I use the tamron 17-70mm f2.8 for apsc, but for my last trip I saved and picked up the sigma 56mm f1.4 which was my first prime lense. Super happy with the pictures I get from both :)
I just got the sigma 30mm and I have to say, it's really good, I really love it a lot. I have the sigma trio and I struggle to get the most out of the 16mm simply because it's too wide for me and I'm not a good enough photographer yet. The 56mm is by far my favourite lens. It is gorgeous. I was at a photography event and tried the Sony A1 with a bunch of different lenses, like the Sony FE 50mm F1.2 GM and the pictures from my A6400 with the sigma 56mm looked just as good. Amazing lens.
You are the reason why I bought the a6400 and the Sigma 56mm. I must say that the Sigma 56mm is great for portraits and I love it. I own the Sigma 56mm and the kit lens and I am looking to get the Sigma 16mm for videos and landscape shots.
Hi Arthur, thanks a lot for showing us your latest collection of lenses. I bought all of mine after having seen your great reviews. Here is my collection: As primes I have the Samyang 12mm f2.0, the Sigma 16mm f1.4, the Sony 35mm f1.8 and the Sony 85mm f1.8. Still, I mostly use my Sony 18-135mm f3.5-5.6. It is very compact, sharp, stabized and has a great focal range, especially for travel. For me, a wide focal range makes more sense than a 2.8 aperture: For stills, the stabilizer in my 18-135 f3.5-5.6 will compensate the smaller aperture. For astro and night photography, an f2.8 on apsc would not be enough anyway. For portraits on apsc, a 1.4 or 1.8 prime will deliver better results than a 2.8 zoom. So the additional 85mm (max. 135mm instead of 50mm) are of much greater use for me than the "plus" in aperture with the 2.8 zoom lenses. Coming to my primes: I thought for a long time if to take the Sigma 56mm f1.4 or the Sony 85mm f1.8 for approximately the same price on prime day and decided for the Sony f1.8. Reasons: Full frame capability I might use in the future, extra buttons (I programmed the customizable one for eye AF) and a bigger difference in focal length to my Sony 35mm f1.8. In addition, the AF is usually a little better on native lenses and the Sony is absolutely quiet (my Sigma 16mm makes quite some noise - not beeing perfect for videos - still beeing a brilliant lens). I also have the Sony SEL 70-350mm which is super compact for its focal range, very sharp and fast. For wildlife, still it might not be enough. The Sony SEL 200-600mm (I rented it) will give the extra reach which is often needed. ...and the kit lens: Extremely compact and stabilized. For video more than enough, especially as you can use the 2x clearfield zoom without loss for 4k video, converting it to a 16-100mm zoom (+~20% crop). For pictures Ok, especially for travel photography in daylight or when you want a really lightweight setup. Cheers from Germany, Johannes
hi, you have missed tamron 11-20/2.8.it can replace sony 10-20/4 pz, sony 11/1.8 and viltrox 13/1.4.i did not mentioned sony 15/1.4 and sigma 16/1.4 because they not that wide and they must be kept in collection.
2 lenses that I enjoy are: Sony 18-135 and 7artisan 7.5mm. The first does not have great specs but the pictures are good! The second is pure fun but not super sharp.
I own an a6300 with 18-105 and just got the sigma 18-50 f2.8 ytd. It is much sharper and more compact than the old lens. Thanks for the review. I ve been watching this channel since I bought the camera couple years ago. Back then the channel was still called technology mafia.😄 Great videos and reviews, precise and concise as always.
I'd say the lens that spends the most time on my camera is the Simga 30mm, but I do plan on a walk-around zoom for the versatility. Next purchase may be the 56mm though as I've been doing more portraits and even pets. Also as a side note of the mystery lens used for this video. I noticed a lot of focus breathing, especially on the Sigma 16mm highlight, so kind of interested into what it may be.
I am using three Sony Bodys, A6600, A7C and A7IV and have some lenses. My favourite lenses are clearly the 135/1.8 GM, the 40/2.5G for street and the 70-350 OSS for tele shots, but also the Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN ART and the Tamron 70-180/2.8 are good lenses.
I used to own the Sigma 16 and 56 f1.4. I did not like the cheap plastic design. The 56 is at least small, the 16 is big. Since I don't do astro photography and owned the Sony 16-55 f2.8 I never took the Sigma 16 with me. I have sold all my APS-C gear. The Sigma 24 f2 I bought before I got my Sony a7iv and I love it. When Sigma released the 20 f2 I bought that too.
Bro, the guy just put his hand for a split second in front of the camera at the beginning of the video and the camera immediately focused on it. I didn't even noticed the hand.🤣🤣🤣. Damn, thats fast auto-focus
Thank you for the suggestions, they were really helpful. Also wanted to point out that you missed a cut right at the end of the video. Maybe you'll want to fix it
I decided to take a chance with the Tamron 28-200mm lens as an "all in one" option and it has really worked out great. We went to Yosemite in early May and I ended up shooting with that lens almost exclusively (on my A9 )
Really besides the color fringing (an easy fix in Lightroom) the lens is freaking fantastic. Is it as good as my 70-200 f/2.8 and 16-35 f/2.8 (or 20mm f/1.8) combo? Obviously not. But it’s lightweight, I mostly shoot from 28mm on up, and I don’t have to deal with lens changes. If I’m limited to a single camera body, it’s my go-to. Overnight backpacking trips for example. I got started with an A6300 and an 18-135. The Tamron gets me back to that general feel, but still a huge jump in image quality.
I'm building trying to bulid a collection with fast aperture (F2.8 or lower) Primes and Zooms and need help for deciding in the UW/Standard focal range (~10-55ish). I already use the amazing Sigma 18-50mm and I love it. For you to know, mainly I take pictures of friends at get togethers, birthdays, a little bit of street photography, stuff like that. As amazing the Sigma is, sometimes I find the 18mm a little limiting, especially indoors. I need a wider lense so I was thinking to combine my Sigma with the Tamron 11-20, to cover the whole 11-50 focal range with constant F2.8 aperture. On the other hand, Sony often offers Cashbacks/Discounts where you can get the Sony 11 and the super expensive Sony 16-55 for about the same money. So as I am trying to swap my Sigma 18-50 for the Sony 16-55 anyway in the future (and as I think the overlap in focal range between the Tamron and the Sony Zoom is too big), maybe the Sony zoom paired with the Sony 11 would be the better combination. What do you guys think? It would be the same wheight, about the same price, two lenses in each combination. Is it bad not to have 12-15mm covered in the Sony combination? Do the Tamron users even use the whole focal range or are the most pictures like at the end of the focal ranges anyway? Is the greater focal range and the slightly better image quality worth the bigger size of the Sony compared to the very small and convenient Sigma? I am looking forward to your answers!
For APSC I fully agree, the Sigma 16mm and 56mm are must have's. I'd not go for the 18-105mm as it's not that sharp. One advantage of the kit lens is that it's very compact so if you need an a6xxx to fit inside a coat pocket and still want some flexibility in focal length then it's definitely useful for some casual shooting. On the FF front as holiday lens I'd recommend the Sony 24-105mm. Assuming you are on holiday in a sunny place the F4 is more than enough though it does weigh more I think than the Tamron zoom. Did you happen to compare that Sigma 85mm with the Zeiss? Not so fond of the colors the Zeiss gives at times. Though I'm switchng from APS-C to Panasonic m43 (G9) - because of the better image sabilization - I''m still staying as subscriber for the excellent lens reviews. I will miss the awesome autofocus of my a6400 though, still think it was better than my a7iii.
Thanks for the video, it's great to see your personal lens collection. I was wondering why you don't own any telephoto lenses, not even short ones like the Tamron 70-180.
I have the Sigma 16. Awesome. Sony 18-105. Great for some videos I did. Sony 35mm 1.8. Sony 55-210. I’m thinking about that 70-350 you compared it to. The kit lens 16-55. And my wife just bought me the Viltrox 23mm 1.4 for my birthday three weeks ago. What a great focal range for indoors and chasing my dogs around. Super deal at under $300! I’m quickly learning in my photography journey that fast aperture lenses are the way to go. Thanks for all your great reviews and advice.
if I could only have one lens it’d be the Sigma 30mm 1.4 I’ve had it for 6 years now and I’m shooting 99% of my pictures with it. sailing, street, travel, portrait, event. I just love it. replaced a Samyang 12mm with a 16mm 1.4 for indoor. got the 18-105 in the bag as well, for the travel. i never really need more reach than the 30mm but if I do, the 105 came in handy sooo often, not sure I’d trade it for a Tampon or Sigma lens. would have probably went with the Tamron or Sigma zoom if it was a thing back then but I could live with the 30mm Sigma alone
Great video. As an APSC and a full frame user, I would really like a review of the compact Sony 24 f2.8 G on both formats. It is a tiny 24 on full frame and a 35 on the APSC. Both very useful!! Great to see the Sigma 30 and 56 on this list. Lenses I personally own too.
I will be interested to hear what you make of the ZV-E10. I've been using it since release, and as good as it is, it certainly has some issues. Great video as always!
Following your reviews I added the Sony 35 mm f1.8 and 30mm f3.5 macro to the 16-55 mm and 18-200 mm power zoom lenses I initially had. I primary used the 16-55 mm but have really taken to the 30 mm f3.5 macro lens. So far I prefer using the 16-55 mm power zoom for street photography. Cameras Nex 7 and recently the A6600 which have been in short supply for over a year (listed as out of stock on several web sites). I do miss the built in flash of the Nex 7 and have a Neewer Speedlite NW320 with adapter for the Nex 7.
That's so true. However, I would rather have it as small as the Sigma 30 f2.8. If Sigma can make a compact 23 with F2 or F1.8 with latest AF motors and full weather sealing, then it would be the best carry around lens, especially suitable for street photography. I still use the Sigma 30 f2.8 during the day despite all its AF quirks. I also own the Sigma 30 and 56 f1.4, 18-55 kit lens and the Sigma 19mm f2.8.
I was on the fence about upgrading my kit lens to the sigma 18 to 50 but then went for the sigma 16 f1.4 because you made a video saying that the kit lens is almost as good as the expensive alternatives. Now you are saying that it’s well worth the upgrade and I’m left wishing I had bought it instead of the 16mm😒
This depends on when the video was produced. Prior to the Sony 16-55, Tamron 17-70, and Sigma 18-50, that statement is correct. The difference between the Zeiss 16-70 or Sony 18-105 or Sony 18-135 and the Sony kit lens isnt dramatic. Its maybe a 15-20% improvement. The new lenses from Sony, Tamron, and Sigma are giant leaps in optical performance - as good as many prime lenses, and 50%+ better than the kit lens.
I remember a comparison from you between the Sony 35 f1.8 and the Sigma 30 F 1.4 and i am pretty sure in the end you preferred to get the Sony 35 1.8 over the Sigma 30 1.4. So i am surprised you sold the Sony and kept the Sigma. What changed?
I have 👉🏻7artisans55❌ chromatic aberration/manual (good for tripod constant subject video work) 👉🏻16-55 kit✖︎slow (love oss and zoom rocker) 👉🏻16-55 f2.8✖︎heavy,money,2.8apsc🥶 (love focal length) 👉🏻sigma 30✅slow auto focos (perfect focal) 👉🏻sigma 56✅ focal length barrier (best for outdoor user, sharp,good af) (I'm a6000 and a6600 user planning to get 11mm or 15mm) When you start to use prime lenses you don't feel wow even f2.8 native lenses on apsc !! Only you love it for off camera flash and not keep changing lenses but you feel something not wow in many scenario !!
Thanks Arthur, this is a useful overview. Two questions - which, if any, full-frame lenses do you regularly use on your APS-C bodies - and, why no telephoto lenses?
The lack of telephoto lenses is a major concern. I find my 70-200 my go to lens on many cases. For some landscape photos it’s better than a wide angle.
Great video. I have several of the APSC lenses you have except any manual focus ones. I am surprised you don't have a Sony 70-350. I do have the Sigma 17-50 and it is my go to lens.
Get rid of a lens, not sure I know what you mean? Love all your videos and this one is great. Got many of the same lens and need to keep up, I got a little ways to go.
From what's apparent in Arthur's videos, the Sigma being the sharper of the two is the better lens for him. Especially, after the firmware update. He probably doesn't mind the significant weight and size disadvantage. I shoot streets, where you hardly ever shoot under f4. For me, the unobstrusive little Sony is a better lens. It is sufficiently sharp at F4 for street work. For street work, the Sony is hands down the better choice.
Surprised Tamron 17-70mm VC is not on your apsc collection. I think its still better due to Vibration Compensation. Anyway, thanks for this video, it gave me idea as to what are the lenses I need to buy next
Great lens, just too redundant for me because of the Sony 16-55 and the Sigma 18-50. You are right about the Vibration compensation, but when I think i need stabilization i just use my A6600.
Love your lenses and have bought a few based on your recommendations. Thought you would keep one telephoto lens in your collection even though you love the wider focal lengths.
Maybe you should do a comparison between the Sigma 85mm f1.4 FF lens and the Sigma 56mm f1.4 apsc lens. I have the a7R3 which I sometimes shoot in crop mode, and I will eventually get the a7R5. My thought is that since the 56mm is smaller for traveling and it's cheaper maybe it's worth getting the 56mm over the bigger and more expensive 85mm. I don't know if the image difference is worth the size, weight, and cost of the 85mm.
I would have thought you would include the Tamron 17-70 2.8 as this one has built in stabilisation vs the Sigma 18-50 you highly recommend here for APSC. Their price difference here in Hong Kong is only about USD200 n the Tamron can almost double up as a macro lens but not the Sigma. Without image stabilisation I’ve ruled out the Sigma for video work - what’s your opinion? Also I love the Zeiss Touit range even though they are a bit old by now. Finally do u think if I can just use the Sony 30mm Macro for online store marketing stuff such as close up product shots n short promo videos?
I second that. The 18-55 stays at F4 a lot longer than the pancake kit lens. The 18-55 is nicer to use and just a better lens for photography. Being a manual zoom, it does not suck the battery dry too. You can have it ready at a particular focal length before you switch on the camera. Great little lens.
Do you have a leaning between the Viltrox 13mm F1.4 vs the Sony 11mm F1.8? I’m also trying to decide between the Sony 20mm F1.8 and the Sigma 20mm F2. These lenses all seem so, so close. Great video as always.
Thanks for your good information videos! Watching your channel from 2016 when I have at first a6000. Have some question. What high-power lens for sony A7c you can recommend for foto wife and children if probably 85мм focus is more for me? Thanks
I noticed you dont have the 35mm oss i watched your previous video and you preferred the sony , If similarly priced, which woudl you recommend for a hybrid shooter 35mm sony oss or the sigma in 2022? Thanks.
Awesome video (As always) I'm currently rocking the Sony 35.1 8 (was my first lens ever, got it with my A6500 back in 2017) and the Sony 18-105 F4 which, honestly, I kind of dislike. It's bulky and not that sharp. Do you think it's worth it to get the Sigma 18-50 2.8 and selling the 18-105?
Man, here in Brazil is Too expensive to buy Lenses, i have a sony a6400 and kit lens, but i like to photograph my family, dogs and nature.. i tried to take a bird photo at 50mm but… not sharp. Which lens should I get?
Good telephoto lenses are not cheap (you need that for bird photos). The A6400’s AF is good enough for most cases, but the lens’ AF motors need to be fast as well to catch up. The cheapest (and have the the reach, barely) is the Sony 55-210. But this lens is not that sharp (you’d need sharpness because you will crop), and the AF motor is slower - not recommended. Next one, and fairly good - both in terms of reach, sharpness & af speed, is the Tamron 70-300. Slightly better than that (and more expensive) is the Sony 70-350 g. 300mm is still considered short for birding to be honest; especially for small birds.. I would suggest getting a good general lens first (one you’d be using the most) and if you want to get into birding, add a used telephoto after that.
I always look up to your channel when i get a thought of upgrading to FF and after watching i'm happy with my APSC. Do you feel APSC will become extinct in 10 years or will it continue to exist because of portability?
@@lukazupie7220 perfect. for landscape we could get a better reach due to the crop factor. And end of the day if we dont have the skill then no use in having FF.
Viltrox is so wide that you would have to use it in active stabilization mode to get a reasonable field of view, if you're not planning to do that get the Sigma. Viltrox is better for vlogging but I'd rather have a more wider compact Lens for vlogging like Sony 11 f1.8
Why was the new Sony 15mm F1.4 G not included here??? In some reviews, it's even slightly faster and sharper than the legendary Sigma 16mm F1.4 DC DN...
here in argentina the new sony 15mm f1.4 y cheaper than the sigma 16mm, this country is rare with prices, but the question, should i get it? is it worth it for a wilde lens? thank you!!!!
Get the Sony , Sigma here is 380 and Sony's like 760. Which is consistent to the rest of the world too, Sony is better in every way and you shouldn't even think if it's cheaper in your country
Hi Arthur! I planned to buy my first ff a7c and my brain is blowing - witch lens to buy? i shoot youtube like lessons and webinars + presentation. What lens was universal answer of this?
I see you like the 10-20 lens, however, you seem lukewarm on it. I wonder if you would do a comparison of the older 10-18 and the new 10-20. The price difference is now significant. Factor in price, weight, size, image quality, focal length, minimum focal length and other factors. You have the new lens and should be able to barrow a older lens.
Its just not a lens thats for me. I like the 11mm F1.8. Its more my style. If I am shooting ultra wide, i want to be ultra wide. As for the 10-18mm, ive had enough bad experiences to never want to buy or borrow that lens again. I simply dont trust it.
I would suggest the re-release of the Meyer Optik Gorlitz Trioplan 100 2.8ii The soap bubble bokeh is like nothing else. It’s pricey but I can’t think of something more rewarding. Especially good with portraits at night with an AD200 and a cityscape background. Worth a look.
Nice lens collection. But two things surprise me. Where is the Sony 85mm 1.8 lens? In my opinion this lens combine with a6100 is a perfect combo to shot action pictures of my teenagers when doing sport indoors. The 85mm is also very affordable. Second, where is the Sony 35mm1.8 OSS lens? It surprises me that there is no lens in your lens collection with OSS except the KIT lens, especially when you use a6100 all the time. And also, in your previous review you rated the Sony 35mm 1.8 above the Sigma 30mm 1.4 😊
Hey Arthur, fairly new to the camera game. I have done all my research when it comes to lens and I recently got the ZV-E10 and was looking for a few lens but did not want to get anything unnecessary. With money not being a issue what so ever. What lens would you recommend picking up to cover ALL needs for video and photography - Thank you in advance 😌
For me, I have the 18105 F4. I find myself liking the telephoto photos very much and frequently taking photos on the telephoto end. My next purchase will likely be sony 70350G to cover my telephoto itch. If want other lens to compliment the 1655, I think it would be a telephoto, a sharp portrait (maybe sigma 56) and a good ultra wide for occasional landscape / interior shot (mine is a samyang 12 AF)
