Please keep reviewing older canon EF lenses that needs updating! Us canon users don't have many lens options currently, so lenses like the Sigma Art EF lenses and stuff would be awesome for us!
Would be super nice for canon to open up for third party lenses. I believe one day sigma will manufacture a version for mirrorless, hopefully for all brands.
I don't think I've ever bought a lens without first watching your reviews. You've done a landmark job of documenting lens performance, and saved a many of us a lot of work and frustration. Thank you. One comment on this video, though: Unless two or more items in the image chain have nearly equal resolution, the end resolution of the system will be almost completely determined by the lowest resolution item in the chain. Camera lens>sensor>monitor screen>human eye, for example. If a lens provides excellent resolution at, for example, 20 Mpixels, putting the same lens on a 50 Mpixel camera cannot produce lower resolution. So I think I disagree with your statement that your high resolution sensor degrades the sharpness of the lens.
I don't use to comment on videos and the very few comments I made was to ask for this, some time ago. I was surprised and really happy when I saw this review as first recommended video! Thank you, Chris! And continue these amazing reviews (I watch every single one of them)! Cheers
And the outgoing version actually has full frame coverage from 27 mm to 35 mm so I would really love to see an updated version that tries to see how much full frame coverage they can get across that entire range.
i dunno why they haven't. for aps-c it's definitely doable, and Tamron released a 35-150 f2-2.8, f2 through 85, then 2.8 to 150... i guess folks wanna sell as many lesser lenses as they can before bringing out stuff that will kill sales of older designs.
I really miss mine. I sold it when I upgraded to full frame. Really wish I had kept it as it's still useful for crop video options or used on my M50 I picked up now.
I've had one of these sitting in my lens collection since it came out I originally used it on my 7D, Since then I moved to FF but still have my little M5, This lens combined with the Viltrox speed booster gives me a f1.2 18-35, I often consider selling it but it's such a great lens I can't bring myself to do it
this is one of the most classic lenses i’ve never owned i recently had a videographer film something for me & he had this glued to a black magic camera the results were lovely ✨
@@znub206 I hopefully get my R7 tomorrow, I grew up with a 500D so the improvements are a bit staggering. It will be interesting to feel the difference between the R7 and R10 compared to the leap from the 500D.
Thanks for revisiting this one. Did get it for my 90D and also am still satisfied to is it on my R7, for Video. Have not found a good alternative yet to be honest, well, at least not for the price. Would love to see an update, but currently canon is blocking other companies for RF mount. Have a nice weekend, cheers.
Huh, this was very well timed, Chris. I was just about to sell mine after moving to full-frame a year ago. In fact, I just rewatched your original review yesterday, and I did some test shots today. To be honest, I never understood why this lens was so hyped. It always looked kind of soft to me, even after I spent a whole day on calibrating the autofocus. In video, I always heard the focus motor, unless I used a lavalier microphone. In retrospect, part of my experience seems to be a consequence of mounting it on a 90D, which also has a 32.5MP sensor.
Just bought this for canon c100 mkii. When using clog no joke....... Take picture in raw looks exactly same as video with the lens. Very sharp lens. I used canon 3ti raw and compared video on c100 mkii and sat back and said to myself when photos can match video you got something special. This lens when set right with correct exposure this lens is great. By the way quiet with continuous af in c100 mkii.
I've owed this lens for 8 years now and will never get rid of it. Moved from Canon systems to Fuji and via the Fringer Pro adapter this works just perfectly, as well as native lenses, on my Fujifilm X-H2 with it's 40MP sensor. Yes, at 100% zoom you can see it's slightly softer than the very best of the best Fuji primes but the Sigma 18-35mm is still sharper than 99% of other lenses out there. It's incredible and always been known to compete with primes. More than capable for 4k/6k/8k video work. Buy it used and you won't be disappointed!
Hello there! I have been considering getting this Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 for my X-T5 with adapter for photography. Perhaps do you have a gallery with sample images taken with your X-H2 and this lens? There are little to no videos of these old Sigma EF lenses adapted onto modern Fuji bodies.
Nice little sneaky photo of Korea at 4:45, I was there from August 29th to the 12th of October with the wife. Drove 4500km, Suwon, Jeonju, Busan, Sokcho, back over to Seoul and back home to Suwon. I took a nice 240mp pixel shift photo of Kaesong North Korea in the DMZ with my Riv haha. Love your reviews as always Chris!
Heard a lot about this one! I've moved on to full frame but it seems like it is still good (for video at least). Very cool. However, I'd still also love to see a Tamron 17-28 2.8 review, can't imagine that hasn't popped up in the comments a lot!
I have both lenses and I use for video with my a7iv the sigma have that 3d pop like the 55 1.8 from zeiss and the af works great not like the new lenses like the tamron but it can keep the subject. It struggle a bit with low contrast situations .
@@christopherfrost the thing about tamron 17-50 f2.8 VC is that it's pretty bad wide open, however when stopped down it is on par or better that the sigma 17-50, which is better wide open and thus generally liked more than the Tamron. It would be lovely to see the VR version of tamron 17-50 retested, since it might be the best budget option for those in need for maximum sharpness and those ready to stop down for that
@@sunlbx but the sigma is not much more expensive, at max 100$ more than the tamron, so why not just get the sigma which has better sharpness at that wide aperture? and the sharpness stopped down of the tamron is not better than the sigma
Nice review as always, I’m using it with my SD Quattro and Quattro H with their über demanding Foveon sensors and it’s razor sharp, guess at the time Sigma really optimized its design for those cameras.
It's a fascinating lens. I originally had it on my 90d, then used it a bit on my R7. Tried it for the first time on the R6 Mark II yesterday (it automatically put it into crop mode). I need to pull out my old Rebel XT and see how it looks on it! :)
Can you still put the R6 II back into full frame with this lens attached? Canon forces APS-C lenses into crop mode but previously some Sigma DC lenses "escaped" this and could still be used on full frame.
@@synura8086 Tried it on the R6 Mark II and it forced crop mode. One thing to consider though is I have a faint memory of reading that it might be controlled by the lens firmware meaning an older firmware on the lens might give you that option. Could be worth a try. Mine is relatively new and I do not have the lens dock so not something I can test.
@@NobleEndeavours123 Thanks for your reply! Now that you mention it, I faintly remember people saying that newer firmware locked the Sigma lenses into the Canon forced crop mode. It's a shame for some special applications, like using cheap APS-C ultrawide lenses or reversed lenses on full frame.
@Noble how do you find the autofocus compares between mirrorless and DSLR for photos (through the view finder)? I'm running an 80D and whilst the 18-35 (and 50-100 Art) helped me secure some paid work, the DSLR autofocus misses regularly (even with countless firmware adjustments I've made with the USB dock). Given mirrorless cameras use a different autofocus system than DSLR, I'm hoping that an R7 will be a cheaper upgrade path than also having to replace my two Art lenses.
Aaaah ! Finally now we have this review. Hats off to you Chris. However slightly disappointed with the sharpness of lens on R7. But at the end it is what it is. Please review R7 with the Sigma 50-100mm also some day. Thanks a bunch. Highly appreciated. Love from India. TC
On the tests, did you use electronic or mechanical shutter on the resolution charts? I notice some possible shutter shock at slower speeds with mechanical.
I have the lens for years now and use it on Canon 90D ; same sensor as R7, and I mean it performs far, far better than what you have demonstrated here...surprising!
A great lens i had for quite some time on my 9 year old D5300. On the 24MP sensor image quality was very good wide open to pretty fantastic at F2.8. Especially for astrophotography a real gem as it shows very little smearing. I was only let down by it's autofocussing speed. At newer cameras it probably a lot better but on my old cam it was often quite slow and missed focus here and there. On the used market the price is also a lot lower. It can be had for under 400 Euros in good condition. The last time i looked i saw even someone selling it for 320 Euros!
I’m awaiting delivery of this lens for my R7 so this video helps me ground-truth my expectations. I’ve only been exploring the mirrorless world for about 6 months so I think the user will be tested more than the lens in my case. Thanks for the in-depth review!
Thanks for your lovely videos! I really appreciate your efforts to bring us so nice and standardised revies! Do these results concern also to canon eos 90d?
Should I buy the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8? I'm really thinking of buying one. Your comments will confirm my answer. I have the Canon 90D (32.5MP) and Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L and I want to add a lens that covers wider angles. Do you have other recommendations or is that the best lens for APC-S sensors like the 90Ds. It's the largest aperture lens that I know and the build quality/design looks lovely. I love how it looks! I would love to hear some of your opinions/answers! :)
I first tested this lens on a Nikon D90 that I used with a 50mm f1.8D, which was already a really sharp lens. I couldn't believe how sharp it was, I still think about going back to apsc just to use this lens again, but this time with a Canon 70D or something like that for video making.
Hello! With these results, does it mean that the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 performs "better" on a lower MP camera? I have a Canon SL3 (250D) and that Sigma lens. If I get the R7, would I get objectively worse performance? Or would it be the same unless I zoom in too much?
It’s more that you would be leaving some of the canon r7’s performance on the table. Basically you’d be getting a 20-24MP quality image from a 32MP camera, which may or may not be what you want
be nice to see sigma fill in the ƒ1.8 zoom gap between the 18-35mm and 50-100mm first, thats a lens i've been wanting for a long time, 24mm/35mm-50mm ƒ1.8 one of the reasons i stuck with the M50, at 24mp its good enough, going to a 32mp+ i wonder how many of my existing ef ef/s lenses would cope with a higher grade sensor lol
Sweet, I just go this for my r7. Shutter shock is a big issues on this camera. Only in electronic i get perfect sharp shots, or if i use above 1/200 shutter speed in mechanical. Should make more videos about the shutter shock on the r7.
How do you like that lens/camera combo? Chris eluded to the R7 being too pixel hungry for this lens, but I’m curious to hear your opinion as I’m in the market for a fast wide angle zoom for my R7. Thanks!
I have a love-hate relationship with it. It's super heavy, but it's also unique for what it is. Beautiful rendering, super fast, internal zoom, and actual *real* manual focus for video (instead of focus by wire). But you also have the option for decent AF when you want it. Haven't been able to bring myself to sell it.
i really doesn't care about weight of lenses, probably because ive been working photo journalism over 4 years with heavy dslr L lenses and FF bodies, so when i was invited to work in a wedding they gave me an 80D with a 18-35, including the grip. That was like a normal combo for me in terms of weight, but a revelation of my new favorite lens so far. i bought the lens last year ❤️.
@@pabloalvaradolopez3941 I used to shoot with a 5D + 70-200 f2.8 frequently and didn't have any problems. But things change haha. Especially dabbling in MFT, then seeing things like the Sigma 18-50 f2.8. For me, it's getting harder to justify the extra weight (unless it's needed for sports, etc). These small lenses and bodies are putting out excellent quality. Sure, I use the 18-35 for "serious" jobs, but for lower key stuff, I don't reach for it as much.
Thank you for all your thorough, well organized lens reviews, Chris, but this time it's not clear whether you recommend this lens for Canon r7 or not. I'm pretty satisfied with my Canon 17-55mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f4 is usm, both of which I think are less sharp than the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 that you just reviewed. Am I wrong? Are there other parameters we should consider as well?
I am currently looking in to this lens and all other reviews I’ve seen are excellent or above and wonder if your copy isn’t a good sample variant given the softness you experienced on the edges
Yes, the 32.5 mp sensor is indeed a "beast" as far as gobbling up lenses, as Christopher says. I got tired of waiting for the next "7" iteration and bought an M6 Mkii three years ago. I still love this camera, BTW, which remains extremely underrated. With the right lenses, the cropping for distance and macro work is amazing because of the sensor, and the size and weight are wonderful. I still have the 18-35 reviewed here because there really is no other comparable low-light zoom option. I would be very interested in knowing from Christopher, either posted here or in a video, which lenses he has found that do live up to the demands of the 32.5 mp sensor.
Currently really sharp on R7 are new RF L lenses like 70-200 (4 and 2.8), 135 1.8, 50 1.2, 16-35 4, 15-30 2.8 and 28-70 2.8. Old L lenses just suck on R7 (tried 70-200 2.8 non IS, 16-35 2.8 and 85 1.2. Quite new 16-35 F4 is really good, maybe newest ones like 70-200 2.8 III or 400 f4 DO could perform well too)
I owned a R7 for a short while, but sold it back because I couldn't get on with it, though it did work well with my 18-35 sigma, there was a strange vignetting with my sigma 35mm 1.4 full frame lens which I can't explain wondered if anyone else has come across this
Really excellent review, Chris. I've often considered getting this adapted for my X-T4, but having seen your results I might keep my eye out for the XF 16-55 instead.
I would say on the 26mp sensor, the softness will be far less of an issue. The 16-55 is great, but doesn't come close in terms of apertures, I'd recommend you go for some primes instead, if primes are workable for you. Viltrox make a good set that Chris has tested.
My first mirrorless camera was a Panasonic GH4 and then a GH5. I remember it was popular with some to use the Sigma 18-35mm on those cameras with a Metabones Speedbooster for general purpose video work and often if you asked what a good standard zoom lens would be to use on the GH4 or GH5 for video, at least one person would suggest the Sigma and a Speedbooster. I have never went down that path and have mostly stuck to native MFT lenses.
I see a lot of complaints about this lenses and comparisons mounted in other cameras... But it gets very confusing for R7 owners whether to buy it or not. So, what other better options we have instead this lenses considering all aspects like the price?
I heard that with this lens you have to disable the R7 internal stabilisation, otherwise you have serious problems with the sensor. Do you have this problem too ?
This is why Chris Frost is the one to listen to... because others have been praising this lens in very recent videos. For Canon R7 owners, these are setting people up to wash their money through the toilet. Thanks for the save, Chris. This is why I pay for your content, keep it up!
On the R7, specifically a zoom lens for APS-C only, no. Unfortunately. As Dustin Abbott said: a great camera, no good lenses. I bought the R7 to replace my broken 40D before the R8 came out. I was underwhelmed with the picture quality because the 32.5 Mpix is so demanding on lenses and the sensor needs at least f/3.5 to focus properly with AF. The Sigma tested here is a big mama and in my opinion not worth the bother if its IQ is anything less than perfect, corner to corner - it is a wide angle after all. I own one lens that is awesome on the R7: the RF 28mm f/2.8 pancake. It is a Full Frame, but very compact. It can resolve more detail than the 83 Mpix FF equivalent resolution and it is bright enough to have the R7 nail AF. The others I have can't cut it on the R7. The RF-S 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM is the best of the Canon APS-C bunch, but it struggles to nail autofocus, it is too dark. I have seen a whole flood of youtube videos, also by professional birders, that all say the same thing: the R7 cannot AF reliably if the light is anything but bright and ideal. My copy of the old Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM outperforms my copy of the 18-150 by a landslide. But in the corners it is weak. And the AF broke, it is erratic. My copy of the Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L IS USM Mark I is a great lens, but on the R7 it is weak. Not any sharper than the RF-S 18-150 and also too dark for reliable AF when shooting indoors. Most images I make with that combo are disappointing. James Reader confirms the R7 is not very good with portraits. The Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM is way too dark for the R7. I traded in my old Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM for it and that was a mistake. The 100-400 is much sharper, but with the f/4 of the EF, the R7 at least focused with the EF once in a while. It misses focus all the time with the RF 100-400. That is why - instead of buying incredibly expensive glass like the Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM - I went for another body, the Full Frame R8. That was the right call. I am very happy I made that call. It is less demanding of lens resolution, has much better dynamic range, nails AF every time with any lens. For that money, all my lenses now can shine again. Especially the EF 24-105 f/4 L IS USM Mark I with portraits, it is great. And combined with the 28mm pancake a dream combo for street photography. The R7 is a problematic camera. But I did not sell it. IF you nail focus, it can make great wildlife images. With the 28 pancake for street, it takes wonderful images. So I'm waiting for the right APS-C lens. The Sigma tested here isn't the one. And the new SIGMA 18-50mm F/2.8 DC DN doesn't really cut it either on sharpness. It doesn't do much better than Canon's RF-S 18-45mm F/4.5-6.3 IS STM in the sharpness department and that lens is a lemon. The f/2.8 will make the R7 nail AF, so it is very tempting. But no. Because I have the R8 with the EF 24-105 for that work. The R7 needs a very bright and very sharp APS-C zoom, like a 24-200 f/2.8 and I doubt it will ever see daylight because there is not much of a market for it.
@@PhilippeDHooghe Got you. But some of us can’t switch to another camera. It’s just a hobby for me so my best option is to look for the best low light lenses in a budget and keep my R7. I heard the Canon RF 24mm 1.8f it’s a better option than the Sigma one for the R7 because of the crop factor the worst aspects of the lens are not present. It ends to be a 38mm in the sensor so it’s a versatile fixed focal length. For some 35mm is their favorite for photography. So including primes, not matter if they are Full frame, you know better options that the sigma lens for R7 for low light?
The RF 28mm f/2.8 pancake is fabulous value. I understand Canon is announcing new lenses soon. From what I gather, they won't be the cheap ones. But at the same time, Sigma may also be announcing some new lenses. Do you know the website of "Ordinary Filmmaker"? You can keep busy for hours watching him and speculating ... I don't, but once in a while it is good to check with him what Canon Rumours has listed.
I bought the sigma 17-50mm 2.8 lens for my r7 before i ended up buying the sigma 18-35mm 1.8, tbh i loved the sigma 17-50mm 2.8 but the only issue i had with it was the zoom ring and focus ring! For video that lens sucked just bevause it wasnt smooth at all but for pics it was crazy sharp and just as good! Also i had got it for 270 whereas i payed 490 for the sigma 18-35 but after getting my hands on the lens, i can say that its worth the extra money for sure, the build quality is next level and i dont need ibis inside the sigma 17-50mm because of the r7s built in ibis
What will the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art be like on the Canon R7? this 18-35mm has not convinced me to upgrade to R7 from 90D, nor get this lens. On the 90D I do like 50mm onwards tho, so would be nice to see how the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art does on the R7, as the 90D also has 32.5MP .. Would the picture quality differ from R7 to 90D, given their high MP sensors are same / similar??
Thank you very much for this video, I was interested in this lense , so I wanted to know if you have any alternative lenses which keep up with the 32.5MP for my 90D ?
The best lens review channel, hands down I have a question thu Does this mean that (in general) I will get sharper/higher resolution images with a lower resolution sensor if the lens resolving power can't handle the higher resolution? Thanks in advance, Keep up the good work 🤝
That Canon sensor is very very hard on lenses. I had the M6 Mark ii and sold it due to issues getting super sharp images, im guessing the R7 is the same sensor.
Can you do a review on the Sigma 85mm f1.4 dg hsm (non Art version) for Canon EF mount please? I can't find any review of this lens out there. Thank you !!!
Which glass is sharper on 32.5 mp ASPC cameras (90d for example): Sigma 18-35 1.8 art or Canon 16-35 2.8 III ? I've tried to find any tests on youtube, but noone did that.
It is great lens for video. Can be adapt to many systems. And sharp enough for 4k. And even just stop down to f2.0 produce better image at 24-35mm range.
What do you mean like sharp enough for 4k? I was thinking to get sigma 18-50 2.8 for video work only. I thought that it doesn't matter too much while filming. Could you please expand 🙏
Great re-test and surely the trick is to match the resolution of the lens to that of the sensor. If you have this lens on your 12-24 sensor the lens can even at full aperture give you great results on an A3 print. At higher resolution sensors it struggles but on an A3 print at a normal viewing distance (say 1.5-2x the diagonal ) I doubt anyone will be able to distinguish any difference. All you need to bear in mind is that having really high resolution sensors requires very expensive lenses and nobody will notice any difference.(forget the argument about cropping! If that matters why buy a zoom which does it for you?)
I own and love this lens (as well as the Sigma 30mm APC-S) but now have a full frame 6R and a Sigma 24-70 EF so I guess they are redundant (since they are the full frame equivalent of 28.8mm - 56mm, and 48mm). I used them with my Canon 7D, which produced such drastically better images and vid, it made me realize how lousy the kit lens was. But I love the 18-35mm SO MUCH that I'd almost never sell it even so!
Hello Christopher! Thanks as always for the review. One question though. Why do you say it will work for 4k video recording if the sharpness is not so good on the photos? Are "just good" lenses enough for video? I´m always checking your videos for my selection of lenses, but I do just video, maybe I shouldn´t be so picky ... ? thanks !!
Essentially yes. 4K involves far less pixels than stills at 32mp. As such, there isn't actually enough pixels to see the softness, no matter how much you drop in.
thanks ! i was considering based on the old review , this lens for my 90D which is a 32.5 Mp as well , so this review came just on time - and saved me a lot of frustration... for me the results you showed in this review are not good enough - I'm locking for a 2.8 standard zoom for this demanding sensor. the ef 24-70L 2.8 mkii is great but expensive and not wide enough and does mot have IS - so it will be interesting to see a review about an affordable 2.8 lens with EF/EFS mount that the 32.5 Mp sensor will not kill it .
I´m pretty happy using my 24mm f2.8 pancake lens on my 90D. It's sharp enough for me. I´m not a pixel peeper, and I´m of the opinion that razor sharpness is overrated. This lens somehow just seems to produce great photos.
@@am1rb In that case, you might consider the Tamron 24 - 70 f2.8, which has had good reviews and is much cheaper, and it has image stabilization, though may not be wide enough for you. I don't know of any more options without spending big bucks.
@@goldenfrog6EsCoSes i have the Sigma dg 18-50 f2.8 macro , i used it many years but it started to doing me problems , the zoom ring and focus ring are touching on each other , so the friction is huge and the auto focus simply fails or miss badly .. i can use it in manual focus but it does not worth the effort i have better lenses (e.g 24-105 is usm f4 L) Thanks for your input .
Have you done a review wit the Canon R7/R10 with the Sigma 35mm 1.4? I can’t find any videos on it. Do you have any or can provide a link so I can see a review??
What kind of documentary was that in Korea? The Moonies maybe? I would love to see that. That should be fascinating. I’m sure you did as good of a job with the documentary as you do with lens reviews. Shining a light on the good and exposing the bad.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Please keep reviewing older canon EF lenses that needs updating! Us canon users don't have many lens options currently, so lenses like the Sigma Art EF lenses and stuff would be awesome for us!
I second this ✊🏽✊🏽✊🏽✊🏽
Christopher needs to review more Nikon F mount lenses too!
Yes, this is a necessity!!!❤😅
I agree. I’d love to see a new version for mirrorless cameras. I’d love this on the Fuji XH2S open gate.
Would be super nice for canon to open up for third party lenses. I believe one day sigma will manufacture a version for mirrorless, hopefully for all brands.
I don't think I've ever bought a lens without first watching your reviews. You've done a landmark job of documenting lens performance, and saved a many of us a lot of work and frustration. Thank you.
One comment on this video, though: Unless two or more items in the image chain have nearly equal resolution, the end resolution of the system will be almost completely determined by the lowest resolution item in the chain. Camera lens>sensor>monitor screen>human eye, for example. If a lens provides excellent resolution at, for example, 20 Mpixels, putting the same lens on a 50 Mpixel camera cannot produce lower resolution.
So I think I disagree with your statement that your high resolution sensor degrades the sharpness of the lens.
yep, this lens is still great IMHO!
I don't use to comment on videos and the very few comments I made was to ask for this, some time ago. I was surprised and really happy when I saw this review as first recommended video! Thank you, Chris! And continue these amazing reviews (I watch every single one of them)! Cheers
I would love to see a version 2 of this lens from Sigma
If Sigma made a mark ii for mirrorless, i'll not hesitate to buy it and continue using apsc
And the outgoing version actually has full frame coverage from 27 mm to 35 mm so I would really love to see an updated version that tries to see how much full frame coverage they can get across that entire range.
I’d buy an APSC camera from any brand if sigma release a Mk ii
@@portraitblake I know right!
i dunno why they haven't. for aps-c it's definitely doable, and Tamron released a 35-150 f2-2.8, f2 through 85, then 2.8 to 150... i guess folks wanna sell as many lesser lenses as they can before bringing out stuff that will kill sales of older designs.
I really miss mine. I sold it when I upgraded to full frame. Really wish I had kept it as it's still useful for crop video options or used on my M50 I picked up now.
I've had one of these sitting in my lens collection since it came out I originally used it on my 7D, Since then I moved to FF but still have my little M5, This lens combined with the Viltrox speed booster gives me a f1.2 18-35, I often consider selling it but it's such a great lens I can't bring myself to do it
this is one of the most classic lenses i’ve never owned i recently had a videographer film something for me & he had this glued to a black magic camera the results were lovely ✨
I just got it and an R10 (R7 on back order). It's amazing.
@@derain95 damn makes me wanna go out & grab it 🔥 i’m not gone lie
@@SunnySoCal I can give you some uncompressed test pics/video if you want to be sure
@@derain95 It's beautiful on the R7, also. Tack sharp, autofocuses greatly, and with cLog3 it's perfect.
@@znub206 I hopefully get my R7 tomorrow, I grew up with a 500D so the improvements are a bit staggering. It will be interesting to feel the difference between the R7 and R10 compared to the leap from the 500D.
Thanks for revisiting this one. Did get it for my 90D and also am still satisfied to is it on my R7, for Video. Have not found a good alternative yet to be honest, well, at least not for the price. Would love to see an update, but currently canon is blocking other companies for RF mount. Have a nice weekend, cheers.
Huh, this was very well timed, Chris. I was just about to sell mine after moving to full-frame a year ago. In fact, I just rewatched your original review yesterday, and I did some test shots today. To be honest, I never understood why this lens was so hyped. It always looked kind of soft to me, even after I spent a whole day on calibrating the autofocus. In video, I always heard the focus motor, unless I used a lavalier microphone. In retrospect, part of my experience seems to be a consequence of mounting it on a 90D, which also has a 32.5MP sensor.
Just bought this for canon c100 mkii. When using clog no joke....... Take picture in raw looks exactly same as video with the lens. Very sharp lens. I used canon 3ti raw and compared video on c100 mkii and sat back and said to myself when photos can match video you got something special. This lens when set right with correct exposure this lens is great. By the way quiet with continuous af in c100 mkii.
Best lens reviews 👍👌🤘
For me and most people on youtube you are no.1
Great great job!!
Greetings from Slovenia 🇸🇮
I've owed this lens for 8 years now and will never get rid of it. Moved from Canon systems to Fuji and via the Fringer Pro adapter this works just perfectly, as well as native lenses, on my Fujifilm X-H2 with it's 40MP sensor. Yes, at 100% zoom you can see it's slightly softer than the very best of the best Fuji primes but the Sigma 18-35mm is still sharper than 99% of other lenses out there. It's incredible and always been known to compete with primes. More than capable for 4k/6k/8k video work. Buy it used and you won't be disappointed!
Hello there! I have been considering getting this Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 for my X-T5 with adapter for photography.
Perhaps do you have a gallery with sample images taken with your X-H2 and this lens?
There are little to no videos of these old Sigma EF lenses adapted onto modern Fuji bodies.
Hey, can you give me the link for that adapter? Just bought the xh2 and considering buying the Sigma 18-35mm, would be appreciated.
Nice little sneaky photo of Korea at 4:45, I was there from August 29th to the 12th of October with the wife. Drove 4500km, Suwon, Jeonju, Busan, Sokcho, back over to Seoul and back home to Suwon. I took a nice 240mp pixel shift photo of Kaesong North Korea in the DMZ with my Riv haha.
Love your reviews as always Chris!
Heard a lot about this one! I've moved on to full frame but it seems like it is still good (for video at least). Very cool. However, I'd still also love to see a Tamron 17-28 2.8 review, can't imagine that hasn't popped up in the comments a lot!
It's weird he didn't make a review for that lens
Tamron still haven't got round to loaning me that one, and the hire companies don't seem to have it :-(
I have both lenses and I use for video with my a7iv the sigma have that 3d pop like the 55 1.8 from zeiss and the af works great not like the new lenses like the tamron but it can keep the subject. It struggle a bit with low contrast situations .
@@christopherfrost the thing about tamron 17-50 f2.8 VC is that it's pretty bad wide open, however when stopped down it is on par or better that the sigma 17-50, which is better wide open and thus generally liked more than the Tamron.
It would be lovely to see the VR version of tamron 17-50 retested, since it might be the best budget option for those in need for maximum sharpness and those ready to stop down for that
@@sunlbx but the sigma is not much more expensive, at max 100$ more than the tamron, so why not just get the sigma which has better sharpness at that wide aperture? and the sharpness stopped down of the tamron is not better than the sigma
Nice review as always, I’m using it with my SD Quattro and Quattro H with their über demanding Foveon sensors and it’s razor sharp, guess at the time Sigma really optimized its design for those cameras.
My dude! Thanks 👍. I've been wanting this video for so long :)
It's a fascinating lens. I originally had it on my 90d, then used it a bit on my R7. Tried it for the first time on the R6 Mark II yesterday (it automatically put it into crop mode). I need to pull out my old Rebel XT and see how it looks on it! :)
Can you still put the R6 II back into full frame with this lens attached? Canon forces APS-C lenses into crop mode but previously some Sigma DC lenses "escaped" this and could still be used on full frame.
@@synura8086 Tried it on the R6 Mark II and it forced crop mode. One thing to consider though is I have a faint memory of reading that it might be controlled by the lens firmware meaning an older firmware on the lens might give you that option. Could be worth a try. Mine is relatively new and I do not have the lens dock so not something I can test.
@@NobleEndeavours123 Thanks for your reply! Now that you mention it, I faintly remember people saying that newer firmware locked the Sigma lenses into the Canon forced crop mode. It's a shame for some special applications, like using cheap APS-C ultrawide lenses or reversed lenses on full frame.
@Noble how do you find the autofocus compares between mirrorless and DSLR for photos (through the view finder)? I'm running an 80D and whilst the 18-35 (and 50-100 Art) helped me secure some paid work, the DSLR autofocus misses regularly (even with countless firmware adjustments I've made with the USB dock). Given mirrorless cameras use a different autofocus system than DSLR, I'm hoping that an R7 will be a cheaper upgrade path than also having to replace my two Art lenses.
How did it do on the 90D? I´m thinking about buying this lens. I've heard bad things about the autofocus, though.
I have this on my very outdated (now) canon 80d and this is the lens I use about 80% of the time!
Oh no! Don’t call it outdated! It’s still a wonderful camera! Just did a wedding with mine this summer! It made my career xD (super biased btw) ❤
Could you also retest the 50-100mm F1.8?
Can you make a video about the Sigma 50-100mm lens on a Canon R7 camera?
Aaaah ! Finally now we have this review. Hats off to you Chris. However slightly disappointed with the sharpness of lens on R7. But at the end it is what it is. Please review R7 with the Sigma 50-100mm also some day.
Thanks a bunch. Highly appreciated. Love from India. TC
On the tests, did you use electronic or mechanical shutter on the resolution charts? I notice some possible shutter shock at slower speeds with mechanical.
I have the lens for years now and use it on Canon 90D ; same sensor as R7, and I mean it performs far, far better than what you have demonstrated here...surprising!
Def getting this lens
Exactly the review I was looking for. Thank you very much!! 👌😎
Why is this flickering when autofocusing at 4:10 ? Is it normal ? does all mirrorless do that?
Bought this lens during last year's Black Friday sale. The lens is a tank!
A great lens i had for quite some time on my 9 year old D5300. On the 24MP sensor image quality was very good wide open to pretty fantastic at F2.8. Especially for astrophotography a real gem as it shows very little smearing. I was only let down by it's autofocussing speed. At newer cameras it probably a lot better but on my old cam it was often quite slow and missed focus here and there. On the used market the price is also a lot lower. It can be had for under 400 Euros in good condition. The last time i looked i saw even someone selling it for 320 Euros!
I’m awaiting delivery of this lens for my R7 so this video helps me ground-truth my expectations. I’ve only been exploring the mirrorless world for about 6 months so I think the user will be tested more than the lens in my case. Thanks for the in-depth review!
How is it working out?
Thanks for your lovely videos! I really appreciate your efforts to bring us so nice and standardised revies! Do these results concern also to canon eos 90d?
Seeing as the 90d has the same amount of megapixels and the same size sensor it definitely will
Should I buy the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8?
I'm really thinking of buying one.
Your comments will confirm my answer.
I have the Canon 90D (32.5MP) and
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L and I
want to add a lens that covers wider angles.
Do you have other recommendations or is that the best lens for APC-S sensors like the 90Ds.
It's the largest aperture lens that I know and the build quality/design looks lovely.
I love how it looks!
I would love to hear some of your opinions/answers! :)
I first tested this lens on a Nikon D90 that I used with a 50mm f1.8D, which was already a really sharp lens. I couldn't believe how sharp it was, I still think about going back to apsc just to use this lens again, but this time with a Canon 70D or something like that for video making.
Hello!
With these results, does it mean that the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 performs "better" on a lower MP camera? I have a Canon SL3 (250D) and that Sigma lens. If I get the R7, would I get objectively worse performance? Or would it be the same unless I zoom in too much?
It’s more that you would be leaving some of the canon r7’s performance on the table. Basically you’d be getting a 20-24MP quality image from a 32MP camera, which may or may not be what you want
@@jmanig76 oh I see. Well I don't really need that many MPs so that wouldn't be an issue for me. Thanks!
Hello. Should I pick this over an RF 35mm lens if I'm looking for a mix of portraits and landscapes? Image quality wise which one is better?
Would love to see the 50-100 retested for the R7 too. If possible. Thanks Chris!
be nice to see sigma fill in the ƒ1.8 zoom gap between the 18-35mm and 50-100mm first, thats a lens i've been wanting for a long time, 24mm/35mm-50mm ƒ1.8
one of the reasons i stuck with the M50, at 24mp its good enough, going to a 32mp+ i wonder how many of my existing ef ef/s lenses would cope with a higher grade sensor lol
Legendary! It is IMHO simply still the best lens for APS-C sensors. And it's even better on the Canon R7 with IBIS.
Sweet, I just go this for my r7. Shutter shock is a big issues on this camera. Only in electronic i get perfect sharp shots, or if i use above 1/200 shutter speed in mechanical. Should make more videos about the shutter shock on the r7.
How do you like that lens/camera combo? Chris eluded to the R7 being too pixel hungry for this lens, but I’m curious to hear your opinion as I’m in the market for a fast wide angle zoom for my R7. Thanks!
@anthonycox8619 it's sharp wide open and razor sharp closed down a bit.
09:06 Sir Were you at seoul Korea?
I have this lens on my Canon 90D. Previously had it on a 70D and it still
holds up as when got brand new years ago. Won’t ever get rid of it
I just sold this chunky boy. God it was such a heavy lens, just went with fast prime lenses to save weight.
I have a love-hate relationship with it. It's super heavy, but it's also unique for what it is. Beautiful rendering, super fast, internal zoom, and actual *real* manual focus for video (instead of focus by wire). But you also have the option for decent AF when you want it. Haven't been able to bring myself to sell it.
if u are film or video pros,this is not heavy at all, even if u are pro photographer, you realise a sigma 50 1.4 is heavier than this
i really doesn't care about weight of lenses, probably because ive been working photo journalism over 4 years with heavy dslr L lenses and FF bodies, so when i was invited to work in a wedding they gave me an 80D with a 18-35, including the grip. That was like a normal combo for me in terms of weight, but a revelation of my new favorite lens so far. i bought the lens last year ❤️.
@@pabloalvaradolopez3941 I used to shoot with a 5D + 70-200 f2.8 frequently and didn't have any problems. But things change haha. Especially dabbling in MFT, then seeing things like the Sigma 18-50 f2.8. For me, it's getting harder to justify the extra weight (unless it's needed for sports, etc). These small lenses and bodies are putting out excellent quality. Sure, I use the 18-35 for "serious" jobs, but for lower key stuff, I don't reach for it as much.
I just bought a "light fast" prime. A Sigma 40mm 1.4 with only 1.2 kilo.
Thanks so much for retesting this lens on the R7.
Thank you for all your thorough, well organized lens reviews, Chris, but this time it's not clear whether you recommend this lens for Canon r7 or not. I'm pretty satisfied with my Canon 17-55mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f4 is usm, both of which I think are less sharp than the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 that you just reviewed. Am I wrong? Are there other parameters we should consider as well?
I am currently looking in to this lens and all other reviews I’ve seen are excellent or above and wonder if your copy isn’t a good sample variant given the softness you experienced on the edges
I still miss my howdy everyone :(
Yes, the 32.5 mp sensor is indeed a "beast" as far as gobbling up lenses, as Christopher says. I got tired of waiting for the next "7" iteration and bought an M6 Mkii three years ago. I still love this camera, BTW, which remains extremely underrated. With the right lenses, the cropping for distance and macro work is amazing because of the sensor, and the size and weight are wonderful. I still have the 18-35 reviewed here because there really is no other comparable low-light zoom option. I would be very interested in knowing from Christopher, either posted here or in a video, which lenses he has found that do live up to the demands of the 32.5 mp sensor.
Currently really sharp on R7 are new RF L lenses like 70-200 (4 and 2.8), 135 1.8, 50 1.2, 16-35 4, 15-30 2.8 and 28-70 2.8. Old L lenses just suck on R7 (tried 70-200 2.8 non IS, 16-35 2.8 and 85 1.2. Quite new 16-35 F4 is really good, maybe newest ones like 70-200 2.8 III or 400 f4 DO could perform well too)
@@groundhoppingwlkp3622would you recommend this lens though for the price?
Will be buying this in monthly payments soon, it'll be my first proper cine lens, glad to see it performs well!
Brilliant review as always! Thanks!
I wish they would come out with a version 2 for mirrorless, like they did with the 85mm 1.4
Ojala puedas hacer una prueba actualizada del Sigma 17-50mm f2.8
I owned a R7 for a short while, but sold it back because I couldn't get on with it, though it did work well with my 18-35 sigma, there was a strange vignetting with my sigma 35mm 1.4 full frame lens which I can't explain wondered if anyone else has come across this
Really excellent review, Chris. I've often considered getting this adapted for my X-T4, but having seen your results I might keep my eye out for the XF 16-55 instead.
I've been using a Finger Pro II with all my Sigma lenses (10-20, 18-35, 50-100, 70-200 and 150-600c) with amazing results
@@RobertWhetton moreso for photos? If so, I'm interested. How's the autofocus on the 18-35?
I would say on the 26mp sensor, the softness will be far less of an issue. The 16-55 is great, but doesn't come close in terms of apertures, I'd recommend you go for some primes instead, if primes are workable for you. Viltrox make a good set that Chris has tested.
My first mirrorless camera was a Panasonic GH4 and then a GH5. I remember it was popular with some to use the Sigma 18-35mm on those cameras with a Metabones Speedbooster for general purpose video work and often if you asked what a good standard zoom lens would be to use on the GH4 or GH5 for video, at least one person would suggest the Sigma and a Speedbooster. I have never went down that path and have mostly stuck to native MFT lenses.
I see a lot of complaints about this lenses and comparisons mounted in other cameras... But it gets very confusing for R7 owners whether to buy it or not.
So, what other better options we have instead this lenses considering all aspects like the price?
Love the content bro please review the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 and the r7
Hi can you also test the 50-100 f1.8 and 50-150 f2.8 on newer camera? Love to see how it will perform
I heard that with this lens you have to disable the R7 internal stabilisation, otherwise you have serious problems with the sensor. Do you have this problem too ?
Would like to see a test for the sigma 14-24 2.8 for dslr. Can’t seem to find it on your channel only the new mirrorless version.
you should use an 0,7x ef-r adapte ith a 16-35m f/2.8 the results ar great
Great stuff…wanted to see how this may work on the new mirrorless
This is why Chris Frost is the one to listen to... because others have been praising this lens in very recent videos. For Canon R7 owners, these are setting people up to wash their money through the toilet. Thanks for the save, Chris. This is why I pay for your content, keep it up!
you know a better alternative for r7 with great low light performance?
On the R7, specifically a zoom lens for APS-C only, no. Unfortunately. As Dustin Abbott said: a great camera, no good lenses. I bought the R7 to replace my broken 40D before the R8 came out. I was underwhelmed with the picture quality because the 32.5 Mpix is so demanding on lenses and the sensor needs at least f/3.5 to focus properly with AF. The Sigma tested here is a big mama and in my opinion not worth the bother if its IQ is anything less than perfect, corner to corner - it is a wide angle after all.
I own one lens that is awesome on the R7: the RF 28mm f/2.8 pancake. It is a Full Frame, but very compact. It can resolve more detail than the 83 Mpix FF equivalent resolution and it is bright enough to have the R7 nail AF.
The others I have can't cut it on the R7.
The RF-S 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM is the best of the Canon APS-C bunch, but it struggles to nail autofocus, it is too dark. I have seen a whole flood of youtube videos, also by professional birders, that all say the same thing: the R7 cannot AF reliably if the light is anything but bright and ideal.
My copy of the old Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM outperforms my copy of the 18-150 by a landslide. But in the corners it is weak. And the AF broke, it is erratic.
My copy of the Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L IS USM Mark I is a great lens, but on the R7 it is weak. Not any sharper than the RF-S 18-150 and also too dark for reliable AF when shooting indoors. Most images I make with that combo are disappointing. James Reader confirms the R7 is not very good with portraits.
The Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM is way too dark for the R7. I traded in my old Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM for it and that was a mistake. The 100-400 is much sharper, but with the f/4 of the EF, the R7 at least focused with the EF once in a while. It misses focus all the time with the RF 100-400.
That is why - instead of buying incredibly expensive glass like the Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM - I went for another body, the Full Frame R8. That was the right call. I am very happy I made that call. It is less demanding of lens resolution, has much better dynamic range, nails AF every time with any lens. For that money, all my lenses now can shine again. Especially the EF 24-105 f/4 L IS USM Mark I with portraits, it is great. And combined with the 28mm pancake a dream combo for street photography.
The R7 is a problematic camera. But I did not sell it. IF you nail focus, it can make great wildlife images. With the 28 pancake for street, it takes wonderful images. So I'm waiting for the right APS-C lens. The Sigma tested here isn't the one. And the new SIGMA 18-50mm F/2.8 DC DN doesn't really cut it either on sharpness. It doesn't do much better than Canon's RF-S 18-45mm F/4.5-6.3 IS STM in the sharpness department and that lens is a lemon. The f/2.8 will make the R7 nail AF, so it is very tempting. But no. Because I have the R8 with the EF 24-105 for that work.
The R7 needs a very bright and very sharp APS-C zoom, like a 24-200 f/2.8 and I doubt it will ever see daylight because there is not much of a market for it.
@@PhilippeDHooghe Got you. But some of us can’t switch to another camera. It’s just a hobby for me so my best option is to look for the best low light lenses in a budget and keep my R7.
I heard the Canon RF 24mm 1.8f it’s a better option than the Sigma one for the R7 because of the crop factor the worst aspects of the lens are not present. It ends to be a 38mm in the sensor so it’s a versatile fixed focal length. For some 35mm is their favorite for photography.
So including primes, not matter if they are Full frame, you know better options that the sigma lens for R7 for low light?
The RF 28mm f/2.8 pancake is fabulous value. I understand Canon is announcing new lenses soon. From what I gather, they won't be the cheap ones. But at the same time, Sigma may also be announcing some new lenses. Do you know the website of "Ordinary Filmmaker"? You can keep busy for hours watching him and speculating ... I don't, but once in a while it is good to check with him what Canon Rumours has listed.
@@PhilippeDHooghe thanks for the advice man!
I hope you can make a retake of the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 with this camera.
Would you please create a video showcasing/reviewing how well the Sigma 17-50mm F/2.8 EX DC OS HSM works on the same camera?
I bought the sigma 17-50mm 2.8 lens for my r7 before i ended up buying the sigma 18-35mm 1.8, tbh i loved the sigma 17-50mm 2.8 but the only issue i had with it was the zoom ring and focus ring! For video that lens sucked just bevause it wasnt smooth at all but for pics it was crazy sharp and just as good! Also i had got it for 270 whereas i payed 490 for the sigma 18-35 but after getting my hands on the lens, i can say that its worth the extra money for sure, the build quality is next level and i dont need ibis inside the sigma 17-50mm because of the r7s built in ibis
What will the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art be like on the Canon R7? this 18-35mm has not convinced me to upgrade to R7 from 90D, nor get this lens. On the 90D I do like 50mm onwards tho, so would be nice to see how the Sigma 50-100mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art does on the R7, as the 90D also has 32.5MP .. Would the picture quality differ from R7 to 90D, given their high MP sensors are same / similar??
sigma50-100 f1.8art is not sharp than old sigma 50-150 f2.8APO OS EX DC HSM
I suspect there is some copy variation in play here. The corner performance is quite shocking considering how big the image circle of this lens is.
Thank you very much for this video, I was interested in this lense , so I wanted to know if you have any alternative lenses which keep up with the 32.5MP for my 90D ?
Nice review i have Sony a7siii i want to buy This lens is there any disadvantage for full frame and video?
The best lens review channel, hands down
I have a question thu
Does this mean that (in general)
I will get sharper/higher resolution images with a lower resolution sensor if the lens resolving power can't handle the higher resolution?
Thanks in advance,
Keep up the good work 🤝
Excellent video 😮!
Is there an equivalent for Full Frame? Sony A7iii with MC 11 if needed.
That Canon sensor is very very hard on lenses. I had the M6 Mark ii and sold it due to issues getting super sharp images, im guessing the R7 is the same sensor.
Can you do a review on the Sigma 85mm f1.4 dg hsm (non Art version) for Canon EF mount please?
I can't find any review of this lens out there.
Thank you !!!
Hi Christopher, have you tried this lens on the R5 at all in crop mode for stills and/or video?
Sir, you still have photos from South Korea
I am glad to see them
Could you please test the sigma 35 mm 1.4 art or for that matter the 24 mm 1.4 art on the R7. I imagine they will be vey good?
Which glass is sharper on 32.5 mp ASPC cameras (90d for example): Sigma 18-35 1.8 art or Canon 16-35 2.8 III ? I've tried to find any tests on youtube, but noone did that.
thank God you made it . Well done
I have question my sigma 18-35 when in manual focus ring is very stiff? Is this is a problem or natural?
Can you please review sigma 50-150mm f/1.8 on canon eos r7?
I am looking buy if works fine.
Great video as always Chris. Can you test this lens on the R5 or R5c for both photos and video? Would be interestinng to see the performance
It is great lens for video. Can be adapt to many systems. And sharp enough for 4k. And even just stop down to f2.0 produce better image at 24-35mm range.
What do you mean like sharp enough for 4k? I was thinking to get sigma 18-50 2.8 for video work only. I thought that it doesn't matter too much while filming. Could you please expand 🙏
Great re-test and surely the trick is to match the resolution of the lens to that of the sensor. If you have this lens on your 12-24 sensor the lens can even at full aperture give you great results on an A3 print. At higher resolution sensors it struggles but on an A3 print at a normal viewing distance (say 1.5-2x the diagonal ) I doubt anyone will be able to distinguish any difference. All you need to bear in mind is that having really high resolution sensors requires very expensive lenses and nobody will notice any difference.(forget the argument about cropping! If that matters why buy a zoom which does it for you?)
had that lens on my nikon Z50 miss it badly these days
if they ever make a full frame version for nikon z i would get it in a heart beat
It's a heavy lens, especially on a 90d but it's sharp. The 90d also having a 32mp sensor would get the same results.
Any recommendations of lenses, for the Canon R7?
Preferably EF mount lenses. (Cheaper)
Looks really big on R7, like telephoto lens. I would be curious how big would be if redesigned in style of eg. new 18-50f2.8
I own and love this lens (as well as the Sigma 30mm APC-S) but now have a full frame 6R and a Sigma 24-70 EF so I guess they are redundant (since they are the full frame equivalent of 28.8mm - 56mm, and 48mm). I used them with my Canon 7D, which produced such drastically better images and vid, it made me realize how lousy the kit lens was. But I love the 18-35mm SO MUCH that I'd almost never sell it even so!
This lens and my 70-200 2.8 III are my favorites!!
Hello Christopher! Thanks as always for the review. One question though. Why do you say it will work for 4k video recording if the sharpness is not so good on the photos? Are "just good" lenses enough for video? I´m always checking your videos for my selection of lenses, but I do just video, maybe I shouldn´t be so picky ... ?
thanks !!
Essentially yes. 4K involves far less pixels than stills at 32mp. As such, there isn't actually enough pixels to see the softness, no matter how much you drop in.
This has been my go to lens on the R7, especially for video work
How is it for photography?, I do car photography and was considering this for my R7
thanks ! i was considering based on the old review , this lens for my 90D which is a 32.5 Mp as well , so this review came just on time - and saved me a lot of frustration... for me the results you showed in this review are not good enough - I'm locking for a 2.8 standard zoom for this demanding sensor. the ef 24-70L 2.8 mkii is great but expensive and not wide enough and does mot have IS - so it will be interesting to see a review about an affordable 2.8 lens with EF/EFS mount that the 32.5 Mp sensor will not kill it .
I´m pretty happy using my 24mm f2.8 pancake lens on my 90D. It's sharp enough for me. I´m not a pixel peeper, and I´m of the opinion that razor sharpness is overrated. This lens somehow just seems to produce great photos.
@@goldenfrog6EsCoSes i have the 24/2.8 stm - but i want a zoom .
@@am1rb In that case, you might consider the Tamron 24 - 70 f2.8, which has had good reviews and is much cheaper, and it has image stabilization, though may not be wide enough for you. I don't know of any more options without spending big bucks.
@@goldenfrog6EsCoSes i have the Sigma dg 18-50 f2.8 macro , i used it many years but it started to doing me problems , the zoom ring and focus ring are touching on each other , so the friction is huge and the auto focus simply fails or miss badly .. i can use it in manual focus but it does not worth the effort i have better lenses (e.g 24-105 is usm f4 L) Thanks for your input .
Have you done a review wit the Canon R7/R10 with the Sigma 35mm 1.4? I can’t find any videos on it. Do you have any or can provide a link so I can see a review??
Can you review the Canon rf 85mm f2 with Canon r7? Please 🙏 🥰🥰🥰
Im using it on Pentax where the IBIS helps with low light. Excellent lens.
How is the autofocus on the Pentax?
A 15-35mm f1.8 version of this would be a dream for E-mount
Using this on my R6 🙌🏾
Yesssss!!! Really waited for this but ended up grabbing a NikonF copy about 3 weeks ago for US$350
What kind of documentary was that in Korea? The Moonies maybe? I would love to see that. That should be fascinating. I’m sure you did as good of a job with the documentary as you do with lens reviews. Shining a light on the good and exposing the bad.
can you review the lensbaby twist 60?
What does it mean for a "this type of sensor has a habit of chewing up sharp lenses..."
isn't a sharp lens going to produce sharp on any sensor?