4:24 The equivalent lens would be 27-75 f2.8 with regards to how much light hits the sensor. The f2.8 aperture will let in f2.8 light whether it is a full frame lens or crop lens. It would only be around f4 if you're comparing depth of field and bokeh. In reality its field of view would be equivalent to a FF 27-75, its aperture is still f2.8, and its depth of field and bokeh is exactly that of a 18-50mm f2.8. Great video, but I think Tony Northrup has added too much confusion in the photography community with respect to crop sensor aperture in some of his videos.
Thanks for your valuable insights. The fact is that no matter how you put the so called equivalent numbers, there is always someone who thinks it's wrong😀
You are so right about Tony Northrup. I listened once how he tried to explain and not only he was wrong, but I think he is completely clueless! It's all elementary Physics of which he has absolutely no clue. Yet people like him go on trying to explain to others what they themselves have no idea about. I have not watched any of his video since...
Thanks for this on point, and very useful, review! As a (mostly) prime shooter too, I often wonder what I'd be giving up if I took one decent zoom instead of two or three decent primes, and your video really helped with this.
@@leonfourie5717 This particular video is about APS-C and so was my previous video and also the one before that. Now I'm worried, that I'm shifting towards APS-C without even noticing it myself😂
Nice episode my friend. It's pretty obvious the difference in lens size and weight for that class of zoom in full frame vs APS-C and MFT. I notice you have caught the Kai Man Wong technique of matching different brands - a Carl Zeiss hat and a Lumix strap on a Sony body 😀
Better to go with the 3 prime lenses Sigma has had, or switch to this new lens instead? Right now I only have 1/3 of the Sigma trio lenses being the Sigma 16mm 1.4
I have Sigma 16 mm 1.4 as well. My next purchase probably will be 56 mm 1.4 skipping 30 mm 1.4. As one man said - wider lense to show where the subject is; nifty fifty perfect to show who the subject is. 30 mm lense maybe good for travel, more versatile and smaller than 16 mm.
Thank you for this content, I have a sony a6600 and I use it almost only with my sony 35mm f1.8, Some times I think I need a little of Wide angle for interiors and landscapes and medium tele for portraits. May you please help me to see (here or in a private message or on your blog) a comparrison of the same subject Portrait, Landscape, Interiors with the 3 different crops? 18mm 35mm 50mm, so it may help me to know if is the one that I need. P.S.: which very compact gimball will you reccomend for this set or similar sets? a6600-35mm/ a6600 18-50mm or similars, thanks again :) Have a nice day, Nice weather is starting to show up :) More photos will be taken :)
@@mattisulanto No problem, Thank you anyway :) I will take a look around, If you have some suggestion where to look are also appreciated :) Have a nice Day :)
I'd say the Sigma is better, because it's almost the same size, it has constant F2.8, it's sharp and it's excellent value for money. However, it depends how you define better. I'm sure for many the Leica zoom is better simply because it's Leica.
I have not compared them side by side, but the prime is probably slightly sharper, if you pixel peep. Which is better depends on what you need and want.
Another great video Matti. Thanks. You said that you really like the compact combo of A6400 and 18 to 50 f2.8. Would you say that it is a superior combo to the Lumix GX9 with 12 to 35 f2.8 or the 12 to 60 Leica?
I think it is a major issue since only the most expensive APS-C cameras A6500 and A6600 have IBIS. So, I think this lens was designed for these two cameras specifically.
Great review as always and thank you for that Matti. Just one question… I have an S1H for my video work and mostly use the Sigma 28-70mm f2.8. However, smaller and lighter is always good unless there is a compromise on quality. I only shoot video in 4K 50p so am forced into APSC crop mode which I don’t mind. In your opinion, does this new 18-50 lose out in any way image quality-wise to it’s slightly bigger (but still relatively compact) brother? This tiny f2.8 28-75 equivalent otherwise looks very interesting.
Thanks. In my opinion you don't lose anything with this lens compared to the FF version. I was really happy with the video footage from this lens. If you use APS-C anyway, this could be a really nice option for you. It's quite affordable too.
@@mattisulanto I hoped you wouldn’t say that Matti…but suspected you would! I think I may have to try one and reduce the ‘footprint’ of that S1H even further.
Thanks for this. Looks like this lens is almost as good as the Sigma prime. Wonder how this looks compared to the Sony 18-135. This has sharper images but missing out on the 50-135 range is steep. Your thoughts?
@@scottiebumich i had a setup on a 35mm film camera that worked pretty rad, it was a 16 a 35 & then a longer tele so i’ll probably try to duplicate that setup. & i may do the 18-105 because i do video work, so either that or something above the 35-above135 but i’m gonna wait & see if i really need it. id like to try the 18-50 sigma but it’s not weather proof & no OSS seems like kind of a deal breaker
Thanks, the video & photos both excellent. Lord, I wished Panasonic had decided to make APSC cameras instead of MFT, but I love Lumix ergonomics & am set as I once heard: You date the camera but marry the glass & have big commitment in MFT lenses. Also as MFT shooter, I liked your Lumix camera strap 🙂.
Thanks. At the time MFT seemed to make a lot of sense and it had many advantages. However, today some of those advantages have faded at least. However, I still would not doom MFT and I think it's still a great system😀
@@mattisulanto Thanks Matti & yes some of MFT's advantages have passed but I still enjoy the system. And maybe Sigma will provide a MFT version of the 18-50mm as it sounds like an outstanding lens. BTW if my health was better, I would so like to attend your workshop in Helsinki next year.
@@mattisulanto It's really weird why Sigma is not making a mirrorless version of its possibly most popular APS-C DSLR lens the 18-35f1.8? Just pure total-amount-of-light-per-image math that f1.8 is equivalent to about a 18-80 f2.8 lens as for croppability on the telephoto end, which is not a big gain on the telephoto end but that f1.8 on the 18mm end is more than one stop plus.
@@miklosnemeth8566 Maybe they will do it in the future. It takes from 12-36 months to produce a new lens from scratch and they have so many lenses to make. I don't think they'd be happy to just convert the old lens for mirrorless, they will want to re-design it.
Thanks for the comparison with the FF counterpart - that was quite a stunning contrast considering that the 28-70 is renowned for being small. Like yourself, I prefer primes, but this looks so easy to glide around with without any serious compromise.
Yes, but as Matti explained at 4:25 is not accurate at all. That FF lens on a FF body gives exactly one stop less noise per photo, which could be a fundamental difference in low light situation. The proper comparison would be with a FF 28-75mm f4 lens if it exists.
@@miklosnemeth8566 Depends what you're trying to achieve. The two lenses are counterparts irrespective - if you know of another compact L-mount zoom with a constant aperture then let me know. In my case, I have primes which are bright enough, and I have a FF and APS-C camera, and zooms hold little interest for me. However, these zooms attract my attention because they are as bright as is available for their respect format, and yet smaller than most alternatives. For my minor use-case the aperture need only be the best reasonable lightflow, rather than any concern for equivalence. My APS-C camera with this lens would weigh a THIRD of my FF camera with the 28-70, so it is more likely to fit, and if it does, perhaps I'll also get the 28-70 at a later date if that seems like a good idea. Equivalence is an important consideration in some cases, but they are not the prevailing cases most of the time.
@@mattisulanto thanks that's probably best I suppose. If I would however I just don't know where to find one that is covering the whole image correctly. It can be a little distorted though I only like that. I wonder if anybody would know of anything like that?
It is absurd that folks from Finland, Norway, Sweden - let's move south - Germany, Holland, Greece, Italy - speak better "Mercian than we do....in "Merica.
I hope to see Sigma lenses coming to Fuji where affordable constant, aperture zooms will be welcomed !
Yeah, no joke. Fuji has some solid cameras these days. They really stepped up their game.
This Sigma zoom is now available for Fujifilm.
Loved your manner of speaking. Thanks a lot for the video, got 18-50 for myself, truly nice lens
Great photos also!
Glad it was helpful!
4:24 The equivalent lens would be 27-75 f2.8 with regards to how much light hits the sensor. The f2.8 aperture will let in f2.8 light whether it is a full frame lens or crop lens. It would only be around f4 if you're comparing depth of field and bokeh.
In reality its field of view would be equivalent to a FF 27-75, its aperture is still f2.8, and its depth of field and bokeh is exactly that of a 18-50mm f2.8.
Great video, but I think Tony Northrup has added too much confusion in the photography community with respect to crop sensor aperture in some of his videos.
Thanks for your valuable insights. The fact is that no matter how you put the so called equivalent numbers, there is always someone who thinks it's wrong😀
You are so right about Tony Northrup. I listened once how he tried to explain and not only he was wrong, but I think he is completely clueless! It's all elementary Physics of which he has absolutely no clue. Yet people like him go on trying to explain to others what they themselves have no idea about. I have not watched any of his video since...
Thanks for this on point, and very useful, review! As a (mostly) prime shooter too, I often wonder what I'd be giving up if I took one decent zoom instead of two or three decent primes, and your video really helped with this.
Thank you.
Glad that LUMIX can still be seen in the video😀
Sure😅
Yeah, as a subscriber and follower of Matti, i am getting worried as the mft videos is getting less and less and more focus on FF.
@@leonfourie5717 This particular video is about APS-C and so was my previous video and also the one before that. Now I'm worried, that I'm shifting towards APS-C without even noticing it myself😂
@@mattisulanto Yip agree FF or APSC. Just an observation.But then again many is changing to MFT. So its a space for us viewers to watch.
Nice episode my friend. It's pretty obvious the difference in lens size and weight for that class of zoom in full frame vs APS-C and MFT. I notice you have caught the Kai Man Wong technique of matching different brands - a Carl Zeiss hat and a Lumix strap on a Sony body 😀
Thanks. I didn't know Kai uses the same method, maybe he got it from me😀 I've the cap for a long time.
Just watched the presentation, now I am pretty excited to see your opinion on it.
Thanks. I really like the lens as you can see in the video.
looks like a lovely lens, i would buy it if i hadn't sold off my apsc camera
Yeah, it's a neat standard zoom.
Thanks for video, which lens do you use for vloging? Stabilisation looks awesome
Thanks. This one was filmed on the Gopro Hero8.
Better to go with the 3 prime lenses Sigma has had, or switch to this new lens instead?
Right now I only have 1/3 of the Sigma trio lenses being the Sigma 16mm 1.4
It really depends on what you want. Both primes and zooms are good, but different.
I have Sigma 16 mm 1.4 as well. My next purchase probably will be 56 mm 1.4 skipping 30 mm 1.4. As one man said - wider lense to show where the subject is; nifty fifty perfect to show who the subject is. 30 mm lense maybe good for travel, more versatile and smaller than 16 mm.
@@mantasmuckus A 30mm is the nifty fifty for APS-C.
I have the Sigma 16mm the 56mm and a Sony 35mm 1.8. I will replace the Sony with the new Sigma 18-50 2.8.
@@kp-od8ji Same here!
Thank you for this content, I have a sony a6600 and I use it almost only with my sony 35mm f1.8, Some times I think I need a little of Wide angle for interiors and landscapes and medium tele for portraits. May you please help me to see (here or in a private message or on your blog) a comparrison of the same subject Portrait, Landscape, Interiors with the 3 different crops? 18mm 35mm 50mm, so it may help me to know if is the one that I need. P.S.: which very compact gimball will you reccomend for this set or similar sets? a6600-35mm/ a6600 18-50mm or similars, thanks again :) Have a nice day, Nice weather is starting to show up :) More photos will be taken :)
Thanks. That lens was on loan from Sigma so I can't do that comparison. I'm not a video specialist and I can't recommend a gimbal, I'm sorry.
@@mattisulanto No problem, Thank you anyway :) I will take a look around, If you have some suggestion where to look are also appreciated :) Have a nice Day :)
better than the Leica 18-56mm zoom with variable aperture for APS-C?
I'd say the Sigma is better, because it's almost the same size, it has constant F2.8, it's sharp and it's excellent value for money. However, it depends how you define better. I'm sure for many the Leica zoom is better simply because it's Leica.
@@mattisulanto similar color? I have leica body but i am open to using other brands in the L mount. I'm not that snobby
Is it as much sharp as sigma 1.4 16mm? Which is better to but not having inbody stabilization to have good parameters on low ligh?
I have not compared them side by side, but the prime is probably slightly sharper, if you pixel peep. Which is better depends on what you need and want.
Brother please tell me it is better than sony Zeiss 16 70 reply soon brother
I don't know, because I have not compared the two.
Another great video Matti. Thanks.
You said that you really like the compact combo of A6400 and 18 to 50 f2.8. Would you say that it is a superior combo to the Lumix GX9 with 12 to 35 f2.8 or the 12 to 60 Leica?
Thanks. I would not say it's superior to anything, but I would say it's a very nice combo😀
@@mattisulanto Come on Matti!! You're best placed to answer a question like that. 😅
Isn't that a problem that the a6400 doesn't have an image stabilization? The lens doesn't have as well.
5:37 in the video. I can be a problem, but it's not a problem all the time.
I think it is a major issue since only the most expensive APS-C cameras A6500 and A6600 have IBIS. So, I think this lens was designed for these two cameras specifically.
@@miklosnemeth8566 Sure, it's a matter of opinion whether is a major problem or not, but I agree, that it can be a problem.
People shot without image stabilization for years. Unless your only doing handheld video it’s not really a problem.
@@jbeats02 I orderd this lense, to use on my a6000. For video i want a gimbal. do you think the DJI ronin SC is good?
Is there any chance is this lens coming in efm mount?
I think you'd have to ask Sigma if they are going to make that.
Great review as always and thank you for that Matti. Just one question… I have an S1H for my video work and mostly use the Sigma 28-70mm f2.8. However, smaller and lighter is always good unless there is a compromise on quality. I only shoot video in 4K 50p so am forced into APSC crop mode which I don’t mind. In your opinion, does this new 18-50 lose out in any way image quality-wise to it’s slightly bigger (but still relatively compact) brother? This tiny f2.8 28-75 equivalent otherwise looks very interesting.
Thanks. In my opinion you don't lose anything with this lens compared to the FF version. I was really happy with the video footage from this lens. If you use APS-C anyway, this could be a really nice option for you. It's quite affordable too.
@@mattisulanto I hoped you wouldn’t say that Matti…but suspected you would! I think I may have to try one and reduce the ‘footprint’ of that S1H even further.
Not for full frame? :/ looking for a7iv
Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN for full frame.
Thanks for this. Looks like this lens is almost as good as the Sigma prime. Wonder how this looks compared to the Sony 18-135. This has sharper images but missing out on the 50-135 range is steep. Your thoughts?
Thanks for watching! I have never used the Sony 18-135 so I can't really comment much. Usually more range means worse overall quality.
just sold mine. don’t miss it.
@@wehrwxlf Did you replace it with anything? I like the Sigma 18-50, but not sure if/how to replace with a longer/tele lens.
@@scottiebumich i had a setup on a 35mm film camera that worked pretty rad, it was a 16 a 35 & then a longer tele so i’ll probably try to duplicate that setup. & i may do the 18-105 because i do video work, so either that or something above the 35-above135 but i’m gonna wait & see if i really need it. id like to try the 18-50 sigma but it’s not weather proof & no OSS seems like kind of a deal breaker
maybe sony 35mm for street, 56 sigma for portrait & then 18-105. if i feel like buying the 18-135 back they’re going for 350 all day on facebook
Thanks, the video & photos both excellent. Lord, I wished Panasonic had decided to make APSC cameras instead of MFT, but I love Lumix ergonomics & am set as I once heard: You date the camera but marry the glass & have big commitment in MFT lenses. Also as MFT shooter, I liked your Lumix camera strap 🙂.
Thanks. At the time MFT seemed to make a lot of sense and it had many advantages. However, today some of those advantages have faded at least. However, I still would not doom MFT and I think it's still a great system😀
@@mattisulanto Thanks Matti & yes some of MFT's advantages have passed but I still enjoy the system. And maybe Sigma will provide a MFT version of the 18-50mm as it sounds like an outstanding lens. BTW if my health was better, I would so like to attend your workshop in Helsinki next year.
@@rickkoloian4179 Thanks. We would love to have you😀
@@mattisulanto Indeed your workshop gives me a goal to work towards. I will do my best 🙂
At 7:08 did you mean the 18-35mm f1.8 Art lens?
I meant the 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC.
@@mattisulanto It's really weird why Sigma is not making a mirrorless version of its possibly most popular APS-C DSLR lens the 18-35f1.8? Just pure total-amount-of-light-per-image math that f1.8 is equivalent to about a 18-80 f2.8 lens as for croppability on the telephoto end, which is not a big gain on the telephoto end but that f1.8 on the 18mm end is more than one stop plus.
@@miklosnemeth8566 Maybe they will do it in the future. It takes from 12-36 months to produce a new lens from scratch and they have so many lenses to make. I don't think they'd be happy to just convert the old lens for mirrorless, they will want to re-design it.
Thanks for the presentation, we would like some night walks too
Thanks for the comparison with the FF counterpart - that was quite a stunning contrast considering that the 28-70 is renowned for being small. Like yourself, I prefer primes, but this looks so easy to glide around with without any serious compromise.
Thanks. The compact size makes a difference indeed.
Yes, but as Matti explained at 4:25 is not accurate at all. That FF lens on a FF body gives exactly one stop less noise per photo, which could be a fundamental difference in low light situation. The proper comparison would be with a FF 28-75mm f4 lens if it exists.
@@miklosnemeth8566 Depends what you're trying to achieve. The two lenses are counterparts irrespective - if you know of another compact L-mount zoom with a constant aperture then let me know. In my case, I have primes which are bright enough, and I have a FF and APS-C camera, and zooms hold little interest for me. However, these zooms attract my attention because they are as bright as is available for their respect format, and yet smaller than most alternatives. For my minor use-case the aperture need only be the best reasonable lightflow, rather than any concern for equivalence. My APS-C camera with this lens would weigh a THIRD of my FF camera with the 28-70, so it is more likely to fit, and if it does, perhaps I'll also get the 28-70 at a later date if that seems like a good idea. Equivalence is an important consideration in some cases, but they are not the prevailing cases most of the time.
Anybody knows if it will be released with an EF Canon mount one day ?
It's a mirrorless design and will not be available for DSLRs.
@@mattisulanto oh okay thank you
So you think there is no way this lens can be used with a camera like the BMPCC 4k for example ?
It seems you're well on board with Sigma these days. So maybe you could do some Sigma MFT videos too?.
Sigma is very co operative an I appreciate that. I have videos about the Sigma 16mm, 30mm and 56mm F1.4. What would you like to see?
@@mattisulanto found them, thanks. It was nice to look at those old videos.
Thanks a lot, i will buy Sony A6400 and lens Sigma 18-50 for my channel, i have used Gopro 10, but it not good, i want to change. I come from Vietnam
Thanks. I hope you'll like the combo.
Anybody around here who could say if it would be possible to add a wide angle attachement to it?
I suppose if you can find one, you could use it. However, you might as well buy a wider lens.
@@mattisulanto thanks that's probably best I suppose. If I would however I just don't know where to find one that is covering the whole image correctly. It can be a little distorted though I only like that. I wonder if anybody would know of anything like that?
Dang that’s small, the FF version was already small
True, it's really compact.
It is absurd that folks from Finland, Norway, Sweden - let's move south - Germany, Holland, Greece, Italy - speak better "Mercian than we do....in "Merica.
Thanks so much.
oh，you betrayed m43！