Honestly I'm so stoked that there are Sigma options now. When I had my Sony I almost exclusively had Sigma lenses. I cannot wait for more options to be released.
I have to applaud Sigma for developing such a high-quality lens at such an affordable price. They've come a long way in the last 15 years. However, I still prefer the Fujifilm since I don't need rapid focusing on the 16mm focal length lens.
I always think it's good for consumers to have more choice when it comes to lens selection. I have used a mixture of Nikon, Sigma, Tamron and Tokina lenses on my D7500-some have better sharpness, less vignetting, others control CA's better and some have faster AF than others. But I always try and buy the best lens I can within my budget that suits a particular type of photography that I want to do. It's good that Sigma and Tamron are now offering lenses for X-Mount users.
For years people have exclaimed that Fuji lenses are these high quality optical masterpieces and that dictates their relatively high prices. By releasing these five year old budget lenses in the fuji mount, Sigma has completely burst that bubble. Don't get me wrong, Fuji's lenses aren't bad but this is certainly a wake up call to how much Fuji tax is applied to their lenses.
It's most definitely hype. My Canon 35mm f2 and 24mm is sharper than the offerings from Fuji. But the experience with the aperture ring , weather sealing and look of these is what separates them....does that justify their prices. Hell no. We are just suckers for good marketing and they know it.
I really like the new Sigma X mount lenses. The price is very attractive, especially considering the image quality they provide. It might take me a while to get used to not having the aperture ring but I can see myself picking the Sigma over the Fuji for astrophotography.
I kept rewinding and watching the brick part over and over again. Bricks are my favorite. 😆 it makes me wanna go buy a Fuji film camera and a sigma lens just to experience the sharpness at the edges. I love bricks.
But I already have a Fujifilm 16mm lens. What I don’t have is a 30mm lens. The 30mm equates to a full frame 45mm lens. I first used a 45mm lens on the Contax G1 camera and I really liked it. So for me it was waiting for years for someone to do a 30mm for APS-C sensors. Thank-You Sigma.
I‘m using both the contax 45 and 35mm on my xpro 3. Thanks to the funleader Leica m conversions they made. The crop factor is a little annoying but they are just wonderful optically. I know this isn’t very helpful I just want you to know I‘m still holdin it down.
I've owned the Fuji 16mm for a couple of years now. I've found that it's not the sharpest - but that's not its point. When I tested it against the 10-24 I actually found the zoom to be a hair sharper. That said, the 16mm is one of my most favourite lenses ever, and it's one I truly love shooting with for its sheer versatility :-)
@@anonymousl5150 I'm not so sure. There's a load of hype surrounding the 16mm f1.4. And it a superb lens - probably the best APSC lens Fuji make. But I don't think sharpness is one of its main attributes. That doesn't make it a bad lens - far, far from it. Its other qualities and overall IQ far outweigh any minor sharpness issues.
@@duringthemeanwhilst It was hyped mainly because it was so sharp, especially its corner sharpness. There's quite a bit of lens variance everywhere. Either way I have to say the 16 f1.4 which I borrowed wasn't the most fun lens to use.
Omar - Appreciate these informative and entertaining reviews so much. It is nice to see there are options and your explanation of which is best based on what you prefer shooting is helpful.
Nice comparison. I loved my sigma 35mm art on canon, but they haven't wowed me on x mount. Overall i find the fujinon lenses more Inspiring but that's just my opinion. Sigma obviously much more affordable
Awesome review! I'd love to see a comparison to the new Viltrox 13 mm f/1.4. They're similarly priced. I've heard so much good about Sigma from Sony users but also love my Viltrox 56 mm on Fujifilm.
Brick walls! You did the brick wall thing?! OMG I never thought Omar G-man would do brick walls but there ya' go, hell has officially frozen over! Hey thanks as always for the entertainment. You da man.
Very nice comparison and thanks for your perspective on what is actually Important. I had the Sigma when i was using a sony a6400, which I did not keep, and now have the Fuji 16mm with the XT4. Both are outstanding lenses. We have an embarrassment of riches in good lenses.
You didn’t test the greens 🥬 Fujifilm’s always got the reds right, but the greens were its Achilles heal. Other than that, was a ok review. Now, what about the Viltrox 16mm f1.4?
Great comparison Omar! I can see how you were trying to avoid making another boring Fuji video and made it more fun for yourself. Was really useful, especially the video comparison. Would love to see you try astro sometime!
Not really want to be nitpicky on brick-wall photography, but the fuji seems to be on a more steeper angle with the vertical lines which should be a problem with corner sharpness at 1.4, because the corners you looked at are on the upper frameline, while the corners on the sigma are more of a same distance. Can´t tell if this really would be a difference, but this test seems to be a bit on the flimsy side.
With these weather resistant lenses with the rubber gasket/o-ring at the lens mount.........is there any concern with leaving the lens mounted to the body long-term and compressing/deforming the gasket over time and losing it's sealing capabilities over time? Wondering if the lens should be removed from the body when not in use. Any insights/opinions would be appreciated. Thanks.
Not a popular option but wide open I have always found Fuji lacking let’s be honest, paying for a 1.4 you want it to be decent, and the Fuji is but when you see other lenses half the price beat them in that field it’s quite shocking. Only lens I have been blown away by in the Fuji line up is the 90mm, pretty much their sharpest lens. Other than that I found the viltrox 1.4 lenses all to be sharper than their counter parts. I’m glad the door has finally opened to other brands and look forward to giving the Sigma lenses a try!
The new 1.4 XF lenses are super sharp wide open. I've tried the 18mm 1.4 and can confirm. Tons sharper than my 56mm wide open. They totally upped their game with the recent releases (18, 23 and 33mm)
@@Themistocles82 Bought the Sigma F1.4 last week, exceptional sharpness but I found the 16mm distortion quite fastidious for my day-to-day use. I'll try it for another week and take a decision.
@@francescoberta I just sold my Fuji 16mm for pretty much the same reason. Just a fraction too wide and the distortion was just too noticeable for me. Let me know how you get on with the Sigma.
Now we have Samyang, Tamron, Viltrox, Zeiss and Sigma who offer AF lenses for Fuji. This is great! Another Voigtländer MF lens coming soon and the Fuji X system has so many options, it's beautiful. I got Fujis 16 2.8 and I am happy with that. Would love to try the Sigma and Fuji 16 1.4 though
Which lens was used at 7:54? Theres a ton of chromatic abberation! You laughed at the silliness of shooting brick walls- where we see discernible differences in sharpness in the extreme corners (where it doesn't matter 98% of the time)- yet we see real world results for a split second, and there's some pretty loud magenta around the woman running, and green around the edges in the background. I'd like to see a few shots in the street or of landscapes, between the two. If you still have both lenses, let's have it!
Nice. These look great if you're into the aperture. I think I'd get the tiny 2.8 personally. Are you thinking about trying out the Rokinon 12f2 AF, btw? It would be cool to hear your thoughts. ✌️
Atleast it's better than Viltrox and other third party lens. I might buy 16mm or wait for 18-50. One of my frnd has Viltrox 85mm which I i love it I used that lens on my camera while I gave him mine 35mm haha..
If you like natural lens vignetting Omar, then you should take a look at the plastic fantastic 28 2.8 for the Nikon Z system - Oh man its so good!!! I love it haha
Its a superb lens. Received overwhelmingly positive reviews since released. For me, a possibly affordable purchase, the Fuji must be an excellent lens,however simply too expensive for me.
Great presentation. Glad to see that Fujifilm open up for 3rd party lenses. I would prefer to see more compact design similar to the Canon RF 16mm f2.8?
Awesome vid Omar, seems the sigma is slightly wider than the Fuji!? I have heard the Fuji 1.4 was actually more like 25mm equivalent, whereas the Fuji 2.8 was more like 24mm; thanks
In Poland 16, 23 and 56 are on sale as of now. They are only 110 PLN more than Sigma Fuji X lenses (pre-order). 110 PLN - around 26 USD. Now I don't know what to get. Fuji 56 or Sigma 56 Fuji 23 or Sigma 30.
Great video as always! Thanks Omar. In Canada, the Sigma 16 mm 1.4 is available to pre-order for $569.95. I could buy the Fuji 16 mm 1.4 tomorrow for $1349.99. Is it worth the extra $780 to me as a novice still learning the basics? Nope
All I wanted to know was the close focus as close on the Sigma, can I do the same pseudo macro shots with it. You answered that Inna little 2 second long part of the video haha, thank you!
There is something you did not comment (even in the Fuji 16mm 1.4 first review I think, if I am not wrong about), and the hyperlocal marks are there to play manually, specially at that best apertures (f:5.6 to 11) so I would like to know if they are perfect aligned to make Street Photography or Architecture, because in the Sigma one you do not have this feature. But I have seen distortion it is as big in the Sigma as in the Fuji one (eyes test), if I compare my XF 18 f2 vs f1.4, distortion it is bigger in the older one and here not really, isn't it?
I have been able to buy all of my gear used - so price was a lot better than new. But all of my Sony friends were buying Sigma. Finally we can join them with high quality lenses for much better than OEM price.
It is disappointing that the Sigma doesn't have an aperture ring however since I don't currently have a 16mm lens I think I will save the money and go for the Sigma when it becomes available.
Best thing ever you noticed the lack of interest in spending lots of money on camera and lens then take time editing the pictures of brick walls. Saying it like that sums it up. History lesson, I was on eBay looking for a something. , I saw a 135 mm lens M42 mount. For 16 £ about 20 USD .that was my bid. I won it turned up and peeked at my internet in older stuff . I used it on my z 7.'2 now the lens was small for 135 mm pentax from the old days long time ago when I was still a young boy .The photos I took I loved them , but the lenses were small and my new samyang 135 mm I loved it more because it was the latest version it means buying an adapter ring from Sony to Nikon z. So all In all not cheap. By over. 1000 usd at the time of purchase . Why the difference in size. that's not a man thing question . Why are old lenses smaller ? I Did try testing a few older lenses by buying them cheap but nothing was like this, may old pentax 35 mm was just ok pentax yet a 135 from the 70s. The others were an old no name 400 monster and a 50mn Helios the 400 mm monster weight made it a danger to even try to fit onto the z 7 -2 or Z 8. But I do you know why the lenses today are so large. My Old lens collection but they are all compatible with today's F Stops but smaller so is glass an issue . My 105 z and 85 z 135 samyang my 35 sigma art all big ? My 40 mm z F2 is plastic so I can't count that .
I've really wanted to buy the fuji 16mm and 56mm but now for the same money and can get both sigmas and an Xt3 body. I think for some like me the price is the deal breaker
Hopefully once the new sigma fuji lenses starting shipping they'll stay in stock at retailers... probably not! sorry not sorry. better pre order my sigma 16 NOW
I noticed shutter was constantly a quite a bit faster on Sigma which would suggest it has got better T value than Fuji :-) Not that it would matter a bit :-D
@@djstuc Not silly at all. They are cheap as there is little/no metal machining, and are made of plastic. They have top glass still. The same glass as the XF equivalent if there is one. Focusing is fine and silent too. They also have extra electronics if it's a power zoom. So a little bit of plastic in a ring and related connections, is nothing. The few cents in extra cost for this would be greatly worth it for Fujifilm design model. It's not cost for not adding an aperture ring. They probably don't want them to cannibalize the XF sales, which would be bad if true. Or it could be marketing, to make them seem less complicated and appealing for novices.
@@djstuc Mate, what's wrong? The original statement was about the aperture ring. And I 100% agree. Same for XC lenses too. You know the XC lenses do have a aperture mechanism, like the rest of them, by wire of course. You think a ring (or button attentive) for a electrical switching is high tech?! If they can put in a whole bunch of electronics for power zoom, for weight and economy, they could put a ring in (or buttons) so cheaply. Cool it dude. Thank you for the nasty insult. It came from the source of your being, not mine.
I don’t get the fanboy only buy fujifilm crap…..I’m a Sony user and I love the G master range but I love my sigma lenses too and samyang and tamron makes some great lenses.I love my x100v too.Most of these people could NEVER tell if you shot with Fuji or sigma.Just enjoy taking photos as you said.
LOL, Oh dear, "Sigma more sharp", duck and run for cover, the fanboys are coming atcha PS, you'll almost certainly find that the Sigma lenses are better in regards to Coma and Astigmatism, much better for night sky/astrophotography Come on Sigma, give us some legendary Art zooms
