what I love about your channel Gerald is that you make videos that nobody has ever made that camera gear heads would love some bonus clean crisp information on. keep it up man. big appreciation from Brazil
I picked up the 18-35 the week it was released, and never looked back. I would occasionally stress over what I'd do if I ever decided to go full frame (video), because I enjoyed the 18-35 that much.
The 18-35 works great on video from 27mm on Full Frame. Had it and loved it,although now that i moved to Full Frame my Sigma 24-35 is my favourite,It's so good
I've had the 18-35 for 4 years originally for my 70D and have still found it very useful @35mm on full my frame 6D and now SonyA7iii. At one point I was considering selling but after watching this...nah. Keeping this bad boy. Your videos are always informative. Rock on
You really can’t go wrong with any of Sigma’s Art lenses! I’ve been using the 24mm almost exclusively for the last 6 months and I’m constantly amazed by it.
Wow, I am so grateful for the amount of effort and information that you put into every single one of your videos! I recently purchased a GH5, and have been contemplating which lens(es) to purchase. So many of your videos have helped to guide me in that decision making process! Thank you for all of your incredible efforts and top-shelf content!
I have to say, I'm a really big fan of my sigmas. I like them a lot more than my native Sony lenses. Quality glass, good autofocus. Only lacks IBIS (but my camera has it so I'm good)
Gerald, I love your in depth reviews. I've been looking over these exact lenses to use with my Canon 80D for a RU-vid studio and I've been struggling with choosing between them. I've watched many videos but yours is the first to show them objectively side by side. Also filming this video with the winning lens sold me! As a side note I totally love your intro. I've shared it with others and played it many times. It put a smile on their faces as well as mine:D Great job and thanks for all your efforts.
Awesome video Gerald! Made up my mind to give the 24-35mm lens a try. :) Love the Art lenses but was really on the fence with that one (compared to getting the prime versions) (The fact that it keeps the aperture constant through the zoom range is great as well.) Thx again :)
The 18-35 is a must own lens, especially for a first time upgrade from a kit lens. I use my to do video's, which with the Sigma 18-35 is amazing!!!! I use it with my Sony A7III as well as my Canon EOSR, and its fantastic on both! Again, I get really great video results with the lens!!!!
Loved the Lost In Translation reference! Yourself and Caleb from DSLR VS are far and away my favourite guys laying it down on RU-vid. Everyone else is annoying AF. Thanks for all the amazing comparison videos!
I struggled with the 24-35 vs the 35mm when I went to full frame but ended up going with the prime as it like the extra stop of DOF for stills. I actually ended up selling all of my APSC lenses when I upgraded but kept the 18-35 and still use it for video for both cameras. I don’t think I’ll ever find a great enough reason to part with it.
I got my 18-35 for $555 brand new on ebay during a promo they were running. On my G7 and G85 with a Viltrox EF-M2 speedbooster, its just so nice. Cool to see it do so well in this comparison. Solid info!
That's one comprehensive test. Great review of some great lenses. And you make those lens flairs look really good. That 18-35 seems to be a very popular lens for video, and now I know why. Thanks for the review.
I just sold my Sigma ART 24-35 f2 two weeks ago... truly an outstanding lens... I simply wasn't shooting indoor concerts/shows as much which is the only reason that I sold it.
This is so thorough. I'm a beginner (like 1 week into filmmaking and still confused about what gear to invest in). I learned so much about how to make decisions.
Love the format of the review, and the review as well. Also congratulations on how you have embraced what you really are as a person with a channel, just being your self.
Great video thank you. I really don't get the people that dislike videos this thorough and well made. Deserves ZERO dislikes! Anyway, keep it up big boy!
I was a huge fan of the 18-35 Sigma, I used it both on my T7i and my E-M5 Mk II. I've since switched to the Sony A7 II though. and changed my go to lens to the Zeiss 55 1.8, I do miss the Sigma sometimes though.
It is hard to choose 24-35 f2 because the 18-35 exist. For video you can use 18-35 as 28-35 f1.8 on full frame. And for photo you can use as 35mm f1.8 prime. Because of the versatility, it is hard to buy another lens that the usage is so similar to 18-35. I would suggest for full frame user get your standard 24-70 f2.8 and pair with several f1.4 prime. Usually my go to is 24-70 f2.8 and 50mm f1.4.
Thanks for the review! I am nikon fx and bmpcc og user and have bought nikon 16-35/4 and sigma 18-35/1.8 with 0.7 sb. I recently found the existence of 24-35/2 and am trying to find reviews for decision to move over to that. This review is helpful for my decision making❤.
Good video and interesting comparison of Sigma lenses. I can only speak to the 18-35mm F1.8, as I own it. I use it exclusively on my Canon M50 with EF-M adapter. It does a wonderful job with video and is capable of spectacular still photos. The key word here, is capable. When it's on, it's on. However, I get inconsistent results with this lens with no logical reason for the inconsistency. Sometimes I get photos that acquire focus to drool over. Still, other times, it's like I placed a soft focus filter on the lens and it's a big let down. Nevertheless, when hiking, this is my go to lens for flexibility and MOSTLY sharp photos. At the same time, it always does a good job on video. Many thanks for taking the time to compare these four Sigma lenses, showing your results with same. Always enjoy your take on the given subject matter.
Very enlightening video, the definite review I would say. Had to give it thumbs up 3 times. Now comes the hard part: I have to decide! Thanks from Greece, Gerald! :)
we should note that the 24-35 zoom has very noisy autofocus and is not really useable if you mount a mic on your camera. I am an owner of this lens and I am very satisfied with the image quality, but I constantly struggle with the autofocus responsiveness and autofocus noise.
Sigma never ceases to impress me. I have the 16mm f/1.4 DC DN lens for my a6400 and I absolutely love it. I do most of my video work in low light and it is always a beast. Great review and great info as always Gerald!
Just got the Sigma 18-35mm lens and it is an absolute beast!!!!! I'm getting ready to sell my other lenses because of its versatility. I'm looking at getting the 50-100mm next. GH5 by the way. Excellent video and really verified what I thought about the 18-35!
Sure am glad that the 24-35 F2 didn't take off compared to the rest of the art series - means I could snag one for 450 bucks lightly used :'D Paired with a 85mm prime (Samyang 1.4 in my case) it's basically a complete state-of-the-art portrait and landscape setup at a very low price if you buy 2nd hand.
I love the Art line of lenses. Rat gnawing is right. I wish they would have used silent stepper motors. The glass is awesome and silence would have completed every lens perfectly. My fave is easily the 18-35mm f/1.8. Your tests have me considering the 24-35mm f/2. Gear senses tingling again. Thanks Gerald.
The 28 is what I want . Couldn’t afford it at the moment so purchased the Nikon 28mm f/1.8 yesterday. I’m a 28 mm whore I just finished watching your reviews and the 24-35 f/2 totally blew me away in the results. I’d read some reviews on it and they had mentioned the distortion was very bad . I see now it is not and par focal is a big deal for me right now . I may pick up this lens soon. Thank you ! And your reviews are top notch for sure . One guy mentions (you Canadians) and he’s right . I watch you , Dustin Abbot and DP review most of all RU-vid channels .
Hey Gerald Undone, I don't know if anyone has already commented this, but you actually cannot make the 18-35 parfocal. It doesn't have the right floating elements to do that. You can adjust backfocus to get infinity, but parfocality isn't possible. THAT SAID, there is variation between copies of lenses, especially photography lenses like the 18-35, so if you can get yours to close to parfocal then that's great. Mine won't. Not even close.
Thanks for the time you put into this and the knowledge you brought with it. Very informative and informing my next purchase. Pro photographer for 20 years.
Gerald Undone, What would you recommend for newborn images? Sigma 18-35mm or the Sigma 35mm? I have a Nikon Mount D800E. Or maybe the Nikon 35mm f1.8. Ugh decisions.
So glad I sold my 18-35 and 50-100 months ago. Just couldn't deal with the weight and AF issues. These days I'm kinda debating it, now that I've moved to mirrorless with their Focus pPeaking aids. However, the old 17-50 EX DC OS HSM has been my most reliable for years irrespective of DSLR/mirrorless or Canon/Fuji. My next event though, I will probably do my usual 2 body setup with a prime only 22mm f2 and a 35mm f1.4 and a 50mm f1.4.
Sigma 18-35 + GH5 + Speedbooster has been the choice I made for almost all of my Gear Acquisition Syndrome episodes.. it's just that beautiful. The only real contender I own right now is the Z6 + Z 35mm 1.8 S prime, and that system gets considerably more expensive when adding media and accessories.
Great video, I thought straight away the 18-35mm 1.8 would win. I have owned the 24 and it's a cracking lens. My only problem with it (and this was cos I had canon lenses too) was it was very cold and more magenta than my canon glass. It's also way sharper of a lens than I like. I ended up breaking it and then had an excuse to pick up the excellent 24mm 1.4 ii canon. Which for the money isn't probably worth it.
Gerald Undone gettin' it done. Keep up the amazing work Mr. Undone, your technical acumen and speed speaking super powers (faster than pouring boiling hot maple syrup on pancakes) offer up a fantastic learning value for time spent watching. Keep up the quicksilver Canuckian Cartesian commentary.
You're video is awesome: I love the characteristics break down and competition and how thorough you were! As a tip, I'd say you could relax a bit and allow more humor in. I've never seen a filmmaker go into such details in a comparison, though; which I found super helpful - thanks! 😄
That's an extremely detailed comparison. How much time did you spend doing this video? WoW . Had the 18-35,loved it. Now with Full Frame the 24-35 is a magic lens. 24-35 F2 and 70-200 Sports is 2 lenses for all
Even after kindly offering that people hit the dislike button twice if they didn't like the video, you still only have 33 dislikes. Pretty cool. Excellent breakdown, even if my newbie head is still spinning after all the info. 👍
When I bought my GH5 a year and a half ago, I insisted I needed that 18-35. Its a great lens but don't use it as much because of its weight. I got a little used to the lighter m43 lens and since have gotten the Sig 16mm for emergency run and gun low light because it is lighter and easier to carry in my standard bag. But I'll never get rid of the 18-35, I use it on preplained low light gigs where I would rather have that zoom.
That seems reasonable. I really like the 16mm for that too. The weight of lenses never bothers me though. I kind of prefer them heavier. But I totally get where you're coming from.
I carry a complete run and gun video kit including a tripod and small light/light stand so every little bit space/weight savings counts. I travel mostly by bike unless I need to bring everything. So the 18-35 most of the time gets left at home. Its my primary greenscreen lens though!
@@chrisklugh Yea I got similar experiences with the same combo. Also since I had gh4 before so I bought speedbooster xl for it and with the gh5 the 18-35 vignetting is too bad so it leaves out the wider focal lenghts. I am looking forward to the panasonic 10-25mm f 1.7, it gives a bit less light than the speedbooster combo, but native is always nicer to have and they finally gave an option to not go fly by wire focus so that's great. The only thing not so great about it is the price and ofc it could turn out to be dud image wise but the reviews will tell.
@@cmxpiipl Ya, that's an interesting lens. I doubt it will be a dud, the IQ will probably be similar to their 2.8 zoom lens. I'm sure the Sig will be sharper wide open though. But for those that have the Sig, I think it will be a hard sell to get this new one. The price is a little steep to justify when you have a legend in hand. But if they came out with a 25-50(?) f1.7 to pair with it, for those that could afford both, I see that being a good replacement set for the f2.8 lens.
Excellent and thorough video Gerald. Regardless the results, Sigma has been killing it since the introduction of Art lenses. It would be great to see some episodes comparing Sigma with first-party lenses. Also, I second a 50-100mm review, maybe vs 50mm, 85mm and 70-200 (from Canon and Nikon).
Ah, sorry Marvin. Keep in mind, we're comparing Art lenses here. The margin between them is small. My least favourite art lens is still better than a ton of lenses out there. And if you don't need the zoom, the 24mm is faster and more compact.
Valuable tests, thanks! Let's see that ART28! (or 35mmF1.2...) +Just putting a word in for the black panther of the~24~35 family, the ART24-70mmF2.8 Kazuko mentioned that the priority for this lens was beautiful rendering and bokeh. Although dissed for not being the sharpest 24-70 available, it is still extremely sharp at most focal lengths; it just suffered from high expectations and the latest rival versions exceeding it in one way or another (also perhaps some FW issues with OIS early on.) I'm guessing that they presumed that one would go for primes or those signature bright zooms if seeking quantitative perfection.
I love the 24-35mm! Parfocal and focus breathing are most important to me. However, B&H always has crazy sales on the 18-35 before Christmas. The Sigma 40mm is also a sweet lens; I've tested the cinema version. Would you ever lens test the Sigmas against the Rokinon Cine DS lenses?
I definitely could, but right now I only have the 24mm, which gets destroyed by the Sigma on anything wider than f/4. The 24mm Rokinon is notoriously soft on big apertures.
I just bumped on your channel because of this video. And my first impression is, you kinda look like the one of the reviewer of the AppleInsider. Anyways, thanks for the review! Will go for the 24mm
I'm pumped to see the 18-35 in green since that's what I use 90% of the time these days. Sigma is really dominating right now it seems, at least in terms of sharpness. I love my 56mm 1.4 as well. Thanks for this!
This was so flippin helpful, I already have the 18-35 but was getting pressure from friends to get a prime. Boom, dont need to (right now anyways ) lol Thankyou!
If you use the 18-35 for Cinemascope (using black bars), it becomes almost (because of some heavy distorsion) a good 24-35 in FF. Anyway, I'm also using it for photography, so after watching this I'm definitely switching to the 24-35 f2. I didn't want to let the 18-35 go after all these years, but knowing that the differences aren't big, I have no doubt about it. Thank you!
wow this is an awesome test and one i have wondered about for a while. How primes stack up against zooms with the same focal length. I dont know if you do already, but I'd love to see you continue this across manufacturers as well. Is the voigtlander 35 f1.4 better than the sigma 18-15 @35 f/1.4? So many combos!
Another thorough analysis, great job. The Sigma Art lenses in general do a great job. I was pleasantly surprised with the result of the Sigma zoom lenses. I only wish there was an 18-35mm version for full frame in Canon land. The 24-35 does not make sense for me, (I already have the 24-70). Some of the newer Sigma Art lenses are a better value than the Canon equivalents but with my current investment in Canon glass, it may not be cost effective to swap out to Sigma vs what I would gain, (just a personal opinion). Still Sigma has been doing a great job lately with their offerings and cannot see going wrong with them. . Can't get enough of the technical analysis. I think some others are attempting to cover your style of presenting, but you still are the platinum standard when it comes to these type of videos. Thanks again.
I totally understand where you're coming from. And in your case that makes perfect sense. Thanks again for watching, comments, and sharing kind words. Always appreciated, Phil.
Very good review. Thank you. Here are my thoughts, however. I have the 24mm f1.4 and I plan to use it mainly for indoors video. On my D800, I can shoot it at 24mm in FX mode but also at effectively 35mm in DX mode. HD video is plenty enough for me. IQ at f2 or f2.8 will be perfectly acceptable as corners are of no concern. The big deal of course, is that I can shoot the 24-35mm range at f1.4. This just can’t be done with the 24-35mm f2. I understand that the 24-35mm f2 is an awesome lens but the 24mm f1.4 is cheaper, smaller (77mm filter vs 82mm!) and is one stop faster. Added to this that the background blur is also in its favour. And this can’t be replicated by a boast in ISO or anything else on the zoom. Anyways, you did a pretty good job. Cheers.
Great review Gearld, I've the Sigma SD1M which is sigma's own APSC last Digital SLR before moving on to the live view sd quattro's. The 10 year old SD1M with Foveon true colour sensor requires a lot of light plus low ISOs ideally below 400 before it losses out to noise over standard Bayer sensors which have far better low light performance. I already have the 18-35mm art and I like it a lot, in my mind I was thinking the primes should be better 1st because of the 1.4 vs 1.8 aperture and as a general primes are sharper in the normal lens world, however you have convinced me that's not the case so I going to save my money rather than buying prime lens and instead put the £600 I was considering spending on a sigma 35mm 1.4 prime as it is clearly a poorer quality lens when compared to the 18-35 Art, thanks to your a honest accurate review I now plan on buying a new camera instead, the Sigma SD Quattro H camera body for about £1200 with it higher resolution slightly larger than APSC sensor than my current SD1M, this will benefit me a lot more than the dated 35mm prime which was the first art LENS that sigma produced, it looks like sigma has progressed quite a bit since then. Your review was great BTW I'm getting a little slower at taking in information, I find it difficult with a lot of numbers thrown at me so fast. Still you saved me wasting good money and I thank you for that. I've also learned its wrong to always assume primes are better, clearly not the case here, I can even see a much better contrast with the newer 18-35mm which I already have. BTW I only paid £450 from sigma's ebay outlet shop only last year it had now gone up in price as I think all sigma gear in UK. You have made me appreciate that I've made a good purchase I'll work on carrying a flashgun more instead of faster lens. Thank you again you have a new SUB
In regards to the ability to adjust the speedbooster to make the Sigma 18-35 parfocal, I think this may only work with the 0.71 ultra. I tried to make the same adjustments on my (MFT GH5) speedbooster but I have the XL 0.64x version. I would focus on an object at 35mm, and then zoom out. Instead of having to rotate it clockwise (as if the focus was drifting to the background when zooming out) mine would always focus drift to the foreground. This could only be improved by rotating my rear element counterclockwise and I took it as far as it would go without breaking it (which I almost did) I had to crank pretty hard on the rear element to get it to go as far as it did, and it was still not enough to make my 18-35 parfocal. On the brighter side, I think the adjustment was enough to get my Canon 70-200 to focus to infinity when zoomed all the way in to 200mm, something that was giving me problems before. ( I have to wait until it's daylight outside to really test it).
