16mm on Amazon: amzn.to/2RyHTno or on B&H: bhpho.to/2DUTvJk 22mm on Amazon: amzn.to/2Vv3QDg or on b&h: bhpho.to/2CO1irm David or Goliath; which wide was your winner? 0:28 Lens specs 2:34 Autofocus ring sensitivity 4:50 Gimbal vlog 6:03 Selfie vlog 7:35 Low light vlog 8:58 IQ comparison 16:26 Low light IQ 19:10 Landscape IQ 22:45 Chromatic aberration 26:10 Lens flaring 26:36 Final thoughts
Canon 22mm for me - I owned both and used them for a year and ended up selling the Sigma - I prefer the images from the canon, and the size and weight difference is a big bonus (that 16mm on the M50 feels too big and heavy) , and for me, the extra aperture is negligible - f/2 is more than enough for a wide angle lens. I still have the Sigma 30mm and 56mm - they’re awesome lenses and Canon haven’t got anything available that touches them.
This is EXACTLY what I was looking for. I got the sigma 30mm and 56mm but I knew the 22mm and 16mm would be pretty close. the 30mm and 56mm were easy choices given their alternatives, but the 16mm and 22mm were tough since the 22mm is a lot less expensive, and smaller. Is it just me or is crazy the canon can do better in sharpness with such a tiny front element, especially compared with the size of the sigma?
Great comparison! I had the 22mm for a while but I just prefer the field of view and speed of the sigma 16. I'd love to see a comparison between the sigma 16 and the 11-22 - a wide angle showdown!
Ah yeah here we go! The most awaited video of all time 😆 Just wanted to add something: The Sigma 16mm may look huge here but in real life it’s just the Canon 22mm that’s REALLY small. Compared to full frame lenses, the Sigma is still okay in my opinion ✌🏻
Thanks for this great comparison - saved me a significant amount of money. I've got 22mm and been using it for a while, very happy with it - tiny and bright lens... So portable with my M50. I'm not a pro, so I don't really carry tons of lenses around but I was kind of looking at Sigma, thinking to maybe save up and buy it one day. Nope. The difference is so insignificant that for my type of use (if I leave the house, I'll probably never have it with me anyway - too bulky), I'll just stick to my 22mm.
I was thinking the same thing for myself! I have the 22mm and don't feel there is enough of a difference to warrant getting the 16mm Sigma. For the money, I think another action cam might be better!
I have the canon 22mm and i love it. I wish the aperture was slightly faster for more boken, although it is good enough. Everything else about this lens is fantastic. It competes with my Sigma 17 to 50 mm 2.8 for sharpness despite the sigma costing twice as much and weighs as much or more than any APSC camera out there...
Thank you for the comparison. I loved 16mm wide angle shots and clarity quality of the shapes and colors, if only it not a bit heavier. Yet 22mm did a great job in comparison and its compact shape gives it an advantage to carry around more will travelling. Im going with the 22mm but would still love to have the 16mm with me as an option for certain projects :)
Just got the 16mm, thank you for this wonderful video. And to all those wondering, this is absolutely no contest. The sigma feels like a 3k piece of glass.
i have both of these, and 22mm is really thin, and feel happy with this lens, just take the evening walk and take some shoot with the boys. but Sigma clarity is wow, quality of the lens and speed is different. for traveling i will choose 22mm,
I have both lenses and on the M6 MKii the Sigma 16mm is for my requirements a much better buy. So much sharper and works a lot better with the higher megapixel sensor. Better colour reproduction too.
"better buy"? Eh, who the heck are you to make that call? The sigma seems to be the size of a portable telescope, bigger than my largest optic atm. With the 22mm on, people don't even seem to notice or mind my camera, which they will immediately if I have anything bigger than it.
@@noth606 it was the better buy for me and my requirements. It is a sharper lens with better colour reproduction. Of course if yours is about discreetness then the 22mm suits that purpose better. All lens purchases will come down to your own personal preference, requirements and budget. But this is a comment on a video comparing the two, so I was providing my own experience.
@@disneyanddaysout The way you put it came across as a sort of absolutism, hence the way I commented. For me the 22mm works great because of how stealthy it is, it makes the setup look like a compact camera and gets no attention. At times I use a Viltrox EF adapter with a 35-80mm EF on it and often immediately get very hostile comments as soon as I take it out, people seem to think I'm out to take pics of them or am media/news whatever. I don't take pics of people without asking their permission first, and most of the time when these things happen my purpose isn't to take pics of people at all, but a "scene" of how the lights and shadows play on a street or in a park and such.
@@sparklingstar5479 I haven't used the 22mm since :) Don't plan on getting rid of it. But the 16mm is perfect for the particular shots I do. Here is my channel if you want to see how it looks. th-cam.com/users/pazcondios The camera is at arms length.
The 22 is awesome for candid street photography, with the M6ii. The detail level is awesome and no one even understand that I photograph. The electronic silent shutter is used, of course.
This was an incredible comparison, thanms for putting this together. Sadly, Im still lost as to which one I should get. Sounds like we can't go wrong either way. New supporter, +1👍
Great video. I have the 22mm f2 and looking at getting a Canon 11-22mm next or a Sigma 16mm. I kinda like the canon 11-22mm better as a wide angle lens, but the Sigma has the f1.4 so definitely better in low light.
For travel I use the 22 and the excellent 11-22mm Canon zoom. I notice that the zoom is sharper at the edges with IS off. Given the two Canons are about the same size as the large Sigma, and offer far more versatility, for me I’m sticking with that combo.
Sigma looks way sharper than the Canon! Got to remember it’s a lot wider so there’s fewer pixels covering the subject, so it may seem softer but the fact it’s so close, shows how sharp the Sigma is. The test’s in the video are a bit pointless as this sort of thing only works with lenses of the same focal length.
With the Sigma at f1.4 and the Canon at 2.0, what minimum and maximum distance would you say you are still in focus on those night videos (at around 8m 30s on your video)? In other words, when you say you can move in and out more on the Sigma, how much more? What is the closest and furthest distance (cm or inches) in each case? Thanks, Simon P.S. I'm mostly going to be doing indoor Vlogging for a membership site. But i've got 360 videos to do so want to achieve Bokeh in a closer distance. My background is around 1.5m - 2m wide (yes, I know, tight!) and I sit approx 1-2m out from that background. Camera can go between 2-3m from that background wall (Again limited space!). Would either of these lenses work in this case? I'm currently stuck with the kit lens 15-45 with very limited Bokeh other than cheating and opening up to 45. So this is why I am looking at better options from something more dedicated. I'm not too fussed about low light as I do also have studio lights (but no room for a large background filler light due to the dimensions mentioned above)
Thanks for the nice video. but when it comes to comparing sharpness of a 16mm and a 22mm you can not do this. It will be totally wrong because there is a big difference between 22 and 16 mm it will be like combining 70 and 100 mm due to how much wider the lens is . You can pair a 16 and 18 but a 16m will never be a razor sharp lens. a 16 mm will go into infinite focus of 1.5 meters while a 22 will clear and focus at 3 to 4 meters.I do not own any of the lenses and do not care about the mark on the lens, but nice with a video to find out if you want a 16 mm or 22 but to compete between the two is wrong
What lens between the two is most flattering for faces? Or in general when it comes to lenses is there something to look for that is best for slimming the face? I think I read that 70-100mm lenses are best, yet these ones are 16 and 22mm!??
Hi. I find your reviews very informative and extremely easy to follow. Quick question i have the efm 22 already, will i be adding value to my kit if i buy the Sigma 16? I also have the 15-45 kit lens. Should i go for the Sigma 56 instead so that i have a dedicated portrait lens?
I was going to post my 56mm review friday but I'll do it tomorrow just for you ;) The answer depends on your needs. If you need a wider angle lens the 16mm is amazing, especially great with vlogging. The 56mm is a stellar lens, its immediately become my go to for portraits.
Drive By Reviews Thank you so much 😊, i am extremely eager to see your review on the Sigma 56. To answer your question, i currently use the EFM- 22 for street photography and travel photography since its compact and works decently well in low light. I use the 15-45 kit lens for landscapes when there is sufficient light. My dilemma is that, should i buy a lens which is predominantly a portrait lens or should i buy a lens which gives me flexibility and a really low aperture at the same time like the Sigma 16.
Total thumbs up guy, thank you! I'm torn between the M6 mk II and the Fujifilm X-S10. Do you have any experience with the Fuji? The side flipping screen and the 240 fps slow motion appeals to me but the very expensive lenses turn me off. Knowing that, the M6 has the 22 mm pancake lens you evaluated and that combo is perfect for my motorcycle trips. Thanks man.
I've been very happy with the M6mkii but I know exactly where you are. I was salivating over the 240 fps options a few years back when I went with the m50. The usual 120 fps has done a good enough job but I would have been using 240 if it was available. But as you probably know once you get a few lenses you will want to keep at least 3 or more at a time. So cost is a heavy factor, but I never did try out a fuji. For now I couldn't live without at least 5 different lenses, hah!
Hi man, after searching awhile finally found your video that answer my confusion whether I should buy sigma 16mm or canon efm 22mm. It is such a great review man! My confusion is, I am a travel and landscape photographer as well as videographer. But the thing is I am using zhiyun crane m3 for my canon eos m50. As for the weight I have no doubt when using efm 22mm, but for this small and compact gimbal, do you think sigma 16mm + canon eos m50 will hold in various angles? Would like to hear your opinion on this one, thank you before!
Thank you for the awesome video! I like to do food photography and cooking videos and have the Canon M50. I own the kit lens and the Sigma 30mm. Could you please help me what a good lens would be for plates of food etc??
Hey! Thanks so much for the kind comment. Food photography often requires close proximity; generally a wide prime lens is best. The Sigma 30mm and the Canon 32mm would look great, for example, but leaves little choice to how far you have to stand to take a good composition of food. Sigma 16mm is a good option for low light situation and the wider field of view. Sadly we're limited on wide lens options (canon 11-22mm is an option but not great in low light). I am currently looking at the Laowa 9mm which is the widest option yet and MAY be a decent option for food if the distortion isn't too much. You can check out my sigma 16mm review and comparison to the 22mm on the channel!
@@DriveByReviews Yes that is the problem I am having with the Sigma 30mm for food getting the perfect distance without distortion. Thank you I will keep checking your videos:)
Awesome Video! The low light shots you did are amazing. Question: how did you set up the low light shots starting 7:40 Was there a light source underneath and did you do color grading in post?
That's straight out of the camera without any color grading. Loved the look of the 16mm with canon colors. Light source was above from my house lights which gave it the warm look
But what about autofocus motor noise in video, comparing these two lenses? Recording with internal mic of course. It could be very useful for people, who choosing lenses for video. Good work, as always. Thank you!
Cool video .maybe this is the Difference of opinions but every time you said it’s neck and neck I noticed the canon look incredibly better or overall I’m no professional I guess this is what’s make it hard choosing a lens both the 16 and 22 is great I just can’t figur it out😅
this video was so amazing but i'm still stuck on what to buy!! I feel the sigma 16mm is way too heavy/bulky for traveling, but the 22mm canon isn't as wide of a shot that I'm looking for. thoughts? are there other options out there?
Canon lenses are nice, but that manual focus sucks especially for video because if you shoot hand held you can change focus with a touch of a finger like on Sigma lenses. From other point of view I love that pancake but of course image quality is much better with Sigma ;)
16mm and 22mm is different view,so if you complete shaper,it's not best results. like talking 50mm 1.4 and 22mm 2.0,take some photos at same place. just my idea
Interesting. If you look at the video comparison in low light at the widest aperture of both lenses, you won't really see much of a difference in terms of brightness and bokeh. Personally, I think that the value of a wide aperture diminishes as the lens' field of view goes wider. Parang... the opening of a wide-angle lens is too small anyway to deliver the great benefits of a wide-open aperture. But that's just my opinion. I'm sure the hardcore photographers here can explain this better. Cheers!
I was planning on getting the 22 mm but I already have the 16mm. I am thinking now the 22 mm is almost superfluous as it looks like the 16 mm can do everything the 22 mm can do but a bit better. On the other hand the small size of the 22 mm really appeals plus it is not that expensive. But I don't want to buy it if I will always end up using the 16 mm instead. Decisions
Also, if you want the equivalent "cinematic" 35mm full frame FOV the 22mm is much closer to that than any other lens (besides the alt 22mm out there now)
Hello! Great review, I just bought Canon M50 and planning to get the Canon 22mm f2 since it is only $200 right now on Amazon & Best Buy but I’m planning to get the Sigma 30mm f1.4 as well in the future. I’m doing photography and filming will I benefit from Sigma 30mm?
all you need are kit lens, 22mm f2 and sigma 30mm f1.4.. these three lens have been my go to. daylight use kitlen for video and low light 22mm f2 can do good. when photo use the 30mm f1.4 .. i realize that f2 and f1.8 or even 1.4 are very different in lowlight but just a tiny bit . you can consider spending 400$ to get the 16mm or buy used 22mm f2 for ard 160$
I'm not understand english by ears, but I think sigma 16mm f/1.4 better for night video, but canon 22mm f/2 little bit better in photo and as main tourist lens
Thanks for the review. I'm gonna pick up a 22mm soon for my M50. The differences are very manageable. The Canon wins for me because of the portability. Sigma is too big and heavy for vlogging and street photography.
If its purely IQ, put the 22m next to the 32mm and then you will wonder why you paid 3 x the price considering they sometimes give the 22m away for free.
We hve a clear winner (price) native 22 unless you r a professional looking for that 1.4f .. nd 16mm. But than u won't be be using a crop sensor.😂.. so let's end this debate .. have money buy that 1.4 16mm for wide angle view
I have both, and I prefer the 16mm, partly, for its noticeably faster autofocus. That said I love the small size of the 22mm so if I go out and about using a small sling camera bag I take the 22mm.
The problem with the Sigma is that I'm *not* carrying that thing around. Canon rumored that they would release a 15mm f/2 which who knows now with COVID and the rumors of the EF-M demise. However, if they built that 15mm and it was reasonably small I'd buy it. I will never buy the Sigma. This is coming from a Sigma 56mm f/1.4 owner. The 16mm is just too big and too heavy.
16mm on Amazon: amzn.to/2RyHTno
or on B&H: bhpho.to/2DUTvJk
22mm on Amazon: amzn.to/2Vv3QDg
or on b&h: bhpho.to/2CO1irm
David or Goliath; which wide was your winner?
0:28 Lens specs
2:34 Autofocus ring sensitivity
4:50 Gimbal vlog
6:03 Selfie vlog
7:35 Low light vlog
8:58 IQ comparison
16:26 Low light IQ
19:10 Landscape IQ
22:45 Chromatic aberration
26:10 Lens flaring
26:36 Final thoughts
Canon 22mm for me - I owned both and used them for a year and ended up selling the Sigma - I prefer the images from the canon, and the size and weight difference is a big bonus (that 16mm on the M50 feels too big and heavy) , and for me, the extra aperture is negligible - f/2 is more than enough for a wide angle lens. I still have the Sigma 30mm and 56mm - they’re awesome lenses and Canon haven’t got anything available that touches them.
I guess you haven’t tried the canon efm 32 mm. The sharpest efm lens you ll ever try.
This is EXACTLY what I was looking for. I got the sigma 30mm and 56mm but I knew the 22mm and 16mm would be pretty close. the 30mm and 56mm were easy choices given their alternatives, but the 16mm and 22mm were tough since the 22mm is a lot less expensive, and smaller. Is it just me or is crazy the canon can do better in sharpness with such a tiny front element, especially compared with the size of the sigma?
Great comparison! I had the 22mm for a while but I just prefer the field of view and speed of the sigma 16. I'd love to see a comparison between the sigma 16 and the 11-22 - a wide angle showdown!
Ah yeah here we go! The most awaited video of all time 😆
Just wanted to add something:
The Sigma 16mm may look huge here but in real life it’s just the Canon 22mm that’s REALLY small. Compared to full frame lenses, the Sigma is still okay in my opinion ✌🏻
hah true, although for someone used to the native ef-m lenses the size might be somewhat of a shock 🤠
Thanks for this great comparison - saved me a significant amount of money. I've got 22mm and been using it for a while, very happy with it - tiny and bright lens... So portable with my M50. I'm not a pro, so I don't really carry tons of lenses around but I was kind of looking at Sigma, thinking to maybe save up and buy it one day. Nope. The difference is so insignificant that for my type of use (if I leave the house, I'll probably never have it with me anyway - too bulky), I'll just stick to my 22mm.
I was thinking the same thing for myself! I have the 22mm and don't feel there is enough of a difference to warrant getting the 16mm Sigma. For the money, I think another action cam might be better!
I have the canon 22mm and i love it. I wish the aperture was slightly faster for more boken, although it is good enough. Everything else about this lens is fantastic. It competes with my Sigma 17 to 50 mm 2.8 for sharpness despite the sigma costing twice as much and weighs as much or more than any APSC camera out there...
Perfect video! Definitely happy with the sigma 16mm f1.4 it's such a good lens
Thank you for the comparison. I loved 16mm wide angle shots and clarity quality of the shapes and colors, if only it not a bit heavier. Yet 22mm did a great job in comparison and its compact shape gives it an advantage to carry around more will travelling. Im going with the 22mm but would still love to have the 16mm with me as an option for certain projects :)
Canon 22mm for my money. Thank you for another excellent review!
Just got the 16mm, thank you for this wonderful video. And to all those wondering, this is absolutely no contest. The sigma feels like a 3k piece of glass.
i have both of these, and 22mm is really thin, and feel happy with this lens, just take the evening walk and take some shoot with the boys. but Sigma clarity is wow, quality of the lens and speed is different.
for traveling i will choose 22mm,
I have both lenses and on the M6 MKii the Sigma 16mm is for my requirements a much better buy. So much sharper and works a lot better with the higher megapixel sensor. Better colour reproduction too.
"better buy"? Eh, who the heck are you to make that call? The sigma seems to be the size of a portable telescope, bigger than my largest optic atm. With the 22mm on, people don't even seem to notice or mind my camera, which they will immediately if I have anything bigger than it.
@@noth606 it was the better buy for me and my requirements. It is a sharper lens with better colour reproduction. Of course if yours is about discreetness then the 22mm suits that purpose better.
All lens purchases will come down to your own personal preference, requirements and budget. But this is a comment on a video comparing the two, so I was providing my own experience.
@@disneyanddaysout The way you put it came across as a sort of absolutism, hence the way I commented. For me the 22mm works great because of how stealthy it is, it makes the setup look like a compact camera and gets no attention. At times I use a Viltrox EF adapter with a 35-80mm EF on it and often immediately get very hostile comments as soon as I take it out, people seem to think I'm out to take pics of them or am media/news whatever. I don't take pics of people without asking their permission first, and most of the time when these things happen my purpose isn't to take pics of people at all, but a "scene" of how the lights and shadows play on a street or in a park and such.
@@noth606 I’ve adjusted my comment so it reads better :)
Yes, your use case for street photography makes sense to use the 22mm.
I got both but for different reasons. For the vlog video shots, I need that wide field of view for sure with the F1.4, makes it good.
The Pancake is just the best!
Which one do you recommend to have as webcam right behind the notebook? About 0.5-1m in distance
Couldn't decide, I just bought both lenses. 😁
Excellent review! 💯
Hope you can compare Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 stm VS Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 stm lens
just an excellent video man great job
have both. bought the sigma after your review. NO regrets. love both
👊
Which one is best for you?
@@sparklingstar5479 I haven't used the 22mm since :) Don't plan on getting rid of it. But the 16mm is perfect for the particular shots I do. Here is my channel if you want to see how it looks. th-cam.com/users/pazcondios The camera is at arms length.
The 22 is awesome for candid street photography, with the M6ii. The detail level is awesome and no one even understand that I photograph. The electronic silent shutter is used, of course.
Great video!! Love the detailed comparison, along with the "real life" shots. Well done.
Great review of the video quality and characteristics of both lenses. Thank you!
wauw, just the fact that I even want to watch a vid with "16mm f1.4 vs Canon 22mm F2.0" in it's title!
Just gotta say, that outdoor driveway shot on the Sigma is crazy stunning!!! No wonder you used it for your thumbnail! 😜
absolutely, that driveway view often has me pause for a second to take in the view, great colors throughout the day
This was an incredible comparison, thanms for putting this together. Sadly, Im still lost as to which one I should get. Sounds like we can't go wrong either way. New supporter, +1👍
With the eos-M system, lost is the only feeling!
Great comparison, thanks @Drive By Reviews!
Great video. I have the 22mm f2 and looking at getting a Canon 11-22mm next or a Sigma 16mm. I kinda like the canon 11-22mm better as a wide angle lens, but the Sigma has the f1.4 so definitely better in low light.
Thank you. I have M50 and 22 lens. Thinking about 16mm Sigma, so you gave me lot of info about this !
For travel I use the 22 and the excellent 11-22mm Canon zoom. I notice that the zoom is sharper at the edges with IS off. Given the two Canons are about the same size as the large Sigma, and offer far more versatility, for me I’m sticking with that combo.
Sigma looks way sharper than the Canon! Got to remember it’s a lot wider so there’s fewer pixels covering the subject, so it may seem softer but the fact it’s so close, shows how sharp the Sigma is. The test’s in the video are a bit pointless as this sort of thing only works with lenses of the same focal length.
With the Sigma at f1.4 and the Canon at 2.0, what minimum and maximum distance would you say you are still in focus on those night videos (at around 8m 30s on your video)?
In other words, when you say you can move in and out more on the Sigma, how much more?
What is the closest and furthest distance (cm or inches) in each case?
Thanks,
Simon
P.S. I'm mostly going to be doing indoor Vlogging for a membership site. But i've got 360 videos to do so want to achieve Bokeh in a closer distance. My background is around 1.5m - 2m wide (yes, I know, tight!) and I sit approx 1-2m out from that background. Camera can go between 2-3m from that background wall (Again limited space!). Would either of these lenses work in this case? I'm currently stuck with the kit lens 15-45 with very limited Bokeh other than cheating and opening up to 45. So this is why I am looking at better options from something more dedicated.
I'm not too fussed about low light as I do also have studio lights (but no room for a large background filler light due to the dimensions mentioned above)
Thanks for the nice video. but when it comes to comparing sharpness of a 16mm and a 22mm you can not do this. It will be totally wrong because there is a big difference between 22 and 16 mm it will be like combining 70 and 100 mm due to how much wider the lens is
. You can pair a 16 and 18 but a 16m will never be a razor sharp lens. a 16 mm will go into infinite focus of 1.5 meters while a 22 will clear and focus at 3 to 4 meters.I do not own any of the lenses and do not care about the mark on the lens, but nice with a video to find out if you want a 16 mm or 22 but to compete between the two is wrong
What lens between the two is most flattering for faces? Or in general when it comes to lenses is there something to look for that is best for slimming the face? I think I read that 70-100mm lenses are best, yet these ones are 16 and 22mm!??
Literally have been debating these two for weeks. I need better low light for my videos.
don't we all 👍
Absolutely super review! Very helpful!
Thanks for your review!
Sigma goes out of focus quickly cause of fast 1.4f, put that to f2 same as the canon and it would be same.
Happy with 22mm on the M3, small and light. Anything else I'll take a bigger camera with better glass. Photos only, use Panasonic camcorder for video.
Have both of these lenses. The cannon is razor in comparison. A great little lens
The 22mm is what made me get the M Mount. It is deadly sharp
Hi. I find your reviews very informative and extremely easy to follow. Quick question i have the efm 22 already, will i be adding value to my kit if i buy the Sigma 16? I also have the 15-45 kit lens. Should i go for the Sigma 56 instead so that i have a dedicated portrait lens?
I was going to post my 56mm review friday but I'll do it tomorrow just for you ;) The answer depends on your needs. If you need a wider angle lens the 16mm is amazing, especially great with vlogging. The 56mm is a stellar lens, its immediately become my go to for portraits.
Drive By Reviews Thank you so much 😊, i am extremely eager to see your review on the Sigma 56. To answer your question, i currently use the EFM- 22 for street photography and travel photography since its compact and works decently well in low light. I use the 15-45 kit lens for landscapes when there is sufficient light. My dilemma is that, should i buy a lens which is predominantly a portrait lens or should i buy a lens which gives me flexibility and a really low aperture at the same time like the Sigma 16.
@@avikmajumdar1791 hey man, hopin you're based in india only. Where r u getting the sigma lenses here!
@@sanjtiwari5364 I am based out my America my friend!!!
Total thumbs up guy, thank you! I'm torn between the M6 mk II and the Fujifilm X-S10. Do you have any experience with the Fuji? The side flipping screen and the 240 fps slow motion appeals to me but the very expensive lenses turn me off. Knowing that, the M6 has the 22 mm pancake lens you evaluated and that combo is perfect for my motorcycle trips. Thanks man.
I've been very happy with the M6mkii but I know exactly where you are. I was salivating over the 240 fps options a few years back when I went with the m50. The usual 120 fps has done a good enough job but I would have been using 240 if it was available. But as you probably know once you get a few lenses you will want to keep at least 3 or more at a time. So cost is a heavy factor, but I never did try out a fuji. For now I couldn't live without at least 5 different lenses, hah!
Very nice review! Thank you very much!
Hi man, after searching awhile finally found your video that answer my confusion whether I should buy sigma 16mm or canon efm 22mm. It is such a great review man!
My confusion is, I am a travel and landscape photographer as well as videographer. But the thing is I am using zhiyun crane m3 for my canon eos m50. As for the weight I have no doubt when using efm 22mm, but for this small and compact gimbal, do you think sigma 16mm + canon eos m50 will hold in various angles?
Would like to hear your opinion on this one, thank you before!
Excellent review. Thank you!
Thank you for the awesome video! I like to do food photography and cooking videos and have the Canon M50. I own the kit lens and the Sigma 30mm. Could you please help me what a good lens would be for plates of food etc??
Hey! Thanks so much for the kind comment. Food photography often requires close proximity; generally a wide prime lens is best. The Sigma 30mm and the Canon 32mm would look great, for example, but leaves little choice to how far you have to stand to take a good composition of food. Sigma 16mm is a good option for low light situation and the wider field of view. Sadly we're limited on wide lens options (canon 11-22mm is an option but not great in low light). I am currently looking at the Laowa 9mm which is the widest option yet and MAY be a decent option for food if the distortion isn't too much. You can check out my sigma 16mm review and comparison to the 22mm on the channel!
@@DriveByReviews Yes that is the problem I am having with the Sigma 30mm for food getting the perfect distance without distortion. Thank you I will keep checking your videos:)
You did really good review ❤ make more
Awesome Video! The low light shots you did are amazing.
Question: how did you set up the low light shots starting 7:40
Was there a light source underneath and did you do color grading in post?
That's straight out of the camera without any color grading. Loved the look of the 16mm with canon colors. Light source was above from my house lights which gave it the warm look
Wow! Thanks for the update
Thank you. Brilliant comparison. I shall keep my pancake.
But what about autofocus motor noise in video, comparing these two lenses? Recording with internal mic of course. It could be very useful for people, who choosing lenses for video.
Good work, as always. Thank you!
Both make no noises which you could find disturbing
Clear review and best comparison
The fun thing about the signs lens... When you want to change to let's say Sony, Sigma can change the Bajonette for you
Cool video .maybe this is the Difference of opinions but every time you said it’s neck and neck I noticed the canon look incredibly better or overall I’m no professional I guess this is what’s make it hard choosing a lens both the 16 and 22 is great I just can’t figur it out😅
As a 22mm f2 user...that Sigma thing is huuuuge ^o^
I have the 16mm for vlogging but kind of want the 22 for snap shots and travel for my walk around photo lens
this video was so amazing but i'm still stuck on what to buy!! I feel the sigma 16mm is way too heavy/bulky for traveling, but the 22mm canon isn't as wide of a shot that I'm looking for. thoughts? are there other options out there?
Canon EFM 11-22mm is another alternative. It is definitely wider :)
Hi question. Can I use this lens to shoot live food shows? Or a wider angle would be better?
would work great for that 👍 wider only necessary if you're including a large part of the room like in real estate photos
@@DriveByReviews which zoom lens would you recommend for low light on M50?
Which would you recommend for vlog style public interview? And beginner photography
22mm is classic FOV for video production, but I love the wider look of the 16mm myself. Beginner photographer would benefit from the 22 for sure
Great review!
Canon lenses are nice, but that manual focus sucks especially for video because if you shoot hand held you can change focus with a touch of a finger like on Sigma lenses. From other point of view I love that pancake but of course image quality is much better with Sigma ;)
I think i will get the canon since it is sharper and i want to shoot sharp landscapes. Low light will just need to go higher on my ISO
Nice video bro!
im thinking for buy one of this two to make photos on group, in events and i have the m50 mark 2
Great comparison! Was leaning towards Sigma16 initially, but i think I'm gonna have 22mm instead for my next prime lens.
Best comparation so far
haii..malaysia ke...
@@Jor_Dan01 no. Indonesia. 😉
@@salsabilarahmawati4269 baik👍👍
16mm and 22mm is different view,so if you complete shaper,it's not best results. like talking 50mm 1.4 and 22mm 2.0,take some photos at same place. just my idea
The Canon 22mm F2.0 works nice for real estate photos or should I buy another wider lens ?
You should consider the 11-22 mm.
Interesting. If you look at the video comparison in low light at the widest aperture of both lenses, you won't really see much of a difference in terms of brightness and bokeh.
Personally, I think that the value of a wide aperture diminishes as the lens' field of view goes wider. Parang... the opening of a wide-angle lens is too small anyway to deliver the great benefits of a wide-open aperture.
But that's just my opinion. I'm sure the hardcore photographers here can explain this better. Cheers!
Extremely helpful !!
the colours are also better on the canon lens, i guess maybe because of the lens coating
The perfect review
I was planning on getting the 22 mm but I already have the 16mm. I am thinking now the 22 mm is almost superfluous as it looks like the 16 mm can do everything the 22 mm can do but a bit better. On the other hand the small size of the 22 mm really appeals plus it is not that expensive. But I don't want to buy it if I will always end up using the 16 mm instead. Decisions
Also, if you want the equivalent "cinematic" 35mm full frame FOV the 22mm is much closer to that than any other lens (besides the alt 22mm out there now)
Hello! Great review, I just bought Canon M50 and planning to get the Canon 22mm f2 since it is only $200 right now on Amazon & Best Buy but I’m planning to get the Sigma 30mm f1.4 as well in the future. I’m doing photography and filming will I benefit from Sigma 30mm?
all you need are kit lens, 22mm f2 and sigma 30mm f1.4.. these three lens have been my go to. daylight use kitlen for video and low light 22mm f2 can do good. when photo use the 30mm f1.4 .. i realize that f2 and f1.8 or even 1.4 are very different in lowlight but just a tiny bit . you can consider spending 400$ to get the 16mm or buy used 22mm f2 for ard 160$
I'm not understand english by ears, but I think sigma 16mm f/1.4 better for night video, but canon 22mm f/2 little bit better in photo and as main tourist lens
you got it!
Legit might get both 🤣 I want the 22mm for light hiking and family pictures on the trail but the sigma for vlogging 🤷♂️
Wish you would have turned the sigma lense to 22mm @2.0 and compared them then.
16mm is a prime lens. You can’t make it 22mm
From your review, both lenses are OK, but a biggest conclusion is that you need new pair of eyes with a way wider aperture!
Is the 16mm 1.4 EF-M lens compatible with Canon 5d Mark IV?
Not without an adapter
@@SICKYPOPP you cannot adapt ef-m lenses to an EF or EF-s or EF-R body
you nailed it
I want sigma 16mm f1.4 for my eos m50. I think this can help to get better low light shoot.. hehe
@f8 and f16 on the Sigma’s clouds?? Incredible. I have all Canon glass 🥴
thank you
Thanks for the review. I'm gonna pick up a 22mm soon for my M50. The differences are very manageable. The Canon wins for me because of the portability. Sigma is too big and heavy for vlogging and street photography.
If its purely IQ, put the 22m next to the 32mm and then you will wonder why you paid 3 x the price considering they sometimes give the 22m away for free.
Which lens is better 22mm or 16mm?
SUPERB!!!
Which one is better an apple or a pear? 😂
Depends, you want low glycemic performance or better dynamic flavor
We hve a clear winner (price) native 22 unless you r a professional looking for that 1.4f .. nd 16mm. But than u won't be be using a crop sensor.😂.. so let's end this debate .. have money buy that 1.4 16mm for wide angle view
I'll be honest, since having the 16mm I use it mostly. 22 is only if I'm trying to video a FF 35mm equivalent shot. And that is rare.
Эх. Хочу себе SIGMA 16mm. Видос хороший, информативный 👍👍👍👍👍
Well done
Good vedio I use to have that 22mm now I use 32mm .Can you do vedio Ziess 32mm for fuji vs fuji 35mm 1.4 .thanks
Sigma autofocus looks more responsive
I have both, and I prefer the 16mm, partly, for its noticeably faster autofocus. That said I love the small size of the 22mm so if I go out and about using a small sling camera bag I take the 22mm.
Unfortunately, Sigma removed the weather sealing when they changed to the EF-M mount...and proceeded to charge more versus the Sony Mount.
😍😍😍handsome
😘
please tell me how to display the sound control
The Sigma 16m is a far better lens and it's not even close. The 22mm is better for portraits, the 16mm is better for everything else.
Why is the lens on the 22mm so small.. It looks like a disposable camera.. Lol
Jaby 😱😱😱😱
Do I need the viltron speed booster for the sigma 16mm
nope sigma released an EF-M mount version
well i think this lenses cant be compared. but you just ignored that and did it. :D
The problem with the Sigma is that I'm *not* carrying that thing around. Canon rumored that they would release a 15mm f/2 which who knows now with COVID and the rumors of the EF-M demise. However, if they built that 15mm and it was reasonably small I'd buy it. I will never buy the Sigma. This is coming from a Sigma 56mm f/1.4 owner. The 16mm is just too big and too heavy.