Sigma 16mm f1.4 REVIEW for Fujifilm X vs XF 16 1.4

[@cameralabs]

My review of the Sigma 16mm f1.4 for Fujifilm X-mount! Sigma 16 f1.4 X-mount at B&H: bhpho.to/3i843ce / WEX UK: tidd.ly/3tT45di Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop Gordon’s retro gear channel: kzbin.info Lost photos? I recover mine with: www.dpbolvw.net/click-100568658-13808570?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.stellarinfo.com%2Fphoto-recovery-software.php Equipment used for producing my videos Sony A6400: amzn.to/3hul53c Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF MacBook Pro 14in (16GB / 1TB): bhpho.to/3HiafJL 00:00 - intro 02:19 - Sigma 16mm design and controls 04:33 - Sigma 16mm vs Fujifilm 16mm focusing 06:18 - Sigma 16mm vs Fujifilm 16mm sharpness landscape 07:52 - Sigma 16mm vs Fujifilm 16mm portrait quality 08:36 - Sigma 16mm vs Fujifilm 16mm bokeh balls 09:17 - final verdict and sample images Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

[@ConsciousnessDiscussions]

For my photography, the Fujifilm 16mm f/1.4’s close focusing distance makes it worth the price. 25 cm on the Sigma vs. 15 cm on the Fujifilm. That close focusing allows me to capture images that aren’t possible with other lenses.

[@cameralabs]

Definitely. I'd normally include a macro test, but these were shorter reviews. I did mention the distance in a caption though, hope you spotted it! It's a definitely advantage of the XF 16 and when i originally reviewed it, I loved getting really close!

[@josephchristoffel]

Any review that doesn't include this fact is useless. And also the absence of apperture ring. A lens is more than "corner to corner sharpness" and "bokeh ball" bullshit.

[@korhi4]

Omg. In what conditions do you need to focus so close, at a wide angle?

[@rayongracer]

@@korhi4 More than you believe when you start using it

[@HenryStradford]

Yes to the 16mm f2.8 review/comparison.

[@longrider9551]

Well, Fuji is certainly an enjoyable system to use. After owning some of their cameras and lenses, I always thought they were overpriced for their optical performance and I think sigma is showing that here

[@paceyombex]

You forgot the manual focus clutch, closer min. focus distance, aperture ring, full weather sealing, full metal construction, and some more. But yeah Fuji is a relatively up-market camera brand. I am using the Fuji system and I agree the price is relatively high, but still not overpriced IMO considering X (and GFX) mount has their own dedicated lenses, unlike Sony (and Nikon) that can share lenses between FF and APS-C. Sony can technically develop lenses for FF that APS-C users can use, widening the market of those lenses, driving the price down. That's something Fuji can't do, the market share is smaller, so they have to sell at a higher price. I'm not trying to defend Fuji tho, just trying to rationalize it. I love that more third-party brands are entering the X mount. Sigma 56 is actually the lens that I would most likely buy from the trio. It undercuts the Fuji 56 1.2 like crazy (will be even cheaper at the second-hand market) and has really awesome optical performance, especially when compared to offerings from Viltrox and Tokina.

[@remektekmedia6641]

@@paceyombex Extremely well summarised! I agree 110% :) Bottom line IMHO if you want the best, then Fuji is best, however the price reflects this. I am very happy with my XF 16mm lens.

[@josephchristoffel]

They aren't overpriced. They just never compromised their lens to reduce the price.

[@Indydi]

@@paceyombex Agreed. I just bought the 56 last night, on sale at B&H for $404.

[@AbdonPhirathon]

I think Fuji is applying some color profiles to native lenses while shooting video. When you were doing the face tracking portion, the Sigma seemed to have a bluish cast on your face, whereas the Fuji did not. However, when you did the environmental portrait, they both looked very similar in color rendering. I’ve noticed the same thing happens with the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 in video. It kinda kills the great colors coming out of Fuji video.

[@cameralabs]

I noticed that as well. It could also be WB metering differences for some reason. Normally I'd film in a different profile but here I used the same standard / Provia simulation for stills and video, and some of them were only moments apart. I'll look into this further.

[@nordfresse]

I prefer the color on the Fuji lens, Sigma always seems to have this ever so slight magenta touch. I think it would be interesting to compare the Sigma to the new FX 18mm 1.4 as well.

[@tvurk]

7:30 The corners on the XF clearly look sharper, even stopped down. Not sure why you didn't mention that in the video.

[@cameralabs]

You're right, it is sharper in the corners. I did mention it in my original script, but had to edit a section out and unfortunately the part about the XF being better in the corners was lost too. This is a benefit of the XF, as well as closer focusing, but again if you can close the Sigma down, they do draw near.

[@edwardemmett9481]

I think you're right but there's also some smearing in the Fuji corners (look carefully at the bottom right corner at 7.30, the lamppost etc are smeared at f1.4 and f2). So the Sigma is softer, but a little cleaner. Also, to my eyes the Sigma is DEFINITELY sharper in the centre at f1.4 (check the stones in the wall at 7:16).

[@danieltomanovic1940]

Looks like sigma have a Little smoother bokeh on portrait shots f1.4...Very interesting lens.

[@fellowcitizen]

Very nice. True F-stop appears more open, too. Good to have the different optical colour signature option. Not as compact as the 56mm and 30mm, though.

[@cameralabs]

True, it is quite long!

[@paceyombex]

Now if sigma could make APS-C lenses with the ergonomic and styling of their "I" series lenses, that would match the Fuji aesthetic more. I doubt Sigma will do that, but a man can hope.

[@cameralabs]

Amen!

[@quikee9195]

Sigma 18-50 seems to be near to the I series design-wise, but sadly no aperture ring :(

[@korhi4]

But in terms of aesthetics, Sigma fits the Fuji X-S10, X-H2

[@paceyombex]

@@korhi4 I can see your point, but one of the integral part of the so called "Fuji Experience" is having aperture ring on the lens.

[@korhi4]

@@paceyombex “Sigma Experience” - low price. Therefore, I would not focus on the shortcoming you mentioned 😉

[@rickt.223]

Hi Gordon. Great review. It’s really helped my in my decision to purchase my first Sigma lens. I have a few Fuji primes and wanted to add the Fuji 16 1.4, but the Sigma’s price and performance makes it a very compelling option. Moreover, like the Fuji, the Sigma is also made in Japan. Your review was extremely helpful. Thank you.

[@BrendanMacWade]

Excellent review, Gordon. This lens is one of the 4 lenses that made me commit to the Canon M platform. It's big and heavy, but what a great lens for street photography and video. A top lens in one system might be the 'value priced' lens on another, as the Fujifilm 16mm lens is even better. I don't think Fujifilm users can go wrong with either. Everyone on APS-C needs a 16mm prime.

[@Razor2048]

Many companies use a mix of phase detect and contrast detect auto focus, where the phase detect gets it like 90%there, then the contrast detect runs over a very small focal range. While slower, it does allow for the highest accuracy in focus.

[@cameralabs]

That's true, most do that in single AF modes and only switch to 100% PD in CAF.

[@parmanduke]

This was one of my favorite Sony E mount apsc lens. Glad they made for Fuji.

[@cameralabs]

I have the e-mount version!

[@parmanduke]

@@cameralabs The price of the Fujifilm version 16mm f1.4 is a tough pill to swallow but the Sigma 16mm f1.4 is more in line with my budget.

[@cameralabs]

@@parmanduke Exactly. The Fujifilm lens does have some benefits, but it's over 2x more.

[@mattcero1]

Not to get too forensic but at 6:55'ish, the sigma photo has more white light coming in from the wave where as the fuji 16 picture on the right has less. This may make it appear that the Sigma is actually letting in more light but there is more light to be let in from the wave. Great video man! I always seek your information out before making purchases.

[@fotogmike5887]

Great review--with a lot of useful information! I don't see the reviews on the other two new X mount Sigmas. When do you expect to post them? Thanks!

[@cameralabs]

Thanks! The 30mm is in just over one hour from now and the 56 is on Friday at the same time, 3pm UK time.

[@fotogmike5887]

@@cameralabs Wonderful! Thanks!

[@USMCDragonGunner]

With these weather resistant lenses with the rubber gasket/o-ring at the lens mount.........is there any concern with leaving the lens mounted to the body long-term and compressing/deforming the gasket over time and losing it's sealing capabilities over time? Wondering if the lens should be removed from the body when not in use. Any insights/opinions would be appreciated. Thanks.

[@cameralabs]

Great question, but one for which I have no information. I think they're designed to be left on for a long time if desired.

[@gerzoc2698]

As always and excellent and detailed review. Do you happen to have a review of the MFT version please?

[@cameralabs]

Not of the 16 - but in terms of quality you can just crop-in a little on the results as a 'preview'.

[@eliaspap8708]

Thanks for this thorough review as always Gordon, but for me Sigma have taken the fun away by omitting the Aperture rings! Party poopers, My muscle memory would get confused and would do my head in switching from a Fuji to a sigma lens back and forth. Sigma need to get with the program.

[@cameralabs]

I know what you mean, and this is a serious issue for Fujifilm owners, more so than the other mounts.

[@ammadoux]

thanks Gordon. i had want a 16 mm prime for the xe3. like the fuji one but still think a pancake lens would be better even if 3.5. was happy when heard about the sigma ones but was surprise of how big it is.

[@cameralabs]

Yes, it's surprisingly big! Fujifilm's own 16 2.8 is smaller, but far from a pancake.

[@evtimstefanov8377]

How did you give the fuji lens 1/3 of extra light, i can't figure it out.. And you missed mentioning one of the most significant features and differences between the two-the closest focusing distance... The bokeh is completely different then.

[@cameralabs]

At 8:48 I show a direct comparison between bokeh from the same distance and also mention how much closer the Fujifilm can focus. As for the light, lenses with the same f numbers don't always deliver the same actual amount of light, even though they should do, as that's the point of the f-number system. So as I explained in the landscape test. the Sigma was actually delivering more light at f1.4 than the Fujifilm lens was at f1.4. Since the exposures were identical and the lighting conditions hadn't changed between them, this difference was due to the actual light transmission being a little different. Only 1/3 of a stop, so not huge, but I needed to apply this to match the brightness of the samples here. If you test a lot of lenses, you begin to notice these differences, likewise slightly different coverage on two lenses that quote the same focal length.

[@evtimstefanov8377]

@@cameralabsThanks for your reply. No offence meant. I just don't consider it fair comparing the bokeh limiting to the sigma's min focus distance. So you just raised the exposure in post i guess...

[@cameralabs]

@@evtimstefanov8377 no I didn't raise the exposure in post, I applied compensation when taking the shot on location. I described that in the video.

[@sammy_sam_leonardo]

The Sigma seems to have more distortion?

[@paulbeckmann]

Great review as always! Thanks!

[@cameralabs]

You're welcome! My 30 review comes later today and my 56 on Friday!

[@alainbellare]

Hey mate thanks for the review, I have this lens and use it for Walking Tours. For video, I have noticed the corners have very noticeable wobbling. Do you have an idea why this happens and how to address it? Thanks and keep it up!

[@cameralabs]

Sounds like a stabilisation issue - they don't tend to work well with wide lenses, especially third parties. Is that what you mean?

[@ThorenTravels]

Would IBIS (Photo and video) interact differently with each lens?

[@cameralabs]

It might depending on corrections, but it probably wouldn't be huge.

[@eddieriosyt]

I cant wait for these to come out. My money is ready!

[@cameralabs]

My second review of the 30 comes out today and the 56 review on Friday!

[@SionynJones]

Brilliant set of lenses there's a reason they are known as the holy trinity.

[@NunoxFerreira]

Nice one! Since i am "trying" to buy a Xpro3...after (and still have) a X100V...i think a wide lens (16-18mm) and/or a 50mm equivalent are my best choice to avoid a overlap with that 23mm(35mm equivalent),no?? This will be for outdoors only...since no money to buy a flash 😅🤗Nice work Gordon!

[@cameralabs]

Sounds like a plan!

[@kamikaze_1405]

nice review. Thx Gordon.

[@cameralabs]

You're welcome! My 30 review comes later today and my 56 on Friday!

[@sieyon]

so i bought this lens for my xt3 ... but i'm struggling to get tact sharp images when reviewing the raw files ... any advice?

[@cameralabs]

The Sigma lenses can focus a bit differently . Experiment with single and continuous AF as well as different focusing area sizes.

[@ThorenTravels]

I was searching for this exact comparison a few hours ago.

[@cameralabs]

Glad to help!

[@DanceDeepDas]

Great review

[@lebavu8260]

Please review sigma 30mm f/1.4 vs any Fuji 3x f/x lens 🙃

[@cameralabs]

Your wish is my command! In just over 1 hour, my review of the Sigma 30 1.4 vs the XF 33 1.4 goes live! Make sure you're subscribed and notified so you don't miss it!

[@lebavu8260]

@@cameralabs yes!! Tysm!!

[@sleepyatdawn7648]

The sigma is also weather resistant

[@chrisjames1924]

So is the Fuji

[@cameralabs]

Only at the mount end as I said in the video.

[@DigiDriftZone]

At the moment I cannot find any Sigma 16mm second hand and they cost £360 new, however there are some second hand Fuji 16mm and recently they were sold on eBay for around £340. My primary use is video and I am a bit worried about the older focusing motors and motor noise of the Fuji, is Sigma a better choice? - what other options are there around 15mm to 18mm with a fast F1.4 for Fuji? (other than the monstrously expensive 18mm from Fuji!)

[@cameralabs]

Literally everything I know about your question is in this video, sorry if what you want isn't in there

[@DigiDriftZone]

@@cameralabs ah it talks about being a pre production and contradicts a few other reviews for things like minimum focusing distance. I was wondering if there was a follow up with the production release, no worries if there isn’t. I am guessing you didn’t end up keeping the lens?

[@cameralabs]

@@DigiDriftZone no, everything I review is a loaner which is returned to the company about 1-2 weeks after testing.

[@GuusStemerding]

Love u mate

[@AjaySingh-228]

Nice sir 🙂✌️

[@SinaFarhat]

Nice! Have a good week!

[@cameralabs]

Thanks!

[@yadanxiao2095]

May we have a chance to work together?

[@cameralabs]

On what? You have no content on your channel and a blank icon!

[@yadanxiao2095]

@@cameralabs For a DSLR camera wireless mic,can we discuss more via emil?

[@cameralabs]

@@yadanxiao2095 I'm sorry, I don't have time to review any more wireless mics right now.

[@yadanxiao2095]

@@cameralabs We are not rush for this,you can review it at your convenient time.

[@yosefco]

cant they make them nicer - from the outside? looks like sigma have zero interest regarding the design and appeal.

[@cameralabs]

Not without retooling / rebuilding them, which would make them more expensive. These are affordable because they've done the hard work already, so are just adapting mounts and electronics. I hear you though and it's a shame since they have now designed some good looking lenses more recently that share more of the Fujifilm aesthetic.

[@scottmclean8910]

I sold my 16 1.4, it was a miserable lens. Ridiculous barrel distortion considering it’s not that wide. Flat rendering, no contrast and no character, the only nice thing was the close focus. This sigma looks even more miserable. Replaced it with the Viltrox 13mm which is godlike for the price. If you want a general walk around lens for travel etc the 18 f2 has the true Fuji magic and character, it just gets a bad rep because it’s not clinically sharp.

[@cameralabs]

I must try the viltrox. We've started reviewing some of their full frame options at my cameralabs.com website

[@scottmclean8910]

@@cameralabs I’ve used every one for Fuji. They’re all excellent but the 13 and 85 are standout. They all have vintage character and imperfections with modern sharpness and usability.

[@helionyxcollective]

The bokeh on the Fuji lens is wayyy smoother compared to the sigma.

[@joewellham1]

I've always thought Fuji lenses were were overpriced and overrated, this review confirms that in spades.

[@cameralabs]

They do have some benefits and, as you'll see on Wednesdays video, their XF 33 knocks it out the park. But yes, Sigma is showing you can get close to the performance, or v similar in some respects for a lower price.

[@averageguy1261]

Price is right, but it's ugly.

[@cameralabs]

These aren't their best looking lenses, it's true, but I appreciate anyone making APSC lenses nowadays