i already got this lens and 100% agree what your reviews. . hope sigma will release 50-130mm 2.8 and 10-18mm 2.8 in the future to complete the trinity lens too. .
Great review! I had been eyeing the Tamron 17-70, but the Sigma 18-50 is so much smaller and lighter, and for me that will mean taking the camera more places, and using it more. It's the main reason I am not moving to full frame: the size and weight of my lenses really matters! And congrats on getting married! The finger lakes are a beautiful area; I live in Toronto and have been down in that area a number of times.
@@KoelAnderson bahaha bless you, semi-impulse bought it today in NYC, dealing with the afterthoughts right now haha but first impressions are strong so I'm excited 😃
Another super practical lens from Sigma. Sigma have also released a number of 2.8 primes at significantly lower prices, with much smaller bodies as they are 2.8, not 1.4. I can certainly live with 2.8. Only issue is potential lens redundancies as I have purchased a number of Sony native apsc lens + the Sigma trío. That Sigma 56 1.4 continues to blow me way.
Great and honest review, I could stay a little longer in APS-C with this lens. Just hope that Sony will come out with some new APS-C bodies in the near future too.
Sold my SEL1655G in favor to the 1850. The 1655 feels more valuable, image results might be a tad better, but Quality is good enough for me (the 1650PZ falls a bit short of producing good images IMHO) . But with the Form Factor of 1850, it is easy to put an additional lens in your backpack, like the Samyan 12mm 😊
Congrats on getting married buddy! I’m currently using the Sony 35mm on my a6000, when using it for my Funko photography, I’m definitely getting shackled with regards to being a certain distance away from the subject, especially indoors during the winter months. This lens would definitely be a welcome addition to my kit 🙏🏻🤙🏻
i'm confused btw two lenses sigma 56mm 1.4 or sigma 18-50mm 2.8 which one is better option for first lense buy?sony 6400 with kit lense i'm still using..
for a first lens, I'd suggest the 18-50mm f2.8, as it's provides a more versatility. However if you're doing straight portraits, the 56mm f1.4 sould be better for that purpose.
Just want to add my thanks for all the tips, tricks, reviews you've posted! Just starting in the photography hobby but due to you, and many other shooters, recommendation for the Sony a6000 being one of the best beginner camera, ordered one and a slightly used Sigma 18-50mm. Looking forward to learning this art form, my Dad had a Canon 35mm in the 70's and I know that he really enjoyed shooting and developing his own photos in the darkroom he created in the basement. Cheers!
I really wish Sigma would release these for Fuji X-mount, its in dire need of fast compact zoom lenses, but God, someone make a lens equal to Samsung 16-50mm F2-2.8, this lens is reason I still use NX1, because its such good lens, I never seen ANY lens comparable.
I have just recently sold my Tamron 17-70 for this one. Value of this lens is just priceless :) And I don't miss stabilization at all - I have a ZV-E10 body without IBIS. Faster than 1/80 shutter basically you can shoot sharp photos. I just wonder, why anyone would ever disable lens compensations in-camera? If you shoot RAW+JPEG, you will always have the "distorted" image as well...
Interesting, what was the biggest factor? I was actually thinking of getting the 17-70 over this...Tamron has more range on both ends and for the comparable range is just as sharp I've heard, so the only thing I can think of to go for the Sigma is the size and slightly lower price...?
@@antalgabor gotcha, with EDU discount at B&H it'll be 500 vs 700, and the extra range seems worth it to me. Also a6000 is a bit of a better match but still the decision is hard. Racking my brains 😩. Appreciate your input man 👍🏽
@@MrSwaggernaut83 Hey, I think there is a downside shooting at 70mm on Tamron - it will be not so sharp at f2.8. But for video, it is perfect. I just use clear image zoom, if I want more reach, so I don't miss 70mm, I am good with 50 on the Sigma. Since sigma did the best prime lenses for 6xxx, I gave my heart to the Japanese. :)
@@antalgabor ah yes, I have the 30mm and love it but just need a more versatile option. And yes, I've heard it's softer at 70mm but considering that's 'extra' focal range as it is, this doesn't do much to deter me, especially bc stopping down to f4 seems to alleviate the problem.
You do realize that in order for the "distortion compensation" to 100% work, they would have had to release a firmware, which they did not, since years... And on so old cameras, you are stuck the lenses from back then. Now, I do not know how an older camera will interpret the lens, but it can be seen that distortion is still there, also after your in-camera-compensation shot. Plus, Sigma is too new to even have compensation even in Lightroom or Capture one, by now. Anyone, had success with that? Or gone manually already - best, but not always the best way.
Man, in Mexico this lens is 700 dollars. And average pays are much lower than in the US. But it look like a perfect choice to replace my kit lens 16-50
This lens would be good for A6500 or A6600 as both cameras have IBIS as this is non stabilised. For non IBIS A6xxx cameras use the Tamron 17-70 as is is stabilised !
💯% agree with your reasoning on staying with ASPC...I decided to upgrade my a6000 a year ago and thought for sure I would go full frame. Then I realized that the portability factor means a lot! I also noticed that at family events or just going places with friends that I always had my camera and a lens or two (or more if I brought my backpack) and rarely did the FF owners bring theirs....so ended up with the A6600 a year ago and just love it....keep up the great work Cheers from Alberta 🇨🇦
Hi Kyle, good to see you again. Congratulations and much happiness to you and your bride. Just picked up the 18-50mm Sigma and have been enjoying it. Size and weight is much better then the 17-70mm Tamron (just sold that). Photos are sharp for a zoom lens too. Great for walking around with. Thanks for your reviews.
I haven’t got my hands on the Tamron 17-70 yet, but that’s always my biggest pain point. If something is really heavy, I usually sell it for a lighter/smaller alternative IF the smaller option still performs great, and in this case it does!
Hi I just got the lense as well! I paired it with my 6500 camera and i use it only for video. I found out that the lense 1: When im in focus on target and i start zooming it looses focus… I don’t have that with sony lenses. I can zoom in or out very slowly and still keep my focus. 2: When im on focus on my target on the gimbal and im pulling out again it looses focus, Same with my sony ones all is ok i can do that no issues! Is the lense like that? Its only built for photography?? Because for photography its amazing. Fast allways on focus Do any one have the same issue??
I feel like - it’s not a hugeee diff. I did a review on the 16-55 so long ago now, so it’s hard to say, but the 18-50 is just so lovely to use bc it’s size.
Another great review. If I didn't already own the tamron 17-70 I would seriously consider this lens. I have herd people say this lens suffers from flaring did you experience that at all?
Hi Kyle, Sigma hmm? No image stabilization and Alpha 6100 no image stabilization as well - not too risky to pair those two? I own A6000 and I was thinking to get this Sigma (or Tamron 17-70...)... I would appreciate your feedback.
Hi Kyle, thanks for that cool video. I was considering buying the sigma 56 but now I hesitate with the 18-50 :/ I have the sigma 16mm f1.4 with my A6500. I love it but sometimes it's to wide. Which one do you recommend for photos and videos ? 56 or 18-50 ? Maybe it's a good lenses for traveling but for some professional work, the primes would be way better ? Really difficult to choose because I don't have the chance to test all sigma lenses :) Thank you so much
If you’re going to do professional portraits, you can make the $350-$400 from the Sigma 56mm f1.4 in…one or two sessions. It’s the considered sharpest lens for the Sony APSC cameras. The 18-50mm is much more flexible, a little bit more $, and could be used for more things. But if you’re going to mainly focus on portraits, the 56mm may fit your needs more. If you’re just dabbling right now, and want something to do a lot of things with, the 18-50mm is your pick.
Thanks great info i'm using a kitlens with my A6400 and looking allready long to get a other lens. i was thinking about the Tamron but now after your info i think i would like to go for the Sigma and save some $$ thanks
This is an outstanding lens. I use it for street photography. Bought it second though. No lense hood was included though.. Not sure which size to purchase either 😅
@@kismat_rana The lens has no stabilization. You can use it on the D6400 as long as your steady camera techniques are good. The D6600 has IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization) that will steady the lens. Of course, the A6600 costs more. Every photographer really should know how to steady their camera when shooting regardless if the camera has vibration control. .
@@edc5338 I'm concerned over these spec features but many reviewers say 6600 IBIS is useless but battery backup is great !! I wana get a6600 if It does have better video performance or colour science over a6400
@@kismat_rana I’ve been using with my A6400 for a couple of months now and have been blown away by how good it is. I am getting better hit rates with focussing than before when I was using an image stabilised Sony lens that I have now sold !! Colour rendition is terrific. And f2.8 and close focussing. It’s my favourite lens for out and about and at home with people. Super happy.
@@stuarttracey2009 it is true, you are right. I got it and I can assure you that it is worth every penny. I also have the 16,30 and 56mm sigma and I love it too...of course prime lenses...the best. I was able to sell my sigma lenses to buy the sigma zoom 2.8, but I preferred to keep them and buy a stabilized lens 2.8. Sigma...tamron...great lenses.
You convinced me! I am going on an Honor Flight for Vietnam Veterans to Washington DC. I was going to take my Sony A7iii and Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 but looked at the weight of my A6600 plus this this little lens. Photography will not be a major reason for the trip and I want to travel as light as possible. I have the Sony 16-50mm kit lens but, the IQ is just O.K. - not any better than that. I use the kit lens on my A6600 for video since I have a gimbal that will not handle much extra weight. However, it will handle the A6600 plus Sigma 18-50mm - so the camera/lens combo will not be a one-trick pony. I can use it for stills and on the gimbal i will work just fine for video...
3:40 I was surprised that the Sony G lens doesn't have image stabilization. It does, however, have the advantage of being weather sealed. Great review|!
What a fantastic video Kyle, I own sigma 16mm, 30mm, and sony 18-105f4, I was thinking of adding to my collection, I take mostly sunrise/ sunset pictures, car show pictures, would you still add to your collection if you had the 3 current lenses I have, thanks for any input you might have, btw, I use a6600
I think it’s a good addition - sometimes I do find myself missing the f1.4, that day the sigma 30mm has, but having a zoom at f2.8 is fun! And with it being small
A great lens and as always a very good video. Beautiful photos. I hope you enjoyed your honeymoon and didn't concentrate too much on photography. You got a beautiful wife by the way. Congratulations to your wedding. I recently decided to sell my Sony 18-105 and buy the Tamron 17-70. Will see how it pays out. I considered this one as well, but as I do al lot of photos of my children and want to stay away from the situation / their play to not interrupt them, I decided on the extra zoom-range. But still I consider buying this one in addition for travel as the Tarmon is really a big beast and this must be so tiny in comparison... Keep on the good work and stay safe. Greetings from the other side of the Atlantic... :-)
I love my A6000 photo quality. I've had it since it came out. I hate the battery life and got that reason alone I'm upgrading. I'll keep it for certain uses but if I'm out for a few hours I will no longer have to carry 6 batteries.
How would you compare this with the Sony 18-105 f4 G? I still only use the kit lens for zoom, but when i travel its annoying to swap lenses and i don't like the wide end of the kit lens. Thoughts on which one would be a good option?
You don’t like the wide end of the kit lens? Why? Ans I’d say the one with more range - the 18-105 is double the 18-50. Just depends if you want a little lighter lens, or a lens with f2.8. The 18-105 has OSS, and comes in handy for video.
I'm wondering if I should get this sigma zoom or the 30mm prime. I want a family lens to take pics at home, in restaurants, park, etc. Any thoughts? Is the picture quality comparable to the sigma 30mm 1.4?
The quality is comparable yes. Family lens, screams to me 18-50mm, because of the versatility. If you needed low light and were doing films, I’d recommend the 30mm. If it’s just about budget, the 30mm would be the choice, but the price for the 18-50 is stellar for what it is.
Range is the only downside of this lens. My main lens is Sony 18-105 F4. It's not perfect and surely far form optical quality of this sigma but it's versatility is waaaay better in my opinion.
Great lens. I've done some testing of the sharpness using a tripod in my garden. Plants and vegetables have an incredible range of detail and this lens performed beautifully. It's no slouch. What I love about this lens, like in my 70-200 f4.0 and 200-600, is the internal zoom. It is great for video as you don't have to turn the zoom ring or the zoom ring is super butter smooth.
@@shantibuddha Yes. You might also consider seriously the Sigma 18-50 f2.8. It is also excellent, maybe even sharper than the 18-105 and it certainly has better close focus capability. I would suggest you think about your shooting. If you are doing a lot of video, the zoom by wire is fantastic on the 18-105. If you are primarly shooting stills, the Sigma is probably the better lens, easier to use and much smaller and lighter. It all depends on what you are going to do. I got my son the 18-50 Sigma and it is a 'cute' lens, it's comfortable and very light. Being shorter, you will not knock it around as much as with the Sony lens. Some complain that the 18-105 isn't the sharpest lens out there. If you have a chance, I suggest you try out one before putting down your $$$$.
I know I’m late but just bought this lens today and can’t wait to get it. Kinda haven’t been doing any real photography in a while and want to get back in it and believe this to be a perfect one lens option for my photography style. Congrats on the marriage even if it was a while ago but haven’t watched any camera people in a long time so just seeing this.
I’d say upgrade the body when there is a feature that’s a must have, or if it’s got too much wear and tear. For me, I love the eye AF of the a6100 and touch to focus.
bro very professionally well done video. love the highlights of the physical specs of the lense. Make it easy for someone who doesnt speak "camera" to understand
This lense is making me crazy, I've seen so many reviews of it and now I am totally obsessed with it and I would love to use it. I'm having a feeling that it's one of the best lense for beginners. I have learning about cameras, lenses and about photography for more than 2 years now and It's one of my most favourite lense yet. Though I really don't have a camera or this lense, according to all the reviews I think this a perfect lense for Sony a6x00 series. I wish I had a camera and this lense for my Christmas gift.😅 Btw Merry Christmas!
@@kyletaggart : Do you think pros will like or love this lens just because it is 'cute' and light? I got one for my son's a6400, which I gave him, to have that mid range zoom to compliment his 70-300 Sony zoom. I did take photos with it and really is an incredible lens.
I have zv-e10 with kitlens getting confused between Sigma 30mm prime vs Sigma 18-50mm zoom Only worry is with sharpness which prime lens can give over zoom lens Any thoughts??
I’d you’ve never used a prime before I’d suggest the zoom lens. More flexibility, and the sharpness is there on this lens. If you need all low light ability over everything else, then grab the 30mm f1.4
Just standard, some of them are actually RAW without any profile on them. In editing I've been using adobe landscape and adobe color (regular), then editing from there.
Hi, great video BTW.. Your photos were very sharp. How did you handle taking photos handheld since both the camera and the lens have no stabilization? any tips? Planning on getting one.. Im only held back by the lack of stabilization... will pair it with ZV-E10 which has no IBS. Im choosing between this and the 18-105 PZ F4 OSS G...Thanks Congrats on getting married
For a creator that is wanting to just carry one lens for pretty much everything, What would you recommend? I've been thinking in between Sigma 16mm 1.4 vs Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 vs Tamron 17-70 F2.8 :) any feedback would be much appreciated
The sigma 18-50mm f2.8 is the lightest. I prefer lighter - gear if performance is good. I have. It personally used the tamron 17-70, but it could also be w good choice.
Hiya Kyle - great review, the only problem for me as a travel lens is that it has no weather sealing, which for me would be key on a travel lens. Thanks again. Mark
It does have a rubber gasket at the mount, but the cameras it’s made for aren’t weather sealed. I mean the 6400 and 6600 are more rugged, but not weather sealed. I’m always testing the limits out there with my 6100 😂
another con of the sigma is no weather / dust sealing where the tamron has that. Since most of my vid and pics are outdoors, and in active environments saddly the sigma wont work for me
I’m waiting on that Tamron 18-300 you reviewed to be my all-rounder. So this has me confused I suppose the use case is different? Would you use this in place of carrying a bunch of primes?
The sigma primes Alsace better low light ability, as they’re at f1.4. So depends on your use case. They’re also cheaper than the zoom. And as far as the 18-50mm vs the tamron 18-300, the tamron is more expensive, and IMO not as sharp as the sigma. It’s also much bigger/heavier, and is a variable aperture lens, so lots of things to consider.
Thank you for doing a video based on photography. I got a used 6400 and needed a small lens. I am not a video person. I don’t do RU-vid. I kind of miss the days where you had to buy a video camera because I find getting good info on photography over video is getting harder.
Great that you included a comparison of those three lens, saves me from doing it myself 😂. Wild to see the weight difference of those options. Congrats on the wedding! The autumn honeymoon photos look fantastic.
@@kyletaggart I’ve been looking for that elusive “one lens” to travel with. The 17-70 and this 18-50 seem like the final two options - my last sticking point is how much better are these lenses are than the 16-50 kit lens that I’ve already got 🧐 (are they $500-700 better!?) . Have you done any direct comparisons with the kit lens?
Technicallyyy the kit lens is like $300 brand new. Hard to say how much $$ the gap in performance equates to, but personally I think the sigma vs the kit lens is a big jump. Sharpness, f2.8 vs 3.5, and the sigma can be at f2.8 at any focal length in its range. The kit lens is tiny, but the sigma isn’t gigantic by any means.
My A6000 is also on auto, but the distortion stays terrible. Biggest not so nice issue this lens have. I even correct it in my Adobe Camera Raw, wich knows the lens, but still terrible. It is a nice little lens, 2.8 is nice, the sharpness is nice, but if I had knew that before I would not have bought it.
If you’re strictly doing portraits, I’d say the sigma 56mm f1.4 is better for that, however if you want flexibility, I’d absolutely recommend the 18-50mm f2.8. I love both, but the 56mm f1.4 is better suited for portraits / further away subjects, where as the 18-50mm you can use for many different things.
Dear Kyle. This lens is about the same size as the Sigma 30 f1.4. I use it mostly on the streets at between f2.8 to F8. Is this Sigma zoom as sharp as the older sigma 30mm f1.4 at those apertures? Also is the AF any better than the Sigma 30 f1.4? The sigma 30 hunts in AF-S.
