Yup. Same. I switched from Canon to Sony so I had a 17-50 f2.8 which I adapted for E Mount. Worked well in a pinch but it was rather cumbersome to use.
Same for me, but instead of the a6000, I got a DSLR, because there I had those lenses. A few more years and it might be finally time to switch to mirrorless for me and give my daughter my old gear. Well or just buy her some nice DSLM body and let her collect her own glass … either way, the glass for those mirrorless have come a long way. Pretty impressive lenses and great cheap glass to now. Some nice large bodies as option now as well. Nothing against small bodies, but I like them bigger to fit into my hand.
This is the first actual lens I bought for my 5 year old a6000 other than the one it came with. Hope to see an upgrade in quality with the pictures I take. Might upgrade the body to the a6600 soon too.
I still love my A6000 since they are out. Instead to get a newer generation of body, I prefer to upgrade my quality of lenses. The lenses are good for lifetime but not for the camera. Main reason, is also because I don't do video at all, so I will stay with A6000 maybe a A6100!
finally an honest review of the image quality coming from this lens. all of the other reviews of this lens that I have seen so far have come from creators who were sent the lens by sigma and they werent totally comprehensive like this.
Excellent review as usual. I own the 18-105mm f4 and I use it for wedding videos. I love it for so many reasons, but of course the low light performance isn't the greatest. For that I jump to my sigma 30mm and 56mm f1.4 primes. Big problem is not having the ability to zoom and for live events, it's very necessary. This might be a very nice compromise.
I have full frame and apsc lenses. I have the Sony 16-55 2.8.... but this lens, is incredible. Just incredibly easy to use, small, and handy. Sigma really nailed it on this one. On my A6700 the lack of in lens stabilization is nothing. The bokeh is great, the close focusing is amazing.... it's a knockout!
Would you say Sony 16-55 2.8 is much better? I have Sigma but I often think I should have gotten the Sony 16-55 2.8 instead, as it's probably shaper and has a slightly better zoom range for travels. I feel like Sigma isn't that sharp at 18mm for landscapes, I dislike the background that looks like fish scales in the corners, and when photographing bright white objects in sunlight I get these CAs (but that is a me-issue and my skills issue). On the other hand, the price difference is massive. If you could only get one, which one would you choose - Sony or Sigma?
@@JoATTech What on earth are you going to capture with that .. I wouldn't even waste my time taking that down the coast nevermind out in the Countryside .. it would be useless at capturing anything at Distance
Funny how Sigma went from making the jumbo sized and super heavy lenses to tiny ones! I love that small form factor, but they could've put a little more emphasis on image quality and it would've been irresistible deal!
The Sigma is very sharp. Frost's tests on corner sharpness isn't very useful because it doesn't show you the perimeter around the center which is way more important than corner sharpness which no one looks at. In other tests the Sigma is very sharp.
Great review! Now, let's hope for a longer zoom like 50-200mm F2.8 for apsc :) ...and yes, some now Sony APSC bodies. The A6000-series is starting to be old, especially because of the old sensor, without backside ilumination and with masssive rolling shutter.
The next Sony APS-C better have new sensor, 4k 60p (though I fear that it will have a crop on crop…, but still better than nothing) and if I am not asking much: 10 bit Video like Fuji etc., otherwise time to jump ship.
No problem with my A6000. I prefer for now to buy high quality lens as this one. Nobody will see any difference between A6000 vs A6700 if you are doing only photos. Later on, my sufficient upgrade will be A6100 or A6400. Absolutely no technical need to go higher. I don't do video at all.
I own this lens since it came out for E-Mount. When I look at the pictures in detail, I'm always blown away by the sharpness and overall quality it produces. For me it beats the Sigma 16mm f1.4 and Sigma 30mm f1.4 in every aspect except low light situations.
How much outperformed the 1,4 the 2.8. How can imagine this scenario. How low is the light. This is my first lense besides the stock btw. Looking forward:)
One problem that is not mentioned - the zoom ring goes in the wrong direction compared to Sony lenses. It can be very annoying if you mix this lens with Sony / Tamron lenses.
Hi Christopher, great review! But how is it possible that the lens readjust the focus when you zoom quickly in and out even in manual focus mode? Did I get right what you said at around 3:30? Thanks
Sharpness in the middle looks amazing. But I'll go on with 16-50 kit lens on my zv e10 and a6000, because it is compact and has oss... Thanks to Sigma and you Christopher anyway...
Great review as always. I'm struggling to decide between this Sigma and Tamron 17-70 f/2.8. The stabilization and the extra reach is truly appealing with Tamron, although the image quality at the higher focal lengths is not that great looks like.
For me sigma was a bit better in terms of CA control and bokeh quality, also close up quality was much better on sigma, with tamron I had weird ghosting and lose of contrast. Autofocus better on sigma by far, its like native. Stabilization is good for 50-70 range, for shorter focal I didn't notice much help. I would go for sigma, because it fit APS-C perfectly, while tamron is huge, its like regular fullframe lens.
I am seriously considering his lens for video work. I use a Sony A6600 with the standard Sony 16-50mm OSS kit lens and have recently included a Feiyutech G6 Max gimbal. The payload of the G6 Max will support the weight of the A6600 with the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 lens and I think that I may switch from the kit lens to the Sigma...
I would like to know if I can achieve the same quality (detail and sharpness) with this lens (at 18mm) as with the Sigma 16mm f/1.4, because I already have a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and I was thinking of buying the 16mm f/1.4, but I wonder if I can achieve the same results with the new Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8. Thx
I was asking myself the same thing, for a moment, but even without testing this, I’m gonna directly say: “Never.” At least not so soon. Reason 1 (classical answer): - because it is a zoom lens (The way glass moves inside, at so many focal lengths etc.) Reason 2: released by the same company (Think that Sigma would shout themselves in the foot, so soon? The trio is too fresh, still…)
Cause if that zoom lens is as sharp as the trio or at least 90% sharp, same distortions bla bla, you can imagine that everyone in here will sell their primes. Myself included. I would ANY DAY prefer ONE LENS ONLY, at all times, instead bunch of things rolling through my bag. THAT WOULD BE THE DREAM LENS: - the TRIO combined into ONE :)
Hi, the 1 stop difference let apart, I would enjoy a comparispn between the Sigma 18-50/2.8 on a 24MP APSC camera, and the Sigma 28-70/2.8 on a 24MP FF camera.
But recording videos in apsc mode should be decent I think. We just can't maximize the full sensor... Actually to add to your question I asked if there was any other focal length that might work and make the barrel disappear/ less noticeable.
You can set to Super 35 as APS-C mode, most latest Sony Camera have been set to auto detect if lens is full frame or APS-C. For full frame lens to Super 35 will be around 60% zoom.
Hello Christopher. I really like your reviews. I would like to know your opinion. Which lens is better in terms of sharpness and focus speed, this lens 18-50mm f2.8 or Tamron 17-70mm f2.8?
Eagerly awaiting the X mount version. As also a 50-150 tele twin to this lens. Although, that might have to come with a lower focal range as it would certainly need IS.
After few months of using this cute little sigma I went back to sigma trio, can't live without F/1.4 and possibilites with faster shutter speed. F/2.8 in Poland is too dark, we get only few weeks of sunny days in whole year, rest are dark or cloudy, 1.4 is a must for crop sensor in my environment ;). What I miss from 18-50? Autofocus, fast & accurate autofocus, even is harsh conditions, its like native sony lens.
How does it compare to the much older Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS HSM that you also reviewed some years back? Do they have comparable good image quality? Those 17-50mm sounds like a real steal if you can find them available. So I'm hoping for Sigma to either introduce this new lens for Canon, or just go for that really older Sigma 2.8 Standard Zoom lens. 🤔
I never tested the 17-50mm f/2.8 lens on a 24mp camera but almost certainly this new 18-50mm lens will be sharper - it's a different generation, the 17-50 is quite old now
The 17-50 still holds its own against new lenses, though. I use it on my a6600 alongside Sony primes. It looks to be better corrected than the new lens for distortion and aberration, which isn't surprising given its larger size.
I had already purchased the Sigma 56mm f1.4 lens, but then I just saw that they came out with this and since this is more versatile, I decided to cancel the 56mm and buy this instead. So excited and can't wait for it to come in!
This would have been perfect for me if it had stabilization :-( I really have no wish to upgrade my a6300 to an a6600 to get in body stabilization - too much money for too little benefit (for me). So far, the Tamron 17-70 with its in lens stabilization, despite its size, seems a better choice, My main use for a lens like this is for handheld indoor stills without flash at events. Considering these events are few and far between during Covid I will wait and see if a better choice comes along.
@@megaman2016 It's the higher ISO that I am trying to avoid with a faster lens with stabilization. Stabilization helps enormously with handheld shots in lower light !I never relized how much until I got an Olympus ...
@@WEHAVETHISDREAM Sony has many small lenses with OSS : the 35mm F1.8, the 50mm F1.8, the pancake 16-50mm kit lens, the old 18-55 kit lens etc. No reason why they could not add it to the 16-55 F2.8 G zoom or to a new 23mm APS-C lens. Tamron put Vibration Control on their 17-17 F2,8 Emount lens after all.
Great video as usual! Pretty interrested this time on this lens... I wonder if you noticed image degradation mounted on your A7R3 in crop mode vs on your A5100 apsc camera. Thanks
On the subject of third party lenses, would you be able to test Voigtlander lenses? I heard there are adapters from Techart, Megadap and Fotodiox to adapt these lenses onto Sony E-mount, Nikon Z-mount and Fujifilm X-mount and add autofocus.
Even though it's worse than the Fuji 16-55 F2.8 in every way I'd still rather have this small boy for its small boy price. We just have to be patient, it's annoying it's taking so long but eventually Tamron and Sigma will actually release whatever they're cooking in their basement for Fuji X.
@@Vinterloft for the very considerable amount of handheld work I do, I completely agree with you. For what I do, 10-bit this and that isn’t very important and color science isn’t very important as i make comedy content. All I need is a lens that zooms in and out, at a constant aperitifs, without any flickering/exposure stepping. This lens ticks all those boxes and the Sony a6600 + this lens is cheaper than the XT-4 body alone. I’m really considering a switch haha
I’m eagerly awaiting the Fuji version that’s supposed to be released in December. I switched to Fuji in 2016 after 40+ years with Nikon because as my age advanced my ability to carry big and heavy lenses and cameras declined. So light weight and small size combined with f2.8 and excellent optical performance will be a huge advantage for me. For these reasons, the excellent Tamron 17-70 doesn’t interest me.
In my country the price of this lens is $150 US more than the fuji 18-55 (I compare the used price). So if i want to take photo on holiday trips, which one will be a better choice?
5 หลายเดือนก่อน
I got this lens recently and love it. It's amazing.
hi christopher - please i need an expert advise about some lenses i own !! can you please help me about this topic i have 2 old lenses : 1 - EBC X-Fujinon Z F = 35-70mm and a second one 2- Planar 1.4 / 50 Carl Zeiss 6049185 so my question is i have a canon 700D can i use those 2 lens on it with a rig amount !!? and which one should i bring or do i have to buy 2 different rigs for each one of them ? thanks for help in advance
@@Powerland56 Yeah my XF 18-55 copy seems sharper in the corners at wide open apertures. Same distortion at 18mm though. You should check the uncorrected raws. It's really the only real flaw the fujinon has. Vignetting is more controlled but it's also dimmer. So it's a wash there. Then it has O.I.S and not all Fuji bodies have IBIS. Combine that with everyon already that wants this lens already owns or takes it as a bundle. And you can see there is no market for the Sigma in X-Mount. That said an EF-M or Z-mount version would be an instant hit on both platforms.
I am waiting for this lens since I bought my A6000 years ago. I think I will buy it to replace my Sigma Art 30mm and 60mm. They don't have IS either. So I don't care about. I almost get my too lenses in one by even less weight and with the benefit of zooming from 18 to 50mm. I would prefer the Tamron range of 17-70 but the price and weight of the Sigma make the deal.
😄 👍 I also have the Sigma 30mm and the old 60mm (very sharp). I'm thinking to sell those also only to keep this Sigma 18-50mm. I love the high optical quality of Sigma, better then Tamron.
How is this lens on a full frame camera like the a7iii. Is there a noticeable drop off in image quality? I like the idea of a small zoom on a full frame
The only problem i saw with this lens are the slightly soft corners. But still they are almost perfect. Is this lens going to be any good for Astrophotography/Nightscape?
Finally the mirrorless version of the old 17-50 f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM! Hope Sigma update the 8-16 and 50-150 also, and make lenses to Canon, Nikon and other mounts.
Very nice from Sigma to make such a compact lens. Hope other manufacturers follow soon. I was about to buy the Sony 16-55 f2.8. This lens makes me reconsider.
@@JonathanBarrow if I didn't have the 16-55, I couud buy this Sigma as a compact everyday lens, and the Tamron 17-70 for handeld video work. Too bad that this Sigma has no image stabilization. I actually bought the Tamron 18-300. Very sharp, nice photos. stabilization is great for video. But lens is a bit large for everyday, and not for low light. The Sony 16-55 goes used on ebay for about $800, so after fees and commissions, it does not even cover the price of the new Tamron. How is the weather sealing o this? I read of dust in the lens after little time with the Tamron 17-70
Same way then me. I just cancel my order on the SONY 16-55mm (double the price $1400. vs $550. for the Sigma) with an almost almost identical quality. Even at $1400. // weight: 495g vs 290g // I was ready to buy the Sony (no interest to upgrade my A6000) until I discovered this Sigma.
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..
@@bboon5315 Having said that, the Tamron does offer a lot for the money, and for some people might be the perfect choice. The overall image quality is better than this Sigma, so don’t rule it out just yet..
Thank you so much for the full frame camera setting with the lens attached! I was wondering, does anyone know if any focal length in full frame mode can hide away the rest of the dark circle? I would like to see if I can use some full frame focal lengths plus crop mode.
Hello all! I am a begginer and i don't know...this lens in a Panasonic s5IIx,in apsc mode,will keep the 18mm focal lenght? Or it will crop 18x1,5? Sorry for my language...thank you all!
I always want to ask - *why do you think, Sigma* (Canon/Nikon etc) *18mm is enought for APS-C???* I personally hate this 28 FF eq. look. It's not good at all. It's not WIDE, it's "widish". 16 (24 FF eq.) - is. So why 18?? It could have been so nice...
Question: I am new to zoom lenses. Can you change the aperture from f2.8 to a smaller aperture at different focal lengths? Or are you always shooting at f2.8.
Great review. if I didn't have the 16-55, I couud buy this Sigma as a compact everyday lens, and the Tamron 17-70 for handeld video work. Too bad that this Sigma has no image stabilization. I actually bought the Tamron 18-300. Very sharp, nice photos. stabilization is great for video. But lens is a bit large for everyday, and not for low light. The Sony 16-55 goes used on ebay for about $800, so after fees and commissions, it does not even cover the price of the new Tamron. How is the weather sealing o this? I read of dust in the lens after little time with the Tamron 17-70
@@wanderdutts4584 Tamron 17-70. It has image stabilization and more reach. Or Sigma 18-50 as a compact option. I sold the Sony and got the Tamron. Much better for video, with stabilization. Only con is 1mm focal length less wide
Price: £429 / €499 / $549 (US)
Already ordered this morning
wow what a great US price
It’s about time we have a lens like this. I’ve been waiting for a lens like this when I had the a6000 all those years ago.
Yup. Same. I switched from Canon to Sony so I had a 17-50 f2.8 which I adapted for E Mount. Worked well in a pinch but it was rather cumbersome to use.
Same for me, but instead of the a6000, I got a DSLR, because there I had those lenses.
A few more years and it might be finally time to switch to mirrorless for me and give my daughter my old gear. Well or just buy her some nice DSLM body and let her collect her own glass … either way, the glass for those mirrorless have come a long way. Pretty impressive lenses and great cheap glass to now.
Some nice large bodies as option now as well. Nothing against small bodies, but I like them bigger to fit into my hand.
This is the first actual lens I bought for my 5 year old a6000 other than the one it came with. Hope to see an upgrade in quality with the pictures I take. Might upgrade the body to the a6600 soon too.
I still love my A6000 since they are out. Instead to get a newer generation of body, I prefer to upgrade my quality of lenses. The lenses are good for lifetime but not for the camera.
Main reason, is also because I don't do video at all, so I will stay with A6000 maybe a A6100!
Thanks for all your work. As far as my lens research goes, if Christopher Frost hasn't reviewed it, it doesn't exist to me.
I guess this would be close to a 28-70mm f/4 lens to a full frame. Still awesome size
Just received today from B&H. This lens is superb and very very sharp. Recommended 1000%
I'm definitely buying this lens even with all of its compromises. For video work on a crane m2 gimbal it will shine brighter than the sun!
Wish it was a bit wider though.
What camera you using? I'm thinking the same
Me too!
16mm on this lens would have made me sell the holy trio.
I was waiting for this. Your reviews are concise and diligent - one of the few TH-camrs I trust.
finally an honest review of the image quality coming from this lens. all of the other reviews of this lens that I have seen so far have come from creators who were sent the lens by sigma and they werent totally comprehensive like this.
Excellent review as usual. I own the 18-105mm f4 and I use it for wedding videos. I love it for so many reasons, but of course the low light performance isn't the greatest. For that I jump to my sigma 30mm and 56mm f1.4 primes. Big problem is not having the ability to zoom and for live events, it's very necessary. This might be a very nice compromise.
Hey Michael, if you were to choose between the Sony 18mm-105mm f/4 vs Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8, which one would you pick as your first lens?
Curious too.
@@wehsuhlee 18-105mm 100%. The power zoom and the fact that you can use it on a gimbal because the lens barrel is fixed makes it more valuable to me.
@@MichaelWTurner which camera are you using? i'll work in a wedding in a couple months and i'm not sure if my apsc Fx30 will handle this f4 lens.
I have full frame and apsc lenses. I have the Sony 16-55 2.8.... but this lens, is incredible. Just incredibly easy to use, small, and handy. Sigma really nailed it on this one. On my A6700 the lack of in lens stabilization is nothing. The bokeh is great, the close focusing is amazing.... it's a knockout!
Would you say Sony 16-55 2.8 is much better? I have Sigma but I often think I should have gotten the Sony 16-55 2.8 instead, as it's probably shaper and has a slightly better zoom range for travels. I feel like Sigma isn't that sharp at 18mm for landscapes, I dislike the background that looks like fish scales in the corners, and when photographing bright white objects in sunlight I get these CAs (but that is a me-issue and my skills issue). On the other hand, the price difference is massive. If you could only get one, which one would you choose - Sony or Sigma?
SOLD!! Thank you for your detailed and honest review.
Sigma should release a mirrorless version of the 18-35mm and 50-100mm f1.8.
The 18-35mm in Nikon DX version was not good enough to shell out the money... Instead I got me a cheap AF-P 18-55 VR lens and I love it.
16-35 would be better of course F1.8 like the famous one.
2nd that
@@JoATTech What on earth are you going to capture with that .. I wouldn't even waste my time taking that down the coast nevermind out in the Countryside .. it would be useless at capturing anything at Distance
18-35mm f1.8 apsc sounds pretty good, but it would probably be heavier that this lens
Would love it for Fujifilm. 2.8 through the range would be a good upgrade to their kit 18-55.
Same! I love Fujis 16-80 but f4 is just not the fastest sadly, plus that lens is worlds away from being compact/light
Sigma just confirmed it's coming to go Fuji this year.
Watching back after so many years 😊
Funny how Sigma went from making the jumbo sized and super heavy lenses to tiny ones!
I love that small form factor, but they could've put a little more emphasis on image quality and it would've been irresistible deal!
The Sigma is very sharp. Frost's tests on corner sharpness isn't very useful because it doesn't show you the perimeter around the center which is way more important than corner sharpness which no one looks at. In other tests the Sigma is very sharp.
Sigma has a nice line of compact, "contemporary" f/2 prime lenses for full frame. Just the thing for street photography.
Perfect for my Leica CL! About time, this fills a very obvious hole in the market.
Canons EF-m mount really need this lens...
The EF-M mount needs any lens.
Yes
for sure
Absolutely true
It’s like a brian shaw version of the 15-45 kit lens, the perfect upgrade for it
Great review! Now, let's hope for a longer zoom like 50-200mm F2.8 for apsc :)
...and yes, some now Sony APSC bodies. The A6000-series is starting to be old, especially because of the old sensor, without backside ilumination and with masssive rolling shutter.
The next Sony APS-C better have new sensor, 4k 60p (though I fear that it will have a crop on crop…, but still better than nothing) and if I am not asking much: 10 bit Video like Fuji etc., otherwise time to jump ship.
No problem with my A6000. I prefer for now to buy high quality lens as this one. Nobody will see any difference between A6000 vs A6700 if you are doing only photos. Later on, my sufficient upgrade will be A6100 or A6400. Absolutely no technical need to go higher. I don't do video at all.
@@WEHAVETHISDREAM So would do you think of the new a6700?
Might need a re-review soon on an R7 given the news today!
Today is the day!
I own this lens since it came out for E-Mount. When I look at the pictures in detail, I'm always blown away by the sharpness and overall quality it produces. For me it beats the Sigma 16mm f1.4 and Sigma 30mm f1.4 in every aspect except low light situations.
How much outperformed the 1,4 the 2.8. How can imagine this scenario. How low is the light. This is my first lense besides the stock btw. Looking forward:)
Are you sure it beat the fantastic Sigma 30mm f1.4? Ouf! 🤔
@@clarification007 Mr. Frost provides all the information necessary to decide for yourself 🙂 Beyond, my opinion stands.
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!
16-55/2.8 is a beast but too heavy. This sigma zoom lense is a competitive offering and fits perfectly for apsc system
I suspect it’s coming soon. Sigma teased yet again. If it does then I’m getting it.
Haha time always tells
One problem that is not mentioned - the zoom ring goes in the wrong direction compared to Sony lenses. It can be very annoying if you mix this lens with Sony / Tamron lenses.
Hi Christopher, great review! But how is it possible that the lens readjust the focus when you zoom quickly in and out even in manual focus mode? Did I get right what you said at around 3:30? Thanks
Sharpness in the middle looks amazing. But I'll go on with 16-50 kit lens on my zv e10 and a6000, because it is compact and has oss... Thanks to Sigma and you Christopher anyway...
The kit is awesome for how small it is and can do.
People forget that.
you can also go for a TTartisan 27 2.8 for daily carry
Great review as always. I'm struggling to decide between this Sigma and Tamron 17-70 f/2.8. The stabilization and the extra reach is truly appealing with Tamron, although the image quality at the higher focal lengths is not that great looks like.
For me sigma was a bit better in terms of CA control and bokeh quality, also close up quality was much better on sigma, with tamron I had weird ghosting and lose of contrast. Autofocus better on sigma by far, its like native. Stabilization is good for 50-70 range, for shorter focal I didn't notice much help. I would go for sigma, because it fit APS-C perfectly, while tamron is huge, its like regular fullframe lens.
@@Patrick-vi9xr Well, yes... The Tamron 17-70 f/2.8 is basically equivalent to a full frame 24-105 f/4.
@@Patrick-vi9xr
Tamron is f2.8, for full frame even a F4 would be bigger and heavier.
Purchased tamron was thinking its aka 24/105 f4 but vc was jerky the weight too much had to switch to sigma 18-50
I am seriously considering his lens for video work. I use a Sony A6600 with the standard Sony 16-50mm OSS kit lens and have recently included a Feiyutech G6 Max gimbal. The payload of the G6 Max will support the weight of the A6600 with the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 lens and I think that I may switch from the kit lens to the Sigma...
So u did?
I would like to know if I can achieve the same quality (detail and sharpness) with this lens (at 18mm) as with the Sigma 16mm f/1.4, because I already have a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and I was thinking of buying the 16mm f/1.4, but I wonder if I can achieve the same results with the new Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8. Thx
I was asking myself the same thing, for a moment, but even without testing this, I’m gonna directly say: “Never.”
At least not so soon.
Reason 1 (classical answer):
- because it is a zoom lens
(The way glass moves inside, at so many focal lengths etc.)
Reason 2: released by the same company
(Think that Sigma would shout themselves in the foot, so soon?
The trio is too fresh, still…)
*shoot :P
Cause if that zoom lens is as sharp as the trio or at least 90% sharp, same distortions bla bla, you can imagine that everyone in here will sell their primes. Myself included.
I would ANY DAY prefer ONE LENS ONLY, at all times, instead bunch of things rolling through my bag.
THAT WOULD BE THE DREAM LENS:
- the TRIO combined into ONE :)
No zoom from any company can beat a well-made prime lens.
Hi, the 1 stop difference let apart, I would enjoy a comparispn between the Sigma 18-50/2.8 on a 24MP APSC camera, and the Sigma 28-70/2.8 on a 24MP FF camera.
So can this be used with a sony a7c ?
Wouldn't recommend it. You'd get what's shown at 1:59
@@PhobiaSoft OR you'd get a 9.4MP image
@@PhobiaSoft thanks
But recording videos in apsc mode should be decent I think. We just can't maximize the full sensor... Actually to add to your question I asked if there was any other focal length that might work and make the barrel disappear/ less noticeable.
You can set to Super 35 as APS-C mode, most latest Sony Camera have been set to auto detect if lens is full frame or APS-C. For full frame lens to Super 35 will be around 60% zoom.
Still rocking sigma 17-50 2.8 dslr version. ☺️
I miss that glass, optical quality was AMAZING. Was kinda bulky/heavy though
@@christopherjc54 yup.. Little bit on the heavy and bulky side. And also the focus ring, it's a shortthrow and manual focus is little bit difficult.
Always like to watch your reviews, many thanks.
Hello Christopher. I really like your reviews. I would like to know your opinion. Which lens is better in terms of sharpness and focus speed, this lens 18-50mm f2.8 or Tamron 17-70mm f2.8?
I'm tempted to buy this for my a7r3 and just shoot in app-c mode! Its about the size of my sony 35mm f1.8 ! Brilliant!
finally. . I've waited for this mid zoom lens to complete with my trio sigma lens.
Eagerly awaiting the X mount version. As also a 50-150 tele twin to this lens. Although, that might have to come with a lower focal range as it would certainly need IS.
I can't believe how small and light it is. Hoping they make it for the X-mount
they will! great info
After few months of using this cute little sigma I went back to sigma trio, can't live without F/1.4 and possibilites with faster shutter speed. F/2.8 in Poland is too dark, we get only few weeks of sunny days in whole year, rest are dark or cloudy, 1.4 is a must for crop sensor in my environment ;). What I miss from 18-50? Autofocus, fast & accurate autofocus, even is harsh conditions, its like native sony lens.
Is it really that bad?
@@GK-dd5ci Yep, from october to may weather is perfect to make another silent hill movie.
How does it compare to the much older Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS HSM that you also reviewed some years back?
Do they have comparable good image quality? Those 17-50mm sounds like a real steal if you can find them available. So I'm hoping for Sigma to either introduce this new lens for Canon, or just go for that really older Sigma 2.8 Standard Zoom lens. 🤔
I never tested the 17-50mm f/2.8 lens on a 24mp camera but almost certainly this new 18-50mm lens will be sharper - it's a different generation, the 17-50 is quite old now
The 17-50 still holds its own against new lenses, though. I use it on my a6600 alongside Sony primes. It looks to be better corrected than the new lens for distortion and aberration, which isn't surprising given its larger size.
@@rsmith02 for OLD 17-50mm f2.8 is great lens, if you not use for video recording, it can still stand for couple of year ....
Could you review the Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 lens? Thank you!
I’m a little bit confused here, isn’t this lens have fixed aperture of F2.8 through out the range? How did he step to F4 and F5.6? 4:10
Did you got the answer
He stopped the aperture down.
Please do a comparison video of canon rf 100-400mm f/5.6-8 is usm vs Tamron or Sigma 150-600mm
I had already purchased the Sigma 56mm f1.4 lens, but then I just saw that they came out with this and since this is more versatile, I decided to cancel the 56mm and buy this instead. So excited and can't wait for it to come in!
Has it let you down? Or is it worth buying? :)
@@savnac I have both, the zoom is more versatile of course, but on you portrait day, nothing beats the 56.
@@phucth91 On APS-C, a fast 56mm is as good as it gets, for portraiture.
I sometimes like to dual wield 2 crop bodies with Sigma 16 and 30 or 56 in a sling bag. I usually pack the extra lens because it’s so small anyway.
Can't beat this quality at that price.
This would have been perfect for me if it had stabilization :-( I really have no wish to upgrade my a6300 to an a6600 to get in body stabilization - too much money for too little benefit (for me). So far, the Tamron 17-70 with its in lens stabilization, despite its size, seems a better choice, My main use for a lens like this is for handheld indoor stills without flash at events. Considering these events are few and far between during Covid I will wait and see if a better choice comes along.
Use faster shutter speed and higher ISO
@@megaman2016 It's the higher ISO that I am trying to avoid with a faster lens with stabilization. Stabilization helps enormously with handheld shots in lower light !I never relized how much until I got an Olympus ...
Me too.
Don’t want to spend 1000 more cash for a 6600…
The same sensor etc.
Also have the 6300.
Pity but also pretty hard to put OSS on such a small thing. 🤔
@@WEHAVETHISDREAM Sony has many small lenses with OSS : the 35mm F1.8, the 50mm F1.8, the pancake 16-50mm kit lens, the old 18-55 kit lens etc. No reason why they could not add it to the 16-55 F2.8 G zoom or to a new 23mm APS-C lens. Tamron put Vibration Control on their 17-17 F2,8 Emount lens after all.
Oh wow! You just review the lens and don't waste my time. Thank you.
Great review as always!
Great video as usual! Pretty interrested this time on this lens...
I wonder if you noticed image degradation mounted on your A7R3 in crop mode vs on your A5100 apsc camera.
Thanks
I would love for this lens to come to fujifilm. I cannot afford the fujifilm version of this lens, and this lens is definitely within my reach.
On the subject of third party lenses, would you be able to test Voigtlander lenses? I heard there are adapters from Techart, Megadap and Fotodiox to adapt these lenses onto Sony E-mount, Nikon Z-mount and Fujifilm X-mount and add autofocus.
Does anybody else wish Fuji had lens support like this? I love Fuji colors but man I need a lens like this for this mount.
Even though it's worse than the Fuji 16-55 F2.8 in every way I'd still rather have this small boy for its small boy price. We just have to be patient, it's annoying it's taking so long but eventually Tamron and Sigma will actually release whatever they're cooking in their basement for Fuji X.
@@Vinterloft for the very considerable amount of handheld work I do, I completely agree with you. For what I do, 10-bit this and that isn’t very important and color science isn’t very important as i make comedy content. All I need is a lens that zooms in and out, at a constant aperitifs, without any flickering/exposure stepping. This lens ticks all those boxes and the Sony a6600 + this lens is cheaper than the XT-4 body alone. I’m really considering a switch haha
I’m eagerly awaiting the Fuji version that’s supposed to be released in December. I switched to Fuji in 2016 after 40+ years with Nikon because as my age advanced my ability to carry big and heavy lenses and cameras declined. So light weight and small size combined with f2.8 and excellent optical performance will be a huge advantage for me. For these reasons, the excellent Tamron 17-70 doesn’t interest me.
Nice review and nice lens ... especially for the price. Cheers, Chuck (from North East Florida, USA) 👀
For stills only (no video, ever) which is the best? Sigma, Tamron or Sony ?
There's the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM Lens ... did I miss a class? One is for DSLR and the newer one for mirror less?
In my country the price of this lens is $150 US more than the fuji 18-55 (I compare the used price). So if i want to take photo on holiday trips, which one will be a better choice?
I got this lens recently and love it. It's amazing.
I bought my first camera which is a Sony a6000 and the sigma lens, Do I also need an adapter for the lens so it fits?
No adapter required.
hi christopher - please i need an expert advise about some lenses i own !! can you please help me about this topic
i have 2 old lenses : 1 - EBC X-Fujinon Z F = 35-70mm and a second one 2- Planar 1.4 / 50 Carl Zeiss 6049185
so my question is i have a canon 700D can i use those 2 lens on it with a rig amount !!? and which one should i bring or do i have to buy 2 different rigs for each one of them ? thanks for help in advance
I really hope they release this for Fuji too! Can't wait to get rid of my pain in the ass primes.
Why? Fuji has a much better 18-55 2.8-4.0. Sharper in the edges, less vignetting, less distortion.
@@Powerland56 Sigma is 2.8 all the way. More light, thinner DOF.
I have Fuji's 18-55. f2.8 is nice, but I still need fast primes for indoors and low light.
@@Powerland56 Yeah my XF 18-55 copy seems sharper in the corners at wide open apertures.
Same distortion at 18mm though. You should check the uncorrected raws. It's really the only real flaw the fujinon has.
Vignetting is more controlled but it's also dimmer. So it's a wash there.
Then it has O.I.S and not all Fuji bodies have IBIS.
Combine that with everyon already that wants this lens already owns or takes it as a bundle. And you can see there is no market for the Sigma in X-Mount.
That said an EF-M or Z-mount version would be an instant hit on both platforms.
And no OIS and no aperture ring. No go for Fujis.
Thanks. And what about Fuji X mount?
That would be dead on arrival.
Excellent video 😊!
Great review, this lens looks like another great option for APS-C shooters.
Can't wait till they release the Fujifilm version.
I am waiting for this lens since I bought my A6000 years ago. I think I will buy it to replace my Sigma Art 30mm and 60mm. They don't have IS either. So I don't care about. I almost get my too lenses in one by even less weight and with the benefit of zooming from 18 to 50mm. I would prefer the Tamron range of 17-70 but the price and weight of the Sigma make the deal.
😄 👍 I also have the Sigma 30mm and the old 60mm (very sharp). I'm thinking to sell those also only to keep this Sigma 18-50mm.
I love the high optical quality of Sigma, better then Tamron.
Just saw the Canon RF-S review and came over here to see the CA and up close results. Not bad, really.
Great review man ❤️
Much Needed❤️
How is this lens on a full frame camera like the a7iii. Is there a noticeable drop off in image quality? I like the idea of a small zoom on a full frame
The only problem i saw with this lens are the slightly soft corners. But still they are almost perfect. Is this lens going to be any good for Astrophotography/Nightscape?
Finally the mirrorless version of the old 17-50 f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM! Hope Sigma update the 8-16 and 50-150 also, and make lenses to Canon, Nikon and other mounts.
Wish there were side-by-side tests with the old lens. It looks better for distortion and loca (and has OS).
Will inbody stabalization of a6500 be ok for this non OSS lens?
Please build one for Fuji and Nikon too!
I wonder what light transmission of this lens is actually are
Very nice from Sigma to make such a compact lens. Hope other manufacturers follow soon. I was about to buy the Sony 16-55 f2.8. This lens makes me reconsider.
if i didnt already own the 16-55 2.8, i would probably get this lens.
@@JonathanBarrow if I didn't have the 16-55, I couud buy this Sigma as a compact everyday lens, and the Tamron 17-70 for handeld video work. Too bad that this Sigma has no image stabilization. I actually bought the Tamron 18-300. Very sharp, nice photos. stabilization is great for video. But lens is a bit large for everyday, and not for low light. The Sony 16-55 goes used on ebay for about $800, so after fees and commissions, it does not even cover the price of the new Tamron. How is the weather sealing o this? I read of dust in the lens after little time with the Tamron 17-70
Same way then me. I just cancel my order on the SONY 16-55mm (double the price $1400. vs $550. for the Sigma) with an almost almost identical quality. Even at $1400. // weight: 495g vs 290g // I was ready to buy the Sony (no interest to upgrade my A6000) until I discovered this Sigma.
Can't wait for this for Fuji
now if only they had released this for the canon ef-m mount years ago... Oh well. I am curious to see if they ever release anything for the rf mount.
Just bought this and I can't wait to try it out! I'm excited and waiting for my step up rings before I take it out for a spin. Get it? XD
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..
On any body - stabilised or not, I wont go with the Tamron. Too long and heavy for my liking. It’s between the Sigma 18-50 and Sony 16-55 for me..
@@saifaldin_ Great reply and agreed with thanks
@@bboon5315 Having said that, the Tamron does offer a lot for the money, and for some people might be the perfect choice. The overall image quality is better than this Sigma, so don’t rule it out just yet..
Can you please do a review on the 35-150 f2-2.8 Tamron lens?
So, in-camera corrections ARE supported using a sigma lens on Sony body?
great video and nice photos
fr, it's always relaxing to enjoy his pictures and video clips
Thank you so much for the full frame camera setting with the lens attached! I was wondering, does anyone know if any focal length in full frame mode can hide away the rest of the dark circle? I would like to see if I can use some full frame focal lengths plus crop mode.
Because of the small barrel of the lens, the dark circle stays present through the entire range
Can we expect the same quality for Fuji as well? Thank you
Oh sorry. Not available for Fuji… yet
Sigma should release a fuji x mount version
Already talked with the dealer for my Sony A6300...
Hello, will there be a test of the Tamron 35-150 2-2.8?
Hello all! I am a begginer and i don't know...this lens in a Panasonic s5IIx,in apsc mode,will keep the 18mm focal lenght? Or it will crop 18x1,5? Sorry for my language...thank you all!
I wonder how this stack against the old sigma 17-50 f.28 for dslr ...in terms of focus breathing , image quality ...
Way less focus breathing on the new lens but looks like more aberration, especially LoCA, and more overall distortion.
Waiting for Fuji lens 33/1.4 review please
Can you only change the aperture in the settings not on the lens?
Would the image circle from this lens cover a 1:1 aspect ratio on a full frame sensor?
อยากให้ทำ 50-200 F2.8 C บ้างจังเลยครับ
I always want to ask - *why do you think, Sigma* (Canon/Nikon etc) *18mm is enought for APS-C???*
I personally hate this 28 FF eq. look. It's not good at all. It's not WIDE, it's "widish". 16 (24 FF eq.) - is. So why 18??
It could have been so nice...
28 is too wide I think.
Hoping the fuji mount ver
Why? they have the 18-55 F2.8-4 that everyone has a copy of.
thoughts on using it in super 35 crop mode on the a7rii? it's a curiously small 2.8 zoom :-)
Anybody knows if it will be released with an EF Canon mount one day ?
So this for full frame?
Question: I am new to zoom lenses. Can you change the aperture from f2.8 to a smaller aperture at different focal lengths? Or are you always shooting at f2.8.
You can change the aperture at all focal lengths
@@EmileModesitt Thank you!
Is it possible to correct distortion, vignetting and chromatic aberration for this lens in A6000 with newest 3.21 firmware? Has anybody tested it out?
Tamron 17-70 2,8 or sigma 18-50 2,8. Which is the better one?
I hope you get to review the new Tamron 2-2.8 soon
Great review. if I didn't have the 16-55, I couud buy this Sigma as a compact everyday lens, and the Tamron 17-70 for handeld video work. Too bad that this Sigma has no image stabilization. I actually bought the Tamron 18-300. Very sharp, nice photos. stabilization is great for video. But lens is a bit large for everyday, and not for low light. The Sony 16-55 goes used on ebay for about $800, so after fees and commissions, it does not even cover the price of the new Tamron. How is the weather sealing o this? I read of dust in the lens after little time with the Tamron 17-70
If you had the choice now to either pick the Sigma for £380 or the 16-55 at £800 which would you pick?
@@wanderdutts4584 Tamron 17-70. It has image stabilization and more reach. Or Sigma 18-50 as a compact option. I sold the Sony and got the Tamron. Much better for video, with stabilization. Only con is 1mm focal length less wide
I want Sigma to release these lens to RF APS-C format so bad :(