lct Posted February 22, 2022 Share #61 Posted February 22, 2022 Advertisement (gone after registration) 39 minutes ago, Daedalus2000 said: One last point to make is that when people compare the sigma to the Leica, I am not sure if they compare the Sigma at f2.8 and the Leica at f3.5 for example. I think it will be very difficult to see major differences if you use both at f4 for example You would have to compare at 18mm only then. Wider apertures must be something like f/4.5 at 35mm and f/5.6 at 56mm i seem to recall but i may be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 22, 2022 Posted February 22, 2022 Hi lct, Take a look here Leica 18-56mm or Sigma 18-50mm?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Daedalus2000 Posted February 22, 2022 Share #62 Posted February 22, 2022 4 minutes ago, lct said: You would have to compare at 18mm only then. Wider apertures must be something like f/4.5 at 35mm and f/5.6 at 56mm i seem to recall but i may be wrong. Correct, that is what I mean, that to be fair we should compare at the right aperture for each focal length which as you say goes all the way to f5 for 50mm (I think) and f5.6 for 56mm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldwino Posted February 22, 2022 Share #63 Posted February 22, 2022 I think the 18-56 is a "glorious" kit lens. It really does perform much better than its specs would lead you to believe. I was never dissatisfied when I used mine. The TL 35/1.4 was, OTOH, a bit of a let-down for me. It never lived up to its promise, despite its great build quality and Summilux name. Hardly "glorious" for me...more "glorified" (just MY opinion) The Sigma is probably a good lens, certainly more versatile in more and different lighting situations. But I am betting that it performs pretty much as expected - competently. And maybe a little boring. In other words, like a Sigma. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aksclix Posted February 22, 2022 Share #64 Posted February 22, 2022 ☝️“Glorified” again! It may be the best kit lens in the world in APS-C format, optically and build quality wise.. BUT, it is still a very basic 3.5-5.6 lens. Does the 5.6 perform like a 2.8 or. 4 because it’s Leica? No.. then sharpness, build quality and debatable contrasty-ness aside, it’s just pretty basic. Sigma on the other hand is no slouch, it is very sharp! I don’t believe we need the highest grade build quality for a kit lens. However, the sigma build quality is pretty solid! Sigma isn’t what it used to be. They’re the best alternatives out there! The ART, C and the DG DN lenses are far from boring. There are several photographers who use them on this forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldwino Posted February 22, 2022 Share #65 Posted February 22, 2022 In spite of Sigma now producing some of the best lenses in their company's history, many are often a bit "flat" to my eyes. Sharp, sure. "Sharp" is only one aspect of how a lens behaves. Some of the C (or is it I? DN DG I C?) lenses are nice. So many abbreviations... Some of those big "ART" lenses really underperform, such as the 35/1.2. It's really meh for such a big, over-wrought lens. There's nothing "wrong" with it, but it doesn't produce inspiring images for me. Sigma is a very conservative lens maker. BTW, I used "glorious", not "glorified" to describe the Leica 18-56. Big difference. Best APS-C kit lens right now is the Nikon Z 16-50 DX VR. Tiny, feather-weight, very sharp (!) and built in vibration reduction. Punches way above its weight class, as they say. And - cheap. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aksclix Posted February 22, 2022 Share #66 Posted February 22, 2022 I thought it is glorified when you call it glorious? No? ive heard that about the sigma 35 f/1.2 but there are so many other stellar lenses in the ART and C line up! No comments on their abbreviations.. I never understood the S006 naming after the S2 (and then a 007 followed by S3) and then the various “typ” tags to cameras.. am sure there’s a reasoning behind it but I don’t understand it. Anyway, the point is - it’s their product and they obviously get to choose whatever naming convention they want.. am ok with that regarding lens sharpness, I know that’s not the only quality to look for in a lens. The sigma 18-50 has a lovely look to it. No 3d pop like the Zeiss or some of the Leica lenses across different mounts but way better than what you can get from 18-56. The 18-56 is a great lens and of course the images are going to look great when the lighting is right and the composition is good and there’s a lot vibrant colors that almost any Leica lens will reproduce well.. But that’s not enough, is my opinion. Being a Leica kit lens, I already expect all of that.. what else can it do? That’s where the sigma wins! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted February 22, 2022 Share #67 Posted February 22, 2022 Advertisement (gone after registration) The joy of the 18-56 making a bigger splash than maybe people expected... 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! 13 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/329952-leica-18-56mm-or-sigma-18-50mm/?do=findComment&comment=4389003'>More sharing options...
aksclix Posted February 22, 2022 Share #68 Posted February 22, 2022 (edited) @Life By Stills just in case the above shot completely changed your mind about the 18-56, just wanted you to know that it can be taken with the sigma 18-50 and I guarantee that it will be joyful as well. Edited February 22, 2022 by aksclix Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Life By Stills Posted February 22, 2022 Author Share #69 Posted February 22, 2022 20 minutes ago, Le Chef said: The joy of the 18-56 making a bigger splash than maybe people expected... 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! Thanks for sharing this shot. Does uploading onto this forum automatically compress the image? Also, can you remember what ISO and aperture you used for this shot please? Was this snapped with the CL or the TL2? Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted February 22, 2022 Share #70 Posted February 22, 2022 1 minute ago, Life By Stills said: Thanks for sharing this shot. Does uploading onto this forum automatically compress the image? Also, can you remember what ISO and aperture you used for this shot please? Was this snapped with the CL or the TL2? Thanks. You have to compress as a jpeg to a max of 2k. Look for Jaap's instructions at the top of the page. Shot on CL at 100 ISO, 18mm, 1/800th, f5.6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Life By Stills Posted February 22, 2022 Author Share #71 Posted February 22, 2022 Also @Le Chef, aside from posting your image of a wave, would you be able to explain why you support the Leica 18-56mm over the Sigma 18-50mm please. I am actually genuinely asking for an opinion because I am new to the system. I shoot with a Q2 so I have not had to worry about lenses, so would love to know why you are for the Leica 18-56mm instead of the Sigma 18-50mm please. Thanks again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted February 22, 2022 Share #72 Posted February 22, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Life By Stills said: Also @Le Chef, aside from posting your image of a wave, would you be able to explain why you support the Leica 18-56mm over the Sigma 18-50mm please. I am actually genuinely asking for an opinion because I am new to the system. I shoot with a Q2 so I have not had to worry about lenses, so would love to know why you are for the Leica 18-56mm instead of the Sigma 18-50mm please. Thanks again. It was a very simple choice: there was no Sigma 18-50! The person selling it was very snobby about it being a "glorified kit lens" so I stressed its downmarket credentials and inferiority and got even more discount. I like the slightly longer reach the 18-56 has. If I need a wide aperture for portraits I have a Sigma 56mm. If I want wider angle view I have an 11-23mm. It's always horses for courses. Edited February 22, 2022 by Le Chef Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aksclix Posted February 22, 2022 Share #73 Posted February 22, 2022 Just took these sample shots for you with the CL and 18-50. The 18-56 Leica cannot get you this result.. This first image below was at 6cm away probably? at 18mm, f/2.8, 1/160s, ISO 800 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! this second image was shot at 41mm, f/2.8, 1/100s, ISO 400 Yesterday I posted a B&W image from my neighborhood walk in the CL image thread.. you may look at that as well for landscape shot. I have several images of the family taken with it and I don't intend to share those here.. 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! this second image was shot at 41mm, f/2.8, 1/100s, ISO 400 Yesterday I posted a B&W image from my neighborhood walk in the CL image thread.. you may look at that as well for landscape shot. I have several images of the family taken with it and I don't intend to share those here.. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/329952-leica-18-56mm-or-sigma-18-50mm/?do=findComment&comment=4389031'>More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted February 23, 2022 Share #74 Posted February 23, 2022 The obvious thing to do is try both for yourself and then you don’t have to rely on people pushing their personal and subjective preference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aksclix Posted February 23, 2022 Share #75 Posted February 23, 2022 (edited) I fail to understand your problem sir! I have barely shared my opinions with the OP and never pushed my preference! I seriously believe everyone’s got to make their own choice and I have said the exact same thing earlier in this thread. All you have done is take extreme offense to my remarks on that lens like you helped with the design or production. Kindly learn to respect others’ opinions. It is OK for me to call it whatever I want! You’re well within your right to state your opinion instead of trying to chase me down for stating mine. I have stated my reasons for labeling it whatever! You can put it on a pedestal and worship it, I do not care about that. Am sure you have better things to do.. I am not interested in these meaningless arguments.. let’s please end it and share what you have to with the OP. Enough with these ridiculous jabs.. it’s not why I joined the forum! Edited February 23, 2022 by aksclix Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guytou Posted February 23, 2022 Share #76 Posted February 23, 2022 (edited) 2 years ago I sold my X Vario and bought a used CL + 18-56 mm + 18 mm set + some accessories. Everything was in new condition, not used and for a total price of 2500 €. It was a very good deal and I am obviously very satisfied with this beautiful material. But I think if the Sigma 18-50 had existed at the time, I would have bought it with a bare CL. I also have a Sigma macro Art 2,8-105 DG DN which is really excellent. It is undeniable that Sigma today makes very good optics at realistic prices. Guytou Edited February 23, 2022 by Guytou 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 23, 2022 Share #77 Posted February 23, 2022 16 hours ago, aksclix said: The 18-56 Leica cannot get you this result.. This first image below was at 6cm away probably? at 18mm, f/2.8, 1/160s, ISO 800 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! Fortunately for Leica i would say . Just kidding but your pic looks too soft with respect. It is perhaps out of focus which would explain that. Are you sure you shot it at f/2.8? I can't seem to go below f/3.2 on closeups with the Sigma lens (see link hereafter, details in exif data). Not sure what real aperture the Leica lens can reach on closeups though. https://photos.smugmug.com/Diverse/n-QFBj4/Leica-digital-CL-Sigma-18-2028/i-G7Qq7vS/0/5ff3a4f4/X4/C1130033_si-X4.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted February 23, 2022 Share #78 Posted February 23, 2022 (edited) 8 hours ago, aksclix said: I fail to understand your problem sir! I have barely shared my opinions with the OP and never pushed my preference! I seriously believe everyone’s got to make their own choice and I have said the exact same thing earlier in this thread. All you have done is take extreme offense to my remarks on that lens like you helped with the design or production. Kindly learn to respect others’ opinions. It is OK for me to call it whatever I want! You’re well within your right to state your opinion instead of trying to chase me down for stating mine. I have stated my reasons for labeling it whatever! You can put it on a pedestal and worship it, I do not care about that. Am sure you have better things to do.. I am not interested in these meaningless arguments.. let’s please end it and share what you have to with the OP. Enough with these ridiculous jabs.. it’s not why I joined the forum! If you bother to read, you will see that I have not expressed an opinion about the Sigma 18-50 or the TL 18-56, and merely shown an image taken with the TL 18-56. “The lady doth protest too much” Edited February 23, 2022 by Le Chef Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aksclix Posted February 23, 2022 Share #79 Posted February 23, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, lct said: Fortunately for Leica i would say . Just kidding but your pic looks too soft with respect. It is perhaps out of focus which would explain that. Are you sure you shot it at f/2.8? I can't seem to go below f/3.2 on closeups with the Sigma lens (see link hereafter, details in exif data). Not sure what real aperture the Leica lens can reach on closeups though. https://photos.smugmug.com/Diverse/n-QFBj4/Leica-digital-CL-Sigma-18-2028/i-G7Qq7vS/0/5ff3a4f4/X4/C1130033_si-X4.jpg maybe its the shallow DOF. the letters on this particular aren't sharp by itself.. its got some weird texture.. maybe that's why? the bottle does not have sharp edges.. its round and soft I have the same image taken with a Leica 75 f/2 and the bottle edge is super sharp in that. But that's not a fair comparison.. here's another shot of the same bottle and another one of a tiny souvenir.. I have some pictures of my 6month old daughter with it and it looks sharp as tac! 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 February 23, 2022 by aksclix Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/329952-leica-18-56mm-or-sigma-18-50mm/?do=findComment&comment=4389398'>More sharing options...
aksclix Posted February 23, 2022 Share #80 Posted February 23, 2022 (edited) @lct one more ALL pictures posted on this thread by me were taken at f/2.8 and the exif confirms that.. 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 February 23, 2022 by aksclix Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/329952-leica-18-56mm-or-sigma-18-50mm/?do=findComment&comment=4389404'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now