Anyone use the Sigma 16mm F1.4 ?

Bejersey wrote:

Are you happy with it? Complaints?

Thanks

Rick

A lot of folks here use that lens, it's the widest-angle 'fast' prime AF lens on the mount.

Many vloggers use it as their main lens due to having a wider angle than the Canon EF-M 22mm f2 and Viltrox 23mm f1.4 lenses, especially with the m50 and m50ii which crop 4k video. The EF-M 11-22 and 15-45 are also good lenses for videos, but quite dark at f3.5 - f4 maximum.

When I need to shoot wide angle in dark locations, this is often the lens I will take. It's very sharp even at f1.4 for stills shooting. Sometimes if I need wider, don't mind the one-stop hit, and don't need AF I'll take the Rokinon (Samyang) 12mm f2 lens which has similar sharpness once corrected. The Roki is smaller, lighter, and easier on the wallet.

The main issue with the Sigma is that it's bigger and heavier than other EF-M native lenses (than all the Canon EF-M lenses) so it takes up more space in the camera bag. Also at more than $400 new usually it's also a bit expensive.

Ergonomically and functionally it's a lovely lens, high quality, if you don't mind the extra size and weight. It's not really that big and heavy, just when compared to most other EF-M native lenses.

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

rz64 wrote:

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

+1

Rock and Rollei wrote:

rz64 wrote:

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

+1

+20 

R2

rz64 wrote:

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

I am still hesitating to get it mainly because of its size, while enjoying its brother 56mm very much.

Bejersey wrote:

Are you happy with it? Complaints?

Thanks

Rick

Hello Rick,

Yes I am happy with it globally.

My only complaint is the minimal focus distance of 25cm....

Otherwise, it is a no brainer for the EF-M system (which I use and love since the beginning of 2018).

Best Regards,

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

I am still hesitating to get it mainly because of its size, while enjoying its brother 56mm very much.

It was the same with me. But because of the following reasons I finally decided for it:
- there is no alternative with this FL and this large aperture,
- "its brother 56mm" has become my favourite lens,
- every purchase of an EF-M product supports the M-line,
- I could get it for a very good price (230 EUR).

Probably it is no every-day-lens, but the results are very good. And for me there are situations where it is very useful. And finally, it completes my set of f/1.4 lenses (16, 32, 56mm).

For me it is too big and on the heavy side. I rather enjoy the EF-M 11-22mm with IS.

I don't need a wide angle this fast. YMMV.

rz64 wrote:

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

I am still hesitating to get it mainly because of its size, while enjoying its brother 56mm very much.

It was the same with me. But because of the following reasons I finally decided for it:
- there is no alternative with this FL and this large aperture,
- "its brother 56mm" has become my favourite lens,
- every purchase of an EF-M product supports the M-line,
- I could get it for a very good price (230 EUR).

Probably it is no every-day-lens, but the results are very good. And for me there are situations where it is very useful. And finally, it completes my set of f/1.4 lenses (16, 32, 56mm).

What if it was smaller and lighter, but more expensive? I would be still hesitating. As a matter of fact, a good price is one of the best specifications. Look at RF 24mm 1.8! Thankfully I am learning how to be satisfied with what I have.

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

Indeed. There seems to be no chance to have RFS 16mm 1.4, 56mm 1.4, or 12mm 2.0.

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

I am still hesitating to get it mainly because of its size, while enjoying its brother 56mm very much.

It was the same with me. But because of the following reasons I finally decided for it:
- there is no alternative with this FL and this large aperture,
- "its brother 56mm" has become my favourite lens,
- every purchase of an EF-M product supports the M-line,
- I could get it for a very good price (230 EUR).

Probably it is no every-day-lens, but the results are very good. And for me there are situations where it is very useful. And finally, it completes my set of f/1.4 lenses (16, 32, 56mm).

What if it was smaller and lighter, but more expensive? I would be still hesitating. As a matter of fact, a good price is one of the best specifications. Look at RF 24mm 1.8! Thankfully I am learning how to be satisfied with what I have.

Of course you can always ask "what if.....". You could argue that "a good price" is the main argument for the M.

Up to now, however, for none of my lenses the price was the "best specification". But I always tried to purchase a lens, when a price reduction was available.

I don't need R or RF-lenses. Indeed, I am also very satisfied with what I have.
And the Sigma16mm is one additional part that lets me enjoy my M6 and its results a little bit more

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

I am still hesitating to get it mainly because of its size, while enjoying its brother 56mm very much.

It was the same with me. But because of the following reasons I finally decided for it:
- there is no alternative with this FL and this large aperture,
- "its brother 56mm" has become my favourite lens,
- every purchase of an EF-M product supports the M-line,
- I could get it for a very good price (230 EUR).

Probably it is no every-day-lens, but the results are very good. And for me there are situations where it is very useful. And finally, it completes my set of f/1.4 lenses (16, 32, 56mm).

What if it was smaller and lighter, but more expensive? I would be still hesitating. As a matter of fact, a good price is one of the best specifications. Look at RF 24mm 1.8! Thankfully I am learning how to be satisfied with what I have.

My question to myself is would I have bought it sooner if it was smaller, lighter and f2? And I think almost certainly so. But I now have 4 f1.4 EF-M fit lenses - 16, 23mm Viltrox, 32mm Canon and 56mm Sigma - and despite the fact that I don't like the size, the 16mm is my most-used. 24mm is my most used full frame focal length, so perhaps it's no surprise - but it simply suits my low-light travel needs better than all the others. 
I will never be entirely happy with the size and weight of this lens by EF-M standards, but it'll probably stay my most-used prime for the system.

Rock and Rollei wrote:

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

I am still hesitating to get it mainly because of its size, while enjoying its brother 56mm very much.

It was the same with me. But because of the following reasons I finally decided for it:
- there is no alternative with this FL and this large aperture,
- "its brother 56mm" has become my favourite lens,
- every purchase of an EF-M product supports the M-line,
- I could get it for a very good price (230 EUR).

Probably it is no every-day-lens, but the results are very good. And for me there are situations where it is very useful. And finally, it completes my set of f/1.4 lenses (16, 32, 56mm).

What if it was smaller and lighter, but more expensive? I would be still hesitating. As a matter of fact, a good price is one of the best specifications. Look at RF 24mm 1.8! Thankfully I am learning how to be satisfied with what I have.

My question to myself is would I have bought it sooner if it was smaller, lighter and f2? And I think almost certainly so. But I now have 4 f1.4 EF-M fit lenses - 16, 23mm Viltrox, 32mm Canon and 56mm Sigma - and despite the fact that I don't like the size, the 16mm is my most-used. 24mm is my most used full frame focal length, so perhaps it's no surprise - but it simply suits my low-light travel needs better than all the others.
I will never be entirely happy with the size and weight of this lens by EF-M standards, but it'll probably stay my most-used prime for the system.

Hey Rock’, agree with you about the 16.  I love it for low light groups, and for environmental portraits too.

What do you think of the Viltrox 23?  It’s been on and off my radar for quite a while, but I’ve never jumped on it (I still use the 22).  Would appreciate your thoughts.

R2

R2D2 wrote:

Rock and Rollei wrote:

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

I am still hesitating to get it mainly because of its size, while enjoying its brother 56mm very much.

It was the same with me. But because of the following reasons I finally decided for it:
- there is no alternative with this FL and this large aperture,
- "its brother 56mm" has become my favourite lens,
- every purchase of an EF-M product supports the M-line,
- I could get it for a very good price (230 EUR).

Probably it is no every-day-lens, but the results are very good. And for me there are situations where it is very useful. And finally, it completes my set of f/1.4 lenses (16, 32, 56mm).

What if it was smaller and lighter, but more expensive? I would be still hesitating. As a matter of fact, a good price is one of the best specifications. Look at RF 24mm 1.8! Thankfully I am learning how to be satisfied with what I have.

My question to myself is would I have bought it sooner if it was smaller, lighter and f2? And I think almost certainly so. But I now have 4 f1.4 EF-M fit lenses - 16, 23mm Viltrox, 32mm Canon and 56mm Sigma - and despite the fact that I don't like the size, the 16mm is my most-used. 24mm is my most used full frame focal length, so perhaps it's no surprise - but it simply suits my low-light travel needs better than all the others.
I will never be entirely happy with the size and weight of this lens by EF-M standards, but it'll probably stay my most-used prime for the system.

Hey Rock’, agree with you about the 16. I love it for low light groups, and for environmental portraits too.

What do you think of the Viltrox 23? It’s been on and off my radar for quite a while, but I’ve never jumped on it (I still use the 22). Would appreciate your thoughts.

R2

Well, the Viltrox is a lens I bought online after a few glasses of wine because it was a very decent price. So I wouldn't say it was my most logical or sensible purchase....
But I really like it, within certain constraints. 
Good points: f1.4, an aperture ring that fully integrates with the electronics in any mode, pretty decent AF, generally pretty sharp. And it feels absolutely beautifully built, lovely damping to the very wide focus ring - feels much more expensive than it is.
Bad points: Somewhat soft wide open (not something I generally mind too much, in fact I quite like taking advantage of it), bulky and heavy compared to the 22/2, silver coloured - so not unobtrusive, closest focus distance longer than the 22mm f2.
I enjoy using both the 22 and the 23. If I'm not sure I'll need the focal length, then the 22 is always the lens I'll pick. Just come back from a few days in Budapest, the 22 was in the bag and got a little use (the 16 much more) - I'll carry it anywhere. But I did some street photography a couple of weeks ago, and absolutely loved using the 23 for it - f1.4 gives that bit more subject separation from the background, and that aperture ring is a delight to use. 
If I could only have one of the two, for me the 22 is the better compromise. But the Viltrox is a very fine lens that is a great choice if 35mm full frame equivalent is your favourite focal length.

Rock and Rollei wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Rock and Rollei wrote:

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

lumenite wrote:

rz64 wrote:

KEG wrote:

Yes, it is wonderful, be happy to have the only Canon mirrorless mount that has active 3rd party support.

I can confirm that it is a wonderful lens.

For a long time I hesitated because of the lens' size. But there are situations where this lens fits perfectly in combination with my M6. Even adapted to an M100 it is a good combination.

It is almost as great as the Sigma 56mm.

I am still hesitating to get it mainly because of its size, while enjoying its brother 56mm very much.

It was the same with me. But because of the following reasons I finally decided for it:
- there is no alternative with this FL and this large aperture,
- "its brother 56mm" has become my favourite lens,
- every purchase of an EF-M product supports the M-line,
- I could get it for a very good price (230 EUR).

Probably it is no every-day-lens, but the results are very good. And for me there are situations where it is very useful. And finally, it completes my set of f/1.4 lenses (16, 32, 56mm).

What if it was smaller and lighter, but more expensive? I would be still hesitating. As a matter of fact, a good price is one of the best specifications. Look at RF 24mm 1.8! Thankfully I am learning how to be satisfied with what I have.

My question to myself is would I have bought it sooner if it was smaller, lighter and f2? And I think almost certainly so. But I now have 4 f1.4 EF-M fit lenses - 16, 23mm Viltrox, 32mm Canon and 56mm Sigma - and despite the fact that I don't like the size, the 16mm is my most-used. 24mm is my most used full frame focal length, so perhaps it's no surprise - but it simply suits my low-light travel needs better than all the others.
I will never be entirely happy with the size and weight of this lens by EF-M standards, but it'll probably stay my most-used prime for the system.

Hey Rock’, agree with you about the 16. I love it for low light groups, and for environmental portraits too.

What do you think of the Viltrox 23? It’s been on and off my radar for quite a while, but I’ve never jumped on it (I still use the 22). Would appreciate your thoughts.

R2

Well, the Viltrox is a lens I bought online after a few glasses of wine because it was a very decent price. So I wouldn't say it was my most logical or sensible purchase....
But I really like it, within certain constraints.
Good points: f1.4, an aperture ring that fully integrates with the electronics in any mode, pretty decent AF, generally pretty sharp. And it feels absolutely beautifully built, lovely damping to the very wide focus ring - feels much more expensive than it is.
Bad points: Somewhat soft wide open (not something I generally mind too much, in fact I quite like taking advantage of it), bulky and heavy compared to the 22/2, silver coloured - so not unobtrusive, closest focus distance longer than the 22mm f2.
I enjoy using both the 22 and the 23. If I'm not sure I'll need the focal length, then the 22 is always the lens I'll pick. Just come back from a few days in Budapest, the 22 was in the bag and got a little use (the 16 much more) - I'll carry it anywhere. But I did some street photography a couple of weeks ago, and absolutely loved using the 23 for it - f1.4 gives that bit more subject separation from the background, and that aperture ring is a delight to use.
If I could only have one of the two, for me the 22 is the better compromise. But the Viltrox is a very fine lens that is a great choice if 35mm full frame equivalent is your favourite focal length.

Many thanks.  Yeah I can see how it would work well for street (and maybe candids).

I wish Sigma would bring out a 22 in f/1.4.  I know it'd rock for action!

R2