–
DxOmark tested the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 lens:
The Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 DC HSM A remains an outstanding example of what’s achievable with modern lens designs. And at $799, it’s reasonably accessible in price as well.
The Lens also got tested at Dpreview (Click here). The Lens earned a Gold Award and the DP team writes:
Its relatively narrow zoom range is undeniably a little restrictive, but on the other hand, the image quality it can offer over that range is absolutely stellar. It’s let down a little by inconsistent autofocus, which makes it difficult to get consistently sharp results every time when shooting wide open. But if you’re prepared to live with this, the 18-35mm is capable of delivering truly exceptional results.
You can preorder the lens at Amazon (Click here), BHphoto (Click here) and Adorama (Click here). There is even a price drop on the lens at Amazon UK. But there is still not exact release date info from Sigma! And that’s really annoying!
35 Responses
If only this was full frame and they made an e-mount version…….
*facepalm*
+1
If the Canon 16-35 f/2.8 is any indication a FF version of this lens would be bigger and heavier than the 70-200 that’s coming out for e-mount
Why go Canon F/2.8. Just look at the Sony-Zeiss SAL1635z. Staying within a brand makes it easier to identify the possible size. Nevertheless, its still enormous. This lens makes Alpha full frame cameras look like SAL1650 fitted to A35 LOL!
I have pre ordered the a7r. Anyone knows if it will fit? what adaptor needed?
This is an APSC lens, available in A-Mount, as well as Canon and Nikon mounts.
1) Yes, you will need an adapter, similar to LA-EA2
2) It will vignette like a motherf**ker. So your only option will be to use it in crop mode. On A7r that would take it down to 16mp and will make effective focal length 24-50mm F1.8. Due to crop factor, you will also have an increased in-focus depth of field at the same F-Stop.
Any chance that they would make this lense i emount or is there a technical reason that cant be done?
I guess they could make it even longer to match e-mount flange-distance, but I guess it would be akward on a NEX, A3000 might be ok though.
I don’t it will ever happen, way too big for nex camera.
And the best thing to do, it to get an A-Mount version of the lens and a LA-EA2.
I already own a LA-EA2, this lens is very very tempting, but it is so huge… My nex-7 would look so tiny with it.
But I’m also very tempted by the sony SAL1650 F2.8 SSM which is a very good performer too, hopefully DxO will review it one day.
In principle and e-mount version would be possible. In optical terms, it just amounts to extending the length by the difference in the registration distance for the two mounts. Of course, this will make it notably longer. Then there’s the electronic interface, which ought to be straightforward enough, but whether the lens focus mechanism is compatible with the requirements of CAF is another thing, although I suspect it could be re-engineered to do so. However, whether the market is large enough to justify the development is another thing, especially when the lens can be mounted via an adapter.
If it’s a native e-mount to make use of the short e-mount registration distance, that’s a completely different issue. It would require a totally different optical design and, if carried to extremes, would almost certainly compromise edge and corner performance, at least towards the wide angle end.
accessible in price … that’s true … what’s going wrong with Zeiss? Always overpriced …
Yeah, I agree. As third party lenses get better it’s hard to justify the massive price difference in Zeiss. I have Zeiss lenses and even I think they’re over priced. But, I love them for the build and guaranteed solid optics. I’m not sure how I’ll feel about this in the next two years though as sigma and tamron are making some attractive alternatives.
You can find Zeiss c/y 2.8 glasses for under $300 w/manual focus, sharp wide open all across frame. This zoom A lens require tripod anyhow for landscape on e mount, so go hunting. No tripod needed for 2.8 Zeiss primes.
Why does it require a tripod? Due to it not having stabilization? Well, neither does Zeiss. That would make this lens require a tripod only at slower shutter speed than a reciprocal of selected focal length, which would make it 1/18 to 1/35. Same goes for Zeiss. Turn on stabilization and for 2 F-Stop compensation, you’d need a tripod for 1/4-1/8. Again, same for Zeiss.
By stabilization I meant if you’re using it on A-mount. E-mount would just have to do with those shutter speeds.
Hmm, I hadn’t really thought about that. Really? Maybe I should consider an e-mount camera. All that manual zeiss glass and oh so cheap.
Don’t forget the notion set by Jake, that Zeiss glass magically does not require a tripod, while other glass does. lol
There are people, that no matter the glass quality of the specific brand/model, they would still buy it, regardless of available alternatives. For me – 2 come to mind right off the bat: My co-worker and his friend. My co-worker has Canon camera and always uses Canon glass, regardless of price/performance, while his friend always uses Zeiss glass, again regardless of price/performance.
Sony sets the pricing for their Sony Zeiss lenses.
I think it’s funny how full frame cameras and lenses are getting cheaper now. It’s happening right at the time aps-c sensors are showing remarkable improvements as well as crop lenses. I mean, dang- sigma is really stepping it up lately. I think their whole imagine is really getting a make over right now. Add to this their excellent line up of art lenses and hopeful additions in the pipeline. Sounds like success to me. Keep it up Sigma.
+1
Completely agree. Sigma has always been in my eyes as a brand that produces cheap crap glass. But after 35 1.4 release and a few other lenses following suit in quality. My perception of Sigma has changed for the better.
I’d prefer 30-100 F1.8 in APC-S or MFT or 50-135 F1.8 in full frame 🙂
Why not make it 18-250 F1.8 then? Either way it will be enormous. Might as well go all out 🙂
It menas that Sigma can make 16-40 f/2.0 for APSC too? (another useful lenght), then 24-70 f/2.8 art edition (smaller than normal version) can show up for Full Frame. Show us what you can do, Sigma!
Wish Sigma were making some FE mount lenses. Doubt it will happen any time soon though…
Sigmas high performance/price primes were just built for their DP series and refitted for mirrorless systems. As long as Sigma doesn’t go FF Foveon, FF mirrorless primes are less likely to be developed.
This is one of those decisions where it is hard to choose between Arpeture and Zoom.
Sony 16-50 F2.8 or Sigma 18-35 F1.8.
Shouldn’t even be a question. 18-35 is the better option, If its on an aps-c sensor you have equiv of 24-50 which is the range for semi-wide street photograph, up to portrait length. You cover the best range with the 1.8 aperture, so you get the creamiest shots. The 16-50 is a great lens, the 18-35 is an exquisite lens. All the best. (Oh and remember sigmas mount change option in the future if you want to use that to change systems…a real bargain).
Oh Snap! Didn’t know about mount change option.
18-35 on a Sony APSC is equivalent to 27-52.5
I agree; it sounds like a great lens–I’d love to get one. But it was announced in April; it is now November, and there is still no indication that I know of as to when it will be available in the Sony a-mount. Sigh!
i’m doing a lot of architecture, Landscape but also Concert and Club… For the last two situations this lens is perfect. for architecture und landscape 16mm would be better. I have a 16-50f2,8… is the image quality at 18mm at f5-8 better then with the sony 1650?
Did you notice the difference in sharpness when this Sigma is mounted on D7000 and D7100? Almost twice better performance… this is strange. D7000 is also a good camera.
Yes and it isn’t strange. Like any other lens tested by DxO they have better scores with higher resolution sensors.