens, so that is going to be the major deciding factor for me. Which lens do you think is superior?
If compactness is a priority to you, then the Sony/Sigma combination is an easy win. I do like the XF 16-55mm, and it gives you a little more flexibility in focal length, though your Fuji package would cost you about 50% more. I would personally probably go with the Sony package and use that extra money to add another lens to augment your work, or perhaps move up to the a6600 and get stabilization in the body along with the Sigma. Another option (if you go Sony), is to get the Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 instead, as it has a bigger zoom range along with lens stabilization. That would allow you to stick with the a6400
Im so glad I clicked on this review. It was really good and helpful and you even inclduded astro photogrpahy samples !
May I ask which bortle ratio you had were you shot the picture ?
I'd say about a 4.
The distortion is corrected automatically, when "lens compensation" is put to "auto" in camera menue. Also works with RAW files, no need to do the correction in post process!
It actually doesn't also work on RAW files, at least on Sony cameras. Post software has to autodetect the lens and apply the profile.
@@DustinAbbottTWI That's what I wanted to say ;-). Maybe there is a misunderstandig, Capture One Pro has no lens profile yet for the SIGMA 18-50mm 2,8, but automatically correccts the distortion when importing the RAW files, so no need to do any settings in C1. However distortion in the camera viewer of my alpha 6300 indeed is still visible.
I am torn between this 18-50 2.8 vs sony 18105 and 18135 for when I want to travel or hiking light. 135 will give you more range and a used copy will allow me to buy another fast 1.8 or 1.4 prime. 18-50 2.8 will allow me to take indoor restaurant or food photos. Any recommendation?
You can really only make that decision for yourself, as you know your needs. The Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 might actually be the happy medium for you if you don't mind a slightly larger lens.
I love all of your reviews; very detailed. The folks over at DPreview when reviewing this lens, noticed.a bit of Longitudinal Chromatic Aberration. Maybe I missed if you mentioned it. Was it an issue during your review?
Check out my text review, as I really highlight that type of thing in the image quality section.
Hi Dustin,
Maybe this is a odd question, but If I have to choose one from Tamron 11-20mm f2.8 vs Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8, which one should I go for ? My requirements are travel photography, portraits of my daughter/wife and landscapes like mountains/ponds. Also I visit to cities in night so I take pics of architecture buildings that are glowed in night.
If portraits are part of your requirements, then I would go with the Sigma. 20mm isn't really long enough for portrait work.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks a lot for your suggestion.
Those are the same requirement i have(except for daughter and wife part, instead of them, portraits of random people, family etc). Thank you for asking this question 🌟
@@Akagami753 What is your camera model?
The real question for me is this… While shooting I honestly hate switching between my sigma trio lenses. I know the focal lengths are different between the trio and this zoom, but for all intents and purposes will this suffice as a one and done for photo and video without too much loss of quality?
Obviously you have a loss of maximum aperture options, but I would say images will still be good. Biggest weakness optically probably will be the 50mm vs 56mm, as that lens was incredible sharp.
Thank you Dustin for this superb work. All relevant informations are there for all to use to make a clever choice.
Another great content, thank you for your investment. Bravo !
Great review! Just bought this lens with the A6700. Love it! So sharp, so fast af, great towards the sun, ok "sun star" actually, and great bokeh at this price point! 🙂
Awesome. Enjoy
Hello, Lars, I have the exact camera body and I'm researching this lens. Does it now have raw in-camera correction? How do you like the lens after spending some time with it?
@@denispopescu8775 I also have a6700 with Sigma 18-50mm. I used this lens 1 month now...I can say this is wonderful lens with good sharpness
Nice review and what do you think is this Sigma 18-50 better buy than Fuji 18-55 2.8-4 or 16-80mm f4 or maybe even 16-55 2.8 (of course for Fuji release end of year but will be the same like for Sony). From pictures that I see (Sigma 18-50) on some reviews the sharpness and IQ looks amazing even at corners. Bokeh is also not bad. Maybe is even better than heavy 16-55 2.8 ?
I do think this is a nice alternative to those lenses. Not quite as useful a zoom range, but great size, weight, performance, and price.
Is anyone else totally on the fence with this lens? The 6600 has IBIS, so that is my game. But there is just someting about this lens that makes me reluctant to pull the trigger. This could be a lens for everything in my work - street, documentary-style, journalism - but what is it that makes me hesitate? Opinions and suggestions, please. And this Dustin Abbot fellow it pretty sweet.
I can't speak for your hesitancy, obviously, but I can say that this is a solid choice...particularly if you already have a camera with IBIS.
Maybe it's "fear of missing out" on focal lengths provided by the Sony G, and the Tamron? Or is it "that small, that light, that relatively inexpensive, it can't be good"? The latter was my concern when specs leaked first. I already have the Sigma 16mm & 56mm f1.4, so the missing wide/tele lengths don't really matter to me. Yes, it feels a good deal less premium compared to those primes, and it's not for manual focus aficionados due to the flimsy focus ring. That said, I own it since a month now, and I love it for all the other great aspects: optical quality, close focusing, size & weight.
@@jhirse3547 THank you for your reply. I love those sigma trio lenses . Amazing for the price. I just bought the zoom anyway. Might as well have at least one zoom.
@@jtwolfstories how do you find the image quality compared to the sigma primes? Is that loca really prominent?
Currently I'm saving for Sony 16-55 f2.8. For me it is important the lens is compact. I expect the image quality of sony is little bit better but also more expensive. Which one would you recommend?
I would find it very hard to think that the Sony is 2 1/2 times better. I'd personally buy a second lens with the extra money and get the Sigma
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for the reply. Will buy this one when it's available.
Hi Justin. I am very new to this. Just brought first camera a used Sony A6000, as I would like to try out first before putting too much money. Now the time to choose first lens. Which one you recommend I am thinking of Sony 18-135, Sigma 18-50, Sigma 30, and Sigma 56, but to start with I only have budget to buy maximum 2 lenses. Could you please give me advise if I can only pick up one, which one to start? If I can pick up 2 of them, which ones? Thanks a lot for your help!
If you are going to have just one lens, then the 18-135 makes a lot of sense. It allows you to cover most all types of photography with just one lens. You can then compliment it with a fast prime or two for specific things (like the 56mm F1.4 for shallow depth of field shots and portraits)
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks so much for your help!
Hi Dustin, thank you for this really informative review. I am a FujiX shooter and I am currently using the Fuji 16-55 f2.8 (your review of this lens was also really helpful). Any thoughts on how this Sigma 18-50 would compare with the Fuji 16-55 in terms of image quality? I am more than happy with the images I get from the 16-55, but size and price of the Sigma are definitely appealing (I heard that this little zoom from Sigma coulb be available on the Fuji X mount by the end of the year...).
Thanks!
I think the 16-55 probably has a slight edge in some ways optically, but there's no question that the Sigma is much more appealing from a size perspective and is very good optically.
Nice video
Can i use this lens for food photography ?
I don't see why not.
Hello Dustin, I'm buying my first ever camera next month and i was(still am) so confused about the sigma 18-50, sigma trio and tamron 17-70. I am a complete beginner and i want to buy this 18-50 but the distortion part is not sitting quite right with me. Can you please tell me if that would be much of a problem during travels(landscape photography) and moderate portrait photography? Your insight is very valuable for me
By the time the correction profiles kick in, you probably wouldn't have a problem for those applications.
Awesome review as usual. Thank you!
My pleasure!
Better to go with the 3 prime lenses Sigma has had, or switch to this new lens instead?
Right now I only have 1/3 of the Sigma trio lenses being the Sigma 16mm 1.4.
I think you'll find that the prime trio will give you a little more image quality, but the zoom is more likely to get regularly used.
The 16mm f1.4 is noticeably sharper compared to the zoom lens at its widest 18mm :) I also find the bokeh less “fizzier” on the 16
Same situation here. I'm planning to get this instead of the other 2 primes to go with Sigma 16 since I really like shooting wide. At 35/56mm I'm hardly motivated enough to swap my zoom lens to take them anyway;)
Great value! 😊
Agreed.
This would a nice one for subtle street photography
Agreed.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I recently dusted off my 18-135 and forgot what a great shooting experience it is to use a compact zoom that keeps the whole system small and light.
Thanks for the video Dustin very nice. I have a question for you I just bought ZV E10 and I need to buy 3 lenses for going on holidays to Europe, I am struggling with the choosing, since I want to take photos of landscape and cities, also on people, day and night. So between tamron 11-20 f 2.8, Sony 11 mm f1.8, Sigma 16 mm f1.4, Sigma 18-50 f 2,8, Tamron 17-70 f2.8 and Tamron 18-300 F3.5 -6.3, which 3 lenses would you pick for the trip( theses are my first lenses) Thanks a lot for your help
Hmmm, I see a lot of potential for redundancy in your proposed lenses. I would say the Tamron 11-20mm for the wide end, the Tamron 18-300mm for longer distance and when you want a one lens solution, but then a lens like the Sigma 56mm F1.4 as a portrait/wide aperture choice.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks a lot, yes basically on the wide part I need to choose between Tamron 11-20 or the Sony 11, on the middle range between Sima 18-50 or the Tamron 17-70, and on tele Tamron 18-300 or Sony 70-350 mm, and it is true maybe with tamron 11-20mm and the Tamron 18-300 I am all covered and spend less money. Thanks for your advice and time
Maybe there will be a Leica version of this lens ?
That's right - L mount APS-C
great video. What small tripod are you using at the beginning of the video?
Oben Tabletop Tripod shown in video: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy
Any thoughts on how this might compare to 28-70mm 2.8 DG DN Sigma? I know different formats, but just in terms of OOF smoothness, build quality, focusing speed and overall impressions.
Hmmm, I would say they are fairly similar in performance. The 28-70 might be slightly sharper, but that's probably mostly due to sensor differences.
Do the Sony APS-C cameras allow to focus bracketing? Because that combined with the 18mm macro this lens provide without breathing would be extremely interesting.
I think the answer is yes, but that's not something I do.
Sorry not, not yet...
Hi Dustin, thank you for another beautiful review.
What's the difference between a fully vs partial splash and dust protected lens in terms of sensor dust problems? Can dust reach the sensor on a partial tropicalized lens as well? Thanks
I would say the gasket at the lens mount is the most important for protecting the sensor. The other seals are more for keeping dust or moisture out of the lens itself.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks, and congrats for your channel!
would love ti see a tel option to pair with this 50-200 f2.8 or even 70-250
Agreed.
Hi Dustin! Great review as always. One question tho. I have sony fx30 and i dont have any lens right now. I am in between to get sigma 1.4 16mm plus tamron 28-75 g2 or i can get only this lens and call the day! I am looking for video shooting mostly(like ancient ruins, zoo, jungle, hiking, church, streets animals) and some photos here and there. I am also going to shoot talking head videos in door. Do you think this lens is good enough for all of these or i should go for 2 lens combo? (Or if you have better suggestions) I am also planning to use 4k 120fps option in Fx30 which has 1.5 more crop on top of apsc crop! Thanks for reply in advance!
I think this lens is a logical start. The FX30 is a compact body, and this lens is a great match in size. If you find that you don't get as wide as what you would like, there are some good options (The Sony 11mm F1.8 comes to mind) to compliment it.
Awesome review..if you have SONY a6600 IBIS, which one u wish to buy? Tamron 17-70mm or Sigma 18-55mm? Not so important about focal length difference..
If you don't care about the focal length different and want to travel small, the Sigma is probably a good option. Slightly nicer bokeh but not quite as sharp as the Tamron.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Great,thanks for the replied..
Great video! Would this work on the Lumix S5ii ?
This is an APS-C lens and the S5II is a full frame camera. You probably want to stick to full frame lenses.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you :)
Excellent review, first time here on the channel but I’ll be back!
Glad to have you here!
Great.. Now all we need is a 10-18mm f/2.8 and a 50-180mm (preferably upto 200mm) f/2.8 with Optical Stabilization...!
Hmmm, the latter might be a tall order, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a wide angle zoom for sure.
@@DustinAbbottTWI It is apsc, I think it will be possible to make it. Moreover, it could even be smaller than a fullframe 70-200mm f/2.8 lens.
Too bad it doesn't have OS, but otherwise a great little lens.
Agreed.
Would this lens perform as well as the sigma prime lens 56mm at 2.8?
Not in terms of sharpness. The 56mm is probably Sigma's sharpest APS-C lens, period.
What's the tripod you are using in this video?
I reviewed it here: bit.ly/CTT1000
would love to get this lense for my Z50...
Yes. Here's hoping that we see Canon and Nikon open up.
Great review, as always. THANK YOU !!!!! regards, Dan
My pleasure!
Great review,This lens very fantastic.
It's an excellent lens, for sure.
I plan to buy this lens Sigma 18-50mm for Sony A6400, i still worry with lens Sigma 30 mm. I come from Vietnam
You’ll enjoy the lens
what tripod is that?
Oben Tabletop Tripod shown in video: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy
What’s the small tripod you use?
Oben Tabletop Tripod shown in video: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you so much
Brother please tell me it is better than Sony Zeiss 16 70 I have sony 1670 please reply soon
Unfortunately I haven't tested that Sony lens, and don't have an opinion.
Anybody around here who could say if it would be possible to add a wide angle attachement to it?
I've not heard anything like that.
Would you recommend I sell my sigma 30mm and 16mm to have an all in one?
Only if you feel like you would prefer having to deal with only one lens. Both of those lenses are pretty good.
@@DustinAbbottTWI would you say that the bokeh at 50mm 2.8 is comparable to the 30mm 1.4? Does the 75mm equivalent reach compensate for the lack of aperture size?
@@ricknotd1cc same here
Can this lens be used on a7riii?
Only in APS-C mode
Can you tell me please if is better than Sigma 16 mm ?
Better? That's a difficult question, as the two lenses don't even cover the same focal length. The zoom is more versatile, but the prime has the advantage of being wider and having a larger maximum aperture. Which lens is right for you depends on what you want to do with it and what other lenses you have.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you!
@@DustinAbbottTWI I use Sony A 6400 whit sony Gmaster 35 mm 1.4 and Sigma 16 mm 1.4 Unfortunately sigma 16 mm has distortion in photography; I have a lense similar whit 16 mm 1.4 but whit less distortion .
Any 2.8 lenses for my Sony a 58 a mount camera?
Only on the used market: Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]
Sony has a 16-50 2.8 for A mount that's not a bad lens.
@@networm64 thank you
@@timritter144 thank you
You've gotten the only decent recommendations already.
If Sigma only would make this for Fujifilm X-mount…
I could see that happening.
Very precise review. Nice
Thank you!
This vs 30mm F1.4 Sigma ?
That really depends on your needs/priorities. The zoom is pretty tempting if you don't have other lenses covering some of those focal lengths.
Wow, that was a beautiful cat.
He is a lovely animal, for sure.
This or sigma 1.4 16mm?
That really depends on your needs. I personally would probably choose this lens.
Lol I am also looking literally at these two XD for streaming and photo things lol. I have ff but its video focused and obviously don't want to use it for twitch as aps-c is more than enough for streaming (almost too much)
The 17-50 2.8 with stabilization was better. Also because you the 17 mm!
At this point who cares about the weight? It is better the tamron 17-70...as its weight is barely thre same to the old sigma 17-50 2.8 OS HSM
It's not better in terms of sharpness. The Bokeh might be a little softer, though.
Worst lense i have used for video… can follow focus for its life… tried 3 off them on 3 bodys . Same outcome. Sigma said this is how it works…..
Wow- that's too bad.