NEW Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 for APS-C

[bherman01545]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The test reports show that the Sigma 18-50  DG DN is a very competent lens for the price. 
 

Pros:

Constant aperture, somewhat weather sealed, compact for a 2.8 CA zoom,  very good overall performance

Cons:

Plastic build, pretty pronounced barrel distortion at 18mm, heavy Loca 

if I didn’t already have the 18-56, I would look at the Sigma. That being said, you can pickup a mint Leica 18-56 for less than $1000, but it’s still 2x the price of the Sigma

-Brad

Edited October 29, 2021 by bherman01545

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[lct]

13 hours ago, Boojay said:

The Sigma 18-50 is available UK now.  Mine arrived this afternoon, for anyone wondering how it looks compared to 18-56.

I think weight difference is around 80g so barely noticeable, different direction to zoom ring but feels smooth, other than of course the available constant 2.8, the MFD of 12 cm compared to 30cm of the 18-56 could be very useful.  

Interesting indeed thank you. Would you mind to elaborate on the way distortion is corrected by the CL?

[Boojay]

1 hour ago, lct said:

Interesting indeed thank you. Would you mind to elaborate on the way distortion is corrected by the CL?

Not able to elaborate but took this shot from tripod with both lenses set to 18mm f3.5 shot at around 2m (excuse messy shelves)..  these SOOC with nothing other than default Lightroom import settings.

18-56 gives this

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Sigma provides this

 

I have not really investigated any further yet... early days

Edited October 30, 2021 by Boojay
typo

[Boojay]

These two from a quick walk were both 18mm - first f/4, second f/2.8 quick adjustments to highlights, shadows, very little else.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

Six or seven other shots from yesterday's walk, at various focal lengths to be found on my flickr stream.   

[lct]

Thank you much

[Boojay]

2 minutes ago, lct said:

Thank you much

No worries, not sure that is much help at all but the Leica is definitely the better optic (no surprise there then).

Have to decide whether the f2/8 and MFD is enough to make it a keeper😊.

 

 

[aksclix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 10/30/2021 at 5:30 AM, Boojay said:

No worries, not sure that is much help at all but the Leica is definitely the better optic (no surprise there then).

Have to decide whether the f2/8 and MFD is enough to make it a keeper😊.

 

 

Thanks for the sample images.. I don’t have the 18-56.. only have the 11-23 and 23.. I am really interested in this one.. constant f2.8 is kinda the only temptation for me.. MFD is also a really nice added value.. with the CL being not so good with noise, lacking IS, I don’t know how and why the 18-56 became such a popular and well liked lens.. optically it might be very good but the modest aperture range might become an issue in remotely challenging lighting conditions.. 

 

Is there a difference in sharpness or just colors between the 18-56 and this one?

[Boojay]

10 hours ago, aksclix said:

Thanks for the sample images.. I don’t have the 18-56.. only have the 11-23 and 23.. I am really interested in this one.. constant f2.8 is kinda the only temptation for me.. MFD is also a really nice added value.. with the CL being not so good with noise, lacking IS, I don’t know how and why the 18-56 became such a popular and well liked lens.. optically it might be very good but the modest aperture range might become an issue in remotely challenging lighting conditions.. 

 

Is there a difference in sharpness or just colors between the 18-56 and this one?

Given the cost of this lens compared to the TL 18-56 it's really a no-brainer if you want a longer and more flexible lens than your 23mm.  Yes, some difference in colour rendition, I'm not seeing any lack of sharpness, I'm guessing for those using the Sony mount version on bodies with IBIS it's a real treat. 

It feels like this lens changes things around given that most 18-56 kit lenses come at a lower price with aperture range of 3.5/5.6 as with the TL, but the TL's optical quality is the best I've ever seen from a so called kit lens.  Most manufacturers come along later with a 2.8 version that have a significantly higher price tag and a better optical performance, Fuji's 16-55, Canon's old 17-55 for example. Here we get the 2.8 and very useful MFD, at about a third of the cost with maybe a tiny tiny loss of IQ.   As it seems Leica has pretty much abandoned aps-c at this point, thank goodness for Sigma I say and if I was starting today with the CL or TL I'd save a bundle and forgo pretty much any of the TL lenses, and use my M lenses when I want that Leica colour and rendition.   

Couple more samples.. if you click through to my flickr stream for better viewing, last dozen or so images are from the 18-50.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Chasing Whippets at 2.8 

 

 

[mikeLD]

Just got mine on Tuesday as a candidate replacement for my 18-56mm walkaround on my CL.  First impressions, it is really, really good for me.  Very fast focus, smooth operation, perfect operation with the CL.  I already have the recent Sigma 90mm as my longer 135 equivalent.  I regret to say that my 23mm and 18-56 are going on the sale block.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited November 4, 2021 by mikeLD
text format correction

[aksclix]

5 hours ago, Boojay said:

Given the cost of this lens compared to the TL 18-56 it's really a no-brainer if you want a longer and more flexible lens than your 23mm.  Yes, some difference in colour rendition, I'm not seeing any lack of sharpness, I'm guessing for those using the Sony mount version on bodies with IBIS it's a real treat. 

It feels like this lens changes things around given that most 18-56 kit lenses come at a lower price with aperture range of 3.5/5.6 as with the TL, but the TL's optical quality is the best I've ever seen from a so called kit lens.  Most manufacturers come along later with a 2.8 version that have a significantly higher price tag and a better optical performance, Fuji's 16-55, Canon's old 17-55 for example. Here we get the 2.8 and very useful MFD, at about a third of the cost with maybe a tiny tiny loss of IQ.   As it seems Leica has pretty much abandoned aps-c at this point, thank goodness for Sigma I say and if I was starting today with the CL or TL I'd save a bundle and forgo pretty much any of the TL lenses, and use my M lenses when I want that Leica colour and rendition

Thanks again..

I had a used 18-56 for a while and I returned it.. 

it was only usable in good lighting conditions and that was a deal breaker for me. I was giving away the CL as well but then decided otherwise.. even with the 11-23 at home in normal ambient light, it is dark up until ISO 3200!! And the CL for me becomes too noisy starting at 1600..  

Anyway, I’ve ordered my 18-50 now and I know I won’t be disappointed.. 

I think the sigma has come very late.. better late than never though.. 

also, it’s hard to say if Leica has abandoned the CL.. they’re always super slow.. since the introduction of the SL, they’re yet to complete the lens line up.. the 21 is coming forever!!
 it seems like they care more about the M than any other models anyway

[aksclix]

3 hours ago, mikeLD said:

I regret to say that my 23mm and 18-56 are going on the sale block.

I am also contemplating getting rid of the 23.. it’s only staying because how compact my SL2 becomes paired with it.. a nice 35 equivalent 

Edited November 4, 2021 by aksclix
Typo

[Dopaco]

On 10/30/2021 at 2:13 PM, Boojay said:

Not able to elaborate but took this shot from tripod with both lenses set to 18mm f3.5 shot at around 2m (excuse messy shelves)..  these SOOC with nothing other than default Lightroom import settings.

18-56 gives this

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Sigma provides this

 

I have not really investigated any further yet... early days

In this case and taking as an example your 2 photos that you have uploaded and from my monitor I observe that the photo that has captured more details is the one taken with the TL 18-56mm lens.

Zooming the photo to 200 x 100, notice the details of the cushion and the texture of the sofa.

The data used for both photos have been the same:
- Exposure program ...: Manual
- Exposure time .......: 1/50
- Number f .............................: 3.5
- Focal length ..................: 18 mm.
- Sensitivity (ISO) ...............: 200

 

Edited November 4, 2021 by Dopaco

[Boojay]

12 minutes ago, Dopaco said:

In this case and taking as an example your 2 photos that you have uploaded and from my monitor I observe that the photo that has captured more details is the one taken with the TL 18-56mm lens.

Zooming the photo to 200 x 100, notice the details of the cushion and the texture of the sofa.

The data used for both photos have been the same:
- Exposure program ...: Manual
- Exposure time .......: 1/50
- Number f .............................: 3.5
- Focal length ..................: 18 mm.
- Sensitivity (ISO) ...............: 200

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

No argument from me on that.  I have said I believe the 18-56 to be a slightly better optic.  You're also pixel peeping at 200% and towards the outer edge of the frame, I'm surprised it's as close as it is.😊

 

[Dopaco]

To reach reliable conclusions, I think it is necessary to continue testing and observing results and looking for the hot spots of each lens, although I doubt that Sigma lenses offer better quality in the photos than Leica TL objectives, in any case it can be approximate. . (which is already a good result).

[mikeLD]

Thank you for the comparison.  My comparisons have not scrutinized at that zoom level.  I certainly agree about further testing.  I also subscribe to an earlier post about the benefit of the 18-50 in lower light situations.  I do a good bit of street shooting where lighting is often not the best and have been stuck on the street with the need to switch lenses.  I cheat and carry a Lumix LX100 II (same as Leica D-Lux 7) which has a nice Leica blessed zoom lens that is an f1.7-2.8. The 10-50mm at F2.8 looks like it will let me leave the LX100 at home, a pound less to carry.

[hoolyproductions]

Thanks for these examples and impressions! I got quite interested in this lens but already have the 18-56, and the CL recently became my second camera to an SL2-s.

Interestingly I noticed that the PCMag reviews for these two lenses (carried out on different occassions and never sure how accurate/subjective these types of tests are) gave the Sigma higher sharpness scores than for the Leica. Happy to hear that users here have the opposite impression!

https://uk.pcmag.com/lenses/33966/leica-vario-elmar-t-18-56mm-f35-56-review

https://uk.pcmag.com/lenses/136363/sigma-18-50mm-f28-dc-dn-contemporary

[Marac]

Big contender for me, This Sigma will certainly do the job for me as a walk-about lens with AF. I mainly use Voigtlander-M mount lenses with my CL however, this lens could work it's way into my gig bag.

[aksclix]

Mine arrived today and it’s such a great addition to my CL.. this is going to be really fun to use!! Don’t care about the LOCA or other minor imperfections.. CL is just a fun walk around camera for me anyway.. don’t need it to be optically perfect.. this is a true winner!! 

Edited November 6, 2021 by aksclix
Typos

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[mikeLD]

10 minutes ago, aksclix said:

Mine arrived today and it’s such a great addition to my CL.. this is going to be really fun to use!! Don’t care about the LOCA or other minor imperfections.. CL is just a fun walk around camera for me anyway.. don’t need it to be optically perfect.. this is a true winner!! 

I don't know the acronym LOCA, please explain??  Something to do with chromic aberration maybe?  Oops found it:  Longitudinal Chromatic Aberration.  Has this been reported somewhere on this lens???  

Edited November 6, 2021 by mikeLD

[aksclix]

1 hour ago, mikeLD said:

I don't know the acronym LOCA, please explain??  Something to do with chromic aberration maybe?  Oops found it:  Longitudinal Chromatic Aberration.  Has this been reported somewhere on this lens???  

Yes, dpreview review.. on YouTube