And next here’s the Continuous AFC version which uses phase-detect autofocus and avoids the wobble it’s a little faster too.įor comparison, here’s the budget Sony 16-50 kit zoom at 50mm, although its maximum aperture is two stops slower at this point at f5.6. Starting with the Sigma 18-50 at 50mm f2.8 in AFS, the focusing is very swift with only the usual minor contrast wobble to confirm and it’s effectively silent too. To test the focusing I mounted each lens on my A6400 and recorded the view in both Single AFS and Continuous AFC modes. The Sigma is weather-sealed at the mount, albeit not throughout the entire barrel, but this is an upgrade over the Sony 16-50 kit zoom which has no sealing and feels quite rattly in comparison. The single control ring adjusts either the zoom or manual focus, while an additional lever provides an alternative zoom control. It weighs-in at a barely noticeable 118g and employs a collapsing barrel which starts off at just 65x30mm, before extending when powered-up. Whatever criticisms you can level against this lens, being too big is not one of them. Like the other two premium options, Sigma supplies the lens with a plastic hood, although the 55mm filter thread is narrower than the 67mm on the Sony and Tamron.īut while the Sigma becomes the most compact of the three 2.8 zooms, none can match the tiny 16-50 3.5-5.6 from Sony, supplied over the years with so many A5000 and A6000 cameras. In terms of controls, there’s just two: a fairly narrow manual focusing ring with ribbing that’s flush to the barrel making it a little awkward to turn at times, and a wider zoom ring that extends the barrel by about 24mm. It may have a shorter range than the Sony 2.8 and especially the Tamron, but at 60x76mm it’s comfortably more compact than either model, and at just 288g, roughly half their weight too. Ok, so here’s the Sigma 18-50 2.8 mounted on my own Sony A6400. You’re clearly a person of great taste so thanks for watching and if you’re not already subscribed please consider it so you don’t miss any of my future reviews! For more information on, er, you, check the link below, oh no, I’ll just get on with it. Just before I start, this video is sponsored by none other than you dear viewer. I hope to make some direct comparisons between the Sigma, Tamron and Sony 2.8 zooms in the future, but for this video I’m going to concentrate on the performance of the new Sigma versus the Sony 16-50mm 3.5-5.6 as it’s one of the most widespread kit lenses out there. Inevitably this also makes it heavier and longer than the Sigma, but at $799 it’s priced keenly for its range especially as it’s the only one of these three 2.8 zooms to also include optical stabilisation. Meanwhile at the end of 2020, Tamron launched the 17-70mm f2.8, again for Sony e-mount with the same aperture, but this time extending the range further, especially at the long-end. However the Sony’s larger, heavier and at $1399, much more expensive. In August 2019, Sony launched the E 16-55mm f2.8 G, sharing the same aperture as the new Sigma but with a fractionally broader range. ![]() ![]() Sigma wasn’t the first with this idea though. Alternatively get yourself a copy of my In Camera book or treat me to a coffee! Thanks! Buy it now! Check prices on the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 DC DN at B&H, Adorama, WEX UK or. But if you own one of the many Sony A5000 or A6000 bodies and despair at the 16-50 kit zoom, salvation has arrived. So at the asking price of $599, it seems almost churlish to complain about the Sigma’s shortcomings, other than the sheer cruelty of not announcing a version for Canon’s much-neglected EF-M mount. Sony and Tamron both offer broader ranges, but with larger, heavier and more expensive models. The only downsides are a lack of optical stabilisation, an omission that will frustrate owners of the many APSC bodies lacking IBIS of their own, and a range that would have been more compelling had it started at 16 rather than 18mm. SummaryThe Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 DC DN is the zoom many cropped mirrorless cameras have been waiting for: the range may be fairly standard, but the constant f2.8 aperture, potential for shallow depth-of-field results, and corner sharpness are all a step-up over basic kit zooms, and crucially it won’t break the bank or your back either.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |