My Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 DC DN review for Canon RF - the best ultra-wide zoom for cropped EOS R cameras! Order the Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 for Canon RF from B&H: bhpho.to/3MySbiE or WEX UK: tidd.ly/4cUsEuI Sell your used gear to MPB at: bit.ly/3ULU9yL Buy used gear from MPB at: prf.hn/l/YLqwRAP Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop Gordon’s retro gear channel: ua-cam.com/users/dinobytes Gordon's travel tips channel: www.youtube.com/@GordonsTravelTips Equipment used for producing my videos MacBook Air 15in (M3): amzn.to/4cPat9S DJI Osmo Pocket 3: click.dji.com/AIOhqT-LWUFDq-bGk8hD4Q?pm=link Panasonic Lumix S5 II: amzn.to/3Hf5IcI Sony A6400: prf.hn/l/pRO0wp5 Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF 00:00 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 introduction 01:18 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm design and controls 05:02 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm focusing 07:10 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm focus breathing 07:46 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm landscape quality 10:54 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm vlogging and stabilization 13:03 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm portraits and presentations 13:38 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm bokeh quality 14:21 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 sunstars 14:45 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 samples and verdict Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
My though: I should use my second hand Canon EF-S 10-18mm more before considering buying a RF mount version (and probably would go for the Sigma in that case)
Thanks a lot for that. I can't help noticing that there is a significant difference in color rendition and I am surprised to see that the Canon lens is warmer with greener blues and less cold/magenta than the Sigma. Usually it is the other way around.
Nice review! I think the Sigma’s lack of IS and the R50’s lack of IS is a bad combination. The IS of the Canon 10-18mm kinda makes up for the brighter Sigma.
when i started photography and looking for a camera.. gordon with his video of canon 450d review many years ago helped me to which camera to get!!! that was 2008 😊.. cheers!!!
I have used the manual focus ring on my Sigma RF 18-50mm f/ 2.8 lens as a control ring in the menu settings. I like that option so much, I now have a button on my R7 customized to switch the ring between manual focus & control ring. I think I set it to the red record button, which I never use to start video recording. So I think that's a great thing to be able to do, and maybe a easier way to switch the function of the ring than a switch on the lens body.
This lens has surfaced just in the nick of time, I was on the verge of offloading my R10 and moving over wholesale to FujiFilm X instead. I now intend to pick the Sigma up over the next 2-3 weeks, even though it's about £100 more expensive that either the E or X mount versions. However, I would have loved to see how the larger aperture performed for night work (city) before finally committing, as my previously adapted EF-S 10-18mm was almost unusable after dusk!
All the Sigma RF-S lenses made me slightly bitter about upgrading my 2 R10's to R8's. Although there are benefits with full frame, it's money that could've been saved, both glass and body.
It is frustrating, but the R8 is still a great body and there aren't many Sigma lenses for RF-S as yet - just their small collection of DC DN ones so far. They may not even do any more for all we know.
Interesting about the difference in the auto focus area between the Sigma, and Canon lenses. I hadn't noticed it really with my Sigma 18-50mm, but I hadn't really tried to directly compare it to my only other remaining RF lens, the Canon RF 100-400. All my other lenses I currently have are adapted EF lenses. Like you said it probably doesn't make a lot of difference, just curious why there is a difference? Wonder if it has something to do with what Sigma did with the lenses, or a limitation Canon is placing on them??
Nice video! I have the Canon R50 and I am wondering which lens I should get between these two, the thing I am scared of about the sigma lens is that there is no image stablization, my goal with either of these lens is to vlog and create content and the canon R50 also does not have image stabilization, so if you were me, which lens would you get if u had the R50 or would you just use your phone to create content instead. Thank you so much
Good question. All Canon cameras have optional digital stabilisation for movies that works pretty well, in fact often better than IBIS when you're walking with the camera. So I'd say go for the R50 with the Sigma 10-18 and enjoy the brighter aperture! PS - if you're ordering online, please consider using my links!
Thanks for testing out ! I'm planning on getting this 10-18 and I was a bit bumped out about the control ring that I came to enjoy on Canon RF lenses. Cool to know it will still be there in another form
Not a Sigma fan. Also would be nice to see a comparison with the EF-series Tamron 10-24 VC HLD. Loved that on the 80D (it was a 2017+ build lens so easily abel to serv the 24MP sensor) with a beefy stabiliser and like all Tamrons of that time dust/spray sealed.
No, they're all the same apart from mount specifics. Not sure if the mf ring can be customised on other mounts though, but all optics are the,same. I previously reviewed the Sony version if you're interested
@@cameralabs Last question I have is: I have the R50 (so no IBIS), so with just the R50 digital image stabilization or without any stabilization, how bad does it get when recording videos and taking pictures? If it all possible I would love to see a dedicated video or even a short showing what it would look like, I'm ready many people are wondering this but no video shows it yet. I do have a gimbal, but since it's quite heavy and large, it's rare I have it with me.
@@levischuurmans9400 for video, I find digital stabilisation can work really well. It'll be similar to the results I showed, but potentially a bit less warpy on the edges. But for photos, you'll just need to have a fast enough shutter speed to handhold - shouldn't be a big issue for a super-wide angle lens, especially if you have f2.8 on your side.
@@cameralabs Thanks a million, appreciate you taking the time to reply! As an event organizer that takes pictures for marketing purposes and *an amateur hobby photographer I really need to upgrade my setup badly. Your video reviews are by far the most thorough, answering all questions I had and didn't know I had. I took your recommendation before without regret, please keeping doing what you're doing. 🙏
What is the distortion of the lens in tight space Compare to Canon 10-24 RF F4 L lens for Stills and Video on APSC or Super 35? Im concern about a curvature look of the wall espercially for Real Estate work for video if I want to shoot 4K 60p RAW (Super 35) on Canon r5c, c70 or c80.
Hi Gordon, an excellent review as always! you know, I have the Sigma 10-18 for Fuji and I love it but it has an issue (for me) when you zoom in or zoom out the image gets blury! Does this occurs also in this RF mount?? Thanks!! Greetings from Mexico!
Hey Gordon, I am using the Canon rfs 10-18 on my R7 and noticed that the control ring does not seem to work, it only does manual focus. Do you know if this is a fluke or settings issue? This issue alone is driving me towards the Sigma since I would not have to deal with that issue or the deploy lens feature (I often forget to deploy it when I need it).
Hmm, I don't remember how well that one performed. I suspect more modern optics coupled with profiles would mean this is smaller and corrected overall.
Is it just the video, the camera or is there also a noticeable difference in light transmission? The Sigma shots look brighter and more vivid. Compared to the Sigma, the Canon pictures almost look discolored and dull.
You certainly seldom need F2.8 at such a wide angle? Or do you? I mean at 10mm even F2.8 gives no massive DOF. I use an old ef-s 10-22 on my R7 for the very occasional wide shot I take when using the R7. And then I shoot F8 usually. If I ever upgrade, it will be the RF-S 10-18 for sure. Sharper and cheaper.
You can see a small depth of field difference when I'm vlogging at 10mm, but remember the extra stop is also allowing lower ISOs under those conditions. Obviously if you can already achieve low ISOs due to bright light or tripod use, then that's not necessary and likewise if you shoot mostly at f8 for maximum corner sharpness, then the RF-S version makes more sense to you. Shame the build is pretty basic though.
I almost feel like the real winner of this review is the Pocket 3, which is such a phenomenal little camera, yet it still manages to get a stabilized image with some bokeh providing background separation.
EXACTLY! I filmed that deliberately in a similar location just so we could see how it compares to an APSC body with an ultra-wide lens. And the answer is, it does it very well! I've used it to film many of my (non-ski) videos on my travel tips channel: www.youtube.com/@GordonsTravelTips
I think Canon plans on filling the mid-range gap themselves before opening up to third party. That new 28-70mm f/2.8 from them is good evidence. I agree with the gameplan if Canon can make lenses that force buyers to think twice about going with the cheaper lens
Great review. I get why Canon doesn’t like Sigma. They make much better lenses for a fraction of the cost of native RF lenses. I’d love to try this Sigma but I doubt it’s available in EOS-M and the only RF mount camera I have is FF. Maybe one day Canon will allow Sigma to sell full frame lenses - hopefully RF mount still exists by the time they do.
I wouldn’t say that Sigma makes better lenses than Canon. Canon L glass is some of the best of the best out there, but for slightly less quality and no IS, the much cheaper Sigma is definitely attractive for anyone who is not a professional
I think you answered your statement in the 2nd-3rd sentence. That would be the truth on most 3rd companies, they make better lenses than the camera companies.
@@justinburley8659 Yeah I have plenty of L glass. Although I can’t imagine buying anymore. For real estate I use a Laowa MF lens. For event photography, maybe L is still worth it to some people, not me. If canon stopped boycotting 3rd party lenses, we would have more choices for less money - that’s a good thing for consumers
Once again the Sigma renders much cooler colors than the Canon. That is something that keeps me from getting more Sigma lenses in future as I hate the color cast. (Really it’s the dissonance between the lenses. I use mostly Canon and I hate having to color match)
Was waiting for your opinion on this one. Just sold my R8 and getting back my R10. Do shoot already with the R7 and the 10-18 and 18-50 are perfectly finde for my needs. Look Do mainly Vidoe work on tripod so this is going to be a good combo. Thanks for pointing everything out, Cameralabs is not just a description!! Have a great new week Gordon, cheers.
I got the ef-m 56mm sigma for my m50 and I just don’t like the color! Very sharp 1.4 lens though! Had to buy the sigma dock to upgrade the firm ware which sucked! On my r10 I’m perfectly happy with the 2 kit lenses, 18-45 and 18-150 and an RF 50mm 1.8 for portraits! If I get another lens it will be the new 28-70 f2.8 for a grand! Don’t really like birds, so I will never need more than 100mm
My conclusion at the end was that it's not that important. For photo it's not that big a deal and for video I find digital IS works better, at least when walking.
I cannot get excited for RF-S lenses no matter how hard I try. I have a couple of full frame RF bodies as well as the EOS R7, but I find it more useful to get the full frame lenses and live with the slight inconvenience of the reduced field of view. Any APS-C lenses I have are EF so I can adapt and use a speed booster. However, I am happy to see that Sigma are creating lenses for RF, let's see the new Sigma 24-70 mkII on canon RF too please Edit: How was I not subscribed before? I have remedied that, I always enjoy your reviews sir
Depends what aperture you shoot at and if you use a tripod. If you're a run and gun handholder, then the Sigma will serve you better, but if you can take time, close the aperture down for maximum focus AND use a tripod so you can use the lowest ISO for the best quality, then either will do. I suspect the Sigma will have lower geometric distortion, but at super-wide, that's kind of game over anyway.
@@cameralabs thanks for the reply, I decided to try the canon 10-18mm first and see if it’s good enough, it’s harder to find the sigma lenses where I live but I’ll probably upgrade to in the future
Christopher Frost's tests show that the Canon has slightly better corner sharpness than the Sigma. Interesting. Maybe in reality the differences are tiny to the point of subjectivity creeping in
As always a great review. If I hadn't got the Canon speedbooster I think I would have bought this sigma lens. it's F2.8 nice! (might still grab one) The corners looked good too. I wonder if it would even make it as a choice for astro. If the coma is ok.
People talk too much about video things. Cameras are firstly made for stills with video options. 99,9% of the time I use Pocket 3 for video and mirrorless for stills. Thanks for talking and comparing stills.
I agree. The thing about UA-cam is if you're a creator here then you are by default, a videographer in some capacity. Most creators come from videography to doing reviews, hence their bias towards video features and quality. That's what they know and what's important to them. But I came to YT videography having been a camera tester and photographer for a couple of decades in print. So my bias is towards photography first. But equally I appreciate video is important to a lot of people, including myself now as a creator, so I try to take a hybrid approach. Still mostly photo, but with about 25% video in there. i hope you enjoy the balance! PS - I also love my Pocket 3 and use it to film most of the videos on my small travel channel at www.youtube.com/@GordonsTravelTips
Wonder when they release replacement for DSLR lenses like Sigma 8-16 or Sigma 18-35/1.8 and 50-100/1.8 for mirrorless mounts. Some 16-35/1.8 would be great. Or maybe even 16-50/2 :)
Thanks for comparison, wondering how performance of both these lenses compare at close focusing distance, both look like good options for wide angle macro/closeup work and depending on budget either can serve that group well.
Glad you mentioned smaller af area compared to native glass. Want to hear official statement from Sigma or Canon about this, why this restriction exists Right now Iam using Canon r5m2 and Sigma glass on official ef-rf adapter and af area also smaller(
I suspect it's imposed by canon. It'll probably be something that only their lenses support. Sony does it too, only supporting the top burst speeds with their own lenses.
Thanks a lot for this review of the Sigma 10-18mm f2.8! Even as an R50 user this Sigma 10-18 would be a no brainer if I didn't own already the Canon RF-S 10-18mm! Here the better lens is clearly the Sigma even without IS! IMHO, that's not the case with the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 vs the Canon RF-S 18-150mm f3.5-6.3! There the Canon's versatility and bigger reach wins for me. The two lenses are similarly sharp and for travelling the RF-S 18-150 is the more versatile lens for sure. I will probably wait for the Sigma 16mm f1.4 because this could be a very interesting lens for all users that already own the RF-S 10-18mm. 🤔
It's awesome to see Sigma glass available for a Canon but it also highlights my aggravation toward Canon in a few ways... Why does Canon care so little about it's APS-C line? It's really sad. If I were guiding an enthusiast camera buyer looking for a good APS-C camera (either for size or budget) I would steer them toward ANY other maker, particularly Sony or Fujifilm. If Canon really cared, they'd have an L-glass line for APS-C that prioritized image quality and size. Second, as a full-frame Canon user, it's REALLY annoying that I can't buy 3rd party glass. I have a lot invested in some great Canon L-glass for professional use but it becomes difficult to justify buying some fast L prime glass when it doesn't really benefit my business (photographing buildings). A fast Art-series Sigma lens would satiate my desire for some good prime lenses without breaking the bank.
I have no idea why Canon has always been so casual about APSC lenses - to be fair, all the new ones are very sharp, but there's nothing inspirational about their rendering or apertures.
The Sigma looks to be a nice alternative to the Canon lens. I have the Canon lens and like it for its small size and light weight. I purchased it when I realized that my adapted 10-22 EF-S on my R7 produced poor results when shot wide open. I have since moved away from adapted lenses and just have native lenses: RF-S 10-18, 18-45, 18-150; RF 100-400, 16, 28, 50; TTArtisan 7.5, 25. For the 10-18 range, I'm not too concerned about shallow dof for what I use it for. It would be nice to have a faster aperture for low light conditions though. I may pick up a Sigma 1.4 prime when they come out for those time when a super shallow dof is needed. Thanks for the video.
how doe's the ef canon glass with adapter fare as many people still have ef glass.i would not waste my money on either of these lenses,over all a poor effort from both company's.
An impressive lens. I won't buy one though, because my R50 is just a fun/travel camera which "borrows" full frame RF lenses. What I really want is the Canon RF 10-20mm F4L IS STM Lens, which you sold me on last year. I say "want" because I don't need it - in practise I always end up relying on primes. My most underused lenses are L zooms.
@@cameralabs I have the R7 with its 32MP sensor, and then Canon provides RF-S options that are "Meh." Of course, my RF L lenses work great, but I'm not going hiking with them.
I'm not entirely sure that Canon is being "saved" by Sigma. I think that Canon is smartly allowing Sigma and Tamron to develop RF-S glass as a means to push their lower end APS-C cameras. We've seen just how backed up Canon manufacturing is. So Canon allowing Sigma/Tamron to fill out the lower tier lens portfolios makes a lot of sense from a business perspective. Time will only tell if Sigma and Tamron will produce full frame glass on the RF mount.
@@atselykovskiy it does for some people. In fact I think on YT, Tik Tok, reels etc, more people are in front of the camera than behind it. At least in a lot of them anyway! Either way, that's what I wanted to test with this particular lens. I often include behind the camera video samples in other reviews.
What I find funny is that Canon users will claim that the Sigma is overpriced like they did with the 18-50mm. I think there are way too many whiners both inside and outside the Canon market. Sony users love Sigma glass!
@@whipahoula Understandable. I personally aspire to be a professional sports photographer, so good pro glass is important to me and I think Canon is a great place to be for that
I love Sigma. When I had Canons, the 17-50/2.8 was an excellent crop-sensor alternative to the 24-70/2.8s for full frame. I have the 56/1.4 that I use on MFT, which is one of the best lenses ever, and the 24-70/2.8 L mount for my S5. Also a brilliant lens. If Canon had allowed third parties to make FF R mount lenses, I might not have switched to Panasonic.
@@whipahoula Does Sigma Art glass leave a cooler color tone than Canon glass like the Contemporary lenses? Or does it have the color tones that pro glass has? (I love the look of my Tamron SP 70-200 and I only want glass with those tones or at least Canon tones)
My Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 DC DN review for Canon RF - the best ultra-wide zoom for cropped EOS R cameras!
Order the Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 for Canon RF from B&H: bhpho.to/3MySbiE or WEX UK: tidd.ly/4cUsEuI
Sell your used gear to MPB at: bit.ly/3ULU9yL
Buy used gear from MPB at: prf.hn/l/YLqwRAP
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs
Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop
Gordon’s retro gear channel: ua-cam.com/users/dinobytes
Gordon's travel tips channel: www.youtube.com/@GordonsTravelTips
Equipment used for producing my videos
MacBook Air 15in (M3): amzn.to/4cPat9S
DJI Osmo Pocket 3: click.dji.com/AIOhqT-LWUFDq-bGk8hD4Q?pm=link
Panasonic Lumix S5 II: amzn.to/3Hf5IcI
Sony A6400: prf.hn/l/pRO0wp5
Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk
Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp
Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo
Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY
Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE
Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF
00:00 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 introduction
01:18 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm design and controls
05:02 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm focusing
07:10 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm focus breathing
07:46 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm landscape quality
10:54 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm vlogging and stabilization
13:03 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm portraits and presentations
13:38 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 10-18mm bokeh quality
14:21 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 sunstars
14:45 - Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 samples and verdict
Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Sigma is saving the RF line. It was a long wait. I was tired of waiting and went with FujiFilm X instead. But I still exclusively use Sigma glass.
At the moment it's only the RF-S line where Sigma had announced 6 lenses for. Also Tamron announced an RF-S lens but we're still waiting!
I think no way Canon will allow Sigma to do RF full-frame line, lol. RF-S Sigma is there because Canon didn't want to do anything at all about APS-C.
Fujifilm have worse focus and is, If you just snapshot Fujifilm is fine.
My though: I should use my second hand Canon EF-S 10-18mm more before considering buying a RF mount version (and probably would go for the Sigma in that case)
Great to hear you like the lens! Finally, an upgrade to my well built but aging (and slow) sigma 8-16 DC lens!
I think this'll be great for filming indoors on the R7! That f/2.8 will be really nice to be able to film Clog3 at native ISO.
Definitely!
Thanks a lot for that. I can't help noticing that there is a significant difference in color rendition and I am surprised to see that the Canon lens is warmer with greener blues and less cold/magenta than the Sigma. Usually it is the other way around.
You're welcome, and yes you're right, there was a noticeable colour difference
I'm really looking forward to Sigma saving Canon's fullframe RF-line!
Yeah, that may not be allowed to happen for some time if at all
Saving? They have the best glass on the market.
@@VantaBlackhole «What Did It Cost? Everything»
@@EdvardKALEN Does Ferrari need to be saved so YOU can afford one of their vehicles?
@@VantaBlackhole How long ago did Canon turn from Honda into Ferrari?
Nice review! I think the Sigma’s lack of IS and the R50’s lack of IS is a bad combination. The IS of the Canon 10-18mm kinda makes up for the brighter Sigma.
Yes and no, depends what you're doing. Digital IS alone can work pretty well for video on the Sigma.
I'm waiting for the Tamron to release its RF version of the 11-20mm f/2.8. It looks like it may be a better lens.
When is this coming?
when i started photography and looking for a camera.. gordon with his video of canon 450d review many years ago helped me to which camera to get!!! that was 2008 😊.. cheers!!!
Happy to help and still here!
I have used the manual focus ring on my Sigma RF 18-50mm f/ 2.8 lens as a control ring in the menu settings. I like that option so much, I now have a button on my R7 customized to switch the ring between manual focus & control ring. I think I set it to the red record button, which I never use to start video recording. So I think that's a great thing to be able to do, and maybe a easier way to switch the function of the ring than a switch on the lens body.
Thanks for confirming!
This lens has surfaced just in the nick of time, I was on the verge of offloading my R10 and moving over wholesale to FujiFilm X instead. I now intend to pick the Sigma up over the next 2-3 weeks, even though it's about £100 more expensive that either the E or X mount versions. However, I would have loved to see how the larger aperture performed for night work (city) before finally committing, as my previously adapted EF-S 10-18mm was almost unusable after dusk!
Optically it's the same as the other versions so you could check for examples in the x and other mounts
At last that lovely little R10 I bought for travel makes sense!
I’ve found the 18-45 kit is perfect for travel! The r10 handles up to 6400 ISO impressively! Its light weight and IS were selling points
Very complete video! Thanks for all the info helping to choose Sigma Lens
You're welcome!
Nice to finally see some third party lenses for Canon RF, but a shame they are still limited to RF-S with no OS.
All the Sigma RF-S lenses made me slightly bitter about upgrading my 2 R10's to R8's. Although there are benefits with full frame, it's money that could've been saved, both glass and body.
There’s RF28-70/2.8 now, no need to bitter
It is frustrating, but the R8 is still a great body and there aren't many Sigma lenses for RF-S as yet - just their small collection of DC DN ones so far. They may not even do any more for all we know.
You’re in the wrong business, if you think about saving money here xD
@@Dewabarasunderan Gosh, I am not even in the business. What photographer would buy 2 R10's in the first place?
@@zegzbrutalisn’t that lens like $1200?
Interesting how Canon is getting more Sigma APS-C options than Nikon Z now. Seems pretty nice!
True, a situation I thought we'd never see
Thank you!
You're welcome!
does it make a noise when its focusing in video ? The canon one that is ?
No, it's v quiet
@@cameralabs thanks for the quick reply , getting this tmw ! thank you! :)
Interesting about the difference in the auto focus area between the Sigma, and Canon lenses. I hadn't noticed it really with my Sigma 18-50mm, but I hadn't really tried to directly compare it to my only other remaining RF lens, the Canon RF 100-400. All my other lenses I currently have are adapted EF lenses. Like you said it probably doesn't make a lot of difference, just curious why there is a difference? Wonder if it has something to do with what Sigma did with the lenses, or a limitation Canon is placing on them??
We may never know!
Nice video! I have the Canon R50 and I am wondering which lens I should get between these two, the thing I am scared of about the sigma lens is that there is no image stablization, my goal with either of these lens is to vlog and create content and the canon R50 also does not have image stabilization, so if you were me, which lens would you get if u had the R50 or would you just use your phone to create content instead. Thank you so much
Good question. All Canon cameras have optional digital stabilisation for movies that works pretty well, in fact often better than IBIS when you're walking with the camera. So I'd say go for the R50 with the Sigma 10-18 and enjoy the brighter aperture! PS - if you're ordering online, please consider using my links!
Yes. The auto focus ring of my 18-50mm can be set as control ring in facus/control ring in AF menu 6.
That’s great info! I’m going to go and test that now!
thanks for confirming
Thanks for testing out ! I'm planning on getting this 10-18 and I was a bit bumped out about the control ring that I came to enjoy on Canon RF lenses. Cool to know it will still be there in another form
Спасибо,буду думать,так ли мне нужен ширик подороже,да и нужен ди вообще.🤔 Хотя sigma 18-50 f2,8 очень радует.
Not a Sigma fan. Also would be nice to see a comparison with the EF-series Tamron 10-24 VC HLD. Loved that on the 80D (it was a 2017+ build lens so easily abel to serv the 24MP sensor) with a beefy stabiliser and like all Tamrons of that time dust/spray sealed.
Hard call at this price to upgrade from my Tokina atx-i 10-22 for astro. It would have to overcome all coma to justify the price.
Are there any differences between this one (for the Canon mount) and the older ones for the other mounts.
No, they're all the same apart from mount specifics. Not sure if the mf ring can be customised on other mounts though, but all optics are the,same. I previously reviewed the Sony version if you're interested
@@cameralabs Last question I have is: I have the R50 (so no IBIS), so with just the R50 digital image stabilization or without any stabilization, how bad does it get when recording videos and taking pictures? If it all possible I would love to see a dedicated video or even a short showing what it would look like, I'm ready many people are wondering this but no video shows it yet.
I do have a gimbal, but since it's quite heavy and large, it's rare I have it with me.
@@levischuurmans9400 for video, I find digital stabilisation can work really well. It'll be similar to the results I showed, but potentially a bit less warpy on the edges. But for photos, you'll just need to have a fast enough shutter speed to handhold - shouldn't be a big issue for a super-wide angle lens, especially if you have f2.8 on your side.
@@cameralabs Thanks a million, appreciate you taking the time to reply! As an event organizer that takes pictures for marketing purposes and *an amateur hobby photographer I really need to upgrade my setup badly.
Your video reviews are by far the most thorough, answering all questions I had and didn't know I had. I took your recommendation before without regret, please keeping doing what you're doing. 🙏
@@levischuurmans9400 thanks, much appreciated!
Was curious to see how an R5 in APS-C mode shot with the sigma.
It should be similar in experience to the Canon's APSC cameras, albeit with only approx 17megapixels
What is the distortion of the lens in tight space Compare to Canon 10-24 RF F4 L lens for Stills and Video on APSC or Super 35? Im concern about a curvature look of the wall espercially for Real Estate work for video if I want to shoot 4K 60p RAW (Super 35) on Canon r5c, c70 or c80.
I've not compared their geometry, but you'd hope the RF 10-24 L would be superior. I'd suggest renting one to try it out.
Hi Gordon, an excellent review as always! you know, I have the Sigma 10-18 for Fuji and I love it but it has an issue (for me) when you zoom in or zoom out the image gets blury! Does this occurs also in this RF mount?? Thanks!! Greetings from Mexico!
Do you mean while you are filming video? It will probably change focus a bit while zooming, you will need AFC mode for video if you zoom as well...
Hey Gordon, I am using the Canon rfs 10-18 on my R7 and noticed that the control ring does not seem to work, it only does manual focus. Do you know if this is a fluke or settings issue? This issue alone is driving me towards the Sigma since I would not have to deal with that issue or the deploy lens feature (I often forget to deploy it when I need it).
Hmm, you should be able to configure the function of the ring in the menus on BOTH lenses.
How would this Lens compare to an older Sigma 10-20 mm F3,5 EX DC HSM?
Hmm, I don't remember how well that one performed. I suspect more modern optics coupled with profiles would mean this is smaller and corrected overall.
this and the 18-50 makes you wonder just how sigma can make these at such competitive prices
they really are wizards.. maybe
Mostly Canon jacking up prices because people are willing to pay them.
Is it just the video, the camera or is there also a noticeable difference in light transmission? The Sigma shots look brighter and more vivid. Compared to the Sigma, the Canon pictures almost look discolored and dull.
you put things closer on sigma that on canon also ...
Its good sir
You certainly seldom need F2.8 at such a wide angle? Or do you? I mean at 10mm even F2.8 gives no massive DOF. I use an old ef-s 10-22 on my R7 for the very occasional wide shot I take when using the R7. And then I shoot F8 usually. If I ever upgrade, it will be the RF-S 10-18 for sure. Sharper and cheaper.
You can see a small depth of field difference when I'm vlogging at 10mm, but remember the extra stop is also allowing lower ISOs under those conditions. Obviously if you can already achieve low ISOs due to bright light or tripod use, then that's not necessary and likewise if you shoot mostly at f8 for maximum corner sharpness, then the RF-S version makes more sense to you. Shame the build is pretty basic though.
Agreed.
I almost feel like the real winner of this review is the Pocket 3, which is such a phenomenal little camera, yet it still manages to get a stabilized image with some bokeh providing background separation.
EXACTLY! I filmed that deliberately in a similar location just so we could see how it compares to an APSC body with an ultra-wide lens. And the answer is, it does it very well! I've used it to film many of my (non-ski) videos on my travel tips channel: www.youtube.com/@GordonsTravelTips
damn Canon market share about to go up with Tamron and Sigma get fully onboard the RF mount (which they will)
I think Canon plans on filling the mid-range gap themselves before opening up to third party. That new 28-70mm f/2.8 from them is good evidence.
I agree with the gameplan if Canon can make lenses that force buyers to think twice about going with the cheaper lens
Great review. I get why Canon doesn’t like Sigma. They make much better lenses for a fraction of the cost of native RF lenses. I’d love to try this Sigma but I doubt it’s available in EOS-M and the only RF mount camera I have is FF. Maybe one day Canon will allow Sigma to sell full frame lenses - hopefully RF mount still exists by the time they do.
I wouldn’t say that Sigma makes better lenses than Canon. Canon L glass is some of the best of the best out there, but for slightly less quality and no IS, the much cheaper Sigma is definitely attractive for anyone who is not a professional
I think you answered your statement in the 2nd-3rd sentence. That would be the truth on most 3rd companies, they make better lenses than the camera companies.
@@justinburley8659 Yeah I have plenty of L glass. Although I can’t imagine buying anymore. For real estate I use a Laowa MF lens. For event photography, maybe L is still worth it to some people, not me. If canon stopped boycotting 3rd party lenses, we would have more choices for less money - that’s a good thing for consumers
As far as I know, the only Sigma lenses for EFM are the DC DN primes. Those are nice, but they're not these zooms
You love making a ton of false statements about a Company.
Once again the Sigma renders much cooler colors than the Canon. That is something that keeps me from getting more Sigma lenses in future as I hate the color cast. (Really it’s the dissonance between the lenses. I use mostly Canon and I hate having to color match)
Yes, I've been noticing that as well. Obviously you can adjust the WB, but it's annoying if you're mixing brands.
Was waiting for your opinion on this one. Just sold my R8 and getting back my R10. Do shoot already with the R7 and the 10-18 and 18-50 are perfectly finde for my needs. Look Do mainly Vidoe work on tripod so this is going to be a good combo. Thanks for pointing everything out, Cameralabs is not just a description!! Have a great new week Gordon, cheers.
Thanks! Yep, it's a must have lens for most EOS R APSC owners
I got the ef-m 56mm sigma for my m50 and I just don’t like the color! Very sharp 1.4 lens though! Had to buy the sigma dock to upgrade the firm ware which sucked! On my r10 I’m perfectly happy with the 2 kit lenses, 18-45 and 18-150 and an RF 50mm 1.8 for portraits! If I get another lens it will be the new 28-70 f2.8 for a grand! Don’t really like birds, so I will never need more than 100mm
Do we need is on such wide lenses?
My conclusion at the end was that it's not that important. For photo it's not that big a deal and for video I find digital IS works better, at least when walking.
I didn’t know Canon had allowed the RS mount to be used. Is this a general release?
Yes, Sigma is releasing two zooms and several f1.4 primes in the RF-S mount for cropped Canon cameras. Not full frame as yet though.
Hoped that you would have done some LS captures out in the Countryside of the same view .
Would i buy ethier tbh no .
Does the Sigma work on the r5?
In a crop APSC mode. It's only designed for cropped APSC area. Didn't I mention this in the first 16 seconds?
Will the Sigma lens work mounted on an R5 ?
Yes, but it's only corrected for the cropped APSC area, so much lower res.
Have a nice evening Gordon
Thankyou, you too!
Great review. I use a Canon R100 camera.
It'll work great on an R100
I cannot get excited for RF-S lenses no matter how hard I try. I have a couple of full frame RF bodies as well as the EOS R7, but I find it more useful to get the full frame lenses and live with the slight inconvenience of the reduced field of view. Any APS-C lenses I have are EF so I can adapt and use a speed booster. However, I am happy to see that Sigma are creating lenses for RF, let's see the new Sigma 24-70 mkII on canon RF too please
Edit: How was I not subscribed before? I have remedied that, I always enjoy your reviews sir
Glad you're now subbed, thanks!
The Sigma is much better than the Canon, no doubt. But at twice the price, is it twice as good? That I am not sure.
Well, that's what the review is for! I show you in what respects it's better, but then you have to decide if it's worth it! For me it is.
Which one would you say is better for real estate photography?
Depends what aperture you shoot at and if you use a tripod. If you're a run and gun handholder, then the Sigma will serve you better, but if you can take time, close the aperture down for maximum focus AND use a tripod so you can use the lowest ISO for the best quality, then either will do. I suspect the Sigma will have lower geometric distortion, but at super-wide, that's kind of game over anyway.
@@cameralabs thanks for the reply, I decided to try the canon 10-18mm first and see if it’s good enough, it’s harder to find the sigma lenses where I live but I’ll probably upgrade to in the future
Christopher Frost's tests show that the Canon has slightly better corner sharpness than the Sigma. Interesting. Maybe in reality the differences are tiny to the point of subjectivity creeping in
It could be a result of sample variation as well
Was Chris testing a chart at close range or a distant real life landscape?
@@cameralabs Chart I think.
@@FilipDePreter so that's a different kind of test and why I always say to evaluate performance at infinity, you need a test subject at infinity.
As always a great review. If I hadn't got the Canon speedbooster I think I would have bought this sigma lens. it's F2.8 nice! (might still grab one) The corners looked good too. I wonder if it would even make it as a choice for astro. If the coma is ok.
Thanks! Yeah, sorry I didn't test with star images.
The control ring works! Can confirm. Same for the 18-55
Thanks for confirming!
People talk too much about video things. Cameras are firstly made for stills with video options. 99,9% of the time I use Pocket 3 for video and mirrorless for stills. Thanks for talking and comparing stills.
I agree. The thing about UA-cam is if you're a creator here then you are by default, a videographer in some capacity. Most creators come from videography to doing reviews, hence their bias towards video features and quality. That's what they know and what's important to them. But I came to YT videography having been a camera tester and photographer for a couple of decades in print. So my bias is towards photography first. But equally I appreciate video is important to a lot of people, including myself now as a creator, so I try to take a hybrid approach. Still mostly photo, but with about 25% video in there. i hope you enjoy the balance! PS - I also love my Pocket 3 and use it to film most of the videos on my small travel channel at www.youtube.com/@GordonsTravelTips
Wonder when they release replacement for DSLR lenses like Sigma 8-16 or Sigma 18-35/1.8 and 50-100/1.8 for mirrorless mounts. Some 16-35/1.8 would be great. Or maybe even 16-50/2 :)
Well, they kind of did the 18-35 as a full-frame 28-45, but yes, an APSC version would be nice!
Thanks for comparison, wondering how performance of both these lenses compare at close focusing distance, both look like good options for wide angle macro/closeup work and depending on budget either can serve that group well.
Glad you mentioned smaller af area compared to native glass. Want to hear official statement from Sigma or Canon about this, why this restriction exists
Right now Iam using Canon r5m2 and Sigma glass on official ef-rf adapter and af area also smaller(
I suspect it's imposed by canon. It'll probably be something that only their lenses support. Sony does it too, only supporting the top burst speeds with their own lenses.
Thanks a lot for this review of the Sigma 10-18mm f2.8! Even as an R50 user this Sigma 10-18 would be a no brainer if I didn't own already the Canon RF-S 10-18mm! Here the better lens is clearly the Sigma even without IS! IMHO, that's not the case with the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 vs the Canon RF-S 18-150mm f3.5-6.3! There the Canon's versatility and bigger reach wins for me. The two lenses are similarly sharp and for travelling the RF-S 18-150 is the more versatile lens for sure.
I will probably wait for the Sigma 16mm f1.4 because this could be a very interesting lens for all users that already own the RF-S 10-18mm. 🤔
Yep, well we know the primes are definitely coming...
It's awesome to see Sigma glass available for a Canon but it also highlights my aggravation toward Canon in a few ways... Why does Canon care so little about it's APS-C line? It's really sad. If I were guiding an enthusiast camera buyer looking for a good APS-C camera (either for size or budget) I would steer them toward ANY other maker, particularly Sony or Fujifilm. If Canon really cared, they'd have an L-glass line for APS-C that prioritized image quality and size. Second, as a full-frame Canon user, it's REALLY annoying that I can't buy 3rd party glass. I have a lot invested in some great Canon L-glass for professional use but it becomes difficult to justify buying some fast L prime glass when it doesn't really benefit my business (photographing buildings). A fast Art-series Sigma lens would satiate my desire for some good prime lenses without breaking the bank.
I have no idea why Canon has always been so casual about APSC lenses - to be fair, all the new ones are very sharp, but there's nothing inspirational about their rendering or apertures.
Thanks for the review. So, now we have 10-18; 18-50 now we only need something to about 100 or even 150.
That would be nice in the APSC format.
The Sigma looks to be a nice alternative to the Canon lens. I have the Canon lens and like it for its small size and light weight. I purchased it when I realized that my adapted 10-22 EF-S on my R7 produced poor results when shot wide open. I have since moved away from adapted lenses and just have native lenses: RF-S 10-18, 18-45, 18-150; RF 100-400, 16, 28, 50; TTArtisan 7.5, 25. For the 10-18 range, I'm not too concerned about shallow dof for what I use it for. It would be nice to have a faster aperture for low light conditions though. I may pick up a Sigma 1.4 prime when they come out for those time when a super shallow dof is needed. Thanks for the video.
Glad you found it useful!
Thank you, Gordon! Opened UA-cam, saw your title and screen title, and clicked faster than lightning. 😊
That's what I like to hear!
how doe's the ef canon glass with adapter fare as many people still have ef glass.i would not waste my money on either of these lenses,over all a poor effort from both company's.
How is the Sigma 10-18 2.8 a poor effort? It's a great lens.
An impressive lens. I won't buy one though, because my R50 is just a fun/travel camera which "borrows" full frame RF lenses. What I really want is the Canon RF 10-20mm F4L IS STM Lens, which you sold me on last year. I say "want" because I don't need it - in practise I always end up relying on primes. My most underused lenses are L zooms.
Yeah, the 10-20 is a somewhat different proposition!
Much as I assumed. Thanks for the review! I look forward to trading my Canon 10-18mm in on the Sigma.
It's a nice upgrade
@@cameralabs I have the R7 with its 32MP sensor, and then Canon provides RF-S options that are "Meh." Of course, my RF L lenses work great, but I'm not going hiking with them.
Rfs lenses are useless, canon need to let them make the entire FF lineup
I'm not entirely sure that Canon is being "saved" by Sigma. I think that Canon is smartly allowing Sigma and Tamron to develop RF-S glass as a means to push their lower end APS-C cameras. We've seen just how backed up Canon manufacturing is. So Canon allowing Sigma/Tamron to fill out the lower tier lens portfolios makes a lot of sense from a business perspective. Time will only tell if Sigma and Tamron will produce full frame glass on the RF mount.
I was being a bit cheeky, but I do feel Sigma is saving their APSC lens lineup which they don't seem to have much interest in to date.
Could you show environment and not yourself in video stabilization tests?
Since this lens will appeal to vloggers, I wanted to include handheld vlogging tests.
@@cameralabs Vlog doesn't mean selfy video
@@atselykovskiy it does for some people. In fact I think on YT, Tik Tok, reels etc, more people are in front of the camera than behind it. At least in a lot of them anyway! Either way, that's what I wanted to test with this particular lens. I often include behind the camera video samples in other reviews.
@@cameralabs I know. I would like to see more examples of walking with the camera showing the surroundings.
@@atselykovskiy I hear you. I'll try to include more examples like this in future reviews.
What I find funny is that Canon users will claim that the Sigma is overpriced like they did with the 18-50mm. I think there are way too many whiners both inside and outside the Canon market. Sony users love Sigma glass!
As a Canon user I love my Sigma art glass. I have been using them on my R5 since it came out because I refuse to buy Canon crazy RF glass
@@whipahoula Understandable. I personally aspire to be a professional sports photographer, so good pro glass is important to me and I think Canon is a great place to be for that
I'm not sure, I think many will welcome the option and be grateful! Sony owners have so many options!
I love Sigma. When I had Canons, the 17-50/2.8 was an excellent crop-sensor alternative to the 24-70/2.8s for full frame. I have the 56/1.4 that I use on MFT, which is one of the best lenses ever, and the 24-70/2.8 L mount for my S5. Also a brilliant lens. If Canon had allowed third parties to make FF R mount lenses, I might not have switched to Panasonic.
@@whipahoula Does Sigma Art glass leave a cooler color tone than Canon glass like the Contemporary lenses? Or does it have the color tones that pro glass has? (I love the look of my Tamron SP 70-200 and I only want glass with those tones or at least Canon tones)
Reasons why I wouldn't invest in RF-S lenses: 1.6x crop, unaesthetic
Canon is kicking themselves in the bag by still producing garbage lenses..
If only Canon would see sense and let full frame 3rd party lenses onto the full frame part of the platform.
I think Canon plans to fill the gap for mid tier lenses themselves before allowing third party
@@justinburley8659 I think you may be right