Sigma filed a patent for a 50-135mm f/2.8 zoom for APS-C last year so it's safe to say that it's coming out at some point this year. Also there was an interview with the Sigma CEO (it's on YT) who has suggested that the 18-35mm f/1.8 will be released for mirrorless at some point.
Totally on your side. I only shoot APSC and have been wishing for an APSC telephoto for a long time. I almost made my mind to get the sigma 70-200mm f2.8 for my A6400 recently. This video gives me some confidence to wait for the drop of one lens as such. Let's hope some lens manufacturers would do something to fill this blank space.🤞
Rented Sony 70-200mm f2.8 with 2x TC: works great. Great price as well. Still use my RX10 for long range beside a6700 but APS-C lens 50-135mm f2.8 completes my lens set for me (together with 11mm & 16-55mm both 2.8)
I bought it 2 times and returned it 2 times. I really wanted to like it, the range is fantastic. But since i also own the Tamron 17-70 and i used to own the Sony 70-350 i am used to a certain picture quality wich the 18-300 just does not deliver. I am aware that the luxury of having one lens to cover everything without changing lenses comes at a price. But to me the downgrade in picture quality wasnt worth it. And still i am frustrated about having to carry around at least two lenses at all times or one lens wich is even way bigger and more expensive to cover the same focal range. Why cant we just have everyting? Maxium range from 12-600 mm with constant aperture, small, lightweight and cheap with excellent picture quality? 😂🙈
Its part of my travel lens kit, along with my sigma 18-50mm, and an indeterminate prime lens (the 30mm sigma and the 50mm sony OSS are duking it out in conceptual space)... and possibly the Samyang manual 12mm...
I made some of my best telephoto-shots (mostly Wildlife) with my Sony 70-350 attached to an A6600. The image quality and focussing speed are really good and it has OIS -which is a MUST HAVE for me, as I shoot handheld all the time. And yes, I wish a faster Mark II version of this lens would be released in the near future. However, 99 times out of 100 I shot at a focal length between 150 and 350 mm. So my dream lens would be a 150-350 APS-C maybe at a constant 3.5. That would be perfect for me.
You're not alone here. I've been wishing for this lens for years in comments sections all over the internet. I used to own the Sigma 50-150/2.8 (not the one pictured in your video but the earlier one) for my Minolta 7D and it was probably my favourite lens. With a modern design this would be a very desirable lens for me and pretty much an insta-buy. Sigma has a couple of patents (i think it was 50-135/2.8 and 50-140/2.8) so I really hope to see one of them released. With the 10-18/2.8 and the 18-50/2.8 it would make sense to complete the trio. And I agree 100% with your talk on things being "good enough". APS-C gives me more than "good enough" image quality and I love the compactness. FF can give (slightly) better dynamic range and more shallow depth-of-field (in practice - not in theory) but I really don't need it.
We soooooooo need this!!! Can you make a social media short on this?? Gonna tag all brands and blow this request up lol. Thanks for speaking out for us APSC users
Thank you! I'm also looking for a similar lens on APS-C and a video like yours can only help manufacturers think about it! It would be an instant buy for me.
As a huge Sigma fan I every once in a while e-mail them to say thanks for their crazy good DC DN lenses. Of course I leave lens wishes, and so far the 18-50mm F2.8 and 23mm F1.4 became true. So I made wishes for two more lenses: that 50-140 F2.8 tele lens, and a 90mm F1.4 portrait killer. They kindly replied thanking me for my enthusiasm and told me: stay tuned! So here's me waiting for the big news for us APS-C shooters 😃
Yessss, a new edition of the 50-150 F2.8 would be exactly the missing link on my a6700 between the Tamron 17-70/Sigma 18-50 and a Tamron 150-500. Maybe you could even save yourself the wide-angle zoom and, in addition to a 50-150 F2.8, only work with fixed focal lengths like Viltrox 13mm F1.4 and Viltrox 27mm F1.2.
Yea, you're right We got many Wide-Normal ranges in the past few years. In the past (coming from a NEX-5N user), good Sony E lenses were very lacking and people thought Sony might abandon APS-C. Thanks to Vlogger and UA-camr trend, we get a lot of good lenses recently. I want some Telephoto as well as I am using Sigma 18-50mm, is a bit too short sometimes. A compact Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 would be a nice addition 😄
i would love to see this. i went with the tamron 70 - 180 g2 because it was lightweight compared to the others and i still think its too big. even if it was 10- 20% smaller that would be really convenient
I agree, I’ve been looking for something with more reach and faster aperture. I’ve been thinking about the Samyang or Tamron 35-150 FF lenses. Leaning towards the Samyang for the par focal. I’d prefer to stay with APSC lenses.
I have a Sigma 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM for my old Nikon Digital SLR Camera that I wish I could get converted to the Sony E mount for my A6400. I realize I will lose the many benefits of a fixed F stop (e.g., f2.8) but I found the lens to be my “all around go to” lens in over 85% of the shots I’ve taken over the years as a very amateurish camera hobbyist. The convenience of wide to long lens, image stabilization, and macro range just fit my needs in so many situations with results I was happy with. Thanks Arthur for a great video and UA-cam channel.
Talking videos are great, do them more. Specially about APS-C telephoto lenses. I would love to have third party options to the expensive Sony 70-350mm. I hope they hear you in Sigma.
Yes! I have a Sigma 16mm and 56mm 1.4. Now I’m thinking about a telephoto lens and I thought of your Sony 55-210 video. Just something since I don’t use telephoto for much.
This video is spot on, I bought the a6400 with the 16-50 and 55-210 stock lenses (or whatever they are) and haven't bought ANYTHING longer than 50mm b/c yes, the 55-210 (or w/e) isn't great, but there is literally nothing else that wasn't like you said 3k/1500 depending on manf.
The Sigma goes to 50, not 55, but your point is still there. Fuji has an excellent 50-140 2.8, but it's a bit old now so a new version could probably be a fair bit lighter.
It's incredibly strange that this doesn't exist, honestly. I rabbit-holed a bit researching why. Might be a confluence of factors stemming from R&D cycles that started 4-5 years ago - or product segmentation decisions from 20 years ago! 4-5 years ago Canon and Nikon both launched new lens mounts, and both ended up being 1st-party only for the bulk of the time from then until now. That would definitely have pushed Tamron and Sigma to make some business decisions; a full-frame lens that's cheap, light, compact, or all 3 can do double duty in E-mount or even work in X-mount, and so that's what we've seen a lot of from these guys. Sigma dropped the SA mount (APS-C) for their own bodies and adopted L mount FF. M43 has also withered. Also at that time we were absolutely in the thick of a shift towards the 'prosumer' segment being redefined as a content creator who wanted video features. Everybody's wideangles have gotten wider for selfie video. 6000-series updates have heavily prioritized video; resources have been directed into vlogging cameras as the new consumer entrypoint. We saw a lot of gimbal-friendly video primes from 1st and 3rd party, and the photo segment has been redirected into max-spec full-frame bodies. Probably the reasons for no manufacturer jumping to make a 70-200-2.8-but-for-APS-C are the same reasons why we still have no Sony 'R' series 6000 body on the high end and no photo or hybrid followup to the NEX/5000-style tiny E-mount bodies on the low end. Possibly with the "Race to 4K60" phase past, Nikon/Canon opening their mounts up, and Fuji continuing to push the envelope on APS-C we'll see some shelved lens plans coming back to the fore. All that together though, doesn't really answer why no manufacturer ever adapted their legacy APS-C "holy trinity" telephoto lens designs from DSLR to mirrorless in the 2010-2015 era or later. The real problem seems to be that ... actually, nobody ever made a 70-200 APS-C equivalent DSLR lens to begin with for their system, 2.8 or otherwise - only 70-300 variable-aperture designs, which is not a pro-grade lens. Nikon crop, Canon crop, and Minolta-Sony A-mount crop all had 55-200mm variables (which the Sony NEX E-mount 55-210 lens is obviously descended from). Pentax did produce a 55-135 f2.8 but they were notably APS-C only at the time, making that actually their ~70-200 pro flagship. The Sigma 50-150 f2.8 and Tokina 50-135 f2.8 do exist, but are niche 3rd-party lenses from a brief window of DSLR development where "Pro-grade crop sensor" DSLR bodies were a viable segment. APS-C *mirrorless* was anything but 'Pro' for most of the past 15 years so no first-party invested in a new lens design to meet that criteria. This means a Sigma 50-135 f2.8 DC DN OS, Sony 55-150 f2.8 G OSS, Tamron 60-180 VC VXD Di III-A, etc would all be brand new designs instead of evolutionary development. A "70-200 f2.8" is a high-profile showcase lens for any company and the high R&D hurdle to overcome getting an updated, competitive design may be what has taken it so long + led to decisions to prioritize other FF-capable, video-optimized products with better short-term ROI.
You make a very good point here. I never really thought much about it because I have the Sigma APSC 18-35mm and 50-100mm F1.8 with the MC-11 adapter. However, both Sigmas are big and heavy as FF lenses, and the 50-100mm has terrible focus breathing. Maybe Sigma is secretly working on light weight mirror-less versions of these two lenses?
I'm only about a minute and a half in but immediately the thought of adapting the sigma 50-100 1.8 with the mc11 (clear image zoom will get you to 150mm) or getting one's hands on either the Tamron or the Samyang 35-150 f2 to 2.8 - either of those will hit the need you mentioned in the first minute and a half.
I have the Sony 70-350 which I use with my A6700 and it is excellent for wildlife and aircraft photography. I used to use my 150-500 tamron on my A7iv but it was unwieldy and the zoom was stiff enough to give me the feeling that someone was sawing my left wrist off with a blunt breadknife after 3 days of intensive use. For my own needs I would welcome a 100-400 zoom with stabilisation which did not have a reduced maximum aperture at the end of the zoom range.
The Sigma 50-135 f2.8 is really appealing for me and my A6400. I value the video format, Arthur, what you're talking about is extremely important: voicing the wants of people. Also I loved the point about the good enough mindset, which is lacking and the otherwise values are sickening the enviroment and our mental health.
I have the Sony 70-350mm. I use it for birds, but I would love an F2.8 zoom for portraits. I also have the Sigma 56mm F1.4, but a superfast telephoto would be much more versatile. 👍
Hi. I love your videos, and particularly this one and the recent one comparing all Sony APS-C cameras. I had an NEX-6 for several years and loved it, and traded for an A6300 which I used for a time.. Then I sold it and kept waiting for the next hopefully perfect Sony cameral to come out, and I just didn't buy again. But now I am ready to get back in, and plan to get an A6700.. I want to carry 1 or 2 lenses at most, at least for now, and I appreciate your comments and recommendations. It sounds like the Sigma 18-59 F2.8 is the way I will go, and then hope Sigma comes out with the zoom you mention here. I wondered if you have heard anything from Sigma about that possibility. Thanks for any update or other suggestions you may have.
Hi Arthur, enjoying to watch your channel to stay updated. I do agree. For some lowlight scenarios like taking photos on concerts or ballets, you need this lense. Also, for football, this would be great. I regularly use the 70 to 350mm, but for some real good pictures I need to pitch up iso and reduce the noise later in Lightroom, which takes time. As a workaround a use the tamron 17 to 70mm, which provides the aperture of 2.8. Sometimes the 70mm from the 70mm to 350 is too big. cheers, Florian
What do you think of the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8, which also features VC? Despite its shorter zoom range, it could be a viable option if you're also considering carrying the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8.
I second that. I recently (and finally upgraded) from a Nikon D7200 to Sony a6700 and the first lens I bought was the Tamron 70-180 f2.8 G2. I am mostly taking photos of my daughter's sports and it's been great. It's much smaller than the Nikon 70-200 I had been using. In fact, the Tamron is I'd say similar in size and probably lighter than the Nikon 24-70 I had been using. The G2 has image stabilization as well. For me, the Tamron works well for sports where I generally need the extra reach anyway.
Until your dream lens is available, I will be satisfied with my Sony 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS. Add the Viltrox 23mm F/1.4, incorporate Clear Image Zoom, and you have a very versatile kit that's good enough. Good video.
I'd still love to see a compact 35mm equivalent lens. The Zeiss 24mm f1.8 is fine, same with the Viltrox and Sigma 23mm f1.4, but I'd love to see a lens that's the size of the Nikon Z 24mm f1.7 DX lens or the old Canon EF-M 22mm f2 lens. Bonus if we also get a proper 18mm f2 pancake too!
I was more thinking of a Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 macro for aps c, with an 2x extender. You can use it for travel, portraits, soccer, hiking and put on the extender, if you sometimes do bird watching. Should be small enough, pretty cheap and good enough for many things.
I just bought the Tamron fullframe lens 35-150 F2-F2.8 for my A6400, because i really really wanted this focal length you are talking about with a constant aperture. That lens is really nice in terms of picture quality, but it is so expensive, so big for that camera and so heavy. The Alternative would also have been the tamron 70-180 F2.8 wich is less expensive and does not weigh as much. But i had the 70-350 back in the days and i was always missing more wide angle range. Starting at 70mm made me leave the lens at home very often because i also want to shoot something between 30mm and 70mm but i dont want to switch lenses. And that is the main problem. As an APSC user i'd like to have the one "do-it-all" lens wich of course does not exist, so i go to the next best thing. And to me that was only the 35-150. Just enough wide angle to still be able to cover some street or landscape photography and just enough telephoto range for some nice long shots. But it is and will always be a compromise wich comes at a heavy weight and price. I dont think a zoomrange of 50-130 would be that attractive to many people. Even with a constant aperture. It is not enough wide angle and not enough telephoto.
I agree with your thoughts on this. I have actually been looking for something like this recently, but did not find anything that I was very excited about. I saw the Sony 18-105, but it's F4 and not as sharp as it could be, but at least its a constant aperture. There are others that are more telephoto with variable apertures, but like you said, they just don't work as well in low light. I have the Sony 70-350, which I would probably keep for certain conditions, but I would actually love to have either an APSC lens at about 50-150mm f2.8 or even something like the Sony 18-105 but at f2.8. The f4 lenses are still not too bad, but they are just are much harder to use in low light conditions, which makes them less usable. I hope the lens companies will listen to this as it is a need and I am certain it would be very popular.
I was a little bit unsure about the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 (kept thinking about going for the tamron). Now it barely leaves my camera... I would love a sigma big brother to said lens, similarly slimmed down...
In the MFT world, where I do most (but not all) of my work there is only one lens that falls into the category discussed here: a Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 (70-200 full-frame equiv). It is now in its 3rd iteration., branded Leica and costing around $1500. I use the previous Lumix Version II. It is considerably less expensive on the used market as is the initial Lumix version. It is one of my workhorse lenses, the other being the extraordinarily versatile Olympus 12-100 f/4, a lens that has no other MFT, APS-C or full-frame equivalent (the much less expensive Tamron 18-300 APS-C lens has a wider zoom range but a variable and, for the most part, darker aperture in addition to being larger and heavier).
I am really also looking for something like this. I even consider buying the 18-105 because I want something longer than 50 but the Viltrox 75 is huge and not flexible, the 18-135 is not fast as all other travel-zoom options, the 55-210 is neither sharp nor fast. And when I tried the 18-105, it was nice to have that 105 mm, but it is only f4 and pretty old and heavy... I think a f2.8 zoom like 35-130 or 50-150 would be so nice. Maybe 50 would be a bit long on the wide end to still stay flexible... But I would sacrifice the "wide" angles for a smaller size.
I was looking for a telephoto lens to pair with my sony a6600 for sports photography and videography. All the available lenses are bulk. I personally visited stores and after looking into the sizes of those lenses finally ended up buying sony e 75-350 g lens. Even that lens is bulk, but small compared to other options available on market.
I use a lot off my Canon L glass vis sigma MC-11 on my Sony A6600. I would love a f2.8 zoom as I use my A6600 as a travel camera. So any APS-C f2.8 lenses will be great for travel.
You're right, such a lens would be great. Currently I'm only using FF because of the 20-70 F4. It replaces my ultra-wide because I don't need 16mm FF. Would be great to see an APS-C general purpose zoom which starts at 13mm up to let's say 45mm. That would be the day I switch back to APS-C
Sigma used to make a 50-150/2.8 for APS-C DSLRs. Tokina had a 50-135/2.8 for APS-C DSLRs too. While they were more compact than a FF 70-200/2.8, they aren't as small as you think they might get. Their size came out to just a little smaller than a 70-200/4, although they were also internal zooming like their 70-200 counterparts.
@Nokillok This is a big misconception. You do not actually gain anything via smaller size by making a lens for APS-C once you go up to telephoto. Wide angle APS-C lenses can be smaller because the front element doesn't have to be as big to capture light from the same field of view as the same focal length on FF, e.g a 14mm f2.8 on APS-C vs 14mm f2.8 on FF. Look at how small the Fujifilm 14mm 2.8 is, but that's simply because as said, it has a smaller field of view than 14mm has on FF and therefore the lens can be smaller while maintaining the same entrance pupil size. However once you go to telephoto like above ~70mm the optical flow gets so cylindrical/parallell that the size of the lens is no longer determined by the angle of view, but entirely determined by the focal length + aperture. E.g a 300mm f2.8 requires at least a 107mm front lens regardless of sensor size, and the only difference between an APS-C vs FF lens would be the size of the rearmost lens group, which would be totally diminished by the rest of the barrel anyway. So actually no, sorry to disappoint you, but APS-C absolutely does NOT need any unique long telezoom (e.g 150-600) because there would literally be zero size savings compared to FF. Just get the already existing FF lenses.
Sigma will make it to complete their APS-C trinity. Their lenses are ridiculously good for the money. And I actually prefer them over Sony lenses in a lot of situations. The 18-50 is on my FX30 90% of the time.
What is also missing are fast (below F2.0) telephoto primes (with AF). The longest prime was the Sigma 56mm F1.4 for a long time, now we have Viltrox 75mm F1.2, but that is all. I was thinking when I struggled with my current lenses and it is things like a night safari or night plane spotting. I know it's niche, but hey we are talking about missing lenses. I tried to use the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8, but F2.8 is still dark in these situations. Because of that I'm not sure a 50-140mm F2.8 would be good enough, it would help for sure. What I personally would like is a 135mm F1.8 prime for APS-C. I wrote F1.8 to not make it super big.
yeah lol look at the fuji 200mm f2, that thing is huge, especially compared to their own xc 50-230mm which I love but it definitely struggles in low light.
Sigma did patent the 50-140MM F.28 DC DN. Hoping they announce it soon. Another option is the Sony 70-350 G OSS which is an APSC lens, albiet not as fast.
I need the large aperture and reach for shooting HS Track and Cross Country meets with high shutter speeds. For night meets, the E 4.5-6.3 70-350mm G OSS doesn't really cut it. I turn the ISO up, but get images that are strange and ghostly. An F2.8 70-200 APS-C equivalent would be a God-send.
great video, I´d buy a 200mm constant 2.8 lens in a heartbeat but really wouldn´t wanna go over 1000$. OSS would be great and much needed if your not doing astro or landscape
I own the Sony SEL G 70-350 OSS. Great quality, sharpness, autofocus and OSS... but as you say it's 4.5 - 6.3 (ok for daylight). I am very much into tele photo, so for me 350mm on APS-C is not too much. But, yes, it's not very light.
Hi Alex, My A6000 and ZV-E10 say yes please. Currently using Pentax screw mount primes with an adapter to cover the 50-130 due to their compact size and the images they produce.
the thing i want more is for sony to do another 24-200 f4, i shoot 40mm when i am doing street, but i need something like this for travel, and the last super zoom has been out for ages
Thanks for your thougts and tests! Sorry for being late with my opinion ... but: there's another lens that you find for Sony full frame but no equivalent for aps-c. And that is the 20-70 f4.0. Oh man, I wish some company would make it :-(
Just waiting for Sigma to release that 50-130mm f2.8. My guess year 2025, hopefully sooner! Just wanted to Thank You for all your great and informative videos that inspired me to get back on photography. I am currently enjoying the A6700 with Sigma lenses to capture every moment with my family! Keep it up, cheers!
Fuji 50-150mm f/2.8. They make it, but only for Fuji X mount. Although I am a fan of your channel, I don’t have a Sony. I have a Fuji xt4. I don’t own the Fuji 50-150mm because it is too expensive, I do have Fuji’s 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 zoom, which is very affordable. I’m hoping Sigma will make an APS tele-zoom (not a converted full-frame). Thank to your channel, I already have Fuji mount versions of Sigma 10-18, Sigma 18-50, and Sigma 56/1.4.
I recon you have hit the ball a bit early. Judging from what Sigma is doing with the 10-18 and the 18-50 I recon the exact lens you are talking about is on the way to finish a new Sigma trio 🤔 Fingers crossed 😁
The Sony 18-135 or the 18-105 are the kings of the "good enough" (and beyond) you mentioned for family/trips etc, even if one is f3.5-5.6 and the other constant f4.
Tamron already has a 35mm-150mm f/2-28 lens. It's a full frame, so about the same at the telephoto range as a 70-200mm, and a little bit wider at the wide end.
Amazing piece of engineering, true ! It gets a little old now, and would support a serious rehaul. And making it f/2.8 would get it on another level. The folks at Sony know how to do that, and they have recently put lots of efforts into the 16×24 sensor world... let's remain confident.
8:50 With a speed booster to match the equivalet focal length, a f/2.8 FF lens does in fact become a f/1.8 lens on APS-C sensor. You can't just say that a focal legth is equivalet with a crop factor but not apply it to the aperture and says it is equivalet.
Is f/2.8 good enought on APS-C? Yes. Does that makes it eqivalet to f/2.8 on FF? NO. Only after multipled by the actual focal length does f-number represent the actual size of the aperture. A 50mm f/2.8 lens does in fact let in less light then a 75mm f/2.8 lens do, putting the 50mm lens on APS-C body won't make it became the 75mm lens magically.
@@MarkCupLee Well, it depends on what people mean when they talk about "amount of light hitting the sensor" and I guess that's where the confusion and discussion comes from. Disregarding transmission, a certain aperture will always deliver the same light _intensity_ no matter the sensor size, i.e. 1mm² will receive exactly the same amount of light whether it's a tiny sensor for mobil phones or a medium format sensor. The thing is that the _collective_ amount of light hitting the whole sensor is, of course, different, which is why we have to start using "math gymnastics" to get right equivalence. And why 50mm F1.2 on APS-C will give the same results as a 75mm F1.8 on FF with regard to picture angle, depth-of-field (or background blur), as well as noise levels (when you adjust the ISO accordingly).
Sigma filed a patent for a 50-135mm f/2.8 zoom for APS-C last year so it's safe to say that it's coming out at some point this year. Also there was an interview with the Sigma CEO (it's on YT) who has suggested that the 18-35mm f/1.8 will be released for mirrorless at some point.
I hope it has is
I can't wait!
Doesn't Tamron already have something like that? Like 35-150 I think
@@cancanman That is full frame F2-2.8. Monster of a lens, certainly not light
@@cancanman its for fullframe
Fujifilm make one for their X mount it's a 50-140 f2.8 it's incredibly popular
It's one of their best lenses, and the price reflects it. It's quite pricy but worth it
Totally on your side. I only shoot APSC and have been wishing for an APSC telephoto for a long time. I almost made my mind to get the sigma 70-200mm f2.8 for my A6400 recently. This video gives me some confidence to wait for the drop of one lens as such. Let's hope some lens manufacturers would do something to fill this blank space.🤞
Rented Sony 70-200mm f2.8 with 2x TC: works great.
Great price as well.
Still use my RX10 for long range beside a6700 but APS-C lens 50-135mm f2.8 completes my lens set for me (together with 11mm & 16-55mm both 2.8)
I love my Tamron 18-300mm Di III-A VC VXD. It's on the heavy side, but I love the reach, stabilization and quality it gives me.
My tamron 18-300/3.3 is my first lens. It seems to work well for my needs so far!
I bought it 2 times and returned it 2 times. I really wanted to like it, the range is fantastic. But since i also own the Tamron 17-70 and i used to own the Sony 70-350 i am used to a certain picture quality wich the 18-300 just does not deliver. I am aware that the luxury of having one lens to cover everything without changing lenses comes at a price. But to me the downgrade in picture quality wasnt worth it. And still i am frustrated about having to carry around at least two lenses at all times or one lens wich is even way bigger and more expensive to cover the same focal range. Why cant we just have everyting? Maxium range from 12-600 mm with constant aperture, small, lightweight and cheap with excellent picture quality? 😂🙈
quality isn't that good, I had it and returned it. ended up getting the Sony 70-350mm now those picture come out crystal clear.
Its part of my travel lens kit, along with my sigma 18-50mm, and an indeterminate prime lens (the 30mm sigma and the 50mm sony OSS are duking it out in conceptual space)... and possibly the Samyang manual 12mm...
I love my Tamron 18-300 too 🔥❤️
We need an updated Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 for the new APS-c mounts!
I made some of my best telephoto-shots (mostly Wildlife) with my Sony 70-350 attached to an A6600. The image quality and focussing speed are really good and it has OIS -which is a MUST HAVE for me, as I shoot handheld all the time. And yes, I wish a faster Mark II version of this lens would be released in the near future. However, 99 times out of 100 I shot at a focal length between 150 and 350 mm. So my dream lens would be a 150-350 APS-C maybe at a constant 3.5. That would be perfect for me.
You're not alone here. I've been wishing for this lens for years in comments sections all over the internet. I used to own the Sigma 50-150/2.8 (not the one pictured in your video but the earlier one) for my Minolta 7D and it was probably my favourite lens. With a modern design this would be a very desirable lens for me and pretty much an insta-buy. Sigma has a couple of patents (i think it was 50-135/2.8 and 50-140/2.8) so I really hope to see one of them released. With the 10-18/2.8 and the 18-50/2.8 it would make sense to complete the trio.
And I agree 100% with your talk on things being "good enough". APS-C gives me more than "good enough" image quality and I love the compactness. FF can give (slightly) better dynamic range and more shallow depth-of-field (in practice - not in theory) but I really don't need it.
100% agree Arthur. I’m holding out for a sigma 50-135 f2.8 to complete my setup. All other options for apsc are too expensive, too heavy and too big.
Spot on man. I use a Tamron 35-150 on the a6600 and she’s AMAZING, but big and intimidating for most people.
Totally agree. If there were an apsc equivalent to the Sony 200-600 I would probably do the swop.
We soooooooo need this!!! Can you make a social media short on this?? Gonna tag all brands and blow this request up lol. Thanks for speaking out for us APSC users
I really like you channel Arthur and It’s great to see content other than product reviews
Please give us more!! 😁
Thank you! I'm also looking for a similar lens on APS-C and a video like yours can only help manufacturers think about it! It would be an instant buy for me.
I have 10-18 and 18-50 . I wish Sigma delivers 50-120 f1.8. It would be awesome to complete the trio
As a huge Sigma fan I every once in a while e-mail them to say thanks for their crazy good DC DN lenses. Of course I leave lens wishes, and so far the 18-50mm F2.8 and 23mm F1.4 became true. So I made wishes for two more lenses: that 50-140 F2.8 tele lens, and a 90mm F1.4 portrait killer. They kindly replied thanking me for my enthusiasm and told me: stay tuned! So here's me waiting for the big news for us APS-C shooters 😃
Don't forget about the Sigma 50-100 f/1.8 - awesome lens!
I would love a smaller version for APSC!
It's for APSC @@ArthurR
@@ArthurR That lens IS for APSC.
@@mofotose yes, but not available for modern mounts
Use MC-11.
Sigma might be coming out with a 50-140 very soon. It's THE lens I've been waiting for, Arthur!
Excellent as usual!!! I completely agree.
Such excellent points! Yes, this seems such an obvious lens to make.
Yessss, a new edition of the 50-150 F2.8 would be exactly the missing link on my a6700 between the Tamron 17-70/Sigma 18-50 and a Tamron 150-500. Maybe you could even save yourself the wide-angle zoom and, in addition to a 50-150 F2.8, only work with fixed focal lengths like Viltrox 13mm F1.4 and Viltrox 27mm F1.2.
Excellent video ! 👏🤞
Changed from RX10 iii to A6700. Good enough is good enough. 😎💪
Yea, you're right
We got many Wide-Normal ranges in the past few years. In the past (coming from a NEX-5N user), good Sony E lenses were very lacking and people thought Sony might abandon APS-C. Thanks to Vlogger and UA-camr trend, we get a lot of good lenses recently.
I want some Telephoto as well as I am using Sigma 18-50mm, is a bit too short sometimes. A compact Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 would be a nice addition 😄
Completely agree. What about the FF 24-105 f/4 on APS-C? Will provide a 36-160mm in a compact package...
i would love to see this. i went with the tamron 70 - 180 g2 because it was lightweight compared to the others and i still think its too big. even if it was 10- 20% smaller that would be really convenient
Do some more of these "casual" videos! This made me think about what lenses I have in a slightly different way
Thank you for this video and to emailed Sigma. That is the lens i need too. Hope it arrives soon. Greetings from Italy, by!
I agree, I’ve been looking for something with more reach and faster aperture. I’ve been thinking about the Samyang or Tamron 35-150 FF lenses. Leaning towards the Samyang for the par focal. I’d prefer to stay with APSC lenses.
I have a Sigma 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM for my old Nikon Digital SLR Camera that I wish I could get converted to the Sony E mount for my A6400. I realize I will lose the many benefits of a fixed F stop (e.g., f2.8) but I found the lens to be my “all around go to” lens in over 85% of the shots I’ve taken over the years as a very amateurish camera hobbyist. The convenience of wide to long lens, image stabilization, and macro range just fit my needs in so many situations with results I was happy with. Thanks Arthur for a great video and UA-cam channel.
I have that Sigma 18-250mm for Sony A mount. I use theLA-EA5 lens adapter for E mount. It works well, but not like a Sony lens would.
Talking videos are great, do them more. Specially about APS-C telephoto lenses. I would love to have third party options to the expensive Sony 70-350mm. I hope they hear you in Sigma.
I’d pre order a lens like that for sure, much needed
Sigma 55-140 announcement coming next week!!!! YESSSSSS?!?!! Zooom zooom Arthur! 🎉🎉🎉
Yes! I have a Sigma 16mm and 56mm 1.4. Now I’m thinking about a telephoto lens and I thought of your Sony 55-210 video. Just something since I don’t use telephoto for much.
This video is spot on, I bought the a6400 with the 16-50 and 55-210 stock lenses (or whatever they are) and haven't bought ANYTHING longer than 50mm b/c yes, the 55-210 (or w/e) isn't great, but there is literally nothing else that wasn't like you said 3k/1500 depending on manf.
we also need a 600mm+ lens for the budget category. would be nice to see a 1200mm on Sony E mount as well.
the next sigma zoom apsc is 55-140 f2.8 to complete their trio. 10-18, 18-55
When I saw the 50-135mm I bought the 70-350. 135mm just isn't long enough for me.
The Sigma goes to 50, not 55, but your point is still there. Fuji has an excellent 50-140 2.8, but it's a bit old now so a new version could probably be a fair bit lighter.
@@xbgt85 70-350 is great lens for sports and wildlife, but many users would love to have universal and fast 2.8 (not only) portrait lens.
It's incredibly strange that this doesn't exist, honestly. I rabbit-holed a bit researching why. Might be a confluence of factors stemming from R&D cycles that started 4-5 years ago - or product segmentation decisions from 20 years ago!
4-5 years ago Canon and Nikon both launched new lens mounts, and both ended up being 1st-party only for the bulk of the time from then until now. That would definitely have pushed Tamron and Sigma to make some business decisions; a full-frame lens that's cheap, light, compact, or all 3 can do double duty in E-mount or even work in X-mount, and so that's what we've seen a lot of from these guys. Sigma dropped the SA mount (APS-C) for their own bodies and adopted L mount FF. M43 has also withered.
Also at that time we were absolutely in the thick of a shift towards the 'prosumer' segment being redefined as a content creator who wanted video features. Everybody's wideangles have gotten wider for selfie video. 6000-series updates have heavily prioritized video; resources have been directed into vlogging cameras as the new consumer entrypoint. We saw a lot of gimbal-friendly video primes from 1st and 3rd party, and the photo segment has been redirected into max-spec full-frame bodies.
Probably the reasons for no manufacturer jumping to make a 70-200-2.8-but-for-APS-C are the same reasons why we still have no Sony 'R' series 6000 body on the high end and no photo or hybrid followup to the NEX/5000-style tiny E-mount bodies on the low end. Possibly with the "Race to 4K60" phase past, Nikon/Canon opening their mounts up, and Fuji continuing to push the envelope on APS-C we'll see some shelved lens plans coming back to the fore.
All that together though, doesn't really answer why no manufacturer ever adapted their legacy APS-C "holy trinity" telephoto lens designs from DSLR to mirrorless in the 2010-2015 era or later. The real problem seems to be that ... actually, nobody ever made a 70-200 APS-C equivalent DSLR lens to begin with for their system, 2.8 or otherwise - only 70-300 variable-aperture designs, which is not a pro-grade lens. Nikon crop, Canon crop, and Minolta-Sony A-mount crop all had 55-200mm variables (which the Sony NEX E-mount 55-210 lens is obviously descended from). Pentax did produce a 55-135 f2.8 but they were notably APS-C only at the time, making that actually their ~70-200 pro flagship. The Sigma 50-150 f2.8 and Tokina 50-135 f2.8 do exist, but are niche 3rd-party lenses from a brief window of DSLR development where "Pro-grade crop sensor" DSLR bodies were a viable segment. APS-C *mirrorless* was anything but 'Pro' for most of the past 15 years so no first-party invested in a new lens design to meet that criteria. This means a Sigma 50-135 f2.8 DC DN OS, Sony 55-150 f2.8 G OSS, Tamron 60-180 VC VXD Di III-A, etc would all be brand new designs instead of evolutionary development. A "70-200 f2.8" is a high-profile showcase lens for any company and the high R&D hurdle to overcome getting an updated, competitive design may be what has taken it so long + led to decisions to prioritize other FF-capable, video-optimized products with better short-term ROI.
You make a very good point here. I never really thought much about it because I have the Sigma APSC 18-35mm and 50-100mm F1.8 with the MC-11 adapter. However, both Sigmas are big and heavy as FF lenses, and the 50-100mm has terrible focus breathing. Maybe Sigma is secretly working on light weight mirror-less versions of these two lenses?
I'm only about a minute and a half in but immediately the thought of adapting the sigma 50-100 1.8 with the mc11 (clear image zoom will get you to 150mm) or getting one's hands on either the Tamron or the Samyang 35-150 f2 to 2.8 - either of those will hit the need you mentioned in the first minute and a half.
I have the Sony 70-350 which I use with my A6700 and it is excellent for wildlife and aircraft photography. I used to use my 150-500 tamron on my A7iv but it was unwieldy and the zoom was stiff enough to give me the feeling that someone was sawing my left wrist off with a blunt breadknife after 3 days of intensive use. For my own needs I would welcome a 100-400 zoom with stabilisation which did not have a reduced maximum aperture at the end of the zoom range.
The Sigma 50-135 f2.8 is really appealing for me and my A6400. I value the video format, Arthur, what you're talking about is extremely important: voicing the wants of people. Also I loved the point about the good enough mindset, which is lacking and the otherwise values are sickening the enviroment and our mental health.
I have the Sony 70-350mm. I use it for birds, but I would love an F2.8 zoom for portraits. I also have the Sigma 56mm F1.4, but a superfast telephoto would be much more versatile. 👍
I love the 70-350 but a shorter f2. 8 would be fantastic too.
Hi. I love your videos, and particularly this one and the recent one comparing all Sony APS-C cameras. I had an NEX-6 for several years and loved it, and traded for an A6300 which I used for a time.. Then I sold it and kept waiting for the next hopefully perfect Sony cameral to come out, and I just didn't buy again. But now I am ready to get back in, and plan to get an A6700.. I want to carry 1 or 2 lenses at most, at least for now, and I appreciate your comments and recommendations. It sounds like the Sigma 18-59 F2.8 is the way I will go, and then hope Sigma comes out with the zoom you mention here. I wondered if you have heard anything from Sigma about that possibility. Thanks for any update or other suggestions you may have.
Hi Arthur, enjoying to watch your channel to stay updated. I do agree. For some lowlight scenarios like taking photos on concerts or ballets, you need this lense. Also, for football, this would be great. I regularly use the 70 to 350mm, but for some real good pictures I need to pitch up iso and reduce the noise later in Lightroom, which takes time. As a workaround a use the tamron 17 to 70mm, which provides the aperture of 2.8. Sometimes the 70mm from the 70mm to 350 is too big. cheers, Florian
Waiting for the digna 50 to 140 apsc f2.8 lens. I love the sigma 18 to 55 f2.8. It is a very good lens.
What do you think of the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8, which also features VC? Despite its shorter zoom range, it could be a viable option if you're also considering carrying the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8.
I bought the Tamron 70-180 f2.8. It’s awesome. In fact I use it on my a6600 most of the time.
I second that. I recently (and finally upgraded) from a Nikon D7200 to Sony a6700 and the first lens I bought was the Tamron 70-180 f2.8 G2. I am mostly taking photos of my daughter's sports and it's been great. It's much smaller than the Nikon 70-200 I had been using. In fact, the Tamron is I'd say similar in size and probably lighter than the Nikon 24-70 I had been using. The G2 has image stabilization as well. For me, the Tamron works well for sports where I generally need the extra reach anyway.
WAITING FOR SUPER LOOOOOOOOONNNNNGGGG ! If really came out it's just like the feeling when Tampon 17-70 F2.8 released back then.
Fuji has the 50-140 f2.8 and I’ve been wanting it for a while now.
Until your dream lens is available, I will be satisfied with my Sony 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS. Add the Viltrox 23mm F/1.4, incorporate Clear Image Zoom, and you have a very versatile kit that's good enough. Good video.
I'd still love to see a compact 35mm equivalent lens. The Zeiss 24mm f1.8 is fine, same with the Viltrox and Sigma 23mm f1.4, but I'd love to see a lens that's the size of the Nikon Z 24mm f1.7 DX lens or the old Canon EF-M 22mm f2 lens. Bonus if we also get a proper 18mm f2 pancake too!
I was more thinking of a Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 macro for aps c, with an 2x extender. You can use it for travel, portraits, soccer, hiking and put on the extender, if you sometimes do bird watching. Should be small enough, pretty cheap and good enough for many things.
I just bought the Tamron fullframe lens 35-150 F2-F2.8 for my A6400, because i really really wanted this focal length you are talking about with a constant aperture. That lens is really nice in terms of picture quality, but it is so expensive, so big for that camera and so heavy. The Alternative would also have been the tamron 70-180 F2.8 wich is less expensive and does not weigh as much. But i had the 70-350 back in the days and i was always missing more wide angle range. Starting at 70mm made me leave the lens at home very often because i also want to shoot something between 30mm and 70mm but i dont want to switch lenses. And that is the main problem. As an APSC user i'd like to have the one "do-it-all" lens wich of course does not exist, so i go to the next best thing. And to me that was only the 35-150. Just enough wide angle to still be able to cover some street or landscape photography and just enough telephoto range for some nice long shots. But it is and will always be a compromise wich comes at a heavy weight and price. I dont think a zoomrange of 50-130 would be that attractive to many people. Even with a constant aperture. It is not enough wide angle and not enough telephoto.
Hi Arthur, can you make a comparison video of Sony 16-35 F2.8 GM2 vs Sony 16-55 F2.8 G
Brilliant video, voice of the APSC user! Hope They Listen.
I agree with your thoughts on this. I have actually been looking for something like this recently, but did not find anything that I was very excited about. I saw the Sony 18-105, but it's F4 and not as sharp as it could be, but at least its a constant aperture. There are others that are more telephoto with variable apertures, but like you said, they just don't work as well in low light. I have the Sony 70-350, which I would probably keep for certain conditions, but I would actually love to have either an APSC lens at about 50-150mm f2.8 or even something like the Sony 18-105 but at f2.8. The f4 lenses are still not too bad, but they are just are much harder to use in low light conditions, which makes them less usable. I hope the lens companies will listen to this as it is a need and I am certain it would be very popular.
I was a little bit unsure about the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 (kept thinking about going for the tamron).
Now it barely leaves my camera...
I would love a sigma big brother to said lens, similarly slimmed down...
you are so right about this
In the MFT world, where I do most (but not all) of my work there is only one lens that falls into the category discussed here: a Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 (70-200 full-frame equiv). It is now in its 3rd iteration., branded Leica and costing around $1500. I use the previous Lumix Version II. It is considerably less expensive on the used market as is the initial Lumix version. It is one of my workhorse lenses, the other being the extraordinarily versatile Olympus 12-100 f/4, a lens that has no other MFT, APS-C or full-frame equivalent (the much less expensive Tamron 18-300 APS-C lens has a wider zoom range but a variable and, for the most part, darker aperture in addition to being larger and heavier).
I am really also looking for something like this. I even consider buying the 18-105 because I want something longer than 50 but the Viltrox 75 is huge and not flexible, the 18-135 is not fast as all other travel-zoom options, the 55-210 is neither sharp nor fast. And when I tried the 18-105, it was nice to have that 105 mm, but it is only f4 and pretty old and heavy... I think a f2.8 zoom like 35-130 or 50-150 would be so nice. Maybe 50 would be a bit long on the wide end to still stay flexible... But I would sacrifice the "wide" angles for a smaller size.
I was looking for a telephoto lens to pair with my sony a6600 for sports photography and videography. All the available lenses are bulk. I personally visited stores and after looking into the sizes of those lenses finally ended up buying sony e 75-350 g lens. Even that lens is bulk, but small compared to other options available on market.
What about the Tamron 70-180 G2?
I use a lot off my Canon L glass vis sigma MC-11 on my Sony A6600. I would love a f2.8 zoom as I use my A6600 as a travel camera. So any APS-C f2.8 lenses will be great for travel.
You're right, such a lens would be great. Currently I'm only using FF because of the 20-70 F4. It replaces my ultra-wide because I don't need 16mm FF. Would be great to see an APS-C general purpose zoom which starts at 13mm up to let's say 45mm. That would be the day I switch back to APS-C
Sigma used to make a 50-150/2.8 for APS-C DSLRs. Tokina had a 50-135/2.8 for APS-C DSLRs too. While they were more compact than a FF 70-200/2.8, they aren't as small as you think they might get. Their size came out to just a little smaller than a 70-200/4, although they were also internal zooming like their 70-200 counterparts.
I just need a refresh of a 18-200mm, just so convenient for traveling...
I believe Fuji has it, the Fuji XF 50-140 f2.8 and this is there best lens.
I have a Pentax 50-135mm f2.8. This is an excellent lens. I would like to see an analog from Sony or Sigma.
Arthur, what apsc requires is a good telezoom for wildlife. currently all are full frame and heavy to lug.
Like a 600 equivalent (100-400) ? Or a 900 equivalent(150 -600) types?
@Nokillok This is a big misconception. You do not actually gain anything via smaller size by making a lens for APS-C once you go up to telephoto. Wide angle APS-C lenses can be smaller because the front element doesn't have to be as big to capture light from the same field of view as the same focal length on FF, e.g a 14mm f2.8 on APS-C vs 14mm f2.8 on FF. Look at how small the Fujifilm 14mm 2.8 is, but that's simply because as said, it has a smaller field of view than 14mm has on FF and therefore the lens can be smaller while maintaining the same entrance pupil size. However once you go to telephoto like above ~70mm the optical flow gets so cylindrical/parallell that the size of the lens is no longer determined by the angle of view, but entirely determined by the focal length + aperture. E.g a 300mm f2.8 requires at least a 107mm front lens regardless of sensor size, and the only difference between an APS-C vs FF lens would be the size of the rearmost lens group, which would be totally diminished by the rest of the barrel anyway.
So actually no, sorry to disappoint you, but APS-C absolutely does NOT need any unique long telezoom (e.g 150-600) because there would literally be zero size savings compared to FF. Just get the already existing FF lenses.
Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD is closest. Pretty sharp, too.
Sigma will make it to complete their APS-C trinity. Their lenses are ridiculously good for the money. And I actually prefer them over Sony lenses in a lot of situations. The 18-50 is on my FX30 90% of the time.
What is also missing are fast (below F2.0) telephoto primes (with AF). The longest prime was the Sigma 56mm F1.4 for a long time, now we have Viltrox 75mm F1.2, but that is all. I was thinking when I struggled with my current lenses and it is things like a night safari or night plane spotting. I know it's niche, but hey we are talking about missing lenses. I tried to use the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8, but F2.8 is still dark in these situations. Because of that I'm not sure a 50-140mm F2.8 would be good enough, it would help for sure. What I personally would like is a 135mm F1.8 prime for APS-C. I wrote F1.8 to not make it super big.
yeah lol look at the fuji 200mm f2, that thing is huge, especially compared to their own xc 50-230mm which I love but it definitely struggles in low light.
Sigma did patent the 50-140MM F.28 DC DN. Hoping they announce it soon. Another option is the Sony 70-350 G OSS which is an APSC lens, albiet not as fast.
Another issue with the 70-350G is that its bokeh is a rather harsh. I would expect a 50-135/2.8 (or whatever) to have a much smoother bokeh.
I need the large aperture and reach for shooting HS Track and Cross Country meets with high shutter speeds. For night meets, the E 4.5-6.3 70-350mm G OSS doesn't really cut it. I turn the ISO up, but get images that are strange and ghostly. An F2.8 70-200 APS-C equivalent would be a God-send.
Great video.
great video, I´d buy a 200mm constant 2.8 lens in a heartbeat but really wouldn´t wanna go over 1000$. OSS would be great and much needed if your not doing astro or landscape
Sigma did produce a 50-150mm f2.8 zoom for SLRs maybe ten years ago, but I don't remember it getting that much attention at the time.
I had the first version (without OS). It was OK but not great.
I own the Sony SEL G 70-350 OSS. Great quality, sharpness, autofocus and OSS... but as you say it's 4.5 - 6.3 (ok for daylight). I am very much into tele photo, so for me 350mm on APS-C is not too much. But, yes, it's not very light.
Hi Alex, My A6000 and ZV-E10 say yes please. Currently using Pentax screw mount primes with an adapter to cover the 50-130 due to their compact size and the images they produce.
Tamron 70-180mm 2.8??
the thing i want more is for sony to do another 24-200 f4, i shoot 40mm when i am doing street, but i need something like this for travel, and the last super zoom has been out for ages
Fujifilm did this with Fujinon XF 50-140mm F2.8 R LM OIS WR, now time for Sony, Sigma or Tamron for E-mount.
Have you used a sony 70-200 F4 on an APSC and have any comparable footage to a F2.8?
Thanks for your thougts and tests!
Sorry for being late with my opinion ... but: there's another lens that you find for Sony full frame but no equivalent for aps-c. And that is the 20-70 f4.0. Oh man, I wish some company would make it :-(
Tokina had a 50-135mm f2.8 (non IS)
Just waiting for Sigma to release that 50-130mm f2.8. My guess year 2025, hopefully sooner!
Just wanted to Thank You for all your great and informative videos that inspired me to get back on photography. I am currently enjoying the A6700 with Sigma lenses to capture every moment with my family! Keep it up, cheers!
Fuji 50-150mm f/2.8. They make it, but only for Fuji X mount. Although I am a fan of your channel, I don’t have a Sony. I have a Fuji xt4. I don’t own the Fuji 50-150mm because it is too expensive, I do have Fuji’s 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 zoom, which is very affordable. I’m hoping Sigma will make an APS tele-zoom (not a converted full-frame). Thank to your channel, I already have Fuji mount versions of Sigma 10-18, Sigma 18-50, and Sigma 56/1.4.
There's the excellent 35-100mm F2.8 OIS with MFT :)
From a Sony a6700/Olympus EM5-3 user
I recon you have hit the ball a bit early. Judging from what Sigma is doing with the 10-18 and the 18-50 I recon the exact lens you are talking about is on the way to finish a new Sigma trio 🤔
Fingers crossed 😁
please god let this be PR Stunt for a upcoming lens
The Sony 18-135 or the 18-105 are the kings of the "good enough" (and beyond) you mentioned for family/trips etc, even if one is f3.5-5.6 and the other constant f4.
Tamron already has a 35mm-150mm f/2-28 lens. It's a full frame, so about the same at the telephoto range as a 70-200mm, and a little bit wider at the wide end.
Is it a variable aperture lens?
More options is always welcome
The 55-210mm needs a serious update.
My go to, grab and go is the 18-135mm. If it was 2.8, it would never come off
Amazing piece of engineering, true !
It gets a little old now, and would support a serious rehaul. And making it f/2.8 would get it on another level.
The folks at Sony know how to do that, and they have recently put lots of efforts into the 16×24 sensor world... let's remain confident.
8:50 With a speed booster to match the equivalet focal length, a f/2.8 FF lens does in fact become a f/1.8 lens on APS-C sensor.
You can't just say that a focal legth is equivalet with a crop factor but not apply it to the aperture and says it is equivalet.
Is f/2.8 good enought on APS-C?
Yes.
Does that makes it eqivalet to f/2.8 on FF?
NO.
Only after multipled by the actual focal length does f-number represent the actual size of the aperture. A 50mm f/2.8 lens does in fact let in less light then a 75mm f/2.8 lens do, putting the 50mm lens on APS-C body won't make it became the 75mm lens magically.
@@MarkCupLee Well, it depends on what people mean when they talk about "amount of light hitting the sensor" and I guess that's where the confusion and discussion comes from. Disregarding transmission, a certain aperture will always deliver the same light _intensity_ no matter the sensor size, i.e. 1mm² will receive exactly the same amount of light whether it's a tiny sensor for mobil phones or a medium format sensor. The thing is that the _collective_ amount of light hitting the whole sensor is, of course, different, which is why we have to start using "math gymnastics" to get right equivalence. And why 50mm F1.2 on APS-C will give the same results as a 75mm F1.8 on FF with regard to picture angle, depth-of-field (or background blur), as well as noise levels (when you adjust the ISO accordingly).
Perfect lens for me would be an f2.8 version of the Sony 18-105g. Cheers!
As a matter of principle, I’m not switching to full frame and three years ago I waited for Tamron 17-70, I hope I’ll wait for 50-150/2.8)
A APSC zoom lens with a constant 1.8 is definitely coming in the near future
Should go to Fuji, they have the fantastic xf 50-140 f2.8
The Sony APSC lens I wanted most is an APSC version of a 100-400 telephoto, or a 150-600 full frame equivalent.