Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Sigma 18-200. Opinions?  
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3554 times:

Hy all,
I have recently norrowed my search to the sigma 18-200 because of the range it covers. What does anyone thinks about this choice? Have heard different opinions about it : some say it's a good choice some others say that it's slow at long end, not sharp or has not any decent AF neither...
Another possible choice would be the Sigma 18-125. Basically I'm looking a good lense to keep on my second body which basically covers many shooting needs...
What are your opinions ? Any other possible candidate ? Thanks to all for input.

Ciao


Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineVice911 From China, joined Nov 2006, 57 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3538 times:

hi, well I've tried the sigma 18-200mm on my D200 before and i found it very soft and slow above 100mm, so not really good for moving subjects, i think is ok for ground stuff and static displays. Thanks. Yuan Le


Back in China now. Camera used: Nikon D70 D50 D200 D40 FUJI S3 PRO Canon 400D. Now with Nikon D7000.
User currently offlineBoeingfreak From Germany, joined May 2005, 398 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3525 times:

Quoting Vice911 (Reply 1):
i found it very soft and slow above 100mm

Might be due to the "enormous" range this lens has, it starts at 18mm which is a quite good wideangle and ends at 200mm which is quite long, more than a 10x zoom.... I wouldn't buy it, get one with a smaller range, maybe 4x or 5x at most.

Cheers,
Florian


User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3524 times:

The Nikkor 18-200VR is much better.


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 31
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3463 times:

I have one. It is a bit slower than L glass and a bit softer, but nothing which you can not correct in Photoshop. At least, it was fast enough for this here
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gerardo Dominguez




dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineSluger020889 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 456 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3432 times:

Quoting Viv (Reply 3):
The Nikkor 18-200VR is much better.

Thats one of the hottest "all around" Nikon lens on the market, good luck finding one.



I would love to fly a cargo plane full of rubber dog shit out of Hong Kong!
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3424 times:

Quoting Sluger020889 (Reply 5):
good luck finding one

They are hard to find. I got mine when they first came out - ordered it before shipments started.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineTRVYYZ From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1372 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3424 times:

Last week I saw one with the OS at the photography exhibition here. C$749.99.
http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/10426/sigma_18200mm_os_lens/
I tried it and it seemed ok for the two shots I took with it, but not enough to give an opinion.


User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2071 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3408 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting Viv (Reply 3):
The Nikkor 18-200VR is much better.

I can only second that; I had the Sigma 18-200mm before I got the Nikkor and the Nikkor is better in any aspect (sharpness, light, VR). If you can get one go for it!

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3377 times:

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 8):
If you can get one go for it!

I know. Nikkor 18-200 is great.
I have a Canon 30D and a 300D though...So I must find a good compromise  Sad

Ciao



Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 31
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3363 times:

If you need more examples taken with that lens: http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos....2|869||||lens|2||||||-2|||1|||||||

The Sigma is indeed a good compromise and a good walk around lens.



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineTRVYYZ From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1372 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3335 times:

Quoting Gerardo (Reply 10):

I see you have a Tamron 28-200mm. How does it compare with your sigma minus 10mm wide?


User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2900 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3224 times:

Quoting Vice911 (Reply 1):
hi, well I've tried the sigma 18-200mm on my D200 before and i found it very soft and slow above 100mm, so not really good for moving subjects, i think is ok for ground stuff and static displays.

I'd agree with that - I bought that lens a couple of months ago and I'm using it with a 400D. On the wide end it is sharp, but I find it soft on the long end, even in bright light and using a tripod. I previously used an Olympus C765 compactish camera and I sometimes find it's sharper still.

The Sigma lens doesn't seem to like filters very much, they affect AF it seems.



I scratch my head, therefore I am.
User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 31
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3216 times:

Quoting TRVYYZ (Reply 11):
Quoting Gerardo (Reply 10):

I see you have a Tamron 28-200mm. How does it compare with your sigma minus 10mm wide?

I have never used both side by side. I bought the 18-200 specially for the 10mm difference, which make a hell of a lot difference for me, above all on DSLR.



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Sigma 18-200 F3.5-F6.3 DC Any Good? posted Sat Jul 22 2006 13:05:09 by Andz
Opinions On Sigma 18-200mm Lens posted Sun Nov 20 2005 00:10:31 by Kukkudrill
Sigma 18-50, 55-200 posted Fri Jan 9 2004 02:56:04 by Futterman
Sigma 170-500... Opinions? posted Tue Jan 10 2006 20:41:57 by Andz
Sigma 300 F2.8 V Sigma 120-200 F2.8 posted Fri Sep 9 2005 12:29:24 by LHRSIMON
Sigma 70-200 F/2.8 EX Vs Canon 70-200 F/4L posted Fri Jul 22 2005 07:30:42 by DLKAPA
Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX HSM & 1.4x TC Whats It Like? posted Fri Oct 8 2004 09:29:08 by Ua935
Sigma 18/50 Lens Question posted Tue Sep 21 2004 20:21:56 by UTA_flyingHIGH
Sigma - 70-200 2.8 APO EX HSM posted Wed May 19 2004 20:16:55 by Danny
Lens Ask :canon 70-200 Or Sigma 70-200 posted Wed May 5 2004 18:28:00 by Gust