How's the distortion for Sigma 18-50mm on CL

[Zephyrlam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all, I am a newbie to Leica.

I recently got my CL, a TL23 and a TL35 from second hand market.

Now I am considering to add a Sigma 18-50mm into my set for travel and casual use. It's zoom and 2.8 constant aperture at compact size are attractive to me. 

Saw from reviews stating that the barrel distortion at 18mm of the lens is quite serious. I wonder how bad would it be given CL doesn't support auto correction (am I right?) to the image from this lens. I usually shoot jpeg with no post processing.

Could anyone using the lens share his experience or if there would be any test photo? Much appreciate and thanks.

Edited November 10, 2022 by Zephyrlam

[Boojay]

Hi, welcome.  As a user of the CL from launch, I did have the 18-56 but happily moved to the Sigma 18-50 for the constant f/2.8 and find it an excellent little zoom lens.

Have had no problem at all and seen no need for distortion control, couple below at 18mm and one at 50mm to show the range, no corrections applied, shot in DNG with little or no processing before saving as jpegs.

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!

 

 

 

[lct]

9 hours ago, Zephyrlam said:

CL doesn't support auto correction (am I right?)

It does support auto distortion correction.
A bit too much for my taste but YMMV.

w/o auto distortion correction:

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!

 

w auto distortion correction:

 

Edited November 10, 2022 by lct

[lct]

For test pics, see:

 

[Zephyrlam]

Thanks all of you and nice pictures. I am happy to hear that auto correction could be done by CL. No doubt I will go get the lens soon. 

[rob_w]

I use the 18-50 in crop mode on a Sony full frame A7.  The results are excellent.  Unless it is needed, I turn off lens correction in Lightroom.  In fact, I often find that provides a more natural looking picture than the rectilinear correction of the software.  I had the 18-56 on the CL which is also very good, but I do find the f2.8 extra aperture very handy in lots of situations.

[Zephyrlam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Got my 18-50 today and happy with it after trying on my CL. I got it new at around 60% price of a mint condition 18-56. At this price I think it is a true deal especially for its constant 2.8 aperture. 

[elambo]

Sounds like you already pulled the trigger on this but I'll chime in to say that I have the same lens on a CL and so far it's been excellent. No issues with distortion that I've noticed. Let us know how it pans out for you.

[ruskkyle]

I've got a cross country skiing expedition coming up where I need a 'one and done' zoom to cover most situations. I'm usually a primes guy but I won't be able to stop and change lenses very often so am considering this Sigma or the Leica 18-56. Image quality is a top concern as this is a paid assignment, but so is lightness, so rather than rent a bigger, weather sealed full frame body and zoom I'm considering using my trusty little CL.

Is this Sigma up the the task I wonder...

[lct]

The Sigma 18-50/2.8 works fine on the CL as long as you rely upon software distortion correction.

Sans software distortion correction:

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!

With software distortion correction:

 

Edited April 1, 2023 by lct

[Le Chef]

@BoojayJayne: having used both do you notice the difference in weight between the two and do you notice in usage the difference between the fastest apertures of both lenses?

[Boojay]

1 hour ago, Le Chef said:

@BoojayJayne: having used both do you notice the difference in weight between the two and do you notice in usage the difference between the fastest apertures of both lenses?

I don't have the 18-56 now, I did keep them side by side for a while when the Sigma first came out but honestly saw no reason to keep the TL lens, as good as it is.  Weight wise not sure what the specs say but nothing noticeable in use.  Think I probably posted image samples at some point and my feelings looking through my library remain the same, absolute image quality IMO the TL wins (just) if you are totally pixel peeping, but for my use the constant 2.8 is much more useful, certainly at the long end.  

Edited April 1, 2023 by Boojay

[ruskkyle]

34 minutes ago, Boojay said:

I don't have the 18-56 now, I did keep them side by side for a while when the Sigma first came out but honestly saw no reason to keep the TL lens, as good as it is.  Weight wise not sure what the specs say but nothing noticeable in use.  Think I probably posted image samples at some point and my feelings looking through my library remain the same, absolute image quality IMO the TL wins (just) if you are totally pixel peeping, but for my use the constant 2.8 is much more useful, certainly at the long end.  

Yeah, it looks like a great deal. Though for the particular use case mentioned above, all being out of doors and in daylight conditions, I think the extra reach of the TL makes sense.