For Sure Sigma 18-50 F2.8 is a keeper, such a tiny lens packed with amazing glass. I bought this lens as soon as it was announced and using it since then. I keep the lens around 24-50mm to get sharp images, and use 18mm if really need it but still has usable image quality. Sold my Fuji 16-55mm as doesn't make sense to carry such a heavy lens when there are alternatives available with constant Aperture. This is my Go-To Travel lens on X-T5 that I carry with confidence.
This is my allday combination. I rarely take the sigma off. Especially on a vacation this light and compact lens does a great job for holiday pictures.
Great review. I’ve had the Fuji 18-55 kit lens (which, BTW, does ***not*** have any WR), but gave that to my daughter to use. Missed its size and was thinking to buy again, but then Sigma came with 18-50, which I’ve had now for months and really like. Near macro is a big plus for me. Also, just got the wider Sigma 10-18 this morning on my doorstep!!!! To complete the zoom trinity, I’ve had the Fuji 55-200 since they released it. Might upgrade that one with Fuji 70-300, but will first wait to see if Sigma adds a tele-zoom specifically designed for APS (DC DN contemporary series).
Me ha gustado el video, veo que existe un costo considerable entre el Sigma 18-50mm y el Fuji 16-55mm pero creo que en los extremos da mas nitidez el Fuji, incluso con la XH2 ¿Consideras que debo de continuar ahorrando para conseguir el Fuji 16-55 ya que tengo el 18-55mm f2-4 y se queda un poco flaco en nitidez?
I bought this lens after debating over several similar lenses and feel I made the right decision. The feel of the lens and zoom ring are really great. It is small, light, portable, f2.8 throughout, and yet has very good IQ. Really a great little walk around lens for several uses
Bought this lens for the a6700, pretty satisfied overall. Autofocus on that camera actually make lenses better (especially 3rd party ones), even when compared to my A7IV.
I observed the same using 135 1.8 samyang and the 50-400 tamron. Not close to what a quad motor g master does, but good body autofocus seems to help to eek out a little more from the lens too. @@DustinAbbottTWI
I rented this lens for a trip to England to use with my X-T5 and it was a great travel lens. For shooting subjects, I found it very good. I haven't pixel peeped but do plan to print a few images, just to see.
I'm using it on my XT4, and I'm happy with it. Light, fast aperture, great minimum focus distance allowing semi macro shoots, affordable. Lack of aperture ring doesn't bother me at all.
Another sensible and practical review. Have long been a fan of Sigma glass ( Sigma even made lenses for Leica), and have purchased several for my Sony a6400. However, have been a long time, and very satisfied, owner of the Fuji 18-55 2.8-4 "kit lens"- very capable performer. Were it not for the excellent Fuji just mentioned, would purchase this newish, compact and capable offering from Sigma. Yes, the Tamron is faster, has more reach, however the lens removes the convenient form factor of the smaller Fuji X series bodies.
I bought one while I still had the 16-55 and could compare alongside that lens and some primes on the x-t5. It's very good, but the in-camera corrections are working hard when you compare the jpegs to the RAWS. This does have an impact on images with some softness compared to the Fuji, which also has a fair bit of distortion to deal with. Sadly the close focussing is at the wide end and I found using it at the minimum focus distance, side open decimated IQ. But the 16-55 could do with focusing closer. The 16-55 is noticeably sharper with more compelling rendering. But it was the width, zoom ring, aperture ring, build that I really preferred. The sigma felt almost toy-like on the x-t5. Ended up selling the Sigma. My Fujj 16-55 cost me less as well. Buying used can get you some great lenses at low prices. Never found the size an issue for my uses, but changing lens isn't so fluid.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I own the 16-55 and often wonder if I should jump ship for the Sigma. Ultimately, I keep coming back to having a pro-level zoom with comprehensive weather sealing and phenomenal build quality. It actually salvaged an outing through pouring rain in the Adirondack mountains, and it didn’t miss a beat. I just wish it weren’t so darn big for hauling around on vacation. It’s really tough because I love the image quality on the XT-5.
Those are some valid points. The Fuji is still the premium option in the class. I wouldn't mind seeing Fuji revisit that focal length and give it the series 2 treatment, though. There are some areas that could be improved.
Test it out the last 3 weeks. Needs to prepare a go out and hiking set . The 14mm + 18-55 xf is my not worry set up. The 16-55 is my no need any other kit and Sigma? Same as Tamron, some are ok with colour or no apature ring. I struggle with different ones .... For me actually only Fuji lenses on my xt5 .
Hi Dustin, hope your doing well, I AM CONCERNED BUYING IN TO THE Fujifilm x mount but I am watching all your Fuji videos before I purchase any thing: thanks God bless
Thanks for the review. I am considering this lens for travel as my 16-55 is becoming just too big and heavy, especially as I get older. Please Fuji how about a refresh of this lens. I would be very interested to see your findings if you revisited the 16-55 on the 40mp sensor.
It's a very compelling size and price point, but for those who enjoy photography outdoors and prioritize IQ and a wider perspective in their landscapes over portability and price, there is no substitute for the fuji 16-55. Static indoor tests don't do the lens justice in it's ability to wring out detail, color/tonality and contrast via it's coatings, especially in dynamic lighting conditions where wash-outs, flaring, etc can make or break the image. Maybe because of the front element size, it seems to play nicer with CPLs for whatever reason and skies really pop with less blotchiness than other wide primes and zooms I've tried.
Love this lens. I own it for Sony. Good to see it holds up fine with crazy MP sensors, just in case Sony goes down that rabbit hole (please, Sony, don't!). Thanks for the entertaining review!
As of today since my 10-18 arrived, my "Fuji Trinity" looks like: Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 , Sigma 18-50mm F2.8, Fuji 50-140 F2.8 If I could lighten that load on the long end that would be nice but I guess time will tell who updates that range 1st.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Agreed! The 10-18 and the 18-50 f/2.8 Sigmas are very good lenses for the money. If Sigma could offer a lighter lens with optical quality that equals or beats the Fuji 50-140 along with image stabilization that would be a wonderful option. OTOH, Fuji has more work cut out for themselves since they released the 40MP sensor. Their "trinity" of zooms is heavy and large. I hope that they can come to market with some competitive new options. Perhaps the 3rd party options for the X mount out there will motivate them...
I don't see the sharpness comparison of this lens on Fuji vs on Sony like you did with the Sigma 10-18mm f2.8. Did you reach the same conclusion that the same lens mounted on a 40 MP sensor (Fuji XT-5) produce less sharp images when being mounted on 24 or 26 MP sensor (Sony a6x)?
The Sigma is significantly smaller than the XF 16-55mm. Do you think the XF 16-55mm correspondingly has significantly better optical performance, or are they fairly similar through the 18-50mm focal range (especially at 26mp as I have an XT-4)? In my mind, you’re trading so much size, weight, and cost that the XF 16-55mm needs to obliterate the Sigma optically to make sense, unless you really really need that 16-18mm focal range or weather sealing that the Sigma misses out on. Great review!
I feel the Tamron is the best lens on offer in this competition -- it offers the largest zoom range, weather sealing, image stabilization and superior image quality across the frame. I'm not sure why you don't give it more love.
Well, Sigma 18-50 is almost half the weight and size of Tamron 17-70, so while it is a great lens it would not appeal to everyone (most likely not to people that also have FF cameras in their arsenal).
For travel or hiking, weight and size is a huge factor. Tamron's offering is superior, but it's so much larger and heavier that it may not be the best option for everyone. Frankly for travel, I really love an 18-135.
I actually own the Tamron, but I'm in the process of selling it and picking this lens up. It's mostly about the size, as I typically want to be able to travel lighter with my Fuji setup.
I am surprised. As I was listening to your review, I was thinking, "no so good". Then at the end you said you might buy one. I gifted my 18-55 to my son. I am enjoying my 16-80 f4. How would you compare the Sigma to the 16-80?
I second Dustin’s impressions on the 16-80. It’s better as a video lens. For stills, I found it soft, particularly at the long end. I actually preferred the 18-55 to the 16-80.
Sigma does well marketing. Sadly, most people don't understand they lack microcontrast, AKA 3D pop. Their images are sharp and flat; def not my cup of tea.
Thanks for this review. I will likely get this to replace my XC15-45 kit lens which I find lacking optically.
For Sure Sigma 18-50 F2.8 is a keeper, such a tiny lens packed with amazing glass. I bought this lens as soon as it was announced and using it since then. I keep the lens around 24-50mm to get sharp images, and use 18mm if really need it but still has usable image quality. Sold my Fuji 16-55mm as doesn't make sense to carry such a heavy lens when there are alternatives available with constant Aperture. This is my Go-To Travel lens on X-T5 that I carry with confidence.
The 16-55 is still the more special lens optically, but at double the price and weight it isn't for everyone.
This is my allday combination. I rarely take the sigma off. Especially on a vacation this light and compact lens does a great job for holiday pictures.
I'm glad you are enjoying it.
Great review. I’ve had the Fuji 18-55 kit lens (which, BTW, does ***not*** have any WR), but gave that to my daughter to use. Missed its size and was thinking to buy again, but then Sigma came with 18-50, which I’ve had now for months and really like. Near macro is a big plus for me. Also, just got the wider Sigma 10-18 this morning on my doorstep!!!! To complete the zoom trinity, I’ve had the Fuji 55-200 since they released it. Might upgrade that one with Fuji 70-300, but will first wait to see if Sigma adds a tele-zoom specifically designed for APS (DC DN contemporary series).
I too am hoping that Sigma tackles an APS-C specific telephoto zoom.
Me ha gustado el video, veo que existe un costo considerable entre el Sigma 18-50mm y el Fuji 16-55mm pero creo que en los extremos da mas nitidez el Fuji, incluso con la XH2 ¿Consideras que debo de continuar ahorrando para conseguir el Fuji 16-55 ya que tengo el 18-55mm f2-4 y se queda un poco flaco en nitidez?
I bought this lens after debating over several similar lenses and feel I made the right decision. The feel of the lens and zoom ring are really great. It is small, light, portable, f2.8 throughout, and yet has very good IQ. Really a great little walk around lens for several uses
I'm glad you are enjoying it.
Bought this lens for the a6700, pretty satisfied overall. Autofocus on that camera actually make lenses better (especially 3rd party ones), even when compared to my A7IV.
That's interesting.
I observed the same using 135 1.8 samyang and the 50-400 tamron. Not close to what a quad motor g master does, but good body autofocus seems to help to eek out a little more from the lens too. @@DustinAbbottTWI
I rented this lens for a trip to England to use with my X-T5 and it was a great travel lens. For shooting subjects, I found it very good. I haven't pixel peeped but do plan to print a few images, just to see.
It would be a great travel lens.
I'm using it on my XT4, and I'm happy with it. Light, fast aperture, great minimum focus distance allowing semi macro shoots, affordable. Lack of aperture ring doesn't bother me at all.
Sounds about right.
How about far away details on landscape shots? Thanks.
@@71co0k It’s good enough on 26 megapixel sensor.
Always a great dayvwhen I get to wake up and watch one of your videos with my morning coffee. 🙂👍
Sounds good to me!
fuji really need to make their 16-55 version 2, which I hope matches the size of this lens but with much more resolving power for their 40mpx sensors
It is very unlikely that Fuji could make a lens both significantly smaller and optically superior, but I think they could do a little of each.
Another sensible and practical review.
Have long been a fan of Sigma glass ( Sigma even made lenses for Leica), and have purchased several for my Sony a6400.
However, have been a long time, and very satisfied, owner of the Fuji 18-55 2.8-4 "kit lens"- very capable performer.
Were it not for the excellent Fuji just mentioned, would purchase this newish, compact and capable offering from Sigma.
Yes, the Tamron is faster, has more reach, however the lens removes the convenient form factor of the smaller Fuji X series bodies.
That point about the form factor is the primary reason why I'm actually moving the Tamron for the Sigma.
I bought one while I still had the 16-55 and could compare alongside that lens and some primes on the x-t5.
It's very good, but the in-camera corrections are working hard when you compare the jpegs to the RAWS. This does have an impact on images with some softness compared to the Fuji, which also has a fair bit of distortion to deal with. Sadly the close focussing is at the wide end and I found using it at the minimum focus distance, side open decimated IQ. But the 16-55 could do with focusing closer.
The 16-55 is noticeably sharper with more compelling rendering. But it was the width, zoom ring, aperture ring, build that I really preferred. The sigma felt almost toy-like on the x-t5.
Ended up selling the Sigma. My Fujj 16-55 cost me less as well. Buying used can get you some great lenses at low prices. Never found the size an issue for my uses, but changing lens isn't so fluid.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I own the 16-55 and often wonder if I should jump ship for the Sigma. Ultimately, I keep coming back to having a pro-level zoom with comprehensive weather sealing and phenomenal build quality. It actually salvaged an outing through pouring rain in the Adirondack mountains, and it didn’t miss a beat. I just wish it weren’t so darn big for hauling around on vacation. It’s really tough because I love the image quality on the XT-5.
Those are some valid points. The Fuji is still the premium option in the class. I wouldn't mind seeing Fuji revisit that focal length and give it the series 2 treatment, though. There are some areas that could be improved.
Test it out the last 3 weeks. Needs to prepare a go out and hiking set .
The 14mm + 18-55 xf is my not worry set up. The 16-55 is my no need any other kit and Sigma?
Same as Tamron, some are ok with colour or no apature ring. I struggle with different ones .... For me actually only Fuji lenses on my xt5 .
Hmmm, sounds like you have this focal range covered pretty well already.
I had this lens on the XS-10 and now on XS-20 with improved AF and its great
That's awesome.
Hi Dustin, hope your doing well, I AM CONCERNED BUYING IN TO THE Fujifilm x mount but I am watching all your Fuji videos before I purchase any thing: thanks God bless
I hope that the reviews help. Fuji is a little complicated, as there are some things they are great at and others they are pretty poor at.
Thanks for the review. I am considering this lens for travel as my 16-55 is becoming just too big and heavy, especially as I get older. Please Fuji how about a refresh of this lens. I would be very interested to see your findings if you revisited the 16-55 on the 40mp sensor.
I'm interested in that exercise, too. It's on my list for the new year.
It's a very compelling size and price point, but for those who enjoy photography outdoors and prioritize IQ and a wider perspective in their landscapes over portability and price, there is no substitute for the fuji 16-55. Static indoor tests don't do the lens justice in it's ability to wring out detail, color/tonality and contrast via it's coatings, especially in dynamic lighting conditions where wash-outs, flaring, etc can make or break the image. Maybe because of the front element size, it seems to play nicer with CPLs for whatever reason and skies really pop with less blotchiness than other wide primes and zooms I've tried.
It is a nice lens, for sure, though definitely at a serious price and size/weight premium over the Sigma.
Thanks for testing! FYI, the chapter timestamps seem to be off
Thanks. Updated
Great review! FYI the XF 18-55 is not weather sealed.
Thanks for the feedback. A few others have pointed that out, too.
Purely focused on picture quality - if travelling, would you opt for the Sigma or Fujinon 16-80 4.0, on the xt-5.
Inputs highly appreciated😊
I prefer the Sigma, myself.
Love this lens. I own it for Sony. Good to see it holds up fine with crazy MP sensors, just in case Sony goes down that rabbit hole (please, Sony, don't!). Thanks for the entertaining review!
On Sony it's great.
As of today since my 10-18 arrived, my "Fuji Trinity" looks like:
Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 , Sigma 18-50mm F2.8, Fuji 50-140 F2.8
If I could lighten that load on the long end that would be nice but I guess time will tell who updates that range 1st.
I'd love to see Sigma tackle the telephoto zoom range.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Agreed! The 10-18 and the 18-50 f/2.8 Sigmas are very good lenses for the money. If Sigma could offer a lighter lens with optical quality that equals or beats the Fuji 50-140 along with image stabilization that would be a wonderful option.
OTOH, Fuji has more work cut out for themselves since they released the 40MP sensor. Their "trinity" of zooms is heavy and large. I hope that they can come to market with some competitive new options. Perhaps the 3rd party options for the X mount out there will motivate them...
I don't see the sharpness comparison of this lens on Fuji vs on Sony like you did with the Sigma 10-18mm f2.8. Did you reach the same conclusion that the same lens mounted on a 40 MP sensor (Fuji XT-5) produce less sharp images when being mounted on 24 or 26 MP sensor (Sony a6x)?
I did reach the same conclusion, though it's a little more nuanced than that. I'll break it down in an upcoming episode.
Hi, would you say the 16-55 resolves the new sensor better?
That's a good question that I'm interested in answering. I plan to get a loaner of that 16-55mm in the near future and answer it.
Will look forward to it! @@DustinAbbottTWI
The Sigma is significantly smaller than the XF 16-55mm. Do you think the XF 16-55mm correspondingly has significantly better optical performance, or are they fairly similar through the 18-50mm focal range (especially at 26mp as I have an XT-4)? In my mind, you’re trading so much size, weight, and cost that the XF 16-55mm needs to obliterate the Sigma optically to make sense, unless you really really need that 16-18mm focal range or weather sealing that the Sigma misses out on. Great review!
I am using it on X-T5 and its an overall excellent lens. Size and compactness it second to none.
I just picked up the Sigma 10-18 today. The two Sigmas are a great pairing. Very similar in size and weight.
The Fuji is better optically, but it doesn't "obliterate" the smaller, lighter, and cheaper Sigma.
I feel the Tamron is the best lens on offer in this competition -- it offers the largest zoom range, weather sealing, image stabilization and superior image quality across the frame. I'm not sure why you don't give it more love.
TAMRON is killing it
Well, Sigma 18-50 is almost half the weight and size of Tamron 17-70, so while it is a great lens it would not appeal to everyone (most likely not to people that also have FF cameras in their arsenal).
For travel or hiking, weight and size is a huge factor. Tamron's offering is superior, but it's so much larger and heavier that it may not be the best option for everyone. Frankly for travel, I really love an 18-135.
@@RG-rm9jt 28-200 is the best travel lens period
I actually own the Tamron, but I'm in the process of selling it and picking this lens up. It's mostly about the size, as I typically want to be able to travel lighter with my Fuji setup.
I am surprised. As I was listening to your review, I was thinking, "no so good". Then at the end you said you might buy one. I gifted my 18-55 to my son. I am enjoying my 16-80 f4. How would you compare the Sigma to the 16-80?
I was not particularly impressed by the resolution of the 16-80 even on a 26MP camera.
I second Dustin’s impressions on the 16-80. It’s better as a video lens. For stills, I found it soft, particularly at the long end. I actually preferred the 18-55 to the 16-80.
Sad that there wasn’t a comparison with the Fuji 16-55. Alas, I will live. Lol
I might do that in the new year, as I'd like to revisit the 16-55mm
@@DustinAbbottTWI that would be great, Dustin.
Woot!
:)
Fuji 18-55 is not weather sealed
Yes, I misspoke on that and have gotten nailed over it by many people !!
Sigma does well marketing. Sadly, most people don't understand they lack microcontrast, AKA 3D pop. Their images are sharp and flat; def not my cup of tea.
Some of that is a little overstated, I think, but there are alternatives that produce somewhat richer images