New Fuji lenses! Sigma 16mm, 30mm & 56mm vs Fujifilm & Viltrox

Tony Northrup compares the new Sigma lenses for Fujifilm X-mount against the closest Fujifilm and Viltrox equivalents

* Sigma 16mm f1.4 ($450) vs Fujifilm 16mm f1.4 ($1,000)
* Sigma 30mm f1.4 ($340) vs Fujifilm 35mm f1.4 ($600) and Viltrox 33mm f1.4 ($280)
* Sigma 56mm f1.4 ($480) vs Fujifilm 56mm f1.2 ($1,000)

Tony compares the design and handling, sharpness, contrast, maximum magnification, chromatic aberration, bokeh, and starburst effects.

[TechnoBabble]

My god these comments. People, the Fuji lenses are just more expensive. Saying things like "oh you should have compared it to the EVEN more expensive new lens" just drives the point home further. These Sigma lenses are an amazing deal and are some of the best optics ever made for APS-C.

[FernandoG_]

Interesting choice of 10+ year old Fuji lenses to compare. Not a single contemporary Fuji lens in the review like the XF18mm and 33mm.



That is the real bar of native lenses that Sigma should demonstrate they can get close to at a cheaper price i.e. prove their value for money as a cheaper modern lens against comparable modern technology lenses in the native line-up.



It is difficult to believe the price bracket argument for the selection of lenses in this review. As of today the new FUJIFILM XF 18mm f/1.4 R LM WR Lens costs USD999 in the B&H website. Likewise, the FUJIFILM XF 33mm f/1.4 R LM WR Lens is USD799. Well that is the same / pretty close to the Fujifilm 16mm f1.4 ($1, 000) and Fujifilm 35mm f1.4 ($600) quoted in this review.


No doubts Sigma must be a good budget option for many people, as Viltrox also is. However, by omitting the comparison with modern Fuji lenses, this review seems to only create an urgency of viewers to sell their old Fuji gear and rush to buy Sigma, which is OK for this channel's commercial interests and KEH sponsorship. But it just would be nice the channel starts seeing us as Photographers and not as mindless consumers.

[billsimmons]

Thank you for the systematic comparison of these lenses. It's good to see that Sigma is getting into making X mount models and that they are very good optically. A couple things to note from an avid Fuji shooter who also shoots Nikon:

1) The lack of aperture rings on the Sigma versions would be deal breakers for me. I use the X-T4 and X-T2 cameras and enjoy their dial-based controls, which includes adjusting the aperture ring. There are Fuji cameras more based on control wheel operation, for which it might not be that big a deal, such as a X-S10.
2) I have all three of the Fuji lenses and have been very happy with them. In general use, the 16mm and 56mm, in particular, have seemed quite sharp and pleasing. The 35 mm is beloved amongst Fuji shooters more for its special "character" and rendering than for its sharpness. I recently started using their new 33 mm 1.4, which is much sharper and significantly update in terms of AF motors and speed and overall ruggedness.
3) Although all three of the Fuji lenses in this comparison have long been faves of Fuji shooters, they are older designs now. Their new 18mm and 33mm 1.4's might have been better choices to compare to the new Sigma's.
4) If you can live with the new Sigma's lack of aperture rings, they look like excellent values, especially if their AF speed is acceptable. I hope Tony does tests them further on that front, and includes the newer Fuji's in his comparisons.

Thanks again, Tony

[MichaelBabich]

You should have compared to modern Fuji lenses: to 18/1.4 and 33/1.4. It's not clear why would anybody even compare to decade-old lenses.

[SaraGarcia-wbni]

Good review, but I think the comparison must be done with the new fuji lenses, not the oldest ones.

[colonel_fox]

I think everyone know that the 35 1.4 from Fuji is optically not the best and is more loved for its character. The 35 2.0 is very sharp though

[sambalsamurai]

Awesome review / comparison! +1
Am I the only one who likes the colors of the FUJI 56mm more than the SIGMA 56mm?

[tomapaunovic]

Finally, Fuji users have some good and affordable third-party options. Hopefully, a trio of these lenses will be offered for Fuji as well at around $1000, as it's available for other mounts as well. And hopefully, people will no longer have to reach for Viltrox in order to have lower-cost alternative to native glass :)

Btw, these lenses should be a wake-up call for Fuji to update the rest of their old primes. Having some serious competition clearly shows how outdated those lenses are in terms of optics.

[linksp]

I am glad Sigma finally released these lenses. The 56 f1.4 might be the upgrade from my Fuji 50mm f2. Also a (probably) unpopular opinion, but I am more excited for the Sigma 18-35 1.8 than the already announced 18-50 f2.8, as it might have the potential to replace the Fuji 18 f1.4/f2, Fuji 23 f1.4/f2 and the 33 f1.4/35 f2. Of course, this would not match these f1.4 Fujis when it comes to optical performance and maximum aperture, but it would be really convenient and obviously 1/3 stop brighter than the f2 equivalents.

[jacksoni]

Would love to see how the newer 33mm Fuji stacks up against the Sigma 30mm

[GoranSlika]

Definitely surprised at the difference, thank your for the tests. I think the fact that the Fuji lenses are about 10 years old on average was maybe not stressed enough, and perhaps the new Fuji 33mm was a better comparison. I will probably be buried with my 16mm but good to know for the other focal lengths, cheers!

[andreaskampmiller]

Sadly, it seems like Sigma just ported three lenses from E-Mount to X-Mount, without thinking about why some people shoot Fuji: aperture rings, all manual settings, haptic, look&feel of the camera and lens... These new Sigma lenses might be optically better, and cheaper - but in my opinion Sigma totally missed the point.
Maybe Sigma will bring out an "Art"-version, with aperture rings, metal instead of plastic, weather resistant, and maybe F1.2 (or even faster?); then these lenses would be really pieces of "Art". ;)

This feels like an unfair (though very thoroughly executed) test: new Sigma vs old Fuji.
Then, what about a comparison between these new Sigma lenses, and the NEW Fuji lenses: XF 18mm F1.4 R LM WR, the XF 33mm F1.4 LM WR and the (granted, not so cheap) XF 50mm F1.0 R WR?

[wanderingfool]

Great comparison and it’s fabulous to see sigma finally move to Fuji, can’t wait for the new Sigma vs Fuji 150-600.
In the meantime, can we see these sigma against the new Fuji lenses please?

[teedeeking]

Viltrox has a V2 of this lens.
Which is much better than the one you’ve tested.

[BrownieX]

I am excited for Viltrox 13mm. Hope you get to test that when it comes out.

[stkuj]

Huge fan of Sigma! I shoot Sigma on Sony and their lens are fantastic. Good for Fuji users. I feel they will pay half the price for a better lens even without the aperture ring.

[BrownieX]

Could you compare the F2/2.8 Fuji 16, 35, 50mm with the Sigma when you test the Autofocus?

[JokingJay]

Agreed the exterior build doesn't exude luxury and tactility the way the Fujis do, but having used the Sigma 56mm F1.4 on both MFT and Sony, I can say with confidence it blows the Fuji 56 F1.2 out of the water in terms of actual performance (i.e. sharpness, AF speed/accuracy, lack of CA, etc.). Wish it had the aperture ring and good looks, but I shoot professionally, and at the end of the day the Sigma is the better tool (if a bit soulless by comparison).

[stanb.]

Rather have a Quality, compact f2 18mm X mount offering than any of these giant behemoths which makes the already oversized 1.4 16mm Fujinon look dainty!

[youknowwho]

Really weird that they didn't put an aperture ring on these when the FE mount versions have one.