I love the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 lens. I've heard some people say it's "too sharp". That's like saying water is too wet. You can tone down sharpness in post, if that's what you want. But, adding sharpness in post is more likely to cause problems like "haloing" along the edges in the image. The Sigma 18-35 is a must have in my book.
You can buy filters that gives lenses certain aesthetics as well. I hate this trend of "too sharp" and "clinical" as well. There's a reason why we're seeing so many creative filters. I'd rather have a collection of sharp lenses that I can attach creative filters to than have a lens that does only one look well.
Yes, the crazy hair guy did say that. (FronoFoto w.e the hell his name is). People don't know wtf they want. It is very insane to complain about is too clean and sharp.
This is a great lens for S35 sensors. Of course, the stills version has AF, while the cine version does not. I get close to parfocal performance on my copy. Would love to see Sigma release a mid-range FF cine zoom. Something like a 24-70mm true cinema, parfocal zoom. Thank you for posting, CVP!
Had it since it came out. My go to lens for the GH5s, GH5/GH4 and BMPCC. I even use it on the S1 when in APS-c crop. Can't think of why I'd ever want to get rid of it.
Recently got the Vespid Primes. Really love them so far. For a lot of projects there is one downside. When using tools like gimbals there is often no time to rebalance. All the zoom options from the DZO lineup are pretty heavy and not ideal for a small ronin rs2 setup with float or advanced grip. So the 18-35 has won again and will stay in my kit. Its unbeaten when it comes to weight, sharpness and performance.
I think it pairs really well! I have both. However the autofocus on the 50-100 is not so great for video, it does a lot of hunting. I also have the sigma 4omm F1.4 (full frame), so I have a focal length in between (expensive though but really sharp). The 40mm doesn't have as good auto focus as the 18-35mm. Hope this helps!
Hey, thanks for this video. I have an 80D, and I would like to know if you'd recommend getting the 18-35 Sigma as I initially thought of and later getting something like an R7 or if I should wait until I can afford to get into Sony's ecosystem with an FX30. I never messed with Sony, and I'd be happy to hear your opinion. Your footage looks so smooth and creamy.
I use this Lense on a GH5 with Metabones Ultra. Focus is a bit slow but thatrs all. I love to take stills and video motion pictures with it. My personal go to lense! Wouldn't have it any other way. I wait for mty 50-100 f1.8 to arrive.
There is a 24-70mm F2.8 and a 70-200 F2.8 There difference between F2 and F2.8 (especially with the tele lenese) is barely, if at all, noticable. But the lenses would be giant (each would be around 1,5-2kg) The 24-35mm F2 was already bigger than the 24-70mm F2.8 The 120-300mm F2.8 is 3,5kg, i think people underestimate the size impact such fast lenses cause. If those lenses would exist tomorrow, i would bet you would not buy them because they would be too big and heavy.
Love this lens. Even with its lack of character, as you say can just add filters, I recently found the focus throw to be a bit short! And the follow focus rubber thing slips. Ziess used to have solid ones that would screw into place onto the lens. Would be a great help.
My girlfriend is using the 18-35mm F1.8 on her Sony a6600 (for stills though) and she loves it. The colors, the contrast, the micro contrast, the bokeh. She hopes for an re-release in the DN Line so she can use it without the adapter but other than that, she's highly satisfied.
I've had my Canon R5 for a week now, got a 1.4/50mm sigma lens for it in the package, and it's solid (A little grumpy on the autofocus but is probably me being new to the camera) - But need a wide lens as well, are there any points beside weatherproofing/internal stabilization, to getting this compared to the similar RF lenses from Canon that cost... 3 times as much? Cheers
why not make it an 18-100 1.2, while you are at it? I am afraid that sigma had pushed the specs quite to the max back then. They wanted to create a lens that put them on the map as a serious contender, which the 18-35 absolutely did. But while I absolutely would buy a 18-35 mm full frame for sony FE, I think that thing would be much too heavy, and now that sigma is on the map, I do not think they will make such an extremely cost-calculated product again. Better AF would obviously be very nice, but stabilisation would probably make the lens too heavy. And IS is not as crucial anymore, since most new cameras have inbody. I have tried the 18-35 on a sony a1, and the inbody is quite sufficient.
@@FlorisGerber Never said it had to be Full Frame, nor needed to have such an extreme range. Just pointed some extra or other features that I'd like to see happen because they'd fit my usage. Time will tell if it eventually come close to that or not at all.
Agreed. Actually I would like to see if they could make it a 16-35, for the slightly wider 24mm fov. Even a 16-35 f/2, silent motors, weather sealed will be a great addition, assuming they can design it to be usable on every mirrorless mount. If not I hope they just stick to EF.
I want to ask you, did you use this on a R6? Since its a APS-C lens how is the vignette and other performance. It will be great if you can advise me regarding this. Am confused whether to go for the 24-70f2. 8 art or this one. Thanks
@@soumikkar5049 If you have R6, just go for 24-70 f/2.8. Don't bother with apsc lens. The Sigma 18-35 was engineered to give full frame f/2.8 results on apsc.
Cool post I like the Simga 18-35 very much in 2021 too, but I'll use it for taking photos On the Canon Eos 90D or the M6 MKII Greetings from Germany Markus
Totally agree! Back in the day, this was the first third party lens that I ever dared buy after many years of using Canon L glass. I was shocked at how good it was and use it extensively on several cameras system with various adapters and speedboosters on both APSC and MFT. A truly versatile lens for many disciplines!👍🏾🙏🏾
I own the Sigma 17-70mm for my Nikon D5500. I intend to purchase the Sigma 17-50mm lens and Sigma 18-35mm and Sigma 24-35mm and Tamron 20-40mm for my two future Sony A74 cameras
thanks CVP , very informative video , since bmpcc 6k has al less smaller sensor size than c300 and komodo does this mean it has no vignetting issue with the lens ? what is your observation ? thanks
Why not a full frame 24-70 sigma on red komodo? It's not as wide but longer in length? What's are the pros of the sigma art 24-70 quality wise over the sigma art 18-35mm ?
Love this lens, its all I ever used on my GH4 for 2 years. Now I've switched to the S5 and will be selling this for the Sigma 24-70. Very hard to part ways but really don't need need it anymore.
@@DastanZhumagulov In some ways that's actually way more impressive considering it's a FF lens. Now if only that was on the widely adaptable EF-mount. I think all video shooters worldwide would buy it instantly.
Faster aperture, you get the same DoF as f/2.8 on ff, but you can lower your ISO on a S35 sensor. Internal zooms make it easier to balance on gimbals. Extremely sharp. Many 24-70ish lenses aren't sharp at all, like the Canon EF 24-70. Smaller form factor vs a 24-70 f/2.8 ff lens. I guess the only cons would be, lack of weather sealing?
A question from an amateur, will you get a wider field of view if you use this lens together with a Metabones/Canon 0.71x Speedbooster adapter on a RED Komodo in 4K mode? And how about vignetting? Thanks! 😄
This thing is still dominating for some time, nat seen any other like it to beat it, may be the canon 16-35 f2.8, but still, this sigma has the sharp prime lens look.
I personally find there to be quite a bit of character to this lens. The barrel distortion is something that I really love, gives you something close to anamorphic with the distorted sides, and the out of focus I find to be more on the creative/creamy side and not clinical like something you'd find with a Rokinon. I've had this bad boy for years and this is the first time I've ever heard anyone say this lens "lacks character".
I wouldn't suggest this lens for the R6 as it will limit what formats you can shoot in or the focal lengths of the lens you can use without vignetting. Jake
@@Vamp898 I shoot in 4K, there’s already a crop so it doesn’t affect it. This lens actually makes it so that there’s no crop shooting in 4K, it’s the only lens I know of that offers that.. I actually found that out after buying it, it was a win/win for me :)
@@LukeMackie ah, didn't know that. I actually don't know that camera well. My camera doesn't crop in 4K but if yours do, it's the best lense for the job. You could also use the 50-100 F1.8 then too I somehow assumed you were shooting stills because I almost exclusively shoot stills
Even tho I want to love this lens... I always end up using my Nikon 50mm 1.8 prime on the full frame over the 18-35 on my crop sensor.... there is something about the 18-35 that I don't like for portraits or product photography... but for landscapes I always get great results.
I have really mixed feelings about this lens. On one hand it has great clean color, contrast and sharpness, but is a pain in the ass when working on a professional set due to short focus throw and lack of hard stops. On the other hand nothing in this price range that is proper manual focus comes even close in terms of iq.
Have you tried the rehousing by PChood Cinematics? They're apparently better than official Sigma cine versions cos they're 100% parfocal. And only $1700~ for a piece. If you send in your own glass, it's only about $1000.
I've heard that the official Sigma cine version isn't parfocal, whereas the cheaper 3rd party re-housing are. Strange that Sigma didn't put in a bit more effort.
@@CVPTV Yes. And also watch many other reviews. I also rent a cinema version and compare it to my still version. Optically they're almost the same, cinema version hold up a contrast a bit better in frontlight situation and cinema version is parafocal, still version is NOT. Both still version my and my friend are loosing focus while going from 18-35 or back, (doesn't matter on which focal distance you in focus). And they are both super sharp when focused, and they both were calibrated on a sigma usb dock station.
@@iamfollowingmyheart Sigma says the cine version isn't parfocal. It's close. Almost parfocal, maybe 95%? But Sigma themselves say it isn't so it isn't. The only parfocal ones are 3rd party re-housed versions.
I don't know whether it is me or my American thought process, this dude talks too freggen' fast and I can't understand half of what he was saying. Maybe his European accent was in it's way or that is to be blamed, IDK. However, the idea is to make your video palatable to everyone. Also, this lens will resolve good at 1080P well and at 4K you'll start to see vignetting. We work in 8K acquisition. However, we do NOT recommend this lens for 8K workflow as it does NOT resolve at 8K.Therefore, doesn't affect our workflow.
When did lenses start going out of date? Lmfao 🤣. I use lenses from the 50’s and 70’s. Never ever know that my sigma 18-35 would be up for debate in 2021. I could see if it was 10 years old at least.
Of course they do, why shouldn't they? The lense designs in the 50s and 70s would have been different, if they would have had our current technology. But they did not have that so they created worse lenses. Not because they were bad lense designers, but they didn't have giant high performance computing clusters with incredible software to develop better leneses. They did the best they could, but they would have done it better and/or differnet, if they could have done it. Lense designs constantly improve. The more CPU power und the better software we have, the better can we do calculations and experiement with lense designs, glass elements and so on. Modern lense designs have barely things in common with lense designs in the 50s and 70s. Where a 50mm lenses in the 50s and 70s hat 4-6 Glass Elements, modern 50mm lenses have 14-17 glass elements. Do you think they put so many elements into a lense just for fun, without any influence on the resulting image, not to mention lense coatings and glass materials. Glass Materials and glass development processes constantly evolve, lense caoting technology consantly evolve and the lense design as it is constantly evolves. Where glass used in the 50s and 70s were more or less all the same, plain glass, modern lenses are made from several different glass materials, different coatings and so on and it needs hours of complex calculations to find out which lenses work together in what way. Technology doesn't stop, never did and never will. Sure a lense from the 50s or 70s can still be used today. But in general they are worse in every aspect you can measure, including color, contrast, flare, chromatic aberration, bokeh (but taste plays a big role in bokeh too) and so on. The SIGMA 18-35mm F1.8 is stil amazing in 2021 becaue it is still the most current lense in this sector. When SIGMA will release an DN Version of that lense, it will be better than the 18-35mm in every aspect and at that point, the current 18-35mm is outdated. That doesn't mean its broken or something, its just no longer state of the art.
I have one and on the Canon R it breaths and is non parfocal, however using it on BM pocket 4k with a Viltrox adaptor and adjusting the element in the adaptor, doesn't breath and is parfocal! Same if you use a metabones, check out Gerald Undone's review.... th-cam.com/video/BhmbTpkMECo/w-d-xo.html
The sigma 18-35 is for noobs. Also why would anyone hire you with it when every hack and his dog has it. There’s nothing to differentiate yourself as a cinematographer. This lens is for hacks.
Cinema lenses are parfocal meaning they retain critical focus at any zoom point change. The 18-35mm is not a parfocal lens, and Sigma themselves have stated that it's not possible to make the lens due to how it's designed. The newer 60-600mm Sigma Sport lens is "Parfocal" meaning it retains perfect focus at all zooms levels. A necessity for shooting high-end video. The Sigma 150-600mm sport is NOT PARFOCAL so if you shoot video this is not the sense for you. All Cine Lenses are par focal but Cinema lenses are quite expensive for this reason. Understand that more than 90% of the photography lenses by Canon, Nikon and yes Sony are not parfocal because the cost to make it that way. Some lens come close to being parfocal but be careful because if you are not paying attention you can get burnered by that "almost" perfect focus. For critical work keep it parfocal.
Sigma probably didn't want to put in more R&D after developing it. PChood Cinematics has already rehoused it to be 100% parfocal, for less than half the price.
We've used this lens for years! And it's our go to work horse lens for about 85% of our shoots. We LOVE it!
I love the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 lens. I've heard some people say it's "too sharp". That's like saying water is too wet. You can tone down sharpness in post, if that's what you want. But, adding sharpness in post is more likely to cause problems like "haloing" along the edges in the image. The Sigma 18-35 is a must have in my book.
You can buy filters that gives lenses certain aesthetics as well. I hate this trend of "too sharp" and "clinical" as well. There's a reason why we're seeing so many creative filters. I'd rather have a collection of sharp lenses that I can attach creative filters to than have a lens that does only one look well.
Yes, the crazy hair guy did say that. (FronoFoto w.e the hell his name is). People don't know wtf they want. It is very insane to complain about is too clean and sharp.
@@chickenpasta7359can you suggest some filters? I’m picking up my Canon 80D after a pause. Just bought this Sigma for myself. Now just exploring
You are my go to channel for clear, concise, in-depth gear reviews. Thanks for creating these videos!
I'll never get rid of mine! had it for 4 years now!
In my opinion, this is the best lens for APS-C cameras, I'm absolutely in love with it
Soo basicly when we use on fullframe have vigneting?
You are correct.
@@SenseiiOne is it normal if vignetting in aps-c?
@@naufalghazi6681 The corners might be a bit darker when using with APS-C sensor. But only when shooting at f/1.8 as far as I know.
This is a great lens for S35 sensors. Of course, the stills version has AF, while the cine version does not. I get close to parfocal performance on my copy. Would love to see Sigma release a mid-range FF cine zoom. Something like a 24-70mm true cinema, parfocal zoom. Thank you for posting, CVP!
Works pretty well in 5K mode on the FX9 too.
I REAAAALLLLYYY want Sigma to remake BOTH of these for Sony E mount with modern manufacturing methods.
Absolutely one of my favorite lenses. Love how in-depth you always go with these videos!
Nice to see an in-depth review of an older lens. Good job!
Just picked up this lens for my BlackMagic 6k Pro! Really happy with it so far!
Still my all round lens 80% of my shooting
Had it since it came out. My go to lens for the GH5s, GH5/GH4 and BMPCC. I even use it on the S1 when in APS-c crop. Can't think of why I'd ever want to get rid of it.
Thanks for this video. I'm really considering this lens for an EOS R7 and everything so far is pointing to a YES BUY IT! lol
Recently got the Vespid Primes. Really love them so far. For a lot of projects there is one downside. When using tools like gimbals there is often no time to rebalance. All the zoom options from the DZO lineup are pretty heavy and not ideal for a small ronin rs2 setup with float or advanced grip. So the 18-35 has won again and will stay in my kit. Its unbeaten when it comes to weight, sharpness and performance.
Do you recommend as highly the Sigma 50-100 1.8 to pair with this lens?
I think it pairs really well! I have both. However the autofocus on the 50-100 is not so great for video, it does a lot of hunting. I also have the sigma 4omm F1.4 (full frame), so I have a focal length in between (expensive though but really sharp). The 40mm doesn't have as good auto focus as the 18-35mm. Hope this helps!
? weeks away from buying my first cinema camera. FX6 or Red komodo?
Thanks my friend! Happy owner of a Sigma 18-35, myself. You're Awesome 👌
Hey, thanks for this video. I have an 80D, and I would like to know if you'd recommend getting the 18-35 Sigma as I initially thought of and later getting something like an R7 or if I should wait until I can afford to get into Sony's ecosystem with an FX30. I never messed with Sony, and I'd be happy to hear your opinion. Your footage looks so smooth and creamy.
True words to this lense. I use this on my RED DSMC 1 and 2 cameras - Love this special for documentary and real-estate work.
If you want to clean the rubber grips then try using a toothbrush dipped in Glass Cleaner Spray!
Still my go-to lens to this day. Keep up the great work dudes, always super informational and detailed videos
Nice, short but complete overview. Many Thanks.
I mean this is my go to lens for a reason right 😆 Would love to test his brother the 50-100 F1.8
Horrendous lens breathing even on the cine version :(
@@DastanZhumagulov i don't care. It's a less than 1k lens
@@DastanZhumagulov Absolutely silly lens breathing. I agree. Almost unusable. Have it 2 years. Used it twice.
I use this Lense on a GH5 with Metabones Ultra. Focus is a bit slow but thatrs all. I love to take stills and video motion pictures with it. My personal go to lense! Wouldn't have it any other way. I wait for mty 50-100 f1.8 to arrive.
I would like a set of 24-50 f/2 and 50-100 f/2 for full frame.
There is a 24-70mm F2.8 and a 70-200 F2.8
There difference between F2 and F2.8 (especially with the tele lenese) is barely, if at all, noticable. But the lenses would be giant (each would be around 1,5-2kg)
The 24-35mm F2 was already bigger than the 24-70mm F2.8
The 120-300mm F2.8 is 3,5kg, i think people underestimate the size impact such fast lenses cause. If those lenses would exist tomorrow, i would bet you would not buy them because they would be too big and heavy.
I would like a 18 to 30 f2 and 35 to 50 f2. please sigma
@@jackhkf1419 the is a 14-24mm F2.8 and a 24-70mm F2.8
@@Vamp898 I would like a light zoom lens with 67mm filter thread
@@jackhkf1419 if only the laws of physics would not exist^^
Love this lens. Even with its lack of character, as you say can just add filters, I recently found the focus throw to be a bit short! And the follow focus rubber thing slips. Ziess used to have solid ones that would screw into place onto the lens. Would be a great help.
I do have 3 sigma 2 18-35 and 50-100 and since I bought them ive never needed another lens . well built and image quality is amazing plus the price .
Excellent review, well done guys.
I didn't think I needed it before I bought the lens. Now I use it pretty much on every shoot (and it's always with me)
Could this lens be used for astrophotography? I'm new to the hobby and I'm curious about this because of the fast aperture... TIA
My girlfriend is using the 18-35mm F1.8 on her Sony a6600 (for stills though) and she loves it. The colors, the contrast, the micro contrast, the bokeh.
She hopes for an re-release in the DN Line so she can use it without the adapter but other than that, she's highly satisfied.
I dont know why Sigma is not updating this lens for mirrorless....
This. ☝☝
It genuinely baffles me that they've updated and created so many lenses for Sony but not made a version of this for Sony E Mount yet.
For RF mount, canon didnt make any APS-C body until very recently with R7 and R10.
@@qiyuxuan9437 just picked up the r7 and this lens :)
I've had my Canon R5 for a week now, got a 1.4/50mm sigma lens for it in the package, and it's solid (A little grumpy on the autofocus but is probably me being new to the camera) - But need a wide lens as well, are there any points beside weatherproofing/internal stabilization, to getting this compared to the similar RF lenses from Canon that cost... 3 times as much? Cheers
I'd love a new version of this 18-35 with RF mount, smoother and quieter autofocus, and even IS if possible... ^^
why not make it an 18-100 1.2, while you are at it?
I am afraid that sigma had pushed the specs quite to the max back then. They wanted to create a lens that put them on the map as a serious contender, which the 18-35 absolutely did.
But while I absolutely would buy a 18-35 mm full frame for sony FE, I think that thing would be much too heavy, and now that sigma is on the map, I do not think they will make such an extremely cost-calculated product again. Better AF would obviously be very nice, but stabilisation would probably make the lens too heavy.
And IS is not as crucial anymore, since most new cameras have inbody. I have tried the 18-35 on a sony a1, and the inbody is quite sufficient.
@@FlorisGerber Never said it had to be Full Frame, nor needed to have such an extreme range. Just pointed some extra or other features that I'd like to see happen because they'd fit my usage. Time will tell if it eventually come close to that or not at all.
Agreed. Actually I would like to see if they could make it a 16-35, for the slightly wider 24mm fov. Even a 16-35 f/2, silent motors, weather sealed will be a great addition, assuming they can design it to be usable on every mirrorless mount. If not I hope they just stick to EF.
I want to ask you, did you use this on a R6? Since its a APS-C lens how is the vignette and other performance. It will be great if you can advise me regarding this. Am confused whether to go for the 24-70f2. 8 art or this one. Thanks
@@soumikkar5049 If you have R6, just go for 24-70 f/2.8. Don't bother with apsc lens. The Sigma 18-35 was engineered to give full frame f/2.8 results on apsc.
Cool post I like the Simga 18-35 very much in 2021 too, but I'll use it for taking photos On the Canon Eos 90D or the M6 MKII Greetings from Germany Markus
are you using a gimbal or just handheld in these video shots?
Which shots exactly sorry?
Totally agree! Back in the day, this was the first third party lens that I ever dared buy after many years of using Canon L glass. I was shocked at how good it was and use it extensively on several cameras system with various adapters and speedboosters on both APSC and MFT. A truly versatile lens for many disciplines!👍🏾🙏🏾
I own the Sigma 17-70mm for my Nikon D5500. I intend to purchase the Sigma 17-50mm lens and Sigma 18-35mm and Sigma 24-35mm and Tamron 20-40mm for my two future Sony A74 cameras
thanks CVP , very informative video , since bmpcc 6k has al less smaller sensor size than c300 and komodo does this mean it has no vignetting issue with the lens ? what is your observation ? thanks
If I were to put this lens on the BMPCC6K, what would the focal lengths be? Is there a crop because it is not a full frame lens? Or does it stay 18-35
Love ART Series lenses
Why not a full frame 24-70 sigma on red komodo? It's not as wide but longer in length? What's are the pros of the sigma art 24-70 quality wise over the sigma art 18-35mm ?
Love this lens, its all I ever used on my GH4 for 2 years. Now I've switched to the S5 and will be selling this for the Sigma 24-70. Very hard to part ways but really don't need need it anymore.
It's been a year, but I hope you kept the 18-35 for your S5 because the S5 shoots 4k 60p only in aps-c mode, which is perfect for the Sigma.
I learnt a lot in video thank you. I just purchased one
8 years later and still the only standard zoom with a 1.8 aperture ..what the actual !?
Canon sort of came close with 24-70 f2 RF
@@DastanZhumagulov In some ways that's actually way more impressive considering it's a FF lens. Now if only that was on the widely adaptable EF-mount. I think all video shooters worldwide would buy it instantly.
What would be the main purpose of getting this as opposed to my 28-70 f2.8?
Faster aperture, you get the same DoF as f/2.8 on ff, but you can lower your ISO on a S35 sensor. Internal zooms make it easier to balance on gimbals. Extremely sharp. Many 24-70ish lenses aren't sharp at all, like the Canon EF 24-70. Smaller form factor vs a 24-70 f/2.8 ff lens. I guess the only cons would be, lack of weather sealing?
Hi there,
How did you fix this lense's focus breathing whilst taking photos or filming
It was my second lens that I've ever bought. It's still amazing!
A question from an amateur, will you get a wider field of view if you use this lens together with a Metabones/Canon 0.71x Speedbooster adapter on a RED Komodo in 4K mode? And how about vignetting? Thanks! 😄
I just uploaded a short film shot entirely with this lens on a RED.
Great lens!
It's nice to know that the lens is parfocal. Great surprise!
Only cine version. Still is not. But with speedbuster it can be.
@@turusimpala7155 Cine version isn't parfocal either. Sigma says it's "near parfocal". Only 3rd party cheaper re-housings are parfocal, ironically.
@@professionalpotato4764 ok))
Is it a 18-35mm by FF standard or should we add the camera manufacturer's crop factor ?
It's like 28-56 for FF
My go to lens
got this lens at 2017 still good as new!!
This thing is still dominating for some time, nat seen any other like it to beat it, may be the canon 16-35 f2.8, but still, this sigma has the sharp prime lens look.
great pair with fx30, if sigma release DG DN version
I personally find there to be quite a bit of character to this lens. The barrel distortion is something that I really love, gives you something close to anamorphic with the distorted sides, and the out of focus I find to be more on the creative/creamy side and not clinical like something you'd find with a Rokinon. I've had this bad boy for years and this is the first time I've ever heard anyone say this lens "lacks character".
If Sigma made a non-telescoping 24-70, it would be a wrap and I'd never use any other lens!
What is your suggestion if I buy it for the Canon R6?
I wouldn't suggest this lens for the R6 as it will limit what formats you can shoot in or the focal lengths of the lens you can use without vignetting. Jake
Is Amazing end expensive also in 2023....
it will always be good
Each time I felt like "eww this is ugly" during the video; it was the Z-CAM on screen haha
Is the Cine version par focal? The stills version is definitely not!
The stills version performs very will on a calibrated mount and so does the cine.
Cine isn't parfocal. You have to get 3rd party versions.
@@professionalpotato4764 Technically, no lens is truly parfocal...
do you know a ultra low budget setup without too much autofocus noise?
What camera are you using? Jake
@@CVPTV Sony a6000 with the mc-11 adapter. Maybe a hotshoe extender + audio recorder + shotgun microphone could do the trick. I don't know.
Wishing for native Fujifilm X mount....
love it more and more every day
Dont let the BMPCC user groups see this...
Why? Because it's not a "cine" lens?
@@markoboychuk some of those people lose their minds when they see someone shooting on this lens, and I mean that in a bad way.
@@joenicklo Do you know why though? What is it that triggers them about this lens?
Hahahahahaha. I'm guilty of this. I don't even know why.
An updated E-mount version is needed!
Amazing lens but the one I have has serious focus discrepancies across all focal lengths
This was the first lens I bought when upgrading to the EOS R, really can't fault it. The lens is a workhorse.
Isn't the EOS R a full-frame camera? This is an APS-C lense...
@@Vamp898 It is, but I have an adapter for it.
@@LukeMackie but then it's gonna be cropped, isn't it? I'd say you're better off with an 24-70 F2.8
@@Vamp898 I shoot in 4K, there’s already a crop so it doesn’t affect it. This lens actually makes it so that there’s no crop shooting in 4K, it’s the only lens I know of that offers that.. I actually found that out after buying it, it was a win/win for me :)
@@LukeMackie ah, didn't know that. I actually don't know that camera well. My camera doesn't crop in 4K but if yours do, it's the best lense for the job. You could also use the 50-100 F1.8 then too
I somehow assumed you were shooting stills because I almost exclusively shoot stills
After my house got flooded and lost all my gear, this was the first piece I replaced.
Even tho I want to love this lens... I always end up using my Nikon 50mm 1.8 prime on the full frame over the 18-35 on my crop sensor.... there is something about the 18-35 that I don't like for portraits or product photography... but for landscapes I always get great results.
Clinically sharp, looks unappealing for portraits,
Anyone.. With this lens can the other apertures 2.8 3.5 5.6 and so on , maintain it aperture as you change between 18-35mm? Thank you.
It’s the sharpest lens I have, but I never want to use it. The output is boring.
I'll say it again, it will always be good
Amazing
Iq and handling is great - versatile
Got a bad rep from af issues and noisy AF
Great lens but why would it not be great, a great lens is great regardless of the year
We need this lens on X-mount 🙏 @ Sigma
so it will work great on a canon 80d
Anyone know how the auto focus does on the c300?
Because there is no competitors in the market for this focal range and fast f1.8
No AF tests?
It's a video centric review..so af is only used by youtubers.. its irrelevant!
If you want af go watch sony ;)
@@ludovicavice3496 Very true haha in two years with this lens i've never switched the AF switch on.
@@encoreflix2377 does it have an af switch ? Damn u made me go check my lens..did nt know it had one lol..fk
i want sharp images when i take pictures
I have really mixed feelings about this lens. On one hand it has great clean color, contrast and sharpness, but is a pain in the ass when working on a professional set due to short focus throw and lack of hard stops.
On the other hand nothing in this price range that is proper manual focus comes even close in terms of iq.
Have you tried the rehousing by PChood Cinematics? They're apparently better than official Sigma cine versions cos they're 100% parfocal. And only $1700~ for a piece. If you send in your own glass, it's only about $1000.
amazing it is
I've heard that the official Sigma cine version isn't parfocal, whereas the cheaper 3rd party re-housing are. Strange that Sigma didn't put in a bit more effort.
Cine version of 18-35 is parafocal, and still version is not. They are not identical.
Did you watch the full video?
@@CVPTV Yes. And also watch many other reviews. I also rent a cinema version and compare it to my still version. Optically they're almost the same, cinema version hold up a contrast a bit better in frontlight situation and cinema version is parafocal, still version is NOT. Both still version my and my friend are loosing focus while going from 18-35 or back, (doesn't matter on which focal distance you in focus). And they are both super sharp when focused, and they both were calibrated on a sigma usb dock station.
@@iamfollowingmyheart Sigma says the cine version isn't parfocal. It's close. Almost parfocal, maybe 95%? But Sigma themselves say it isn't so it isn't.
The only parfocal ones are 3rd party re-housed versions.
@@professionalpotato4764 what is the name of this 3rd party re-housed version?
I don't know whether it is me or my American thought process, this dude talks too freggen' fast and I can't understand half of what he was saying. Maybe his European accent was in it's way or that is to be blamed, IDK. However, the idea is to make your video palatable to everyone.
Also, this lens will resolve good at 1080P well and at 4K you'll start to see vignetting.
We work in 8K acquisition. However, we do NOT recommend this lens for 8K workflow as it does NOT resolve at 8K.Therefore, doesn't affect our workflow.
Does it work on super 35 sensor?
You should watch the video
sigma vs tamron 2021 . . .tamron win
When did lenses start going out of date? Lmfao 🤣. I use lenses from the 50’s and 70’s. Never ever know that my sigma 18-35 would be up for debate in 2021. I could see if it was 10 years old at least.
Of course they do, why shouldn't they? The lense designs in the 50s and 70s would have been different, if they would have had our current technology. But they did not have that so they created worse lenses. Not because they were bad lense designers, but they didn't have giant high performance computing clusters with incredible software to develop better leneses.
They did the best they could, but they would have done it better and/or differnet, if they could have done it.
Lense designs constantly improve. The more CPU power und the better software we have, the better can we do calculations and experiement with lense designs, glass elements and so on.
Modern lense designs have barely things in common with lense designs in the 50s and 70s.
Where a 50mm lenses in the 50s and 70s hat 4-6 Glass Elements, modern 50mm lenses have 14-17 glass elements. Do you think they put so many elements into a lense just for fun, without any influence on the resulting image, not to mention lense coatings and glass materials.
Glass Materials and glass development processes constantly evolve, lense caoting technology consantly evolve and the lense design as it is constantly evolves.
Where glass used in the 50s and 70s were more or less all the same, plain glass, modern lenses are made from several different glass materials, different coatings and so on and it needs hours of complex calculations to find out which lenses work together in what way.
Technology doesn't stop, never did and never will. Sure a lense from the 50s or 70s can still be used today. But in general they are worse in every aspect you can measure, including color, contrast, flare, chromatic aberration, bokeh (but taste plays a big role in bokeh too) and so on.
The SIGMA 18-35mm F1.8 is stil amazing in 2021 becaue it is still the most current lense in this sector. When SIGMA will release an DN Version of that lense, it will be better than the 18-35mm in every aspect and at that point, the current 18-35mm is outdated. That doesn't mean its broken or something, its just no longer state of the art.
I have one and on the Canon R it breaths and is non parfocal, however using it on BM pocket 4k with a Viltrox adaptor and adjusting the element in the adaptor, doesn't breath and is parfocal! Same if you use a metabones, check out Gerald Undone's review.... th-cam.com/video/BhmbTpkMECo/w-d-xo.html
The sigma 18-35 is for noobs. Also why would anyone hire you with it when every hack and his dog has it. There’s nothing to differentiate yourself as a cinematographer. This lens is for hacks.
Cinema lenses are parfocal meaning they retain critical focus at any zoom point change. The 18-35mm is not a parfocal lens, and Sigma themselves have stated that it's not possible to make the lens due to how it's designed. The newer 60-600mm Sigma Sport lens is "Parfocal" meaning it retains perfect focus at all zooms levels. A necessity for shooting high-end video. The Sigma 150-600mm sport is NOT PARFOCAL so if you shoot video this is not the sense for you. All Cine Lenses are par focal but Cinema lenses are quite expensive for this reason. Understand that more than 90% of the photography lenses by Canon, Nikon and yes Sony are not parfocal because the cost to make it that way. Some lens come close to being parfocal but be careful because if you are not paying attention you can get burnered by that "almost" perfect focus. For critical work keep it parfocal.
Sigma probably didn't want to put in more R&D after developing it. PChood Cinematics has already rehoused it to be 100% parfocal, for less than half the price.