Fuji Sigma 18-50 2.8 coming

Sigma is releasing an 18-50 2.8 for $550

 

gryphon1911

Hall of Famer
Location
Central Ohio, USA
Name
Andrew
Unless they know something we don't, it may be a misstep on Sigma and Tamron's part to be bringing those lenses to market without OIS/VR/VC in the lens. At the prices they are asking, a used 18-55/2.8-4 (yes, I am aware that the Sigma/Tamrons are f/2.8 constant) may be a more attractive proposition for those of use that have older Fuji bodies or plan to get a newer one that Fuji doesn't put IBIS in.

I said the same for Tamron's 70-300 they brought out for Z-mount. The 50-250 Z lens looks pretty good considering it contains VR and the 70-300 Tammy does not. For the price, I'd rather just adapt the f-mount 70-300 AF-P lens - which works brilliantly on the Z6 and Z fc.
 
Location
Switzerland
Name
Matt
I think the 18-50mm is an attractive proposition on any mound; yes, O.I.S. in any shape or form would be nice, but this is a fast standard zoom - you'll not need stabilisation most of the time. I recently bought the lens to use it on my Z 50 via the Megadap ETZ21, and I'm quite impressed - though ... more on that in a bit.

Anyway, I owned the 18-55mm f/2.8-4 when I had the X-E3; in fact, it was the lens I bought the camera with - and essentially for: as a zoomable companion to my Leicas. And in many ways, the lens delivered - but especially at the long end, I always found it somewhat underwhelming. It's not actually bad, though - it just renders a bit flat and dull at 55mm (you can correct most of this in post, but the lack of plasticity remains). The Sigma 18-50mm gives me very appealing results especially at its long end and otherwise certainly matches (or exceeds) the 18-55mm in terms of optical quality. That's no small feat - after all, the 18-55mm is well-regarded for a reason, and it remains one of my favourite standard zooms to this day.

Do I think the Fuji system specifically *needed* the Sigma 18-50mm? Not sure - but I'm pretty certain that I'd buy it again (or rather, swap it or have it converted) if it was ever released in Z mount. Among the convenience, it'd mean getting in-camera corrections (the ETZ21 doesn't transmit lens profiles, so you have to correct for distortion manually in post).

All that said, the fly in the ointment in my specific case is the quality of my go-to lens for the Z 50, the Nikon Z 18-140mm DX - while it's not a bright lens by any measure, its overall IQ is simply astonishing, and even though the Sigma 18-50mm is a very nice performer, it essentially doesn't top the much more versatile Nikon "superzoom" that's also not a whole lot bigger. I like using the Sigma 18-50mm and certainly don't regret buying it, it makes as nice a walkaround companion as the Fuji 18-55mm was and allows me to play with DoF in a very satisfying way - all in all, I think it's a really good EDC lens. But for dedicated photowalks, I'll keep picking the 18-140mm ...

Anyhow, I think there's a use case for a lens like the Sigma in every system, O.I.S./I.B.I.S. or not. Optically, it's a cut above most kit lenses, it has the constant bright aperture, is very portable and well made (though not as well as the Fuji 18-55 - that lens is a masterpiece in terms of build quality). If you're an APS-C shooter, this is a very attractive proposition, no matter what - and the price is right, too.

M.
 

gryphon1911

Hall of Famer
Location
Central Ohio, USA
Name
Andrew
I watched that, and I generally like their style; they're probably right if it comes to "measuring" stuff, and yes, the Fujifilm lens definitely feels even nicer; but the images coming from the Sigma appeal more (especially at the long end). Just my opinion, of course.

A quite different take here:

M.

I'm going to be 100% transparent.

I've had major issues with Sigma gear. I've tried many lenses in the past and had performance issue and deal breaker focusing issues. Optically, I like what I see...but those past experiences always put doubt in my head.
As just one example, I tried several versions of the Sigma 18-35/1.8 for Nikon and they all were unusable for auto focus except for the middle AF point. Using any other, focus was never right.

I will submit hat those issues all seem to be with DSLR lenses. I have had the pleasure of using the 60/2.8 Art and 30mm f/1.4 ART for m43 and the copies I had were lovely lenses and would definitely get those again in the future - perhaps even skip the 60mm and get the 56/1.4 instead.

On the flip side of that, I've had many more Tamron lenses and have had a much better track record...so I tend to lean toward them as a go to third party.

I know my bias is there toward Sigma, and I do apologize for that...but when I get burned repeatedly, it takes me a while to "forgive" and re-adopt.
 
Location
Switzerland
Name
Matt
I'm going to be 100% transparent.

I've had major issues with Sigma gear. I've tried many lenses in the past and had performance issue and deal breaker focusing issues. Optically, I like what I see...but those past experiences always put doubt in my head.
As just one example, I tried several versions of the Sigma 18-35/1.8 for Nikon and they all were unusable for auto focus except for the middle AF point. Using any other, focus was never right.

I will submit hat those issues all seem to be with DSLR lenses. I have had the pleasure of using the 60/2.8 Art and 30mm f/1.4 ART for m43 and the copies I had were lovely lenses and would definitely get those again in the future - perhaps even skip the 60mm and get the 56/1.4 instead.

On the flip side of that, I've had many more Tamron lenses and have had a much better track record...so I tend to lean toward them as a go to third party.

I know my bias is there toward Sigma, and I do apologize for that...but when I get burned repeatedly, it takes me a while to "forgive" and re-adopt.
Okay, that explains a lot. I tend to react quite similarily, but I've so far only encountered a single Sigma lens (and of that, a single copy) that wouldn't play well with any of my cameras, and that was the otherwise quite astonishing 35mm f/1.4 Art for Nikon F mount; but after the swap, the problems were gone.

The lens in question is really worth its price as far as I can tell so far, and it works really well in spite of the adapter it's sitting on. The only thing missing: automatic lens corrections - but that's the adapter's doing, and to be fair, Megadap never promised that in the first place.

M.
 
As a counterpoint, I guess, I also shot Sigma lenses on my Canon DSLRs. With zero issues in performance. And preferring the images from the Sigma lenses over their Canon counterparts. And like Matt, I like the images coming from the Sigma, especially at the long end over the Fuji. But that is not to say that the Fuji 18-55 is not a stellar performer. Also, in the spirit of disclosure. I've always been in the camp of preferring a constant aperture over IS. Not just for portrait work. But when shooting events, I don't like having my settings changed or thrown off when operating a zoom.
 
Top