My most popular video of 2024 was a showdown between the (then) primary standard zoom options available on the Fuji X-mount platform – the Fuji XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS, XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR, and the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DN. My surprising conclusion was that the Sigma actually held up the best on the modern Fuji 40MP resolution standard, and that the two Fuji zooms were in need of an update. Fuji obviously agreed, as both lenses received an update in the latter part of 2024. I reviewed the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II and the XF 16-50mm F2.8-4.8 R LM WR in early 2025, and decided to follow those reviews up with another showdown using the fresh Fuji options along with last year’s Sigma winner. The results? Find out in the video review here…or you can see my review notes in the article below.
The Fuji lenses are loaners from Fujifilm Canada, while the Sigma is my personal lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *I’m doing this comparison on a 40MP Fujifilm X-H2 camera.
16-55 II – Sharpest, best corners, best contrast, most consistently good
16-50 (TIE) Slightly better corners on wide end than Sigma
Sigma (TIE) – Aperture advantage vs 16-50, better corners at telephoto than 16-55 II
COLOR
Fuji lenses perhaps slightly better color, but hard to see side by side.
BOKEH
16-55 II – Bokeh richer, no bokeh fringing, most potential (55mm)
Sigma – Decent geometry but fringing
16-50 – Slow aperture means least defocus
Reasons to Choose Sigma
Cheapest MSRP
Constant F2.8
Fairly competitive AF and IQ (balanced)
Highest magnification (0.36x vs 0.21x)
Very compact
Reasons to Choose 16-50mm
Can be had as kit lens at cheaper price
Only internally zooming lens
Weather sealed
Most lightweight
Mostly good AF
Reasons to Choose 16-55mm II
Most professional grade build
Best zoom range
Best feature set
Lowest fringing
Best overall image quality (most special)
Best autofocus
Best standard APS-C zoom out there
Conclusion
A sense of order has been restored. The first party lenses from Fuji are now mostly better than the Sigma, though the Sigma will continue to be intriguing because it is small, cheap(ish), lightweight, and constant F2.8. If you can handle a little more size (and cost) the XF 16-55mm F2.8 II is the best standard APS-C zoom you can buy right now.
Keywords: Fujinon XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II, Fujinon XF 16-50mm F2.8-4.8 R LM WR, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DN, 18-50mm, DN, DC, Fuji, Fujinon, 16-55mm II, R LM WR, 16-50mm, F2.8, F2.8-4.8, OIS, LM, WR, R, X-Mount, X, Fuji, Fujifilm, X-H2, weather sealing, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Astrophotography, #letthelightin, #DA, #weather sealing, #VS, #headtohead, #headtoheadbattles
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 DC DN is the second of two Sigma zooms that we’ve seen rereleased on Canon’s RF mount, and they are very welcome. Earlier this year as I was doing my review of the Canon EOS R50 compact APS-C mirrorless camera I couldn’t help lament the state of the lens options for Canon’s RF-S mount. At the time of the review (two years since the release of the EOS R7, the first of Canon’s RF mount APS-C cameras), this was the sum total of the available lenses.
Yuck. I couldn’t imagine a less exciting lineup of lenses. The fastest maximum aperture in the bunch was F3.5, and that lens is F4 and smaller before you make it to 30mm. Canon clearly knew they had a problem, for between the time that I filmed my review and the time I released it, they announced that certain Sigma (and later Tamron) lenses would become available for RF-S (the APS-C version of Canon RF). Now, to be clear, this is only for APS-C lenses, but for now it seems like Canon is going to let third parties solve their APS-C lens problem. This is great news for consumers, however, because it means that Sigma’s lineup of DC DN lenses will be coming to Canon RF. The first release was the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8, a lens that I actually own and gave a positive RF mount review here. A few months later they have followed up with the second zoom release, this time the wide angle Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 DC DN. Is this also a lens worth considering for your Canon R-mount APS-C camera? You can find out my thoughts in the video review below…or read on.
Thanks to Gentec (Sigma’s Canadian Distributor), for sending me a review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own.*The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the 45MP Canon EOS R5, which I reviewed here.
This becomes the first “fast” wide angle zoom for Canon RF-S (APS-C), giving a constant aperture of F2.8 over its zoom range. Now, to be fair, that’s not a big zoom range, but then again, Canon’s own RF-S 10-18mm not only has that same small zoom range but also has a variable aperture of F4.5-6.3! That means that the Sigma is over two stops faster at 18mm (F6.3 is 2 1/3rds stop slower than F2.8). And, while that zoom range is not large, it is enough to give you a variety of options for framing a scene, from this at 10mm:
…to this at 18mm:
This review of the 10-18mm RF is not a whole new review, but rather an update on how the 18-50mm RF translates to Canon RF. I’ve already tested the image quality at both a 26MP (Sony) and 40MP (Fuji) in 2023, so that covers the full gambit (and more) of what’s available on RF bodies. There are no optical surprises here, but I’m always curious to see how the lens changes in terms of its dimensions, but, most importantly, how well it autofocuses on a platform that it wasn’t originally designed for.
The 18-50mm RF is one of six lenses released by Sigma for Canon RF, and those six lenses represent all of the APS-C mirrorless lenses they’ve released over the past three years. You can see my review of the original releases on Sony here.
Sigma’s DC DN lenses have all fallen under the umbrella of their Contemporary lineup, and while Sigma has proven willing to experiment with new features and design elements within the ART and Sport lineups, the Contemporary lenses have all stuck to a fairly rigid design formula. That continues to be the case here, so this little zoom mostly looks and handles pretty similarly to other lenses in the lineup.
There’s nothing new here on the RF mount, but the lens is more of a standout on Canon due to having essentially zero quality competition. The 10-18mm RF is a genuine treat as an addition here. Why? Here’s a few reasons:
Has at least a weather sealing gasket
Better build quality than RF-S lenses
Includes a lens hood
Constant F2.8 aperture
Good up close performance
Great autofocus on RF
In essence, the poor competition makes this lens a star, though frankly I still found it one of the more compelling options on these other platforms as well.
The crop factor on Canon is different than Sony or Fuji, so the zoom range works a little different. Fuji/Sony have a crop factor of 1.5x, which means that the lens goes from a full frame equivalent of 15-27mm. Canon’s APS-C crop is 1.6x, and so that changes the effective focal range to 16-29mm. You’ll miss the extra bit of width at 10mm but get a little more reach. In this case, I think that most of us would prefer the extra millimeter of wide angle coverage, but that’s just not going to happen.
Marked positions in the zoom range are 10, 12, 14, 16, and 18mm, and here’s what the same scene looks like at each of these marked positions.
There’s really only one significant change to the 18-50mm on Canon, and that is that the lens mount portion of the lens has to be flared out to accommodate the much larger diameter of the RF mount.
Unlike the 18-50mm, however, this isn’t the widest part of the lens, so the exterior measurements don’t change despite this change. It is 72.2mm in diameter and 62mm in length (2.8 x 2.4″). That’s actually 2mm shorter than the Sony version, and this obvious reflects a slightly different flange difference between the two mounts. That extra bit of girth near the lens mount also adds a tiny bit of weight, with the RF version weighing 260g (9.17 oz). Other than these minor physical changes to the RF version, the build is otherwise identical to either the E-mount of X-mount versions.
This weighs about 110g more than the Canon, though the Canon is a very plasticky lens that also has a very slow aperture. The build quality between these two lenses can’t really be compared.
The 10-18mm RF is a mixture of metals and “thermal composites” (high grade engineered plastics) in construction, and the construction feels quality in the hand. It is built around a metal mount, unlike the Canon lens, which has a plastic mount.
The overall build quality just feels much higher than any of the Canon RF-S lenses that I’ve tested so far. This feels like a quality lens.
Up front we have the ability to use traditional filters in a very standard 67mm size.
There is a weather sealing gasket at the lens mount (thicker here on the RF mount than on previous versions), but, like other Contemporary lenses, there are no internal seal points.
The only thing on the barrel is the focus and zoom rings. The closest to the lens mount is is the focus ring, which is fairly narrow (10mm), ribbed, and moves smoothly. Like other lenses designed for mirrorless cameras, this is a focus-by-wire system in which input from the focus ring is routed through the focus motor. It is actually the focus motor that moves the elements, making manual focus more of an emulation than a direct movement of the elements. Some lenses pull this off better than others, and the Sigma 10-18mm DN is one of them. There is good weight/damping on the focus ring, and no visible steps during focus changes. I didn’t notice any focus lag either; the action on the ring and the movement of focus seemed directly linked. I will note that the lens will automatically alert the body to magnify the image when you are manually focusing, which is a big help in visually confirming focus. The focus weight is a little lighter than what I like, but not bad.
There is about 10mm between the focus ring and the beginning of the flared section that leads to the zoom ring. I appreciate some space there, as that was one of my complaints about the Sony 10-20mm; there was almost no room between the two rings on that lens, and it was easy to inadvertently move the wrong ring. There’s a very definite difference between two rings and position on the Sigma, though there is a different problem. At the fully retracted position (there is a slight external zoom action), the lens hood fits so tightly against the zoom ring that there isn’t a lot of space for your thumb to fit on the narrow ring. If you happen to have longer fingernails, you might actually find zooming a bit of a challenge.
The zoom action itself is very smooth. This is a “reverse zoom” in terms of the retraction; the inner barrel is fully retracted at 18mm and extends the furthest at 10mm, though the barrel extension is only about 10mm.
Sigma is experimenting with a new lens hood design for this lens. Rather than bayoneting into place, it is actually just a push on design. You still need to line up the markings on the hood and the barrel, but then you just push the lens hood into place rather than rotate it. A spring/lever mechanism holds the hood locked into place. You can release it by just doing a slight rotation to the left.
The primary “pro” of this design is it allows them to the make the lens hood a little thinner as there doesn’t need to be room in the hood design for the bayonet action. Sigma touts the fact that while the filter size of the 10-18mm is 12mm larger than the 18-50mm (67 vs 55mm), the diameter of the lens hood is only 3.8mm larger.
If you want to reverse the hood for storage, you now line up an arrow on the lens hood with the previous mark on the lens barrel and push it forward. Removing it simply requires a similar slight rotation to the left. As per usual, Sigma’s lens hoods are just a little bit nicer than the competition, including some soft-touch materials, texture variations, and lens information imprinted on them.
The 10-80mm DN has two different minimum focusing distances for the wide and telephoto ends of the zoom range. At 10mm you can focus as closely as 11.6cm (4.6″) and can get as high as a 0.25x magnification…though you have to be pretty much right on top of your subject to get it.
At 18mm that disance extends to 19.1cm (4.6″) and the magnification drops to just 0.14x…though shots at 18mm are a whole lot easier to get!
Get close enough and you can produce some creative shots like this.
The aperture iris is electromagnetic and controlled from within the camera (no aperture ring). It has seven rounded aperture blades that do a fairly good job of retaining a circular shape even with the lens stopped down, though frankly you won’t have a lot of opportunity to shoot shallow depth of field shots with a wide angle lens like this.
Stopping down will produce a decent (but not exceptional) 14 bladed sunstar effect.
There is no optical stabilization on the lens, unfortunately, which is the one advantage I can point to for the Canon RF-S 10-18mm. I happened to test on a camera that had in body image stabilization, so I didn’t miss it, but many of Canon’s smaller APS-C cameras don’t have IBIS.
On other platforms the Sigma is a rather plain lens in terms of features and build. Because of so little competition on Canon, however, it feels next level in terms of build and handling. It’s a nicely made little lens that follows a familiar, well-executed Sigma formula.
Autofocus and Video
Sigma continues to utilize a stepping focus motor (STM) in these smaller lenses as the elements are smaller and lighter than lenses and don’t require the higher torque that some of their large aperture full frame or sports oriented lenses. Autofocus is something that Canon does very, very well, and it is clear to me that Sigma has received access to the focus protocols and algorithms, as the 10-18mm RF definitely handles like a first party lens.
The STM motor provides fast, quiet, and accurate autofocus. Eye detection works fine, and I was able to grab some action photos without difficulty.
AF had no problem with a group photo of some friends and I on the golf course, though, to be fair, it isn’t difficult to have a LOT in focus with a wide angle lens like this.
Autofocus speed was excellent, near instantaneous both indoors and outdoors, and utterly reliable and accurate. My focus tests showed extremely rapid transitions from close to distant subjects. Focus breathing is extremely low, so this helps the transitions feel very smooth and rapid.
This is also a huge factor in video recording, as focus pulls are not only quick and confident, but the extremely low focus breathing helps them to feel very seamless and cinematic. No steps, no pulses, but just clean, smooth transitions that are nicely cinematic.
My “hand test” (where I block the view of my face with my hand and then move the hand to allow focus to pop back to the eye) also went well. Focus transitioned confidently from my hand to my test and vice versa.
The lens is not parfocal, however, and I did notice that there were moments of defocus before the lens refocused while zooming and do video recording. I also noticed a bit of warping as I began to move the from the wide end towards the telephoto end.
But overall this is a really solid autofocus system that delivers a fantastic performance on Canon.
Sigma 10-18mm RF Optical Performance
The Sigma 10-18mm RF sports a relatively complex optical formula for such a small lens. There are 13 elements in 10 groups, and that includes number of exotic elements like 4 aspherical elements (including a large GM aspherical concave lens as the front element), 3 FLD elements, and one SLD element. The MTF chart and comparison shows a significant improvement over the older Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 that the was equivalent lens for DSLRs. The MTF chart shows a very strong center and midframe at both ends of the zoom range with minimal falloff in the corners at 10mm. There’s a stronger falloff at 18mm in the corners.
In this section I will be reusing some of my results from the 40MP Fuji X-Trans sensor. It is higher resolution than anything Canon currently makes (current resolution points are between 24 – 33MP. Fuji’s images are also harder to sharpen than Canon, so you will have no problem getting beautiful results on Canon bodies. You can expect sharpness results to look better on Canon. I don’t currently own a Canon RF APS-C camera, so I’m doing this test on my the APS-C mode of my EOS R5, which is only 17MP. That’s fine for showing real world images as I’ve done in this review, but not really for evaluating the limits of the performance.
It has no problem producing beautiful images.
For those that are interested, Canon is not going to allow you to even experiment with this lens for full frame. Only the 1.6x crop option is available; all other options are greyed out.
I will redo the vignette and distortion tests, however, as the vignette amount does change from one mount to another. Here’s a look at the before and after of manual corrections of both at 10mm:
I didn’t expect to see any real difference in distortion (it’s the same optical formula), but I’ve noticed a trend with lenses first developed for Sony that then move other mounts that the vignette tends to be heavier.
At 10mm there is a significant amount of barrel distortion. I settled on a +23 to correct it, though there is definitely some “mustache” shape to the distortion pattern where correcting the barrel distortion across the majority of the frame tends to create some pincushion distortion in the corners. The standard profile does a cleaner job of correcting the distortion. On Sony I needed a +53 to correct the vignette, but on Fuji and on Canon I had to max out the slider (+100). That’s close to two stops higher.
So how about the “telephoto” end of the zoom range?
The distortion flips to pincushion style at 18mm but it was very linear and easy to cleanly correct for (I used a -4 on Canon). Vignette was a little lighter but still required a +74 to correct (+36 more than on Sony). Sigma gets profile support on Canon in camera for everything but distortion for some reason. There is already a correction profile available for Lightroom/ACR that will also clean things up nicely for RAW files. So, not a flawless performance, but nothing critical here, either.
How about chromatic aberrations?
I saw very little longitudinal chromatic aberrations before and after the plane of focus. You can see very little fringing in all of the shiny metal and crystal bits on this decorative reindeer.
Lateral Chromatic Aberrations usually show up along the edges of the frame as fringing on either side of high contrast areas, but that doesn’t seem to be an issue here. Winter is the most obvious time to see issues with LaCA due to all the bare branches, but I don’t see any issues here even with corrections turned off.
That’s good news, as you are far more likely to see lateral CA on a wide angle zoom in real world images than you are to see longitudinal CA.
So how about resolution and contrast? All chart tests done with a the X-H2 (40MP) using a tripod and a two second delay. Here’s a look at my test chart:
And here are the crops (at roughly 200% magnification) from the center, mid-frame, and extreme corner shot at 10mm and at F2.8:
In the center of the frame we can see that the Sigma 10-18X has no problem. It still looks fantastic. Mid-frame is a little murkier, though the corner look relatively good. Stop down to F4 and the mid-frame and the corners take a nice leap forwards:
There’s a bit more on tap at F5.6, so that means that real world landscape images at 10mm will look very nice all across the frame.
Diffraction comes early on pixel dense cameras like the X-H2, so I actually found F8 to have very slightly less contrast compared with F5.6. After F8 things go downhill fast as diffraction robs away contrast and acuity. By F22 (minimum aperture) the image looks very soft.
I would recommend sticking with F5.8-F8 for landscape work on a high resolution camera to get your best results.
I slightly preferred the overall image quality at 12mm. The center is about the same as 10mm, but the results in the midframe and corners are clearly better.
Real world 12mm images look great, though the absolute edges aren’t pin sharp on 40MP.
14mm is very similar to 12mm in contrast, though I didn’t feel like it resolved some of the fine lines quite as well. Take a look at the number 2 and the area around it on the right as compared to the left (12mm).
There’s a clear improvement at F4, however, and landscape apertures look pretty great in real world images.
16mm is mostly similar to 14mm with perhaps a little better detail and contrast…particularly along the edges of the frame.
I did note a mild regression at 18mm in my Sony E-mount review, but I’m seeing it less here on Fuji. As I compare 16mm and 18mm across the frame I see some give and take. Some areas favor 16mm, others favor 18mm. The performance is mostly similar between the two focal lengths, making the overall sharpness and contrast very consistent across this zoom range.
I chose this crop because it illustrates the challenge well – there is very little to distinguish between the two focal lengths…even side by side and magnified to 200%!
As before, you can see some improved contrast a bit more detail by stopping the lens down. I found a more significant different at F5.6 than at F4. By F5.6 the improved contrast is very noticeable.
The two ends of the zoom range are the most important, as you’ll often be in situations where you want to go as wide as possible, while the 18mm end will give both the maximum reach but also will be the go to for up close work…like in the shot of these mushrooms.
You can see from the crop that while the amount of detail at F2.8 on a high resolution sensor isn’t pin-sharp, it is sharp enough to work in most situations.
You are also most likely to get visible bokeh at 18mm. This image allows us to look at both the sharpness of the subject and the bokeh beyond.
At a pixel level I can see that contrast doesn’t “wow” me, but at every other viewing magnification the image looks great. There’s no “bleeding” around the edges of the leaves due to low contrast, and the quality of the bokeh is pretty nice. Wide angle lenses are almost never going to give you amazing bokeh (that’s just not their strength), but I would be happy in getting images like the one above.
Here’s another bokeh shot of a field of frost covered sweet fern. You can see a bit of busyness in the transition zone as things move out of focus (some outlining), but beyond that the bokeh gets fairly soft and creamy.
Flare resistance was fairly good in most situations, with good contrast and only minor issues with ghosting. That performance was pretty similar to what I saw on Sony. Here’s a fresh shot that shows good flare resistance.
I did see some “flashing” with the sun right out of the frame when shooting video, though I did find it fairly artistic and not distracting. Again, that’s a subjective evaluation, and I would recommend watching the video review to draw more conclusions for yourself. Here’s a few screenshots to show the effect.
Overall my feelings were very positive about the flare resistance.
Canon has nice color science, and that means that it isn’t difficult to get images with beautiful color when using the 10-18mm RF on a Canon body.
Here’s another shot that shows nice, rich levels of color saturation.
The Sigma 10-18X is able to navigate the bump to 40MP on Fuji better than most zoom lenses I have tested on the sensor, and that means that Canon RF shooters at lower resolution levels (and easier sensors to sharpen) should be pretty satisfied with the amount of detail you can achieve with this lens.
That Fuji sensor is a monster for making lenses look softer at a pixel level, but that’s not on Sigma. Compared to other lenses, it actually holds up well. Here’s the Tamron 11-20mm F2.8 RXD (another lens that looked very good on Sony but softer on Fuji), and you can see that the Sigma definitely better.
All things considered, I feel like there is a lot of optical performance here for such a small package. You can see many more beautiful images by visiting the image gallery here.
Conclusion
I’ve been recommending the Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 DC DN to a lot of people looking for a good APS-C wide angle zoom on multiple platforms, so I’m not surprised that it performs well on Canon RF mount. Autofocus was fantastic, image quality looks great, and the lens remains very impressive despite its small size. It’s a great match for smaller APS-C bodies in size, and the performance is strong enough to delight owners.
There really isn’t much in terms of competition, so it’s an easy lens to recommend on RF. It is actually the premium option, and while it is isn’t cheap at $659 USD, neither is it ridiculously expensive.
It’s great to see Canon’s RF mount starting to open to these third party offerings, and very quickly we will see the amount of lenses available for RF-S (APS-C) tripled due to Canon’s move to open the protocols. This gives Canon shooters a seriously good little option, and the Sigma 10-18mm 2.8 DN is what I would be buying if I were in the market right now.
Pros:
Fantastic job porting to Canon
Extremely compact and lightweight
Nicely made with a weather sealing gasket
Useful focal range with constant F2.8 aperture
Great autofocus performance
Good video AF performance
Almost non-existent focus breathing
Good sharpness across zoom range
Nice colors
Good flare resistance
Nicer build and handling than RF lenses
Cons:
No optical stabilizer
Fairly strong and complex barrel distortion at 10mm
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Earlier this year I was doing my review of the Canon EOS R50 compact APS-C mirrorless camera. While I liked many things about the camera itself, I couldn’t help lament the state of the lens options for Canon’s RF-S mount. At the time of the review (two years since the release of the EOS R7, the first of Canon’s RF mount APS-C cameras), this was the sum total of the available lenses.
Yuck. I couldn’t imagine a less exciting lineup of lenses. The fastest maximum aperture in the bunch was F3.5, and that lens is F4 and smaller before you make it to 30mm. Canon clearly knew they had a problem, for between the time that I filmed my review and the time I released it, they announced that certain Sigma (and later Tamron) lenses would become available for RF-S (the APS-C version of Canon RF). Now, to be clear, this is only for APS-C lenses, but for now it seems like Canon is going to let third parties solve their APS-C lens problem. This is great news for consumers, however, because it means that lenses like the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN are now available for Canon RF. I love the Sigma 18-50mm, having first reviewed it when it released on Sony back in 2021 and then last year when it became available on Fuji X-mount. I found it useful enough on Fuji that I purchased one myself, and have happily used it since. So how well has the 18-50mm survived the transition to Canon. You can find out my thoughts in the video review below…or read on.
Thanks to Gentec (Sigma’s Canadian Distributor), for sending me a review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own.*The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the 45MP Canon EOS R5, which I reviewed here.
The good news is that this is a great porting of the lens. It’s pretty clear here that this is no “reverse engineering” but rather a direct license of focus algorithms, as this is not only the best focus experience of the now three platforms that I’ve tested the lens on, but also one of the better focus experiences I’ve had on Canon in general amongst lenses priced under $1000.
This review of the 18-50mm RF is not a whole new review, but rather an update on how the 18-50mm RF translates to Canon RF. I’ve already tested the image quality at both a 24MP (Sony in 2021) and 40MP (Fuji in 2023)) level, so that covers the full gambit (and more) of what’s available on RF bodies. There are no optical surprises here, but I’m always curious to see how the lens changes in terms of its dimensions, but, most importantly, how well it autofocuses on a platform that it wasn’t originally designed for.
The 18-50mm RF is one of six lenses released by Sigma for Canon RF, and those six lenses represent all of the APS-C mirrorless lenses they’ve released over the past three years. You can see my review of the original releases on Sony here.
Sigma’s DC DN lenses have all fallen under the umbrella of their Contemporary lineup, and while Sigma has proven willing to experiment with new features and design elements within the ART and Sport lineups, the Contemporary lenses have all stuck to a fairly rigid design formula. That continues to be the case here, so this little zoom mostly looks and handles pretty similarly to other lenses in the lineup.
There’s nothing new here on the RF mount, but the lens is more of a standout on Canon due to having essentially zero quality competition. The 18-50mm RF is a genuine treat as an addition here. Why? Here’s a few reasons:
Has at least a weather sealing gasket
Better build quality than RF-S lenses
Includes a lens hood
Constant F2.8 aperture
Good up close performance
Great autofocus on RF
In essence, the poor competition makes this lens a star, though frankly I still found it one of the more compelling options on these other platforms as well.
The crop factor on Canon is different than Sony or Fuji, so the zoom range works a little different. Fuji/Sony have a crop factor of 1.5x, which means that the lens goes from a full frame equivalent of 27-75mm. Canon’s APS-C crop is 1.6x, and so that changes the effective focal range to 29-80mm. You’ll miss the extra bit of width at 18mm:
…but appreciate the extra bit of reach on the telephoto end.
Sigma 18-50mm RF-Mount Build and Handling
There’s really only one significant change to the 18-50mm on Canon, and that is that the lens mount portion of the lens has to be flared out to accommodate the much larger diameter of the RF mount. You can see that difference when compared to the Fuji X-mount version on the right.
As this is now the widest portion of the lens, the lens diameter changes from 61.6mm (2.4″) to about 68mm by my measurement. I found the RF version to be just a hair shorter than the X-mount version, measuring more like 75mm than the 76.8mm of the X-mount (3″). That extra bit of girth near the lens mount also adds a tiny bit of weight, with the RF version weighing 294g (10.37oz) on my scale, which is about 10g heavier. I haven’t seen the dimensions and weight for the RF mount published by Sigma, so I’m using my own measurements.
Other than these minor physical changes to the RF version, the build is otherwise identical to either the E-mount of X-mount versions.
The 18-50mm F2.8 is a mixture of metals and “thermal composites” (high grade engineered plastics) in construction, and the construction feels quality in the hand. It is built around a metal mount.
The overall build quality just feels much higher than any of the Canon RF-S lenses that I’ve tested so far. Some of them even have plastic lens mounts. This feels like a quality lens.
There is a weather sealing gasket at the lens mount (thicker here on the RF mount than on previous versions), but, like other Contemporary lenses, there are no internal seal points.
The only thing on the barrel is the focus and zoom rings. The closest to the lens mount is is the focus ring, which is fairly narrow (10mm), ribbed, and moves smoothly. It is has light damping and doesn’t have a lot of feel, and is actually slightly compromised here by the thicker lens mount flare, which clearly wasn’t part of the original design. It crowds the focus ring a bit, and I found my thumb slightly pushed off the ring.
The second ring is the wider (20mm) of the two, and it is the zoom ring. The zoom action is very smooth, with a single inner barrel that extends about 25mm. The inner barrel is well engineered and without any wobble.
Also included is a fairly shallow petal-shaped lens hood. It has a ribbed texture section to help you grip it for removal and will reverse for storage.
There are seven rounded aperture blades inside, and these do a reasonably good job of maintaining a circular shape with the lens stopped down.
A look at the front of the lens shows a 55mm front filter thread along with a significant amount of glass inside; this is the huge advantage over the Canon kits lenses with a much smaller maximum aperture value.
Like many recent zoom lenses, there is a separate minimum focus distance for wide angle (18mm) and telephoto (50mm), with interim focal lengths being on a sliding scale between them. The highest magnification (as per usual) is at the 18mm end, where you can focus as close as 121mm. Only one problem – when the lens is mounted on the camera, the distance from the sensor to the end of the lens (without the lens hood) is 95mm, leaving only 26mm of working distance between you and your subject. Here’s what that looks like:
It is basically unusable, as even without the lens hood it is almost impossible for the lens to not be shading your subject. If you add the lens hood, you actually exceed that minimum focus distance. So, in theory, you can achieve a maximum magnification of nearly 0.36x, but you are unlikely to ever achieve that in the field. Here’s what that looks like if you were able to achieve it:
You’ll see a lot of field curvature and a very small sweet spot of focus/sharpness. My advice: back up a little and get much nicer results with more like magnification in the high 20s instead.
The telephoto end doesn’t market as well, but is much more useful. You can focus as closely 30cm there, but the resulting magnification of 0.20x is much more easily attainable.
The wide open sharpness and contrast there is not off the charts, but is good enough to produce nice real-world results like this:
There is no optical stabilization on the lens, unfortunately. I happened to test on a camera that had in body image stabilization, so I didn’t miss it, but many of Canon’s smaller APS-C cameras don’t have IBIS.
As noted, on other platforms the Sigma is a rather plain lens in terms of features and build. Because of so little competition on Canon, however, it feels next level in terms of build and handling. It’s a nicely made little lens that follows a familiar, well-executed Sigma formula.
Autofocus and Video
Sigma continues to utilize a stepping focus motor (STM) in these smaller lenses as the elements are smaller and lighter than lenses and don’t require the higher torque that some of their large aperture full frame or sports oriented lenses. Autofocus is something that Canon does very, very well, and it is clear to me that Sigma has received access to the focus protocols and algorithms, as the 18-50mm RF definitely handles like a first party lens.
The STM motor provides fast, quiet, and accurate autofocus. Eye detection works well, and I was able to get nice “people” photos with quick and easy autofocus.
Autofocus speed was excellent, near instantaneous both indoors and outdoors, and utterly reliable and accurate.
I got well focused results when I took some photos of Nala (working hard).
Even without a trackable subject in frame I was able to get good focus. Here’s some foliage in the evening light.
I’ve got zero complaints about the autofocus for stills; I got a lot of well focused results without any drama. This is a seamless transition to Canon RF.
On the video front my findings were also excellent. My autofocus pulls tests were smooth and confident, with none of the settling or pulsing that I saw on Fuji.
On a positive note focus breathing is fairly low.
My “hand test” (where I block the view of my face with my hand and then move the hand to allow focus to pop back to the eye) also went well. Focus transitioned confidently from my hand to my test and vice versa.
Unlike on Fuji, I also saw smooth focus results when zooming in and out while recording video. There was none of the shattering effect and focus readjustments, which shows again how far behind Fuji’s autofocus is.
This is a great lens all around when it comes to autofocus; a fantastic performance on Canon.
Sigma 18-50X Optical Performance
Sigma has given the 18-50mm F2.8 DN an optical design of 13 elements in 10 groups, and this includes 1 SLD element and 3 Aspherical elements. The MTF charts show a good performance in the center of the frame, fairly strong mid-frame results, and a dip into the corners.
In this section I will be reusing my results from the 40MP Fuji X-Trans sensor. It is higher resolution than anything Canon currently makes (current resolution points are between 24 – 33MP. Fuji’s images are also harder to sharpen than Canon, so you will have no problem getting beautiful results on Canon bodies. It has no problem producing beautiful images.
We’ll start by taking a look at distortion and vignette. Distortion is essentially identical to what I saw on Sony, with some strong barrel distortion at 18mm.
While Sigma lenses do receive good correction profile support on Canon, I turn off those corrections and do a manual correction so that I can see what’s being compensated for. I used a +24 to correct for the barrel distortion, but you can see that there is a mild mustache pattern left over.
Expect less vignette on Canon than what I saw on Fuji, with results more in line with what I saw on Sony. I had to use a +52 to correction vignette at 18mm on Sony. On Fuji? A whopping +92! The good news is that the profile correction does a good job with both distortion and vignette. This F2.8 image has received no addition correction, but you can see that there is no visible shading on the snow.
As you progress through the zoom range the distortion starts to invert and eventually becomes a pincushion style distortion that is more strongly pronounced at 50mm.
I needed to dial in a -11 to correct the pincushion distortion, though it was nice and linear and cleaned up well. Vignette remains heavy, however, requiring a +88 to correction (again, about +40 more than on Sony).
There are longitudinal chromatic aberrations (LoCA), but they aren’t particularly strong. I mostly see them in the form of a blue-green fringing after the plane of focus:
You will see a light fringing around specular highlights as well:
Likewise there is a bit of lateral chromatic aberrations (LaCA) that show up near the edges of the frame. You can see them in the transitions from black to white.
The LaCA is easy to clear up by clicking the “Remove Chromatic Aberrations” button in software or in camera for JPEGs or video.
Chromatic aberrations are a little more visible at a pixel level on high resolution cameras for the simple reason that the fringing occupies more pixels and gets more highly magnified at a pixel level, but they aren’t any more obvious when viewing the image as a whole.
So how about the main event? High resolution cameras also expose any lack of contrast or a lens’ inability to resolve fine details because those flaws are more highly magnified. Here’s a look at our test chart.
Here is a closer look at roughly 180% crops from the center, mid-frame, and lower right corner at 18mm, F2.8:
The center looks great, the mid-frame acceptable sharp, but the corner looks quite low contrast. Stopping down to F4 provides a little more contrast and detail, and F5.6 looks better still, but the corners never get exceptionally sharp.
Real world images look great in the center and mid-frame, but the corners don’t look as crisp.
F8 is a lateral move (not really any sharper than F5.6) due to diffraction starting to soften the image (diffraction comes very early on a high resolution body). After F8 the image will show more obvious softening, and by the minimum aperture of F22 the image looks very soft in my tests.
At 24mm the image shows improvement across the frame, but in particularly in the corners, which are radically sharper.
It’s easier to get sharp landscape images at 24mm due to the more consistent sharpness profile.
28mm is largely the same as 24mm, with a very consistent sharpness profile across the frame.
At 35mm there is a dip in contrast relative to the high water mark of 24-30mm.
Sharpness and contrast do improve if you stop the lens down, however, and by landscape apertures like F5.6 the results look good.
Things rebound a bit at 50mm, and, if they aren’t the peak of sharpness like 24mm, the results look quite good even at F2.8.
When stopped down the lens can produce very nice landscape images with strong contrast.
Here’s another 50mm that looks nice at F2.8, with a nice depth of field that highlights the subject. Contrast at a pixel level isn’t incredibly high, but viewed normally the image looks great.
The quality of the bokeh is mostly good. Zoom lenses like this rarely create the most creamy bokeh, and the Sigma 18-50mm is no exception. At the same time, however, I felt like images looked pretty good. The bokeh here is actually really nice, particularly in the top half of the image.
This shot shows a bit of outlining in some of the defocused textures, which does detract a bit from the bokeh.
This shot is somewhere in between, but overall I feel like it looks pretty nice.
One final example at a little further distance. In some ways this image is a little more impressive, as background isn’t quite as out of focus. The 18-50mm avoids any nervous looking textures in the transition zones, and there is a reasonable amount of 3D pop on the subject.
The look of sunbursts is nice but nothing special. The blades don’t have the distinction of straight blades, but it is nice enough to add a little extra touch to images.
Flare resistance was also fairly good, with only minimal ghosting artifacts showing up in real world images.
Contrast remained strong, however with only a bit of a flare pattern showing in some images.
I was able to test for astrophotography during my review of the E-mount version of the lens, and found a bit of coma smear in the corners along with a bit of generalized fringing on the brightest points of light.
I was able to get nice looking Milky Way images with a lot of asteroid action, too.
Before closing this section, I think it is important to put the Sigma’s overall performance into perspective. The Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 is much larger, and yet it doesn’t really hold up better on the Fuji 40MP sensor. When I compared the two on the wide end, the Sigma clearly had the sharper center of the frame along with a slightly better mid-frame, though the Tamron showed a little better in the corner.
On the telephoto end there is some give and take, with the Sigma looking slightly sharper in the center and the Tamron looking a bit sharper in the corner. The Sigma’s mid-frame is clearly better, however, with more contrast and detail visible.
The fact that the Sigma delivers slightly more sharpness on the 40MP despite being so compact is very impressive. Here’s a gallery of a few more images taken on Canon RF.
Conclusion
I was very encouraged by what I saw from the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN on Canon RF mount. It feels like a seamless port over other than the slightly odd lens shape due to the much larger RF mount. Autofocus was fantastic, image quality looks great, and the lens remains very impressive despite its small size.
This is a great little general purpose/travel lens, as it affords enough flexibility in the focal length to shoot many scenes, and the constant maximum aperture of F2.8 gives you more flexibility in different lighting situations.
It’s great to see Canon’s RF mount starting to open to these third party offerings, and very quickly we will see the amount of lenses available for RF-S (APS-C) tripled due to Canon’s move to open the protocols. This lens isn’t cheap, per se, at $599 USD, but I’d rather spend a few hundred extra bucks to buy this lens over the current Canon options any day of the week.
Pros:
Fantastic job porting to Canon
Extremely compact and lightweight
Nicely made with a weather sealing gasket
Useful focal range with constant F2.8 aperture
Great autofocus performance
Good video AF performance
Minimal focus breathing
Good sharpness across zoom range
Nice bokeh in most situations
Fairly good coma performance
Nice build and handling than RF lenses
Cons:
No optical stabilizer
Fairly strong barrel distortion at 18mm
Some ghosting in certain lighting conditions
Flare for RF lens mount slightly interferes with MF ring
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 vs Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 on Fuji X-Mount
Dustin Abbott
February 15th, 2024
A fast aperture, standard zoom can often be the most important lens in any person’s kit. These are the types of lenses that cover 80-90% of most photographer’s needs, but do so in a more compelling way than most kit lenses. The constant maximum aperture of F2.8 helps in low light and creates a more shallow depth of field, and the focal length covers from moderately wide to short telephoto. The two main third party competitors on the Fuji X-mount platform come from Sigma (the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DN) and Tamron (the Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 VC RXD). I’ve spent extensive time with both lenses (I currently own both of them) and have been comparing them for months. My findings are summarized in this video review.
Thanks to TTArtisan for sending me a review copy of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own. I’m doing this review on a 40MP Fujifilm X-H2 camera.
Both of these lenses are critical and commercial successes. The Sigma has a 5 out of 5 star rating at B&H Photo with 112 reviews, while the Tamron has a 4.5 star rating with 54 reviews. Both companies took radically different approaches to this formula, however, as the Sigma is the smallest, lightest, and cheapest option (including the Fuji 18-55m F2.8-4 OIS and 16-55mm F2.8 LM WR options) while the Tamron is the largest lens in class but also has the largest zoom ratio and has both a constant F2.8 aperture along with an optical stabilizer.
You can find my full reviews of all of these lenses by clicking the appropriate link below:
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Several months ago I reviewed the compact Sony a7CII, which is in essence the internals of the a7IV though in a compact body more similar to Sony’s rangefinder style a6700 APS-C. Obviously Sony’s original a7C camera was popular enough to breed a successor, and, in fact, the lineup has expanded to include a new high resolution model which is the subject of today’s review. The Sony ILCE-7CR (or more commonly, a7CR) is the new high resolution option, taking the 61MP sensor from the Sony a7RV and housing it in a compact body. While the a7CR doesn’t inherit all of the larger a7RV’s features, it does get most of what makes that camera great at a lower price point nearly $1000 less. From the opposite perspective, the a7CR costs $800 more than the a7CII (33MP), so you are paying a premium for all of those extra pixels! So is the a7CR worth it? You can find out all of my thoughts in the video review below…or just keep reading.
Thanks to Sony USA for sending me a review loaner of this camera. As always, this is a completely independent review.
In many ways it makes little sense to buy a compact camera and then attach a large lens to it, so here’s a list of great compact lens options for the a7CR that I’ve reviewed along the way (my reviews are hyperlinked).
This isn’t necessarily an exhaustive list, but these are at least some of the lens that came to mind. Bottom line is that there are a wide variety of compact prime lenses that will enable you to really travel light, and most of these lenses are very strong optically as well. Here’s one from a the Viltrox AF 20mm F2.8 – a lens that costs only $150:
Here is a breakdown of some of the key features of the a7CR:
61MP Full-Frame Exmor R BSI Sensor
BIONZ XR Image Processor
Shooting Up to 8 fps, ISO 50-102400
240.8MP Pixel Shift Multi Shooting
10-Bit Full-Frame 4K60p Video
S-Log3, S-Gamut3, S-Cinetone, User LUTs
7 Stops of In-Body Image Stabilization
693-Point Phase Detection, 79% Coverage
2.36m-Dot OLED Electronic Viewfinder
3″ 1.03m-Dot Vari-Angle LCD Touchscreen
Internal Mic + Inputs, USB Streaming
Pixel shift multi-shooting (240.8MP)
In camera focus bracketing (up to 299 frames)
The list is fairly similar to that of the a7CII with a few areas of differentiation. The sensor is obviously different, but I also noted that the burst rate is a bit slower (8 vs 10 FPS), the ISO is limited to 102,400 rather than 204,800, and there are fewer AF points (693 vs 759) along with a lower percentage of coverage with AF points (79% vs 94%). The real reason to buy the a7CR, however, is the resolution. Sony 61MP sensor is currently the best high resolution full frame sensor on the market and can produce absolutely stunning images.
The MSRP on the a7CR is $2998 USD, so it isn’t an inexpensive camera. But I would definitely spend the extra $500 for it over the similar resolution Sigma FP-L camera which I reviewed a few years ago. So is there a market for a $3000 high resolution compact camera?
Sony a7CR Build, Handling, and Features
The basic shape and size of the new a7CR is identical to the a7C2. It is 4.9 (W) x 2.8 (H) x 2.5″ (D) or 124 x 71.1 x 63.4 mm, while the older a7C was 4.9 x 2.8 x 2.4″ / 124 x 71.1 x 59.7 mm. The two new cameras have a slightly deeper grip, which is a welcome change in my book as it makes holding the camera a little easier. The a7CR is 1 gram heavier than the a7C2 at 515g (1.1lb), though that weight is with the battery and memory card inserted. The feel of the grip is pretty good, though those with larger hands like myself will find the camera not tall enough; I have no place to put my pinky finger and the lower pad of my palm. It all ends up having to curl under the camera when gripping it. In this case Sony helps with this problem by including a grip extender called the GP-X2 which adds a little more height to the camera and gives that pinky of mine a place to go.
I like this approach, as while shooting in my home community I used the grip extender, but when I decided to travel light on a trip to Arizona over the holidays I left the extender at home and kept the camera compact for storage and weight.
The a7CR comes in to finish options – the traditional black or the silver finish option that I’ve reviewed here. I do think the silver finish is a nice, stylish look, though some may prefer the more discrete look of the black.
The physical control layout of a7CR is essentially identical to the a7C2. Both cameras have some key upgrades over the original a7C that really help the ergonomics.
Starting with the front view we see a key addition: there is a control wheel below the shutter button. That missing wheel was my top complaint in my review summary of the a7C. Good camera control requires at least three wheels, and I really missed that typical control touchpoint from the a7C. The addition of that wheel on the a7CR makes using it more functional.
You might also notice that while Sony experimented with a different type of grip pattern with the a7C, they’ve returned the familiar “leather” texture style shared with most of their camera models. I noted in my review of the a7C that the new texture looked cool but didn’t provide as much grip as the older style. Sony must have agreed, as they have scrapped the new and gone back to the old on both new models.
Switching to the rear view everything looks mostly the same but with the addition of a C1 (custom) button next to the menu button. Sony moved the cut-out area that allows you to grip the screen to swing it out to the bottom and utilized that area at the top of the camera to center the MENU button more and add the C1 button that was missing on the first a7C (which takes care of another complaint of mine). The “trash” button has a secondary label of C2, giving these buttons a more familiar layout to Sony shooters from other cameras.
A look at the top shows a few important improvements. They have repositioned the ON/OFF dial so that it doesn’t interfere with the new front control dial, and also enlarged the shutter button, which is a good improvement as it will be easier to use while wearing gloves now. Sony also added a secondary dial underneath the mode dial that allows to switch between separate setups for Stills | Video | S&Q (slow and quick). This allows you to have multiple control setups (and even custom menus) for your photography and video setups, enabling this to be a better hybrid camera. Like other recent models the “hotshoe” is Sony’s newer “Multi-Function” shoe compatible with digital audio, and Sony (along with a few other brands) have continued to release new microphones that leverage that capability.
A more subtle change is that they have removed the markings from what is (by default) the control wheel for exposure compensation. This allows more flexibility in assigning a different area of control to that wheel if so desired.
Most of the other controls are the same in location and default function. My only real navigational complaint is that we still don’t have a navigational joystick, which I do miss.
The LCD monitor is a vari-angle (articulating) 3.0″ screen as before, but the resolution has been slightly improved to 1.04M dots of resolution (from 921,600 dots before). Sony’s touch has also improved over the past few years, and one now has full control of all menus via touch.
On the left side of the camera the ports and card slot is essentially the same though with a very slight reorganization. The top one opens up to reveal that the USB-C port has moved up to join the microphone input. You can charge the camera’s battery in camera via the USB-C port so long as your power source has the correct power delivery spec. The middle compartment opens to reveal (thankfully!) the memory card slot. I despise when the memory cards are relegated to the bottom of the camera with the battery; this is much easier to access. There is a single UHS-II rated SD card slot located there.
The bottom compartment opens to the side and reveals a headphone monitoring jack and a micro-HDMI port. I recognize that the size of this camera makes having a full size HDMI port difficult, but micro-HDMI always feels a little flimsy for serious video making.
The viewfinder is still located to the left rather than central to the camera, and I continue to find that a frustrating position ergonomically. The viewfinder is mostly similar (0.39-inch OLED panel with 2.36 million dots and a maximum refresh rate of 120Hz), but it is slightly improved with better magnification (0.70x vs. 0.59x) and a longer eyepoint (22mm vs. 20mm). That’s not enough of an improvement to me, however, as the viewfinder remains a weak link in the design and I don’t particularly enjoy using it.
The a7CR continues to utilize the same NP-FZ100 common across Sony’s full frame lineup in recent years, though in the a7CR we only have a CIPA rated 530 frames when using the monitor or around 490 images when composing with the EVF. The real world battery life still feels pretty good relative to other full frame models from Sony, though the original a7C was considerably better.
One interesting touch I noted with the grip extender is that it is designed with a hinge near the portion covering the battery to allow it to swing out of the way for easy access to the battery compartment.
The a7CR sports an aluminum alloy chassis that has a wide variety of seal point to ensure the camera is ready for all weather conditions.
One core improvement is to the miniaturized IBIS system. The IBIS in the a7C was rated at 5 stops of assistance, but the new and improved version in the a7C2/a7CR is rated at a whopping 7 stops of assistance. In video mode you also have the option of selecting “Active” stabilization which throws a little digital/gyro assistance in there while moving to give more stabilization, though at a very minor 1.1x crop.
One physical limitation I ran into a fair bit was the 1/4000th shutter speed limit for the mechanical shutter. I happened to do a fair bit of testing of the E-mount version of the Viltrox Pro AF 27mm F1.2 with the a7CR in APS-C mode, and that bright aperture meant that 1/4000th was easily hit. I do understand the constraints in a compact camera, but that slow shutter limit on a $3000 camera was surprising. It’s not hard to blow out images a bit when using a large aperture lens in daylight with an 1/4000th shutter speed.
While I personally prefer a camera with a little more meat on its bones, I think that Sony has done a great job of improving the ergonomics and usability of the a7CR while staying true to the mandate of keeping the camera small and light. I took the a7CR on a trip to Arizona with me and did a number of hikes in the foothills through the desert. The light weight of the camera made it a treat to pack even on a lightweight strap like the Peak Design Leash. I scarcely noticed the weight of the camera and loved having such great resolution in a compact package. Throw a tiny lens like the Brightin Star 28mm F2.8 that I recently reviewed and you have a near-pocketable combo.
The overall ergonomics of the Sony’s compact body are significantly improved over the first generation like the a7C. The additional control points allow me to more easily imitate the setup of my normal Sony cameras, and the changes that Sony has made are subtle but add up to a significantly improved camera. I think that just about everyone can appreciate the changes Sony has made here.
Sony a7CR Autofocus Performance
The a7CR sports a hybrid AF system with 693 phase and 425 contrast-detect autofocus (AF) points that covers approximately 79% of the sensor according to Sony. The AF point array is identical whether shooting photos or video. I was surprised at the coverage percentage, as the original a7C sported a similar number of AF points but Sony claimed 93% sensor coverage. In real world use, however, I can’t say that I noticed the difference…even shooting action.
The rated low light sensitivity is -4Ev with a f/2 aperture at ISO 100, which isn’t as robust as what, say, Canon claims, but again I haven’t noticed any practical low light issues. The camera focuses well and accurately even in very dim conditions.
For a while the marketing trend among cameras was for ever more AF points, but that has faded as A) cameras reached a saturation point where AF points already cover most of the frame and B) the emphasis shifted to AI functionality and the ability of cameras to detect and track subjects accurately and even predictively. So it stands to reason that Sony’s emphasis here is on the improved processor (BIONZ XR) and the AI processing unit that allows for more trackable subjects and more intense tracking of some existing subjects.
Trackable subjects now include humans, animals, birds, insects, car/trains and airplanes, and Sony claims a 60% improvement when tracking humans (including the ability for the AI to track human poses) and a 40% improvement when tracking animals and birds.
I was impressed with the autofocus performance of the original a7C, but there’s no question that autofocus has gotten more sophisticated since that point. The AI tracking applies to video recording as well as photos.
I took the a7CR to a pickup basketball game and had an easy time tracking action (even if the burst rate is a far cry from my typical sports camera – the Alpha 1). I used multiple lenses (one by Sony, another by a third party), and had excellent accuracy with both.
I used the camera for a trip to Arizona where (among other things), I spent a lot of time with family for the holidays. I took photos of fast moving nieces and nephews, captured family moments in various lighting conditions, and I repeatedly ended up with well focused results in all of these varying circumstances.
I even ran into a fan at the Lucid store in Scottsdale, and he posed for a photo.
Sony’s Eye AF is very sophisticated at this point, so shooting portraits is quite effortless. I had no probably getting completely repeatable portrait results with a number of lenses.
As with the a7C2, the fly in the ointment when it comes to recording action is in the buffer depth. The autofocus system seems to have no problem in tracking action, but there are definite limits to the frame rate (a maximum of 8 FPS) and to the amount of images you can record before the buffer fills. This is one of the primary areas of performance where the a7CR falls well behind the a7RV. The a7RV can capture images at a slightly faster 10 FPS (not radically better), but the buffer depth is massive by comparison. With the a7RV one can get up to 550 Lossless Compressed RAW images (my preferred format), but on the a7CR that number drops to an abysmal 16 frames (only 2 seconds of burst time).
Here’s a breakdown of the various file formats and their recording limits:
JPEG Extra Fine L: 48 frames
JPEG Fine L: 320 frames
JPEG Standard L: over 1000 frames
RAW (Compressed): 36 Frames
RAW (Lossless Compressed): 16 frames
RAW (Uncompressed): 14 frames
If you combine RAW and JPEG, expect those numbers to drop a bit further. There is a consequence for increasing having a massive resolution sensor but not improving the storage medium. Sony improved the performance of the high resolution a7R series in this generation by adding CFExpress Type A compatibility, which in turn allows for much faster transfer of information. Sony elected not to do that in their compact lineup, so if you want the ability to capture large bursts, the a7C2 or a7CR are not your best options. They have the tracking capabilities, but don’t have the buffer depth to back those tracking capabilities up.
On a more positive note, Video AF was solid. Sony has really worked to tweak both the focus system and the AI machine learning to allow for essentially equal autofocus performance for either stills or video. This is a true hybrid camera, though if your priority is video capture you may have few reasons to choose the much more expensive a7CR over the equally capable (for video) a7C2. But if you are looking for both a high resolution stills camera along with a competent compact video camera, the a7CR is an attractive option. Sony has so many great lenses at this point for the system, and that includes a lot of lenses that are both compact and well equipped for video capture. The Samyang V-AF series I mention below are intriguing options.
Outside of the buffer issues I’ve detailed, I had a very position autofocus experience. The camera is compact and easy to bring along, but it is a serious performer when it comes to autofocus.
Video Specs and Performance
The a7CR has a reasonably robust video feature set, though, as before, the limitations are largely centered around the speed of the storage medium. There won’t be any 8K or 4K120 options that require faster readout. The a7CR has slightly better 4K options than the a7C2, as you can shoot 4K60 with a very minor 1.2x crop, making it easier to retain a wider angle of view (the a7C2 only allowed for 4K60 in Super35 mode). Full sensor readout (no crop) requires shooting in the lower frame rate 4K30 mode. You also have the option to shoot up to 4K60 in Super35 mode, or with a 1.5x crop. There are plenty of APS-C lenses that will allow you to retain a wide angle of view when shooting in Super35. Super35 footage in general will give you slightly sharper results at it is oversampled from 6.2K footage, while the full frame readout will be slightly lower resolution as it is sub-sampled from that area of the sensor. The a7CR allows for 10-bit 4:2:2 internal recording and an All-Intra compression option up to 600Mbps. Here’s a look at the full list of video modes available:
MOVIE RECORDING FORMAT (XAVC S-I 4K)3840 x 2160 (4:2:2, 10bit) (Approx.): 59.94p (600 Mbps), 50p (500 Mbps), 29.97p (300 Mbps), 25p (250 Mbps), 23.98p (240 Mbps)
MOVIE RECORDING FORMAT (XAVC S-I HD)1920 x 1080 (4:2:2, 10bit) (Approx.): 59.94p (222 Mbps), 50p (185 Mbps), 29.97p (111 Mbps), 25p (93 Mbps), 23.98p (89 Mbps)
Sony’s menus make it pretty easy to find what movie format you want and quickly employ it, and remember that you have the ability to set up custom buttons and menu options separately for video recording.
Here’s a few other video specific specs courtesy of Sony:
Slow & Quick (S&Q) mode allows shooters to capture 4K video at specified steps between 1-60 fps and Full HD between 1-120 fps, depending on the format. These settings will allow you to slow down action as well as speed up a slow-moving scene.
The S-Log3 and S-Gamut3.Cine gamma curves allow for more than 15 stops of dynamic range and for increased post-production flexibility, including matching video from other Sony Cinema Line cameras.
S-Cinetone can be used to deliver distinct colors and healthy-looking skin tone rendering that is based on technology from the professional Cinema Line cameras, such as the VENICE. This color profile offers natural mid-tones, soft colors, and especially well-controlled highlights.
Creative Looks can be baked into the recorded footage to create a specific mood during recording and minimize the need for editing.
User-created LUTs and presets can be set for accurately monitoring footage or previewing a specific look during shooting and can be applied to the camera’s monitor, EVF, or HDMI output.
I shot a number of different video styles and formats, from run and gun footage using a baked-in picture profile to Log recording. Performance is pretty much what I would expect, and while the a7CR isn’t one of Sony’s top video models, this is still a very capable video camera. Here’s a screenshot from one of my video clips, unedited.
There are a lot of positives here, however. Sony’s sensors have excellent dynamic range, so if you shoot in S-Log3 you can get 15+ stops of editing room – extremely useful! One of the main advantages relative to some competitors is that Sony’s video tracking and AI learning is pretty much top notch, and the improved Steady Shot (IBIS) is excellent as well.
If you are more video focused, I really recommend the Samyang V-AF series as they really designed with hybrid video/stills capture in mind. You can see that there are a couple of these that I haven’t reviewed as they are either unreleased or I haven’t gotten a review copy yet.
These lenses are a real treat to use on Sony’s compact cameras, as they have a lot of great video-specific features and weigh in at just 280g. There are a lot of other great compact lenses that work well for video available in E-mount, which has perhaps the greater diversity of lenses available for it of any camera system in history.
Sony a7CR Sensor Performance
This is really the headline area for the a7CR, as the real reason that anyone will purchase it over the much cheaper a7C2 is that it inherits the massive 9504 x 6336 pixels of resolution from the a7RV. This is an incredible sensor that provides rich, beautifully detailed images.
And, thankfully, Sony has finally opened up the ability to choose lower resolution points for Lossless Compressed RAWs as well as JPEGs, which makes this camera infinity more versatile. You can choose L (large), M (medium), or S (small) Lossless RAW and JPEG options at these resolutions:
61MP (9504 x 6336)
26 MP (6240 x 4160)
15 MP (4752 x 3168)
This MRAW 26MP resolution point is particularly useful, as there are many situations in which 61MP is overkill and 26MP plenty for your needs. I particularly love this option when shooting events, as the APS-C mode is also 26MP, meaning that I can switch between these modes at the press of a button and have different framing options available at an identical resolution point. It’s like having a built in teleconverter, but without the limitations. It also means that the a7CR is a really compelling option for those who would like to have access to an APS-C camera, too. The 26MP APS-C mode matches the highest resolution currently available on a Sony APS-C body, and it means that I could use great APS-C lenses like the Viltrox AF 27mm F1.2 at a nice resolution point.
The a7CR allows for up to 14 bit RAW recording and also supports 10-bit HEIF format recording.
There is always some give and take with high resolution sensors, though Sony has been tweaking the performance of this particular sensor for a few years and is getting the best out of it. We’ll take a deeper look at the performance in our tests.
Dynamic Range
Dynamic range has become one those topics debated ad nauseum on photography forums and harped on by certain reviewers to the place where some perspective has been lost on the topic. I can definitely say that there are a number of situations where improved dynamic range gives the photographer (and particularly the post-processor) more latitude to fulfill their vision. This could be in the ability to recover a blown-out sky or shadowed area as a landscape photographer or the ability to balance a foreground subject with a background or sky for portrait photographers. I frequently use good dynamic range in portrait photography to bring up exposure on the faces of subjects when shooting with only available light. Lightroom/ACR has great tools for detecting subjects and creating masks for them, and good dynamic ranges makes it easy to add exposure to the subjects cleanly.
In this shot of a rail bridge, for example, dynamic range allows me to reveal the detail of the underside of the bridge while also retaining some information in the sky.
As DR has improved dramatically in recent years, I have found that I do exposure blending/HDR less often, as it is often possible to get the result I want out of a single exposure. This helps simplify my workflow and yet create images that fulfill my artistic vision. Dynamic range is the range of visible light that a sensor can record, and according to Photons to Photos, the a7RV (they haven’t yet tested the a7CR) manages to squeeze just a hair more dynamic range (11.7 vs 11.62 stops) out of the 61MP sensor than what the a7RIV did. But wait, you say, doesn’t Sony claim over 14 stops? Yes, but if you look specifically, they are referring to 14+ stops when using the LOG3 profile for video. The truth of the matter is that there is a lot of different standards for how dynamic range is tested, so I like a site like Photons to Photos as they use the same methodology over a wide range of cameras and I can look through their findings and compare them to other cameras. By their standards, you can expect the dynamic range or the a7CR to be better than about 99% of other full frame sensors and only consistently bested by Medium Format sensors. This is a fantastic camera for shooting landscapes, portraits, or any other subject where strong dynamic range can be useful. This available light shot of my daughter-in-law shows the ability to pull up exposure on her while also having enough latitude to leave some detail in the sky.
That might mean using DR to balance the exposure in a landscape image, recovering some of the sky while also bringing up some of the information in the shadows, leaving a nice looking exposure afterwards.
I have a standard battery of tests that I like to run cameras through to examine their dynamic range. We’ll start with shadow recovery. I established a proper exposure as the base exposure (1/10th second at ISO 100, F5.6), and then purposefully underexposed progressively by 1 stop through to 5 stops. In post I add the exposure back to test how well the camera does with shadow recovery. We’ll use the 4 stop example first, and you can see how deeply crushed the shadows were in the original on the left and how well they have been recovered on the right.
Zooming in to a pixel level shows just how clean that recovery is:
There is little to no new noise inside the SLR in the recovered shadow area, and you can also see that all the information on the leather strap has been recovered cleanly.
At 5 stops things are usable but a little rougher. You can see some additional noise on the table surface along with some uneven pixels in the area that should be consistently shadowed.
Higher resolution models like this magnify results at a pixel level, and thus slight defects like this are more obvious.
In my experience modern cameras are much better at shadow recovery than they are at highlight recovery, but Sony sensors tend to be some of the best in this regard.
In this instance I purposefully overexposed by one, two, three, and four stops and then reduced that exposure in post to test highlight recovery. I typically see most cameras do reasonably well with recovering 2 stops of highlights, but a 3 stop recovery is rare, and a 4 stop recovery just doesn’t happen. Several things happen in overexposed images: there are “hotspots” where textures and details are blown out and various colors start disappearing. The a7CR (surprisingly) gives a flawless performance at 3 stops of overexposure, as all of the textures and colors are cleanly recovered without any leftover hotspots or faded areas.
I’m more impressed by the 3 stop recovery, which is pretty much flawless. You can see that the color swatches show a near perfect recovery of colors. The front of the SLR in my still life is typically one of the worst offenders in this test, as the metal surfaces tend to reflect light and cause blown out areas. Even at a pixel level all of those blown out textures are perfectly recovered.
If we try to push our luck and go for 4 stops, we do find our limit. I’m fairly impressed by the ability to recover textures, but you can see that colors are lost and the whole image has a dingy look that is the byproduct of unrecovered highlight information.
I’ve never seen any camera pull off a 4 stop overexposure successfully, and while the a7CR isn’t the first, it does deliver one of the best highlight recoveries that I’ve seen. I would say to slightly bias towards underexposure if you want to grab a huge range in a single image, but not by much. There’s a lot of room to recover in both directions that there is naturally there. All in all this 61MP Sony sensor continues to impress when it comes to dynamic range.
ISO Performance
The Sony a7CR has a native ISO range of 100–32000 with extended levels that go as low as 50 and as high as 102,400. I typically don’t recommend going into the extended levels (particularly on the high end), as you get reduced performance. ISO is typically the area where high resolution cameras are the most compromised. All of those extra pixels mean that noise is going to be more obvious on a pixel level, and early high resolution models like the Canon 5DsR had a native ISO range that only went up to ISO 6400 but was most unusable by that point.
The a7CR fairs better than that, and images at higher ISO values like 12,800 are largely usable.
The sensor in the a7CR does a good job of holding color fidelity at higher ISO values (particularly in the native range) and pixel roughness isn’t bad. What holds it back is the emergence of a grid type pattern in what should be areas of even background. If we look closer at the image from above (at ISO 12,800) we can see that the wall behind the guitar (which should be even) has a pattern in it.
This tends to show up specifically in images with large flat areas and will be less of an issue with other type of images. A deep crop from one of my test images at ISO 12,800 with more texture information shows none of the grid pattern.
At a global level there is little to distinguish ISO 100 from ISO 3200.
At a pixel level there is slightly less contrast in the shadows and a bit more noise, but overall the image is perfectly usable.
Between ISO 6400 and 12,800 the noise in the shadows becomes rougher and the pixels more uneven. You’ll see various “hot pixels” in what should be a purely uniform area.
That pattern gradually intensifies at ISO 25,600 and then at 32,000. There’s less contrast at 32,000 than 25,600, so I would recommend keeping 25,600 as your extreme option and don’t go further.
Venturing into the “expanded range” is not recommended. There’s a bit of a green color shift that starts into the image (the typical shift for Sony sensors) and contrast gets robbed due to rough, uneven pixels.
If you are in a situation where you are in low light, however, you might want to elect to shoot in MRAW. The oversampling to get to the lower 26MP of resolution does allow images to at least appear cleaner. While part of that is a lower magnification level at 100%, I do think there is also less of the grid pattern issue.
This is a valid way to get cleaner looking images if you don’t need the full resolution in low light situations.
The a7CR can’t match Sony’s lower resolution sensors for high ISO performance, but it does compete well compared to other high resolution cameras.
Color
Sony has slowly and steadily tweaked its color science over the past five years. The end result is a more nuanced performance that is very close to the level of Canon and Fuji, though I do very slightly prefer those brands for their color. One thing I will say is that Sony’s cameras do a better job with white balance than what either of those other brands do. When doing my chart tests, for example, I always have to correct the white balance when testing on either Canon or Fuji, but my Sony test cameras deliver a consistently good white balance with a variety of lenses. Sony has always done a good job with colors for landscapes:
What has improved over time is their skin tones, which are now more natural with a variety of different skin types. Here’s an uncorrected image that shows a few different skin tones, all of which are rendered accurately.
Sony has updated their “creative looks” with some new options. This is their version of Fuji’s film simulations, and while Sony’s options aren’t as varied or interesting as Fuji’s, there are some widely different ways to approach your images. I’ll show a series of images from the a7C2 that illustrate the various pictures styles (all are the same in the a7CR). Here’s the original image.
What will follow is a series of the same image using Sony’s color profiles along with Sony’s descriptions of what each creative look does. Here’s that same image using ST:Standard finish for a wide range of subjects and scenes.
PT:For capturing skin in a soft tone, ideally suited for shooting portraits.
NT:The saturation and sharpness are lowered for shooting images in subdued tones. This is also suitable for capturing image material to be modified with a computer.
VV:The saturation and contrast are heightened for shooting striking images of colorful scenes and subjects such as flowers, spring greenery, blue sky, or ocean views.
VV2:Creates an image with bright and vivid colors with rich clarity.
FL:Creates an image with moody finish by applying sharp contrast to the calm coloring as well as the impressive sky and colors of the greens.
IN:Creates an image with matte textures by suppressing the contrast and saturation.
SH:Creates an image with bright, transparent, soft, and vivid mood.
BW:For shooting images in black and white monotone.
One final option not shown is SE:For shooting images in sepia monotone.
There are plenty of options to play with there. Obviously different looks are going to suit different scenes/subjects better than others, so developing some familiarity with them might be useful. Remember that you can also select any of these creative looks for video as well. You can check out many more images from the camera by visiting the image gallery here.
Conclusion
I’ve been curious to see what the market’s response will be to the a7CR. Initially the whole concept of mirrorless cameras was the paradigm of getting great image quality with smaller cameras and lenses, but mirrorless has not guaranteed smaller and lighter. It’s perhaps even less so now that basically no one is releasing new DSLRs (the last DSLR cameras from Canon and Nikon were released in 2020), which means that now there must be a mirrorless model for every photographer’s needs. But I also know from my audience that size matters to many photographers, and in this case “less is more”. I certainly think there is a significant group of photographers who personally want their gear to be smaller and lighter, and now they have a high resolution option.
The counterpoint to that is that Sony’s mirrorless cameras don’t tend to be particularly big anyway, so the a7CR with the grip extender attached isn’t really much smaller than the a7RV. But the a7RV also costs nearly $1000 more, and if your priority is purely image quality, then the a7CR represents a real value as it has the exact same sensor as the a7RV.
I didn’t love the ergonomics of the original a7C, but Sony has addressed a lot of the issues I raised in my original review of that camera and produced a camera that handles much better. I still don’t love the placement and performance of the viewfinder, but that’s part of what allows the camera to be so compact.
Autofocus performance was very positive in my tests, though this is not an action camera. The buffers are too shallow to allow for serious burst performance even if the AF can keep up. But most people probably aren’t shooting a lot of action, and the a7CR is going to do fine in most other situations.
If you don’t really need 61MP, the a7C2 remains an excellent option at $800 USD less, but if the idea of having a high resolution sensor in a compact body appeals to you, then the Sony a7CR is going to be your dream camera. Start saving up that $3000!
Pros:
Huge resolution in a compact body
Ergonomic improvements – missing dial and buttons are now here
Included grip extender gives options
Improvements to the touchscreen make navigation easier
Love the ability to have a separate custom setup for video
Improved IBIS is top notch
Strong autofocus performance
More AI tracking for both stills and video
Good video options
Excellent dynamic range
Extremely useful MRAW and APS-C modes
Significantly cheaper than a7RV
Cons:
Buffer depth limits bursts
Viewfinder specs underwhelming at this price point
Keywords: Sony a7CR, Sony a7CR, ILCE-A7CR, a7CR Review, a7CR Review, Full Frame, Review, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Portrait, Photography, let the light in, #letthelightin, DA, Weather Sealing, #ILCE-A7CR
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I received Sigma’s first APS-C specific zoom lens for mirrorless cameras (the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN) back in October of 2021. At that stage the Fujifilm X-mount was closed to most third party development, so the lens was released only on Sony E-mount and Leica L-mount. That started to change in 2022, so Sigma has been slowly rereleasing some of its DN (Sigma’s designation for mirrorless designs) lenses on Fuji’s X-mount. I’ve considered this move worthy of a second look at many of these lenses because of two reasons. The first is that the competition is quite different on Fuji than it is on Sony, with more (and more premium) options as Fuji has been solely focused on APS-C rather than investing most of its energy on full frame. The second is that Fuji has the industries highest resolution APS-C sensor, the 40MP X-Trans monster found in cameras like the X-H2 that I’m doing this review on. That creates a very different optical challenge for lenses than the 24MP Sony sensor I did that review on. How does the Sigma 18-50X (as we’ll call it here) handle these new challenges? You can find my thoughts in the video review below or in my text review of the lens.
Thanks to Gentec (Sigma’ distributer in Canada) for sending me a review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done on the 40MP Fujifilm X-H2 that I reviewed here.
This review of the 18-50X is not a whole new review, but rather an update on how it compares to the competition on Fuji along with reviews of the autofocus and sensor performance on this new platform.
The 18-50x is one of six lenses released by Sigma for APS-C mirrorless now, and all of these lenses are now available on Fuji. You can click on any of the list to see my reviews. Here’s a look at the DC (APS-C) DN (mirrorless) lineup thus far.
Sigma’s DC DN lenses have all fallen under the umbrella of their Contemporary lineup, and while Sigma has proven willing to experiment with new features and design elements within the ART and Sport lineups, the Contemporary lenses have all stuck to a fairly rigid design formula. That continues to be the case here, so this little zoom mostly looks and handles pretty similarly to other lenses in the lineup.
On Fuji there are three primary competitors: the Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 VC RXD (the lone shared competitor from Sony), the Fujifilm XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM, and the “kit lens” Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 LM OIS lens. The weaknesses of the 18-50X compared to this field are 1) a smaller zoom range than any of the competing lenses 2) No image stabilization (the Tamron and Fuji 18-55mm have stabilization and 3) Fewer features than some competitors. The Sigma strengths are 1) Cheapest price 2) Smallest size and lowest weight 3) Higher magnification than any competing lenses. Here’s a breakdown of the specs by comparison:
We’ll explore those differences a little further in the build and handling section below.
This is an extremely useful range, allowing you to go from moderately wide angle (27mm full frame equivalent) to short telephoto (75mm equivalent). Here’s a look at a scene from the various marked positions on the zoom range (18, 24, 38, 35, and 50mm):
The Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 DC DN carries a price tag of $599 USD. Should this lens jump to the top of your list when you are looking for a wide angle zoom lens for your camera? Here’s the original review for more information.
Keywords: Sigma 18-50 DN Review, Sigma 18-50mm Review, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DN, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DN Review, DC, DN, F2.8, Fujifilm X-H2, X-Mount, 40MP, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Portrait, Photography, let the light in, #letthelightin, DA, Weather Sealing, #SIGMA, #SIGMA1850mmContemporary, #SIGMAContemporary, #SIGMADCDN
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
When I reviewed the Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 DN a few months ago I expressed an interest in revisiting it on Fuji. Fuji’s cameras with the 40MP X-Trans sensors are serious disruptors in this space, and, while I own and love the Fujifilm X-H2, I’m still not decided as to whether they haven’t taken resolution on APS-C a bit too far, as everything but the most of elite of lenses struggle to resolve it. Thus a lens that performs well on Sony (at 26MP) may not look nearly as good at 40MP on Fuji. In fact, I have yet to see a zoom lens yet that really excels at 40MP on APS-C; I have a short list of lenses that keep up with the sensor, and they are all primes. This review of the 10-18X is not a whole new review, as there are elements that are identical to the E-mount version of the lens I’ve already tested, but rather an update on autofocus and image quality relative to Fujifilm X-Mount. You can see my thoughts in the video review here…or read on.
Thanks to Gentec (Sigma’ distributer in Canada) for sending me a review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done on the 40MP Fujifilm X-H2 that I reviewed here.
This year we’ve seen two important DC DN lenses, including the excellent 23mm F1.4 DC DN and this new 10-18mm DN, a wide angle zoom lens with a fast maximum aperture of F2.8. This will certainly be a welcome addition to Fuji shooters as there are relatively few wide angle zooms to choose from, and none that quite match the combination of compact size, price, and performance of the 10-18X.
The Sigma 10-18mm DN is the sixth lens in this series. Here’s a look at the DC (APS-C) DN (mirrorless) lineup thus far.
Sigma’s DC DN lenses have all fallen under the umbrella of their Contemporary lineup, and while Sigma has proven willing to experiment with new features and design elements within the ART and Sport lineups, the Contemporary lenses have all stuck to a fairly rigid design formula. That continues to be the case here, so this little lens mostly looks and handles pretty similarly to other lenses in the lineup.
There’s some good and bad with this, but what certainly isn’t bad is that you can capture some absolutely amazing images with this little lens.
Yes, the colors were just that rich; the Sigma has captured them accurately.
This is a useful zoom range, allowing you to go from extremely wide at 10mm (15mm full frame equivalent) through the various steps to 18mm (27mm full frame equivalent).
The Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 DC DN carries a price tag of $599 USD. Should this lens jump to the top of your list when you are looking for a wide angle zoom lens for your camera? Here’s the original review for more information.
Sigma 10-18mm DN Build and Handling
Though Sigma has released a LOT of lenses over the past few years, this is (surprisingly) only the second APS-C specific zoom lens released for mirrorless cameras. The first was the 18-50mm F2.8 DN that I reviewed almost exactly two years ago. I quite liked that little zoom, and am currently working on an updated Fuji X-mount review like this one. The 10-18mm provides an obvious compliment to that lens, allowing for coverage from 10-50mm between the two lenses, or the equivalent of 15-75mm on full frame. This is all with a maximum aperture of F2.8, which is obviously very useful. What’s more, both of these lenses are extremely compact and light, making them very easy to travel with as a kit. The new 10-18mm DN weighs just 250g in Fuji X-mount, or 8.8 oz. It is 72.2mm in diameter and 64.3mm in length (2.8 x 2.5″). That’s about 5g lighter than the E-mount version I tested, largely because X-mount is slightly narrower than E-mount (2mm).
Up front we have the ability to use traditional filters in a very standard 67mm size.
The 10-18mm and 18-50mm make for a very compact pairing.
The closest competitor to the Sigma 10-18mm DN will be the Tamron 11-20mm F2.8 RXD; it has a bit more zoom range, but, importantly, it is not as wide. It’s easier to crop in enough to account for that 2mm on the telephoto end, but you can’t always step back to get more in the frame. Native Fuji options include the 10-24mm F4 OIS WR, and the premium option is the huge XF 8-16mm F2.8 LM WR. The Sigma is easily the least expensive of these options, running $230 cheaper than the Tamron and $400-600 cheaper than the Fuji options.
The Sigma is not the cheapest of their four lenses at $599 USD, and also manages to be the smallest and lightest despite going wide (10mm) and having a large maximum aperture. In fairness, it also has the smallest zoom ratio, though not by much. I suspect that many will find the weaknesses an acceptable tradeoff for the significant strengths.
As noted, Sigma’s Contemporary branded lenses have followed a very definite design path. Sigma’s build quality on these lenses is quite nice. The aesthetic and feel of the lens isn’t really different than their ART series. The design language and materials are quite similar…just smaller.
But where the ART and Contemporary lenses diverge is in the features. The key difference is that the DC DN zoom lenses are essentially featureless. There is no aperture ring, no switches, no iris lock, no declicking of the aperture, no focus hold button. Now, to be fair, the Tamron lens (probably the primary competitor) also lacks these features. The Fuji XF 10-24mm and 8-16mm have an aperture ring, while some competition on Sony has even more features.
I’ve seen this happen before; a lens maker locks themselves into a certain standard of features for a series of lenses, but then the market shifts and that design philosophy is no longer acceptable.
Case in point is Sigma’s approach to weather sealing on the Contemporary lineup. The 10-18X has a weather sealing gasket at the lens mount but no internal seals…just like the other DC DN lenses. This is at least one area where the Sigma falls behind the competitors – the Tamron 11-20mm, Sony 10-20mm, and Fuji 8-16mm + 10-24mm all feature fully weather sealed designs.
This is a very short lens (just 62mm in length), so that means there is a lot to fit in on a zoom lens. Sigma’s design is slightly unique in that the manual focus ring is actually the closer of the two. It occupies the center of the barrel, while the zoom ring is on a flared out section near the front of the lens. Like other lenses designed for mirrorless cameras, this is a focus-by-wire system in which input from the focus ring is routed through the focus motor. It is actually the focus motor that moves the elements, making manual focus more of an emulation than a direct movement of the elements. Some lenses pull this off better than others, and the Sigma 10-18mm DN is one of them. There is good weight/damping on the focus ring, and no visible steps during focus changes. I didn’t notice any focus lag either; the action on the ring and the movement of focus seemed directly linked. I will note that the lens will automatically alert the body to magnify the image when you are manually focusing, which is a big help in visually confirming focus.
There is about 10mm between the focus ring and the beginning of the flared section that leads to the zoom ring. I appreciate some space there, as that was one of my complaints about the Sony 10-20mm; there was almost no room between the two rings on that lens, and it was easy to inadvertently move the wrong ring. There’s a very definite difference between two rings and position on the Sigma, though there is a different problem. At the fully retracted position (there is a slight external zoom action), the lens hood fits so tightly against the zoom ring that there isn’t a lot of space for your thumb to fit on the narrow ring. If you happen to have longer fingernails, you might actually find zooming a bit of a challenge.
The zoom action itself is very smooth. This is a “reverse zoom” in terms of the retraction; the inner barrel is fully retracted at 18mm and extends the furthest at 10mm, though the barrel extension is only about 10mm.
Sigma is experimenting with a new lens hood design for this lens. Rather than bayoneting into place, it is actually just a push on design. You still need to line up the markings on the hood and the barrel, but then you just push the lens hood into place rather than rotate it. A spring/lever mechanism holds the hood locked into place. You can release it by just doing a slight rotation to the left.
The primary “pro” of this design is it allows them to the make the lens hood a little thinner as there doesn’t need to be room in the hood design for the bayonet action. Sigma touts the fact that while the filter size of the 10-18mm is 12mm larger than the 18-50mm (67 vs 55mm), the diameter of the lens hood is only 3.8mm larger.
If you want to reverse the hood for storage, you now line up an arrow on the lens hood with the previous mark on the lens barrel and push it forward. Removing it simply requires a similar slight rotation to the left. As per usual, Sigma’s lens hoods are just a little bit nicer than the competition, including some soft-touch materials, texture variations, and lens information imprinted on them.
The 10-18X has two different minimum focusing distances for the wide and telephoto ends of the zoom range. At 10mm you can focus as closely as 11.6cm (4.6″) and can get as high as a 0.25x magnification…though you have to be pretty much right on top of your subject to get it.
At 18mm that disance extends to 19.1cm (4.6″) and the magnification drops to just 0.14x…though shots at 18mm are a whole lot easier to get!
The aperture iris is electromagnetic and controlled from within the camera (no aperture ring). It has seven rounded aperture blades that do a fairly good job of retaining a circular shape even with the lens stopped down, though frankly you won’t have a lot of opportunity to shoot shallow depth of field shots with a wide angle lens like this.
Stopping down will produce a decent 14 bladed sunstar effect.
There isn’t much deviation from the standard formula here, and while I do think there’s room for improvement, I appreciate the great strengths here as well. This is a lightweight, compact lens that also has a very nice build and feel to it. There’s not much in terms of features, but think what is most attractive is the compact size and light weight of a lens with both a large maximum aperture and a very wide angle of view.
Sigma 10-18mm DN Autofocus
Sigma continues to utilize a stepping focus motor (STM) in these smaller lenses as the elements are smaller and lighter than lenses and don’t require the higher torque that some of their large aperture full frame or sports oriented lenses. My experience with all of the Sigma DN lenses to date has been that I prefer their autofocus behavior on Sony than to Fuji, and that continues to be the case here. To be fair, however, a large part of that is that I prefer Sony’s autofocus on their cameras, and that obviously impacts the performance of a lens. That caveat aside, I was generally pleased with the performance of the 10-18X even on Fuji. The STM focus motor gets the job done, and focus was fast, quiet, and accurate during my tests.
I didn’t really pick up on any focus sound at any point, and focus was responsive enough to pick up on my bratty little Bengal:
I did my autofocus tests indoors and outdoors, and found AF-C autofocus changes to be near instant moving from a close to a distant subject. Focus speed for stills is very good.
I also tested Eye AF tracking, and found that autofocus stayed “sticky” on Nala’s eyes as either she moved towards me or I (and the camera) moved around tracking here.
I had good autofocus results even when shooting backlit subjects, like these morning frost needles forming on bare branches.
Wide angle lenses put less stress on their autofocus systems because depth of field tends to be very large unless you are extremely close to your subject. I have zero complaints about the performance here for stills, however, as focus was quick and confident.
On the video front my findings were mostly good, though not quite as flawless as on Sony. My autofocus focus pulls test showed that there is plenty of speed to make focus transitions, but there is a common problem on Fuji – the autofocus confidence just isn’t as high. The focus pulls themselves go fast, but then there is a little bit of hunting and settling before focus locks on the new subject.
On a positive note focus breathing is fairly low.
My “hand test” (where I block the view of my face with my hand and then move the hand to allow focus to pop back to the eye) went fairly well. I saw less hunting in that scenario, and focus moved and locked with more confidence. This doesn’t surprise me at all, as Fuji has been operating with the same basic focus system for years, but have upgraded it in this last generation of cameras through AI tracking. When modern Fuji cameras have a trackable subject in the frame (something the AI processor is programmed to detect), autofocus works quite well. It works less well when there isn’t a readily identifiable and trackable subject.
For that reason Fujifilm vloggers will enjoy this lens. It’s small and compact and thus “gimbals well”, but because the focus system has an eye to focus on, focus was effective even when I was on the move or spinning around. Here’s a screenshot from one of those shots.
I did test to see if this was a parfocal lens and was pleasantly surprised to find that it was. I could focus at 10mm and zoom into 18mm and find that focus was still correct. That will help with video work.
In conclusion, autofocus isn’t quite as sophisticated on Fuji as it is on Sony, but I’ll also say that this has been one of the better zooms that I’ve worked on Fuji for autofocus performance.
Sigma 10-18X Image Quality
The Sigma 10-18X sports a relatively complex optical formula for such a small lens. There are 13 elements in 10 groups, and that includes number of exotic elements like 4 aspherical elements (including a large GM aspherical concave lens as the front element), 3 FLD elements, and one SLD element. The MTF chart and comparison shows a significant improvement over the older Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 that the was equivalent lens for DSLRs. The MTF chart shows a very strong center and midframe at both ends of the zoom range with minimal falloff in the corners at 10mm. There’s a stronger falloff at 18mm in the corners.
Real world results often look excellent to my eye, with excellent detail and contrast…though as per usual, the 40MP sensor of the X-H2 proves a high hurdle to climb if you start to closely analyze things.
We’ll work through the chart results by first looking at distortion and vignette. Here’s a look at the before and after of manual corrections of both at 10mm:
I didn’t expect to see any real difference in distortion (it’s the same optical formula), but I’ve noticed a trend with lenses that I test on both Sony and then on Fuji that vignette is typically heavier on Fuji. I suspect it has something to do with the smaller diameter of the lens mount.
At 10mm there is a significant but not extreme amount of barrel distortion. I used a +25 to correct it, though there is a mild mustache pattern left after manual correction. The standard profile does a cleaner job of correcting the distortion. On Sony I needed a +53 to correct the vignette, but on Fuji I had to max out the slider (+100). That’s close to two stops higher on Fuji.
So how about the “telephoto” end of the zoom range?
The distortion flips to pincushion style at 18mm but corrected easily with a -7. , but it was very linear and easy to cleanly correct for. Vignette was a little lighter but still required a +80 to correct (+40 more than on Sony). Fuji’s correction profiles (Sigma gets full support here) work fine in camera for the lens for JPEG and video, and there is already a correction profile available for Lightroom/ACR that will clean things up nicely for RAW files. Here’s a look at a SOOC JPEG file of a brick wall at 10mm – no distortion or vignette to be seen:
Clearly no insurmountable odds there.
How about chromatic aberrations?
I saw very little longitudinal chromatic aberrations before and after the plane of focus. You can see very little fringing in all of the shiny metal and crystal bits on this decorative reindeer.
Lateral Chromatic Aberrations usually show up along the edges of the frame as fringing on either side of high contrast areas, but that doesn’t seem to be an issue here. Winter is the most obvious time to see issues with LaCA due to all the bare branches, but I don’t see any issues here even with corrections turned off.
That’s good news, as you are far more likely to see lateral CA on a wide angle zoom in real world images than you are to see longitudinal CA.
So how about resolution and contrast? All chart tests done with a the X-H2 (70MP) using a tripod and a two second delay. Here’s a look at my test chart:
And here are the crops (at roughly 200% magnification) from the center, mid-frame, and extreme corner shot at 10mm and at F2.8:
In the center of the frame we can see that the Sigma 10-18X has no problem. It still looks fantastic. Mid-frame is a little murkier, though the corner look relatively good. Stop down to F4 and the mid-frame and the corners take a nice leap forwards:
There’s a bit more on tap at F5.6, so that means that real world landscape images at 10mm will look very nice all across the frame.
Diffraction comes early on pixel dense cameras like the X-H2, so I actually found F8 to have very slightly less contrast compared with F5.6. After F8 things go downhill fast as diffraction robs away contrast and acuity. By F22 (minimum aperture) the image looks very soft.
I would recommend sticking with F5.8-F8 for landscape work on a high resolution camera to get your best results.
I slightly preferred the overall image quality at 12mm. The center is about the same as 10mm, but the results in the midframe and corners are clearly better.
Real world 12mm images look great, though the absolute edges aren’t pin sharp on 40MP.
14mm is very similar to 12mm in contrast, though I didn’t feel like it resolved some of the fine lines quite as well. Take a look at the number 2 and the area around it on the right as compared to the left (12mm).
There’s a clear improvement at F4, however, and landscape apertures look pretty great in real world images.
16mm is mostly similar to 14mm with perhaps a little better detail and contrast…particularly along the edges of the frame.
I did note a mild regression at 18mm in my Sony E-mount review, but I’m seeing it less here on Fuji. As I compare 16mm and 18mm across the frame I see some give and take. Some areas favor 16mm, others favor 18mm. The performance is mostly similar between the two focal lengths, making the overall sharpness and contrast very consistent across this zoom range.
I chose this crop because it illustrates the challenge well – there is very little to distinguish between the two focal lengths…even side by side and magnified to 200%!
As before, you can see some improved contrast a bit more detail by stopping the lens down. I found a more significant different at F5.6 than at F4. By F5.6 the improved contrast is very noticeable.
The two ends of the zoom range are the most important, as you’ll often be in situations where you want to go as wide as possible, while the 18mm end will give both the maximum reach but also will be the go to for up close work…like in the shot of these mushrooms.
You can see from the crop that while the amount of detail at F2.8 on a high resolution sensor isn’t pin-sharp, it is sharp enough to work in most situations.
You are also most likely to get visible bokeh at 18mm. This image allows us to look at both the sharpness of the subject and the bokeh beyond.
At a pixel level I can see that contrast doesn’t “wow” me, but at every other viewing magnification the image looks great. There’s no “bleeding” around the edges of the leaves due to low contrast, and the quality of the bokeh is pretty nice. Wide angle lenses are almost never going to give you amazing bokeh (that’s just not their strength), but I would be happy in getting images like the one above.
Here’s another bokeh shot of a field of frost covered sweet fern. You can see a bit of busyness in the transition zone as things move out of focus (some outlining), but beyond that the bokeh gets fairly soft and creamy.
Flare resistance was fairly good in most situations, with good contrast and only minor issues with ghosting. That performance was pretty similar to what I saw on Sony. Here’s a fresh shot that shows good flare resistance.
I did see some “flashing” with the sun right out of the frame when shooting video, though I did find it fairly artistic and not distracting. Again, that’s a subjective evaluation, and I would recommend watching the video review to draw more conclusions for yourself. Here’s a few screenshots to show the effect.
Overall my feelings were very positive about the flare resistance.
The weather was much gloomier during my time with the X-mount version of the lens as compared to the earlier Sony version, but I continue to find colors pleasing on Fuji.
Even on a gloomy day the colors have a nice level of saturation.
The Sigma 10-18X is able to navigate the bump to 40MP on Fuji better than most zoom lenses I have tested on the sensor…but the difference in apparent sharpness at 200% comparing 26MP on Sony with 40MP on Fuji is pretty astounding. Look at the difference in corner performance at 10mm here:
That Fuji sensor is a monster for making lenses look softer at a pixel level, but that’s not on Sigma. Compared to other lenses, it actually holds up well. Here’s the Tamron 11-20mm F2.8 RXD (another lens that looked very good on Sony but softer on Fuji), and you can see that the Sigma definitely better.
All things considered, I feel like there is a lot of optical performance here for such a small package. You can see many more beautiful images by visiting the image gallery here.
Conclusion
The Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 DC DN is a very welcome addition to the Fuji X-mount wide angle options. It’s the lightest and most compact while also being the cheapest and one of the best performers optically. It’s a lens that I would personally consider.
I would like to see Sigma increase the feature set of their Contemporary lenses, particularly when it comes to weather sealing, but they also have the advantage of having the lowest price point of competing lenses. This does help make that more acceptable.
Wide angle lenses like this are great for being able to get dramatic images, and this 10-18X is a great pairing for Sigma’s existing 18-50mm DN if you are looking for a lightweight F2.8 zoom. I would love to see Sigma also tackle an APS-C specific telephoto zoom to compete with Fuji’s 50-140mm in the future. I continue to question if Fuji took the quest for high resolution on APS-C a little too far, but the Sigma 10-18X handles the challenge as well as any zoom I’ve tested thus far.
Keywords: Sigma, 10-18mm, Sigma 10-18mm, F2.8, DC , DN, APS-C, Fuji X-mount, Sony E-mount, Leica L-mount, Sigma 10-18 Review, Sigma 10-18mm Review, Sigma 10-18 DN, Review, Sony a6700, Sony a6400, Sony a7RV, Fujifilm X-H2, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Portrait, Photography, let the light in, #letthelightin, DA, Weather Sealing, #SIGMA, #SIGMA1018mmContemporary, #SIGMAContemporary, #SIGMADCDN
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
When I reviewed the Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 DN a few months ago I expressed an interest in revisiting it on Fuji. Fuji’s cameras with the 40MP X-Trans sensors are serious disruptors in this space, and, while I own and love the Fujifilm X-H2, I’m still not decided as to whether they haven’t taken resolution on APS-C a bit too far, as everything but the most of elite of lenses struggle to resolve it. Thus a lens that performs well on Sony (at 26MP) may not look nearly as good at 40MP on Fuji. In fact, I have yet to see a zoom lens yet that really excels at 40MP on APS-C; I have a short list of lenses that keep up with the sensor, and they are all primes. Does the 10-18mm X-mount version handle this transition? You can see my thoughts in the video review below or by reading my text review.
Thanks to Gentec (Sigma’ distributer in Canada) for sending me a review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done on the 40MP Fujifilm X-H2 that I reviewed here.
This year we’ve seen two important DC DN lenses, including the excellent 23mm F1.4 DC DN and this new 10-18mm DN, a wide angle zoom lens with a fast maximum aperture of F2.8. This will certainly be a welcome addition to Fuji shooters as there are relatively few wide angle zooms to choose from, and none that quite match the combination of compact size, price, and performance of the 10-18X.
The Sigma 10-18mm DN is the sixth lens in this series. Here’s a look at the DC (APS-C) DN (mirrorless) lineup thus far.
Sigma’s DC DN lenses have all fallen under the umbrella of their Contemporary lineup, and while Sigma has proven willing to experiment with new features and design elements within the ART and Sport lineups, the Contemporary lenses have all stuck to a fairly rigid design formula. That continues to be the case here, so this little lens mostly looks and handles pretty similarly to other lenses in the lineup.
There’s some good and bad with this, but what certainly isn’t bad is that you can capture some absolutely amazing images with this little lens.
Yes, the colors were just that rich; the Sigma has captured them accurately.
This is a useful zoom range, allowing you to go from extremely wide at 10mm (15mm full frame equivalent) through the various steps to 18mm (27mm full frame equivalent).
The Sigma 10-18mm X-mount lens carries a price tag of $599 USD. Should this lens jump to the top of your list when you are looking for a wide angle zoom lens for your camera? Here’s the original review for more information.
Keywords: Sigma, 10-18mm, Sigma 10-18mm, F2.8, DC , DN, APS-C, Fuji X-mount, Sony E-mount, Leica L-mount, Sigma 10-18 Review, Sigma 10-18mm Review, Sigma 10-18 DN, Review, Sony a6700, Sony a6400, Sony a7RV, Fujifilm X-H2, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Portrait, Photography, let the light in, #letthelightin, DA, Weather Sealing, #SIGMA, #SIGMA1018mmContemporary, #SIGMAContemporary, #SIGMADCDN
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S Gallery 
Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S Review 
LAB vs GM – Sony 35mm Showdown 
Sigma 300-600mm F4 SPORT Gallery 
ST:Standard finish for a wide range of subjects and scenes.
PT:For capturing skin in a soft tone, ideally suited for shooting portraits.
NT:The saturation and sharpness are lowered for shooting images in subdued tones. This is also suitable for capturing image material to be modified with a computer.
VV:The saturation and contrast are heightened for shooting striking images of colorful scenes and subjects such as flowers, spring greenery, blue sky, or ocean views.
VV2:Creates an image with bright and vivid colors with rich clarity.
FL:Creates an image with moody finish by applying sharp contrast to the calm coloring as well as the impressive sky and colors of the greens.
IN:Creates an image with matte textures by suppressing the contrast and saturation.
SH:Creates an image with bright, transparent, soft, and vivid mood.
BW:For shooting images in black and white monotone.
SE:For shooting images in sepia monotone. 
