Thanks Chris, great review as always! Tempting, but I have the f/2.8 28mm and Sigma’s f/2.8 10-18. So this one is less interesting for me because of what I already have. But this one should sit at the higher end of the ”recommended” range, not? Am I missing something? Possibly what is coming up? Canon’s latest AI assisted designs are setting a new standard for sure.
And I'd still like you to review *EF 135mm f/2.8 with Soft Focus* . Leave alone weird SF feature (although it works), but it is the cheapest fast 135 mil native AF lens, which performs even better with mirrorless AF system now...
Thanks Christopher for this review. I've wondered how the lens could handle that tough 32mp sensor. I owned a R7 for about two years, and used it with a host of lenses. It could sometimes give shockingly sharp results, but more often than I liked, one would get oddly muddled (slightly off-sharp) images. It'll be very interesting to see what megapixel sensor Canon opts to put in their R7 replacement that is rumored to be released this year. Part of me hopes it is a more reasonable 24/26 mp density.
I'm waiting for more sigma glasses for Nikon z mount. Surprisingly viltrox like brands & Tamron are bringing all good lens for Nikon but sigma seems not interested.
Tell me, do you have a suspicion that the problem with the sharpness of the lenses on the EOS R7 camera is not in the lenses, but in the camera itself? It's just that I also own an R7 and I don't like its sensor at all. Its megapixels are somehow artificially inflated; I cannot otherwise explain what I see in the shooting results.
Still such a shame Canon is being so difficult with 3rd party lenses. Going from: EF best offering to RF worst offering. I have seen so many people switching to Sony the past few years.
Let's be honest, please. The quality of this optic is unfortunate and sad. Again Sigma has disappointed as with the 18-50 for RF mount. I think this happens because when Sigma designed these lenses they did so for Sony cameras with lower resolution than the Canon R7. It will be interesting to see how this optic performs on a lower resolution camera like the R10 or R50. Thanks for the video
Huh? I thought the performance looked pretty decent, especially considering you would need to spend at least triple the amount to get an equivalent lens on Canon.
It's surprising that the E mount version of this lens appears better in every way. Not sure if it has anything to do with the higher pixel density since it still does get sharper as it's stopped down versus getting softer due to the effects of diffraction. There's even purple fringing on the Canon version when wide open on the test chart versus none on the Sony.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
I can't wait to see your reviews of the new Canon RF VCM lenses 🙂
I have one in my office right now, will be testing it next week :-)
Can't wait to see your review of Canons new 16-28mm f2.8, even though the vignetting is bad
Thanks for the review!
Thanks Chris, great review as always! Tempting, but I have the f/2.8 28mm and Sigma’s f/2.8 10-18. So this one is less interesting for me because of what I already have. But this one should sit at the higher end of the ”recommended” range, not? Am I missing something? Possibly what is coming up? Canon’s latest AI assisted designs are setting a new standard for sure.
I’ve been wanting this focal length but $599 usd is steep. Still hoping canon will release another 22mm like the efm mount.
Be happy, the US$ price, once again, is way lower than many other countries, certainly Australia 😢
So buy gray market @@robertcudlipp3426
I will try my 22 on my m6ii as it is also 32.5mp and let you know how it did.
So instead of weak 1,4 we are getting good 2,8 lens 🤔
Hi Chris, please do review on fuji 16-55 f2.8 mark 2 version. please we are waiting
And I'd still like you to review *EF 135mm f/2.8 with Soft Focus* . Leave alone weird SF feature (although it works), but it is the cheapest fast 135 mil native AF lens, which performs even better with mirrorless AF system now...
Thanks Christopher for this review. I've wondered how the lens could handle that tough 32mp sensor. I owned a R7 for about two years, and used it with a host of lenses. It could sometimes give shockingly sharp results, but more often than I liked, one would get oddly muddled (slightly off-sharp) images. It'll be very interesting to see what megapixel sensor Canon opts to put in their R7 replacement that is rumored to be released this year. Part of me hopes it is a more reasonable 24/26 mp density.
Other mfg have higher megapixel APS-C sensors that do very well. I suspect there is an issue with the Canon, IBIS possibly?
@ Yes, maybe. I’ve wondered how fuji’s 40mp seems to do better than Canon’s 32 mp.
Got a cold Chris ? Hope you feel better soon. Sigma - never sure and I’m sure Viltrox can give them a real fight for the APS c market 😎👍
Slight cold yes :-)
I'm waiting for more sigma glasses for Nikon z mount. Surprisingly viltrox like brands & Tamron are bringing all good lens for Nikon but sigma seems not interested.
Tell me, do you have a suspicion that the problem with the sharpness of the lenses on the EOS R7 camera is not in the lenses, but in the camera itself? It's just that I also own an R7 and I don't like its sensor at all. Its megapixels are somehow artificially inflated; I cannot otherwise explain what I see in the shooting results.
I've wondered about that in the past but with extremely sharp lenses like the Canon 135mm f/1.8 can resolve it
I need full frame sigma lenses 😅
Is there any benefit to this over the RF 24 that already lives fulltime on my R7?
Yes. Brighter aperture, smaller size, lower price (if you live in the UK). Biggest benefit probably is that 66% brighter aperture
Your voice sounds a bit rough, Christopher! God bless you and take care!
Just missing the 16mm.
… hm, could be better. 🤷🏼♂️ It’s not on the same performance level of E-Mount or L-Mount lenses from Sigma.
Sigma 56/1,4 is probably sharper
how do you make your money?
Still such a shame Canon is being so difficult with 3rd party lenses. Going from: EF best offering to RF worst offering.
I have seen so many people switching to Sony the past few years.
Let's be honest, please. The quality of this optic is unfortunate and sad. Again Sigma has disappointed as with the 18-50 for RF mount. I think this happens because when Sigma designed these lenses they did so for Sony cameras with lower resolution than the Canon R7. It will be interesting to see how this optic performs on a lower resolution camera like the R10 or R50. Thanks for the video
Huh? I thought the performance looked pretty decent, especially considering you would need to spend at least triple the amount to get an equivalent lens on Canon.
@@cranemonThe 24mm f/1.8 is the same price with IS. What are you talking about?
@@justinburley8659 24mm 1.4 is like 1500 bucks
It's surprising that the E mount version of this lens appears better in every way. Not sure if it has anything to do with the higher pixel density since it still does get sharper as it's stopped down versus getting softer due to the effects of diffraction. There's even purple fringing on the Canon version when wide open on the test chart versus none on the Sony.
@@nposub It’s the pixel density. Sigma lenses perform much better on an R10/R50. How do I know? I have them