The signa 10-18 and 18-50 would make a pretty darn small travel kit with the xt5. I appreciate you mentioning the diffraction hit after f8 on the 40mp sensor. I think you are the only UA-cam channel that has mentioned that. I have tried not to go smaller than f8 on my XT5 as a result. Thanks again for a great review.
Worth mentioning that diffraction blur is more amenable to sharpening than out-of-focus blur, so if you need deep focus stopping down past f/8 may still be warranted.
Dustin, I always love the thoroughly professional way you conduct these reviews; top notch! You mention in the beginning that there are actually only a few lenses that can handle the 40MP sensor. It'd be interesting to hear you "shortlist". Just bought Fuji's 18mm f/1.4 and I must say that the way it resolves on my XT5 is on a different planet!
Another excellent review thank you Dustin. I have previously stated that I waited, for some time for Fujifilm to release a, modestly sized sensor body, however one which also addressed its long-standing below the competition, AF/IAF. I gave up waiting and purchased the S10, only for Fujifilm to release the S20, a month later ( certainly in Australia). I already have the Fuji wide angle zoom and am very pleased with its performance. Also, I am a true Sigma fan. However, as a confirmed non pixel peeper, it would seem to almost be squandering money to effectively, ditch the Fuji wide angle zoom for the clearly excellent- once again- Sigma offering. I will now view your review of the S20 in order to see if it offers sufficiently advanced AF to justify my losing money on the sale of my S10. Tbh, the much stronger battery in the S20 is a very strong attraction, as the OE batteries in my XT20, XT2 and S10 seem to quickly lose power. As usual, another excellent review, and Sigma keep kicking goals.
Given the amount of in-camera geometry correction that must be done,, especially at the Sigma's 10mm end, I would expect resolution performance to change across the full area of the picture, not only between the corners and the center. And I would expect hits to resolution performance to be more obvious with a 40Mp sensor. For testing camera-corrected resolution performance ideally test charts should cover the entire imaged surface with resolution targets. The worst resolution may not necessarily be in the corners and/or it may vary unevenly across the frame, depending on the amount of geometrical correction being applied. I'd ultimately like to see a full-image "resolution map" at various zoom settings.
Nice review as always Dustin. Would love to see a video on the X-mount lenses that can actually resolve the 40mp. I know the Viltrox 27mm does but wonder which others do. Fuji’s list isn’t great. Many on their list don’t actually resolve the 40mp.
Hi! This is a very nice and comprehensive review. Thank you for the info! I’m trying to decide whether to get the sigma 10-18mm or the 18-50mm for my Switzerland trip this summer. I already own the fuji 23mm f2, but I want a wider lens for landscape and architecture photos. Which one would you recommend?
Thanks for the review! While I shoot on Canon, I wanted to see how this lens does on a high MP camera to estimate how this will do on my R7. Lens looks excellent on 26 MP, but only good on 40 MP. Can't wait to see you test this lens on the 32.5 MP Canon R7 once it is released!
Unfortunately I don't own an R7, so I'm unlikely to test it on that camera. My only option for reviewing RF-S type lenses is in the APS-C mode on my EOS R5, so that's going to be much lower resolution. There's nothing higher at the moment than X-mount where I've already tested it. The main thing I'll be testing on RF is how effective autofocus is and overall functionality.
A great review, very much reflecting my own experience. Let's say I've been on a "journey" with my X-T5, and pairing it with this lens in particular! My copy is actually OK to f/11 but completely falls apart above that. At 18mm I've found my Fujifilm 18-55 is sharper than the Sigma. Generally I'm very happy with the Sigma, once you know its limitations. Those limitations are certainly a fair price to pay for the small size and weight of the lens IMO, especially when you're hiking 20 km with it! FWIW, I've found I get the best detail and acuity from the X-T5 sensor by processing in X-Raw Studio and exporting as a Tiff, before taking that into Lightroom. I did a comparison between that, handling the RAW file direct in Lightroom, processing in DXO, and running it through Lightroom's "Enhance". It's a faff to do it, and the resulting Tiff files are big, but I find it's worth it for those images where crisp details are important. BTW, would be interested to know what's on your 40MP shortlist of lenses that you mentioned?
Great review 👌 I have these new Fuji 40mp cameras but just out of curiosity how much of a difference do full frame cameras have over these Fuji 40mp cameras in image quality? As I was thinking of adding a full frame to my collection as I own Fuji crop and medium format already
I just bought in august the fuji xf 14mm 2.8 used but in pristine condition. I love it But this zoom going even to 10mm is very tempting. Might be the perfect addition to my sigma 18-50mm
Eurgh, of course I invested in the Tamron the other month 🙄 I did get a good deal and I wanted the weather sealing, but still - that side-by-side is savage! I must say, my limted real world results have been good so far and I don't feel like it's underperforming, but then I'm typically using it stopped down. One review (possibly even yours) also mentioned the presence of some field curvature on the Tamron, which I guess might account for some of the corner performance on the test charts. Hmm, tell me I'm not going to regret waiting for this review before jumping...😆
@@DustinAbbottTWI haha well, I was happy with it 😆 I need to get it out more to properly put it through its paces. I actually have the XF18mm f1.4 and the Viltrox 13mm (mostly for astro), but wanted something to save space and weight for hiking. Hopefully the Tamron will do what I need on the X-T5. I'll try to remind myself about its weather sealing every time I envy the Sigma...
I agree with your assessment of the sensor. I love my X-H2, but outside the 200mm f/2, the new 56mm f/1.2, the Viltrox Pro Options, and the 8mm 3.5mm, I haven't found a lens the really shines on this sensor. Forget adapting vintage glass.
@@el_fuckoI think it depends to a large part the extent to which you pixel peep outside of editing. I don't tend to look at prints with my nose pressed against them. I have the lenses you mention and the Viltrox and 56 the other person mentioned. But I can't say I've ever felt disappointed with the 16 2.8 or 16-55 either, nor the samyang AF lenses I had. The only limitation I have found is with slower lenses like the 70-300, which is softer at the long end regardless of sensor, but the possibility to stop down is limited with the x-t5 due to diffraction setting in earlier. Only disappointment I've had was mounting a Helios 44-2. But I can live without the vintage lenses.
I’m happy with my 26 MP on my X-S20. The only time I’d want more is wildlife. Chris of Petapixel sounded very negative while reviewing the 10-18 while raving about the 18-50 in the past. I assume in camera corrections are necessary.
Thanks for this very detailed review. I'm currently on the process of selling some wide angle primes to get this all-in-one wide zoom for my Fuji cameras, and was wondering if I would regret it. After this comprehensive review it seems that the Sigma is an excellent performer, I'll use the hell out of this lens! Was also nice to see the AF report on Fuji since most reviews I saw were on Sony. Just as a note: did you try to use the "enhance details" Lightroom feature on the Fujifilm RAW files? (just normal enhance, not super-resolution or denoise) Asking because I think it will increase resolution a lot. X-trans details compare badly to bayer, and the "enhance details" will sort of restore Fuji files detail and color resolution to bayer-like results. I wish that increasing the MP on the new sensors would make Fuji finally ditch that stupid and non-practical X-Trans marketing BS, but sadly not :/
I've explored the "enhance details" options thoroughly since purchasing the X-H2, and, they do make a difference, but not a radical one...and it comes at the cost of considerable time and storage space.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I don't have a 40MP sensor, still with the old 24MP and I notice a big difference on those. I suspect that as the resolution increases the effect may be more subtle. And yes, the extra time, processing and storage is a bummer already with 24MP, I can imagine it being much worse on 40MP. Having said that, Fujifilm cameras are is still my favourite so I just deal with it (alongside other quirks like the AF inconsistency with some lenses) wishing they abandon the X-Trans sensor array in the future.
At 18:00 it almost feels like if we were to zoom the sony photo to the same level as fuji (or upscale in essence) the sony version would still look better. Have you tried upscaling the sony version, or even downscaling the fuji photo to 26 megapixels for comparison? For me it is hard to believe that different mount lenses should perform differently, unless you were unlucky with the sample you got...
Yes I have done scaling, and yes, the Sony image often does still look better. X-Trans continues to be a difficult sensor arrangement for sharpening (at least on Adobe, which is where I operate).
@@DustinAbbottTWI Have you ever tried comparing sharpness after running the RAF through DXO PureRaw? It's one extra step and expense, but I'd be curious to see a one-off to see if that makes a difference, since Adobe & X-Trans don't play too well together in my understanding.
I tried Pureraw and Capture One(free and premium, Fuji one) alongside LRC and the differences are negligible, nothing worth changing your workflow for, not in the slightest. Supposed noise pattern/reduction differences are usually overblown too, you cant really tell the difference if you dont know what to look for. @@GregoryLopez1
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you. It’s so awesome that you take the time to respond to comments! I tried the Sony 10-20 on my a7riii and managed between 21mp - 35mp after cropping. I’m wondering if this would behave similarly.
Hi, thanks for the video:) Does it lose focus when you zoom in/out, especially while recording video ? or have you noticed any light change when you zoom in/out during video shooting ?
@@DustinAbbottTWI I got the lens today , yes it's a very good lens as long as you are not planning to zoom in/out , especially when recording video. It loses focus terribly when zooming in/out on XT5 , and exposure is all over the place if you zoom no matter what your setting are .
My philosophy is that one should actually want the sensor to out-resolve the lens and not vice-versa, as otherwise aliasing (yes, even on X-Trans) is always a potential problem. In that regard I don't think there can ever be too many megapixels, at least for the foreseeable future.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Because viewing at pixel level makes no practical sense anyway. It's detail level per area (i.e detail level relative to print size) that really matters, and in that regard a higher-res sensor will always have the advantage.
Thank you for this review. This lens seems to be interesting for 40,2 Mpx FujiFilm sensor. Haven't you tried with 40 mpx sensor also older 8-16 Fujinon lens?
Hi Dustin, would you prefer XF8-16 over this? i found a used deal for USD960 the fuji but not sure if it worth the price tag, I'm not using much ND filter however, but nice to have, I'm using XT5 btw.
When Fuji starts playtesting the X-Pro4 please try one out if you can with the Voigtlaender parallax-adaptive lenses like the VX50mmF1.2 etc. I love the H-series Fujis, but now the S5ii/S1R have taken over that area, so the X-Pro and X100 lines of Fuji retain interest for me.
No don't get the 10-24 fuji ultrawide, it's outdated sharpness even if you can buy used ones for like $450 usd. You can look at Frost's charts for comparisons or many mtf charts out there. The sigma will be sharper without a doubt while being the same size with larger aperture.
How is it that that your sharpness result with the tamron is now so bad, as compared to the test of the tamron wich showed excelent result ? I compared your video side by side, and something seems wrong there.
Thank you for your work on this comparison. It is obvious you put a lot of time and effort into the comparison and the professional video. However, everyone, and I mean everyone, knows that Lightroom does a sub-par job in demosaicing X-Trans files. I challenge you to either look at both sets of files in Capture One, which does a much better job of converting X-Trans files or demosaic the X-Trans files in DXO PhotoLab to DNG files and then bring them into Lightroom. Every one of my Fujifilm files, no matter which lens is used, are sharper and detail is better resolved when demosaicing in DXO than in Lightroom Classic. If you see a difference, I think you would then be obligated to make a video with your new findings. I don’t think any lens test with Fujifilm X-Trans files using Lightroom is the best way to judge a lens. Long time Fujifilm users, such as myself, know to get the absolute best results, use DXO, Capture One or Iridient Transformer to process Fujifilm raw files.
I have tested that in the past and didn't find a radical difference (using Capture One), but I'm open to trying again. The bottom line is that it doesn't change the performance from lens to lens, however, as they are all being processed the same way. In theory it might improve the performance of all of them, but not relative to other lenses.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I imagine this comment was prompted by your comparison to the same lens on Sony, where you remarked that the lens looked very sharp on Sony, but was not as impressive on the higher pixel-resolution Fuji. In that respect the performance of the lens on Fuji might increase relative to Sony if both were processed differently.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I also am interested if your past testing of X-Trans on Lightroom vs Capture One was with the 40MP sensor or the older 26MP one, as going off dpeview's sensor comparison tool it looks like the Lightroom processing for the 40MP sensor is worse than for the 26MP, making them look very similar in spite of the pixel-resolution differences.
Hey there, one question. If you had to pick between this lens & the Viltrox 13mm 1.4, which one would you choose? I need a wide angle lens. I already have the Sigma 56mm 1.4 & the Sigma 18 to 50mm 2.8. I like that the Sigma 10 to 18mm is light, small & wider than the Viltrox 13mm. The Viltrox on the other hand is better suited for night shooting because of the 1.4 aperture, it's less expensive, better built, but heavier & bigger. So it comes down to sharpness IMO, I use the Fuji X-S20. Which lens is sharper? Thx
Pick the zoom. Zoom is way more versatile on ultrawides. What kind of wide night shots are you taking at 1.4, you can still take those on zooms and apply the many amazing noise reduction algorithms out there. I suspect if you're comparing 13 mm to 13 mm, and at exactly the same aperture, it won't be much sharper than the sigma.
I agree with you, the difference shouldn't be too severe. With "night shooting", I was as well referring to situations like being in a museum or indoors, where tripods are not an option. Just wanted to hear some opinions or even real life experiences, if people have them. Thx for yer reply, cheers! @@anonymousl5150
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you very much, I think I'll go with the Sigma, as I like the weight & size of it, & I am familiar with Sigma already. As @anonymousl5150 stated, if I really need to crank up the ISO, there are excellent programs that will help with noise. It's more about a backup plan, if I should need that option, like during a holiday & taking pics of the city etc. at night. as well as museums & so forth. Nevertheless, thx for yer opinion, since you have experience with both, that's very valuable.
Just keep in mind that "perform better" doesn't mean "more detail". You absolutely do not gain more detail by going to a lower-res sensor just because it appears sharper on a pixel level.
I found the Laowa 9mm on the X-T5 is significantly better if you care about sharpness towards the edges. The Sigma is quite good throughout the rest of the range though, and it's very small for what it is.
Really interesting. I have Laowa 9/2,8 which I like a lot especially used on X-E3 and my impression was that edges were a bit better on Fuji 10-24/4 at 10mm. If I remember well there was no verdict which lens is better at 10mm f:4. Fuji or Sigma.
@@stanis4218 Hm, I found my Laowa better than my copy of the 10-24 at 10mm. I wanted to try the Sigma because I was getting a bit frustrated by the Laowa's vignetting and colour cast, but I sold the Sigma off after doing a test because I felt the sharpness difference was noticeable enough even at web sizes without pixel peeping.
There's definitely a push towards ever higher resolution, but I think that we've wrung just about all we're going to get out of the smaller APS-C sensor.
Interesting combination, it's a shame that fuji lenses are surpassed by their third party counterparts, but I didn't quite understand the comparison with Sony , I mean , what if you downscale the fuji image to 26 mp or upscale the Sony to 40mp, does still look sharper?
What native Fuji lenses have been surpassed? I'm genuinely curious because I would be interested in replacing my 10-24 with this Sigma - but only if the IQ is better. The Sigma 18-50 is a lovely little lens but it doesn't hold a candle to the XF 16-55 in terms of IQ. In my overall experience I have found third party lenses to represent much better value for money but (where money is not a factor) the Fuji lenses are still better.
I meant especially in terms of value for money, most fuji lenses are expensive for what they are, and from what I heard in several reviews some of the lenses have been surpassed even in terms of iq , for example Dustin considers the viltrox 75mm the best portrait lens and perhaps even this 10-18 matches or betters the 10-24...
@@paololarocca7684 I have the 75mm and it is excellent. I also had to 90 but sold it because the focal length wasn’t all that practical for me. I don’t think I’d say the Viltrox is better but it’s certainly VERY close and it’s a no brainer for the price
Hi, thanks for a detailed review and your every effort into it, but I would like to claim that all the images by Tamron 11-20 in this review (18:05 - 19:11) are far poorer than they originally should be. From your own review of Tamron 11-20 paired with the same X-H2 posted on June 19 2023 ( ua-cam.com/video/1umxijpkp6A/v-deo.htmlsi=HsjN_hqQeyEESK5l ), all the image quality test samples are far more crispy and contrasty than what we see in the current review. Maybe your Tamron 11-20 gone really bad some time in the last 6 months (optics are out of alignment or AF is consistently malfunctioning) ?? Please check this.
Well, it doesn't look like these Sigma lenses are meant for 40mp apsc, but definitely 24mp and 26mp. Looks like Fuji has really shot itself in the foot, as people up and down in the comments don't seem to have very many Fuji lenses that can resolve the 40mp sensor. Fujifilm really messed up. I mean you either buy a Fuji 24 or 26mp sensored camera and invest in a whole bunch of now obsolete lenses. This Sigma lens is already obsolete on Fuji X-mount as brand new. The rapid decline at the smaller apertures is telling of the airy disk problem and that they're not optimized for 40mp. How you gonna do landscapes with a small aperture and the image being crushed by poor resolution. And the Tamron is even worse. 40mp was much too soon, but Fuji is trying to up the game, make most of its own lens lineup obsolete as "Planned Obsolescence". Looks like 26mp sensor is planned as a short lifecycle sensor.
The signa 10-18 and 18-50 would make a pretty darn small travel kit with the xt5. I appreciate you mentioning the diffraction hit after f8 on the 40mp sensor. I think you are the only UA-cam channel that has mentioned that. I have tried not to go smaller than f8 on my XT5 as a result. Thanks again for a great review.
I see it the same way regarding the travel kit.
Worth mentioning that diffraction blur is more amenable to sharpening than out-of-focus blur, so if you need deep focus stopping down past f/8 may still be warranted.
Nah… I would stop down to F22 to get beautiful sunstar at the expense of redundancy in resolution
I’ve been waiting for this. Especially appreciate the comparison to the Tamron 11-20. Thanks, Dustin. As an aside, may God bless you and your family.
God's blessings to you, too. Thank you.
Dustin, I always love the thoroughly professional way you conduct these reviews; top notch! You mention in the beginning that there are actually only a few lenses that can handle the 40MP sensor. It'd be interesting to hear you "shortlist". Just bought Fuji's 18mm f/1.4 and I must say that the way it resolves on my XT5 is on a different planet!
Yes, their newer lenses tend to be better, obviously, as they are engineered for the higher resolution.
Great review, very interesting to have testing looking specifically at that 40MP sensor. Thank you!
It's definitely interesting to me, personally.
Thanks for your work Dustin! 🙏🏼
My pleasure!
What a fantastic tiny lens has Sigma made indeed! Another great comprehensive review Dustin!
Totally agree!
Great review! Thank you so much!
My pleasure
Another excellent review thank you Dustin.
I have previously stated that I waited, for some time for Fujifilm to release a, modestly sized sensor body, however one which also addressed its long-standing below the competition, AF/IAF.
I gave up waiting and purchased the S10, only for Fujifilm to release the S20, a month later ( certainly in Australia).
I already have the Fuji wide angle zoom and am very pleased with its performance.
Also, I am a true Sigma fan.
However, as a confirmed non pixel peeper, it would seem to almost be squandering money to effectively, ditch the Fuji wide angle zoom for the clearly excellent- once again- Sigma offering.
I will now view your review of the S20 in order to see if it offers sufficiently advanced AF to justify my losing money on the sale of my S10.
Tbh, the much stronger battery in the S20 is a very strong attraction, as the OE batteries in my XT20, XT2 and S10 seem to quickly lose power.
As usual, another excellent review, and Sigma keep kicking goals.
Glad to help out.
Given the amount of in-camera geometry correction that must be done,, especially at the Sigma's 10mm end, I would expect resolution performance to change across the full area of the picture, not only between the corners and the center. And I would expect hits to resolution performance to be more obvious with a 40Mp sensor. For testing camera-corrected resolution performance ideally test charts should cover the entire imaged surface with resolution targets. The worst resolution may not necessarily be in the corners and/or it may vary unevenly across the frame, depending on the amount of geometrical correction being applied. I'd ultimately like to see a full-image "resolution map" at various zoom settings.
Nice review as always Dustin. Would love to see a video on the X-mount lenses that can actually resolve the 40mp. I know the Viltrox 27mm does but wonder which others do. Fuji’s list isn’t great. Many on their list don’t actually resolve the 40mp.
I've got that in the works.
@@DustinAbbottTWI awesome 😎
Hi! This is a very nice and comprehensive review. Thank you for the info! I’m trying to decide whether to get the sigma 10-18mm or the 18-50mm for my Switzerland trip this summer. I already own the fuji 23mm f2, but I want a wider lens for landscape and architecture photos. Which one would you recommend?
If you want wider, I would say go with the wide angle zoom.
Thanks for the review! While I shoot on Canon, I wanted to see how this lens does on a high MP camera to estimate how this will do on my R7. Lens looks excellent on 26 MP, but only good on 40 MP. Can't wait to see you test this lens on the 32.5 MP Canon R7 once it is released!
Unfortunately I don't own an R7, so I'm unlikely to test it on that camera. My only option for reviewing RF-S type lenses is in the APS-C mode on my EOS R5, so that's going to be much lower resolution. There's nothing higher at the moment than X-mount where I've already tested it. The main thing I'll be testing on RF is how effective autofocus is and overall functionality.
A great review, very much reflecting my own experience. Let's say I've been on a "journey" with my X-T5, and pairing it with this lens in particular! My copy is actually OK to f/11 but completely falls apart above that. At 18mm I've found my Fujifilm 18-55 is sharper than the Sigma. Generally I'm very happy with the Sigma, once you know its limitations. Those limitations are certainly a fair price to pay for the small size and weight of the lens IMO, especially when you're hiking 20 km with it!
FWIW, I've found I get the best detail and acuity from the X-T5 sensor by processing in X-Raw Studio and exporting as a Tiff, before taking that into Lightroom. I did a comparison between that, handling the RAW file direct in Lightroom, processing in DXO, and running it through Lightroom's "Enhance". It's a faff to do it, and the resulting Tiff files are big, but I find it's worth it for those images where crisp details are important.
BTW, would be interested to know what's on your 40MP shortlist of lenses that you mentioned?
I will do a video at some point to detail that list. I don't have it all compiled yet.
Great review 👌 I have these new Fuji 40mp cameras but just out of curiosity how much of a difference do full frame cameras have over these Fuji 40mp cameras in image quality? As I was thinking of adding a full frame to my collection as I own Fuji crop and medium format already
Many of the good full frame cameras fall in between the XF and GF cameras in sensor quality, though closer to the GF than XF.
I just bought in august the fuji xf 14mm 2.8 used but in pristine condition. I love it
But this zoom going even to 10mm is very tempting. Might be the perfect addition to my sigma 18-50mm
They do make a very nice little kit.
Me too, I'm really enjoying the 14mm F2.8
Thank you for the comparison with Tamron 11-20. I'm using an X-T5 and decide to choose Sigma 10-18 as my wide lens. :)
My pleasure
Eurgh, of course I invested in the Tamron the other month 🙄 I did get a good deal and I wanted the weather sealing, but still - that side-by-side is savage!
I must say, my limted real world results have been good so far and I don't feel like it's underperforming, but then I'm typically using it stopped down. One review (possibly even yours) also mentioned the presence of some field curvature on the Tamron, which I guess might account for some of the corner performance on the test charts. Hmm, tell me I'm not going to regret waiting for this review before jumping...😆
Bottom line is that if you're happy with what you have, don't let this review throw you. Enjoy what you have.
@@DustinAbbottTWI haha well, I was happy with it 😆
I need to get it out more to properly put it through its paces. I actually have the XF18mm f1.4 and the Viltrox 13mm (mostly for astro), but wanted something to save space and weight for hiking. Hopefully the Tamron will do what I need on the X-T5. I'll try to remind myself about its weather sealing every time I envy the Sigma...
I agree with your assessment of the sensor. I love my X-H2, but outside the 200mm f/2, the new 56mm f/1.2, the Viltrox Pro Options, and the 8mm 3.5mm, I haven't found a lens the really shines on this sensor. Forget adapting vintage glass.
You can add the new 18, 23 and 33 f1.4 primes to that list. With some zooms, though, we're in pretty dire need of Mk II versions.
Between your list and that of the other poster, that's pretty much my whole list thus far....and the 8mm is debatable to me.
@@el_fuckoI think it depends to a large part the extent to which you pixel peep outside of editing. I don't tend to look at prints with my nose pressed against them. I have the lenses you mention and the Viltrox and 56 the other person mentioned. But I can't say I've ever felt disappointed with the 16 2.8 or 16-55 either, nor the samyang AF lenses I had. The only limitation I have found is with slower lenses like the 70-300, which is softer at the long end regardless of sensor, but the possibility to stop down is limited with the x-t5 due to diffraction setting in earlier.
Only disappointment I've had was mounting a Helios 44-2. But I can live without the vintage lenses.
@@DustinAbbottTWI as far as zooms are concerned, I’d argue the 16-55 is no slouch on the new sensor.
Don't forget the 18 f1.4.
Hi, it would be nice to include the Laowa 8-16 in this comparison… thanks a lot for your review!
I haven't tested the Laowa, so unfortunately I can't comment on that.
I’m happy with my 26 MP on my X-S20. The only time I’d want more is wildlife. Chris of Petapixel sounded very negative while reviewing the 10-18 while raving about the 18-50 in the past. I assume in camera corrections are necessary.
Corrections are necessary, but I wonder if he reviewed the 10-18 on 40MP while having received the 18-50mm on 26MP...
you have mentioned couple of lenses that are capable of resolving the demanding sensor - what are those lenses?:)
I will release a video in the near future that deals with that.
Are you sharing that list of lenses that are best with the high-res Fuji cams? :)
I've got an episode planned on that, yes.
Thanks for this very detailed review. I'm currently on the process of selling some wide angle primes to get this all-in-one wide zoom for my Fuji cameras, and was wondering if I would regret it. After this comprehensive review it seems that the Sigma is an excellent performer, I'll use the hell out of this lens!
Was also nice to see the AF report on Fuji since most reviews I saw were on Sony.
Just as a note: did you try to use the "enhance details" Lightroom feature on the Fujifilm RAW files? (just normal enhance, not super-resolution or denoise)
Asking because I think it will increase resolution a lot. X-trans details compare badly to bayer, and the "enhance details" will sort of restore Fuji files detail and color resolution to bayer-like results. I wish that increasing the MP on the new sensors would make Fuji finally ditch that stupid and non-practical X-Trans marketing BS, but sadly not :/
I've explored the "enhance details" options thoroughly since purchasing the X-H2, and, they do make a difference, but not a radical one...and it comes at the cost of considerable time and storage space.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I don't have a 40MP sensor, still with the old 24MP and I notice a big difference on those. I suspect that as the resolution increases the effect may be more subtle. And yes, the extra time, processing and storage is a bummer already with 24MP, I can imagine it being much worse on 40MP. Having said that, Fujifilm cameras are is still my favourite so I just deal with it (alongside other quirks like the AF inconsistency with some lenses) wishing they abandon the X-Trans sensor array in the future.
At 18:00 it almost feels like if we were to zoom the sony photo to the same level as fuji (or upscale in essence) the sony version would still look better. Have you tried upscaling the sony version, or even downscaling the fuji photo to 26 megapixels for comparison? For me it is hard to believe that different mount lenses should perform differently, unless you were unlucky with the sample you got...
Yes I have done scaling, and yes, the Sony image often does still look better. X-Trans continues to be a difficult sensor arrangement for sharpening (at least on Adobe, which is where I operate).
@@DustinAbbottTWI Have you ever tried comparing sharpness after running the RAF through DXO PureRaw? It's one extra step and expense, but I'd be curious to see a one-off to see if that makes a difference, since Adobe & X-Trans don't play too well together in my understanding.
I tried Pureraw and Capture One(free and premium, Fuji one) alongside LRC and the differences are negligible, nothing worth changing your workflow for, not in the slightest. Supposed noise pattern/reduction differences are usually overblown too, you cant really tell the difference if you dont know what to look for. @@GregoryLopez1
Thanks for the review! Would you mind telling me how bad the vignetting is on an a7 series? If not, no biggy. Thanks!
It doesn't cover the full frame image circle. You might get a little more than the APS-C crop, but not much.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you. It’s so awesome that you take the time to respond to comments! I tried the Sony 10-20 on my a7riii and managed between 21mp - 35mp after cropping. I’m wondering if this would behave similarly.
Hi, thanks for the video:) Does it lose focus when you zoom in/out, especially while recording video ? or have you noticed any light change when you zoom in/out during video shooting ?
I'm afraid that I don't remember testing those specific things.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I got the lens today , yes it's a very good lens as long as you are not planning to zoom in/out , especially when recording video. It loses focus terribly when zooming in/out on XT5 , and exposure is all over the place if you zoom no matter what your setting are .
My philosophy is that one should actually want the sensor to out-resolve the lens and not vice-versa, as otherwise aliasing (yes, even on X-Trans) is always a potential problem. In that regard I don't think there can ever be too many megapixels, at least for the foreseeable future.
Hmmm, but what about all of your images looking a little disappointing when viewed at a pixel level?
@@DustinAbbottTWI Because viewing at pixel level makes no practical sense anyway. It's detail level per area (i.e detail level relative to print size) that really matters, and in that regard a higher-res sensor will always have the advantage.
I want to try 40mpx Fuji, but I shoot videos more than photos, is it ok to choose xh2 not xh2s for video?
It's the X-H2 that I own, and it is a very nice video rig.
Thank you for this review. This lens seems to be interesting for 40,2 Mpx FujiFilm sensor. Haven't you tried with 40 mpx sensor also older 8-16 Fujinon lens?
I haven't tested the 8-16mm on 40MP yet.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank zou Dustin, understood. I thini I will buy this one anyway. Price, weight and filters reason.
Sir could you please tell me Which mini tripod you use?
Oben Tabletop Tripod shown in video: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy
Hi, Dustin. Have tested the xf 16-55 f2.8 on the x-h2 yet?
No I haven't, but I would be interested in doing so.
Hi Dustin, would you prefer XF8-16 over this? i found a used deal for USD960 the fuji but not sure if it worth the price tag, I'm not using much ND filter however, but nice to have, I'm using XT5 btw.
The size difference is huge. If you don't need that extra 2mm in width, I'd say go with the Sigma. It's orders of magnitude smaller.
When Fuji starts playtesting the X-Pro4 please try one out if you can with the Voigtlaender parallax-adaptive lenses like the VX50mmF1.2 etc.
I love the H-series Fujis, but now the S5ii/S1R have taken over that area, so the X-Pro and X100 lines of Fuji retain interest for me.
I've actually never reviewed any of the X-Pro cameras, so I would be interested in looking at the X-Pro4 when Fuji has one available for me.
@@DustinAbbottTWI 💎
Thanks for the review. I wonder how it compare to the Fuji 10-24 f/4 OS.
He mentions at the end that they have similar optical performance.. The Sigma being cheaper but without OIS
I do hope to do a 40MP review of the 10-24 in the new year.
No don't get the 10-24 fuji ultrawide, it's outdated sharpness even if you can buy used ones for like $450 usd. You can look at Frost's charts for comparisons or many mtf charts out there. The sigma will be sharper without a doubt while being the same size with larger aperture.
X-t5 + xf10-24mk2 = bad duo
The diffraction starts at f8 ? It seems that this is true for all lenses on fuji xh2 with 40 mp?
Yes, that's when it seems to start showing up, and typically becomes noticeable by F11.
How is it that that your sharpness result with the tamron is now so bad, as compared to the test of the tamron wich showed excelent result ? I compared your video side by side, and something seems wrong there.
Are you comparing to the Sony results on the Tamron? The Fuji sensor is very punishing to everything but the sharpest of lenses.
Thank you for your work on this comparison. It is obvious you put a lot of time and effort into the comparison and the professional video. However, everyone, and I mean everyone, knows that Lightroom does a sub-par job in demosaicing X-Trans files. I challenge you to either look at both sets of files in Capture One, which does a much better job of converting X-Trans files or demosaic the X-Trans files in DXO PhotoLab to DNG files and then bring them into Lightroom. Every one of my Fujifilm files, no matter which lens is used, are sharper and detail is better resolved when demosaicing in DXO than in Lightroom Classic. If you see a difference, I think you would then be obligated to make a video with your new findings. I don’t think any lens test with Fujifilm X-Trans files using Lightroom is the best way to judge a lens. Long time Fujifilm users, such as myself, know to get the absolute best results, use DXO, Capture One or Iridient Transformer to process Fujifilm raw files.
I have tested that in the past and didn't find a radical difference (using Capture One), but I'm open to trying again. The bottom line is that it doesn't change the performance from lens to lens, however, as they are all being processed the same way. In theory it might improve the performance of all of them, but not relative to other lenses.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I imagine this comment was prompted by your comparison to the same lens on Sony, where you remarked that the lens looked very sharp on Sony, but was not as impressive on the higher pixel-resolution Fuji. In that respect the performance of the lens on Fuji might increase relative to Sony if both were processed differently.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I also am interested if your past testing of X-Trans on Lightroom vs Capture One was with the 40MP sensor or the older 26MP one, as going off dpeview's sensor comparison tool it looks like the Lightroom processing for the 40MP sensor is worse than for the 26MP, making them look very similar in spite of the pixel-resolution differences.
Please retest viltrox 13mm 1.4 on 40mp sensor. It will be interesting to watch.
That's not a bad idea. I'll have to see if Viltrox will send me one.
Just notice that you still haven't reviewed the XF 10-24mm Mk2 yet. Any plans for that?
I'm working my way through the Fuji catalog as I came to Fuji late. So yes, I do plan to get to it in the new year.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Looking forward to that
Hey there, one question. If you had to pick between this lens & the Viltrox 13mm 1.4, which one would you choose? I need a wide angle lens. I already have the Sigma 56mm 1.4 & the Sigma 18 to 50mm 2.8.
I like that the Sigma 10 to 18mm is light, small & wider than the Viltrox 13mm. The Viltrox on the other hand is better suited for night shooting because of the 1.4 aperture, it's less expensive, better built, but heavier & bigger. So it comes down to sharpness IMO, I use the Fuji X-S20. Which lens is sharper? Thx
Pick the zoom. Zoom is way more versatile on ultrawides. What kind of wide night shots are you taking at 1.4, you can still take those on zooms and apply the many amazing noise reduction algorithms out there. I suspect if you're comparing 13 mm to 13 mm, and at exactly the same aperture, it won't be much sharper than the sigma.
I agree with you, the difference shouldn't be too severe. With "night shooting", I was as well referring to situations like being in a museum or indoors, where tripods are not an option. Just wanted to hear some opinions or even real life experiences, if people have them. Thx for yer reply, cheers! @@anonymousl5150
I would probably lean towards the zoom unless you did a lot of low light performance.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you very much, I think I'll go with the Sigma, as I like the weight & size of it, & I am familiar with Sigma already. As @anonymousl5150 stated, if I really need to crank up the ISO, there are excellent programs that will help with noise. It's more about a backup plan, if I should need that option, like during a holiday & taking pics of the city etc. at night. as well as museums & so forth. Nevertheless, thx for yer opinion, since you have experience with both, that's very valuable.
think the 10-18mm F2.8 DC DN will perform better on older fuji sensors (26MP)?
Yes I do. That would make it similar to the Sony resolution point, where it rocked.
Just keep in mind that "perform better" doesn't mean "more detail". You absolutely do not gain more detail by going to a lower-res sensor just because it appears sharper on a pixel level.
I found the Laowa 9mm on the X-T5 is significantly better if you care about sharpness towards the edges. The Sigma is quite good throughout the rest of the range though, and it's very small for what it is.
Good feedback. Many people don't want to deal with MF, though.
Really interesting. I have Laowa 9/2,8 which I like a lot especially used on X-E3 and my impression was that edges were a bit better on Fuji 10-24/4 at 10mm. If I remember well there was no verdict which lens is better at 10mm f:4. Fuji or Sigma.
@@stanis4218 Hm, I found my Laowa better than my copy of the 10-24 at 10mm.
I wanted to try the Sigma because I was getting a bit frustrated by the Laowa's vignetting and colour cast, but I sold the Sigma off after doing a test because I felt the sharpness difference was noticeable enough even at web sizes without pixel peeping.
This is literally exactly what I was looking for. Just got a a7rv and have this lens. I was wondering how it would look on a full frame.
Probably pretty good for the 26MP crop mode ☺️☺️
It will look fine in crop mode, but it doesn't cover the full frame image circle.
i wish theyd focus on autofocus & iso. im GOOD with 24mp thats it. Why do they keep doing this...
There's definitely a push towards ever higher resolution, but I think that we've wrung just about all we're going to get out of the smaller APS-C sensor.
Interesting combination, it's a shame that fuji lenses are surpassed by their third party counterparts, but I didn't quite understand the comparison with Sony , I mean , what if you downscale the fuji image to 26 mp or upscale the Sony to 40mp, does still look sharper?
When downscaling the Sony image still looks sharper. I'll have to test the upscale variation.
that's interesting, I bet the upscale variation would yield the same result....
What native Fuji lenses have been surpassed? I'm genuinely curious because I would be interested in replacing my 10-24 with this Sigma - but only if the IQ is better. The Sigma 18-50 is a lovely little lens but it doesn't hold a candle to the XF 16-55 in terms of IQ.
In my overall experience I have found third party lenses to represent much better value for money but (where money is not a factor) the Fuji lenses are still better.
I meant especially in terms of value for money, most fuji lenses are expensive for what they are, and from what I heard in several reviews some of the lenses have been surpassed even in terms of iq , for example Dustin considers the viltrox 75mm the best portrait lens and perhaps even this 10-18 matches or betters the 10-24...
@@paololarocca7684 I have the 75mm and it is excellent. I also had to 90 but sold it because the focal length wasn’t all that practical for me. I don’t think I’d say the Viltrox is better but it’s certainly VERY close and it’s a no brainer for the price
I use the Sigma 10-18mm on x-T5 without problems.
That's good!
Hi, thanks for a detailed review and your every effort into it, but I would like to claim that all the images by Tamron 11-20 in this review (18:05 - 19:11) are far poorer than they originally should be. From your own review of Tamron 11-20 paired with the same X-H2 posted on June 19 2023 ( ua-cam.com/video/1umxijpkp6A/v-deo.htmlsi=HsjN_hqQeyEESK5l ), all the image quality test samples are far more crispy and contrasty than what we see in the current review. Maybe your Tamron 11-20 gone really bad some time in the last 6 months (optics are out of alignment or AF is consistently malfunctioning) ?? Please check this.
Well, it doesn't look like these Sigma lenses are meant for 40mp apsc, but definitely 24mp and 26mp. Looks like Fuji has really shot itself in the foot, as people up and down in the comments don't seem to have very many Fuji lenses that can resolve the 40mp sensor. Fujifilm really messed up. I mean you either buy a Fuji 24 or 26mp sensored camera and invest in a whole bunch of now obsolete lenses. This Sigma lens is already obsolete on Fuji X-mount as brand new.
The rapid decline at the smaller apertures is telling of the airy disk problem and that they're not optimized for 40mp. How you gonna do landscapes with a small aperture and the image being crushed by poor resolution. And the Tamron is even worse.
40mp was much too soon, but Fuji is trying to up the game, make most of its own lens lineup obsolete as "Planned Obsolescence". Looks like 26mp sensor is planned as a short lifecycle sensor.
I'm planning on doing a video looking more closely at all of this.