FIRST Sigma lens for Canon RF! 18-50mm f2.8 vs RF-S 18-45mm review 

My review of Sigma's FIRST lens for Canon's EOS R mirrorless cameras, the 18-50mm f2.8 for APSC! Buy the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 at B&H: bhpho.to/3KUGnX8 // WEX UK: tidd.ly/4cCmvUC 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: ru-vid.com Equipment used for producing my videos 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 MacBook Pro 14in (16GB / 1TB): amzn.to/3PrKbPV 00:00 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 introduction 01:58 - Sell your old gear to MPB! Sponsorship 03:03 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 design and controls 05:14 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 coverage for photo and video 06:24 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 focusing for photo and video 08:47 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 focus breathing 09:31 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 stabilization 11:53 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 18-45mm landscape quality 16:14 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 18-45mm portrait quality 17:03 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 18-45mm bokeh quality 17:50 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 vs Canon RF-S 18-45mm macro quality 18:37 - Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 verdict and sample images Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

I heard that Sigma said it's better for them from a business point of view to make APS-C lenses. Cheaper to make and they have a massive audience that want cheaper lenses. But personally, I would really love to get full-frame Sigma RF glass in my hands

Canon getting their act together to allow Sigma on board. I’ve had this lens for Fujifilm and it’s awesome

Sigma RF 16mm F1.4 will be an important lens for talking head video shooters and the 18-50mm F2.8 is best for the product photographers but lack of lens stabilization is a problem. However, in my country (Bangladesh), many small wedding photographer groups use Sony A6400 for the Sigma 16mm F1.8 or Viltrox 13mm F1.4 in a gimbal where A7c/A74 is their main shooter. Hope Canon give a firmware update to the Canon R10 to add C-log and decrease price to fight with Sony A6400. Canon must update its kit lens line and cheap lens line as well. As an owner of a Canon R8 (Previously I used M50 and then R10), I will be happy to see a Canon 28-75mm F2.8 with stabilization cheap version or a 24-50mm F2.8 L version or a good kit lens like a Panasonic 20-60mm F3.5-5.6. Canon will have to face competition from Nikon or Panasonic as well. Once the mid-level user will become a high-end user. If someone invested in the expensive lens in another version, they will never switch back.

FINALLY ...RF MOUNT THIRD PARTY LENSES ~

Nice! Good to have bright crop frame lens options for the crop rf cameras!

Jeez, what a dramatically better lens! I sold off my R7 over a year ago, in large part due to the frustration over lack of viable lenses. Canon, you twiddled your thumbs too long.

Thanks for the quick review and comparison! I’ve been using the older 17-70 2.8-4 on my Canon aps-c cameras for quite a while (including adapting it on my R7), so I’m very eager to upgrade to this newer version. The 17-70 has been a fantastic quality lens, and I’ve captured many great shots with it (my favourite likely being a sunset shot from the Shard overlooking the Thames towards Canary Wharf that printed beautifully). I have mostly Canon and Tamron FF glass, and only two APSC Sigma lenses (the other being the now very old 8-16). The best part of these lenses is their portability for trips, or even a long local hike - I’m rarely hauling my larger L lenses. It’s one reason I’ll keep using the APS-C format, and I’m really glad that Sigma has released this, since I believe (based on my older two Sigmas), these lenses tend to be better quality than what Canon offers, and can get close to L image quality. Thanks again Gordon!

awesome review. thanks

Appreciate your thoughtful reviewsGordon, and always interested to hear about developments of third party options for the RF mount, especially given my high opinion of Sigma's current line up, but I wondered whether you had tried the sigma on any full frame R body such as the R5, which would presumably switch the camera to a cropped mode, but for walk around this might be a reasonable sacrifice?

Thanks Gordon! I have never used third party lenses on my Canon cameras, I've been fortunate enough to be able to purchase used EF lenses in the past for my Canon DSLRs, but when I switched to the Canon R series (currently just got a R6 MkII) I have stuck to Canon RF lenses. Thanks for the review, I'm sure many viewers will appreciate this video. Keep up the good work!

I’ll get one of these - I use an R7 and 100-500 for wildlife work and would like a decent standard zoom to put in my bag for when I see something else I’d like to shoot. It will also make for a smaller lighter (than my full frame R6) walkabout setup with the R7. I’d still like to see a 15-80mm f2.8 to give proper wide angle to mild telephoto range - I used to like the 12-60 when I used to use MFT. Still, this is a start and I’ve preordered mine. Thanks, Gordon!

Waiting for sigma 18-35mm art vs this 18-50mm

Gordon with his hat off 😀 .....summer must be here !

Great option for photographers who want a sharp, well-built lens with a fast aperture Sir.

Funny, I read the report about this on my news feed this morning and imagined I could hear you cheering all the way from Brighton to Vegas ;-) Interesting comparison. Does the FPS suffer like it does on Sony with 3rd party lenses? Not that it matters to me personally, I long abandoned Canon for MFT. I still enjoy your reviews though, cheers!

What a great little lens! I wish they made it in Canon EF-M mount. I've toyed with the idea of changing systems so i can use it but that would be dumb.If i accept a larger heavier setup there are much better lenses out there, including Sigma's great f1.8 zooms.

I might just keep my R7, after all. What we need is an APSC tele zoom with a 5.6 minimum aperture. The trouble with the FR100-500 is that over half of it's area is wasted by the crop. (1.6*1*6=2.56) It could either be a stop brighter or half the weight, both without losing quality. As for the RF100-400, R8 is really too dark for a crop camera at high speeds. An RF-s100-400 f5.6 should be doable at a similar size, weight and cost to the RF100-400 f8. What killed the M6 MkII for me was the lack of high quality native stabilized lenes and an unstabilized body.

I've been using a Canon 17-40mm L lens via an adaptor with excellent results, but perhaps this will tempt me into adding it to my collection, given its much more compact dimensions.

I currently use an R7 with a Canon 17-55 2.8 with an adapter for R mount, what are the differences between these lenses? Is it worth the change? The weight difference is very noticeable, but is the quality worth it for the change?

I wonder why we didn't get Tamron 17-70 yet.. or maybe it will come later, that lens is the swiss army knife of the aps-c crop cameras

Looks cool.

I do use the 18-35 f1.8 on my R7 which really works great. Will add the 10-18 2,8 and later on the 16 F1,4 - not sure whether it makes sense to get the 18-50 with the 18-35 already in my kit. Good to see though canon opening up, also looking forward to tamron. Thanks for the as usual great review Gordon. Keep up the great work 👍🏻👍🏻

dear Gordon, could you also make a comparison of the fuji 16 - 50 and the sigma 18 - 50, because I think, this is for many fuji users a relevant question when buying for example the new fuji xt-50

Some cameras when you shoot jpegs are oversharp. I only shoot jpegs and I am searching for a camera with good jpegs. The M100 outperforms the X-T100 when you pixel peep. Gordon, have you noticed a camera with particularly good jpegs straight out of camera lately? I have a feeling it might be a Canon. Or a Panasonic?

The glaring problem is that Canon's smaller, lighter APS-C bodies (that would really benefit from a lens like this) don't have IBIS. (The R7 is nearly FF size and weight.) So, as a Canon FF user, my biggest problem is trying to decide between a Sony A6700, or Fuji XS-20 / XT50.

A useful review of what appears to be an excellent APSC lens for Canon RF mount. I use a Canon EOS R10 so using this lens would mean that I have no IS which is quite disappointing. I suppose Canon want to limit the performance of it's competitors!

50 years of photography and FINALLY somebody who can explain focus breathing simply and easily. Do NOT watch Tony & Chelsea to learn about focus breathing... Just watch this video starting at 21:28

Looks like a nice piece of glass. Not my favored fl; I'll keep the native 70-200/2.8 for action shots on my R7, and the 18-150 as a walkabout. But if I was in the market for a normal zoom, I'd take Sigma's over Canon's in a heartbeat.

because sigma now have to build in Canon Royalty, the price goes up for ALL APSC sigma glass.

I'm currently using an adapted EF-S 17-55 f2.8 on my R7, and they are a great combo for low light event shooting. While the size and weight of this lens are definitely appealing, I'm not sure that's enough. I'd be giving up IS and 6mm (x 1.6) of zoom range. Change my mind.

Awesome video, I especially appreciate your in-depth IBIS tests and comparison with an RFS lens, though I wonder how the Sigma would fare optically against the R7’s 18-150 kit lens. Thanks for all the work put into these tests!

Your opinion on Canon's commitment to APS-C lenses has been proven over years of neglect from Canon, even before the RF mount. Have they ever made an L-lens specifically for crop sensors? They've always treated the crop-bodies as an upgrade path to full frame, which is a shame. Fujifilm really redefined what a premium crop sensor system could be-smaller, more affordable, and still offering great image quality.

If you own a Canon APS-C Crop camera. You owe it to yourself to buy this Sigma lens. Wow Gordon I am blown away!

Wow!

So what about continuous shooting speed ? When I saw the word "licensed" - this is the first question that came to my mind.

Thank you for the video review. Given Canon's attitude toward 3rd party lens makers, I cannot help but think that Canon does not care about the APS-C segment. I still have a couple M cameras, and Canon had not released any good zooms at the time M line was discontinued. The fact that Sigma is only making APS-C RF lenses and only manual Voigtlander was allowed for RF full frame makes me very suspicious of Canon's commitment in APSC segment.

I can't wait to buy the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN II for RF mount. I totally agree with you that greedy Canon will not let Sigma make full frame for a while. It might even be the third iteration of the zoom lens for Sony and Nikon when it launches on Canon.

I support you Gordon you are the only one I am watching this review on. As a camera nerd I care but as someone who dumped Canon over a year ago, I have moved on.

Perfect lens for the c70!

Looks good for the R-50 body.

The 10-18 works even in full frame. If you crop a little bit the image you get a 13-24 f2.8 in full frame mode

Thanks for this great review! I'm thinking of buying it but I have a Canon R10, so no ibis. Will it be a problem? I also use the rf 50 mm without any problems. Can you switch the focus ring to a control ring in the body? I hope so, it's possible with the rf 18-150 mm.

This is a lens I wished came for the ef-m system as well.

Do you think it's overkill for the R50?

Great review, thanks, Gordon. In low light, my R7 seems to be missing AF all the time, even with an f/4 lens. With the RF 28mm f/2.8 it nails focus every time. Do you thing that would also be the case with this Sigma? Because indeed, that would transform the R7!

Canon owners have become very vocal on the message boards about the third party option, Canon is getting the message and that's a good thing.

Finally.

Canon is the only Major Brand that makes its Own Sensors outside of Sony. So when folks want rattle on and on about Third Party this or that, maybe they ought to keep that in mind. It is NOT cheap to design and then build, your own sensors. Most folks are assumed to buy just the Kit Lens, regardless of Brand especially with these cropped cameras. Folks ought to keep that in mind, again when they rattle on and on about Third Party this or that. So it's one thing to talk about what is the right business choices and it's a whole different thing to actual Run, stated business.

Interesting, nice little lens. Looks like a Canon have room for an f2 version given how narrow that lens looks but we know they focus on full frame. The 10-18 for sure is appealing with such a bright aperture. Nice review, will look out for the 1.4 collection when they are posted

I still dont know why Nikon still holding of this beauty for the APS-C line up.

Thank you Gordon. I'm waiting for such a lens for a long time. Having a 70-200 2.8 on my main cam for sports, I always wanted to have my R7 on the "wide" end as the second cam. Now my 1DxII can retire.

Great made in Japan lens for Canon made in Japan cameras.

i wonder if canon change its mind and block third party lenses with future firmware updates

Compare with sigma 18 35 f1.8 apsc

These Sigma lenses are long overdue. Canon should have worked with Sigma (and others) even prior to introducing their APS-C cameras in RF mount. They have likely lost any number of customers to other brands, who were unimpressed with the mediocre RF-S lens selection. That could have been avoided simply and easily.

Nikon shooters make the switch now.

Its strange that autofocus area is a little smaller vs native rf lenses( I use Sigma art lenses on Canon rf body, using adapter and autofocus area also smaller, around 80% of native, its not a big deal, butt still Thanks for review

The focus tests show the R7's terrible rolling shutter. I'm glad I didn't buy it. Rolling shutter makes me crazy.

Not wide enough. AND we need lens IS 💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯

Thanks for this good review: Its handling of the R7 sensor is a credit and the choice is welcome. I use APSC for my on-the-hoof light travel needs (not a pro). One option is my EOS200D/SL2 and ancient 17-50 NON-IS Tamron. No IS means I need to think about that option. My question, to myself, is whether I want to ''upgrade'' to an RF-S below the R7 now this is out? As it stands I am thinking no for my small and light as possible wants. One swallow was never going to make a summer, but no RF-S 55-250, 24mm prime remains an issue although their new wide angle was welcome.....I have FF .....what to do, what to do

Just wanna say that the canon lens is a kit lens...

Sigma rescuing another Canon mirrorless mount. You love to see it!

They had no choice because they have zero good RF APSC lenses. Canon still suck.

It's not 8 am in the UK and 1:18 am in NY 😂. Why????

Too late Canon 😂

sorry Sigma, no interest until FF 4 RF released.

"Best APSC zoom!" No.

now we know why canon is afraid of 3rd party manufacturers...because their glasses are overpriced garbage

To those begging for sigma to make full frame glass it ain’t happening; just abandon the ship to either Nikon, Sony or Panasonic (if you’re into video hybrid stuff) canon won’t listen to their customers