Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC lens, anyone?

DoctorItDoctorIt Administrators Posts: 11,951 moderator
edited August 30, 2006 in Cameras
Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC: I can't find a single review for this lens via Google. Anyone out there in dgrin land have any experience or even a link to a buried review by someone else? I've been happy with middle-of-the-road Sigma glass in the past...

I'm looking for a new all-purpose travel/motorcycle lens. I know the Nikkor 18-200VR is a great piece of walk-around glass, but I'd have to trade my 70-200VR straight up for it. I'd rather sacrifice some quality for a cheaper len$. Remember, this one will be stuffed in a motorcycle case and only has to give me marginally better performance on my D70 than a little point/shoot.
Erik
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]

Comments

  • StustaffStustaff Registered Users Posts: 680 Major grins
    edited August 28, 2006
    Exactly what I have, exzctly what I use it for!

    I've been really happy with it so far, it works fine noticed a bit of light drop off in the corners, but havent had any real expensive lenses to compare it to!

    here are some photos with it so you can see for yourself

    59528750-L.jpg

    73130822-L.jpg


    80319835-L.jpg


    80323446-L.jpg
    Trapped in my bedroom taking pictures...did i say bedroom? i meant studio!

    My www. place is www.belperphoto.co.uk
    My smugmug galleries at http://stuarthill.smugmug.com
  • SpeshulEdSpeshulEd Registered Users Posts: 341 Major grins
    edited August 28, 2006
    I had the 18-125 and the two are supposed to be similar. Its a bit soft, but other than that, I didn't have too many complaints. I sold it though because I wanted something sharper.

    here's a review for the 18-200
    http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sigma18200mm/index.shtml

    and here's another discussion on it too...
    http://www.dcresource.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-7524.html
    bored? check out my photo site...and if you have the time, leave a comment or rate some pictures while you're there.
    Canon 20D | Canon 17-40mm f/4L USM | Tamron 28-75 f2.8 XR Di LD IF | Canon 50mm f/1.8 II | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
  • DoctorItDoctorIt Administrators Posts: 11,951 moderator
    edited August 28, 2006
    Stustaff wrote:
    Exactly what I have, exzctly what I use it for!

    I've been really happy with it so far, it works fine noticed a bit of light drop off in the corners, but havent had any real expensive lenses to compare it to!

    here are some photos with it so you can see for yourself

    80323446-Th.jpg
    Some great shots, especially the last - looks more than acceptable when handled correctly. nod.gif
    Erik
    moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]

  • DoctorItDoctorIt Administrators Posts: 11,951 moderator
    edited August 28, 2006
    SpeshulEd wrote:
    I had the 18-125 and the two are supposed to be similar. Its a bit soft, but other than that, I didn't have too many complaints. I sold it though because I wanted something sharper.

    here's a review for the 18-200
    http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sigma18200mm/index.shtml

    and here's another discussion on it too...
    http://www.dcresource.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-7524.html
    I see your googling powers are more developed than mine - excellent review by camera labs, thanks! thumb.gif


    Now another question... Stu, you have the lens so can probably answer easily: how close can you go with the lens? As in, does it have a "macro" mode as many Sigma's do?
    Erik
    moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]

  • StustaffStustaff Registered Users Posts: 680 Major grins
    edited August 28, 2006
    Thanks will be getting lots of practice soon so hope to get a real good idea of just what its capable of.

    That last shot is at 18 with the horse maybe two feet away.

    dont do much work closer than that :) No specific macro mode afaik.
    Trapped in my bedroom taking pictures...did i say bedroom? i meant studio!

    My www. place is www.belperphoto.co.uk
    My smugmug galleries at http://stuarthill.smugmug.com
  • DJ-S1DJ-S1 Registered Users Posts: 2,303 Major grins
    edited August 28, 2006
    Interesting article on camera labs here which says that the field of view of lenses with a large zoom range like 18-200mm may not be what you expect.
  • DoctorItDoctorIt Administrators Posts: 11,951 moderator
    edited August 28, 2006
    DJ-S1 wrote:
    Interesting article on camera labs here which says that the field of view of lenses with a large zoom range like 18-200mm may not be what you expect.
    That's pretty common based on the focus. In the end, however, its negligible.
    Erik
    moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]

  • DJ-S1DJ-S1 Registered Users Posts: 2,303 Major grins
    edited August 28, 2006
    yeah, I wasn't trying to imply that it was something specific to this lens, I just wasn't aware of it.
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,703 moderator
    edited August 28, 2006
    Doc,

    These 10 to 1 zooms are asking an awful lot optically.

    I'm not giving any secrets away here.

    Most of them suffer from poor resolution or Chromatic aberration.

    They are fine for snapshots - I used a Tamron 28-200 several years ago, but there definitley was CA in some shots.

    The Nikon 18-200 I think may be an exception. But, I'll bet it is not anywhere as good a good Nikon primes either.

    It comes down to convenience versus quality.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • DoctorItDoctorIt Administrators Posts: 11,951 moderator
    edited August 28, 2006
    pathfinder wrote:
    Doc,

    These 10 to 1 zooms are asking an awful lot optically.

    I'm not giving any secrets away here.

    Most of them suffer from poor resolution or Chromatic aberration.

    They are fine for snapshots - I used a Tamron 28-200 several years ago, but there definitley was CA in some shots.

    The Nikon 18-200 I think may be an exception. But, I'll bet it is not anywhere as good a good Nikon primes either.

    It comes down to convenience versus quality.
    yup, of course. I'm just finding myself needing some convenience in my kit. A 50mm and big 70-200VR really don't make a great motorcycle travel set.
    Erik
    moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]

  • StustaffStustaff Registered Users Posts: 680 Major grins
    edited August 28, 2006
    I finish my road trip across the US and canada on holiday in boston in about 2 months you can have a look then if you like? ;)
    Trapped in my bedroom taking pictures...did i say bedroom? i meant studio!

    My www. place is www.belperphoto.co.uk
    My smugmug galleries at http://stuarthill.smugmug.com
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,703 moderator
    edited August 28, 2006
    My trip over Hagerman Pass from Basalt to Leadville was on a GS, with a 20D and a Tamron 28-85 f2.8 Di. It rode in my tank bag every day.

    Next week, I plan on carrying a 5D and a 24-105 F4 IS L, and a Tamron 200-500 for roadside wildlife shots, through Colorado, New Mexico, and hopefully part of Arizona. I'll be riding an ST1300 this trip. I think I will bring my RRS ground tripod so I'll have a stable platform to shoot from if needed.

    If I didn't own the 24-105, I might consider the 28-135 IS from Canon, that's a pretty nice travel lens also.

    The Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Autofocus Lens, looks like a great choice for Nikonians. That is what I'd take. - http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=277219&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,078 moderator
    edited August 28, 2006
    DoctorIt wrote:
    yup, of course. I'm just finding myself needing some convenience in my kit. A 50mm and big 70-200VR really don't make a great motorcycle travel set.
    Just thinking outside the box. (Nikon didn't have anything like this.)
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • DoctorItDoctorIt Administrators Posts: 11,951 moderator
    edited August 29, 2006
    ziggy53 wrote:
    Just thinking outside the box. (Nikon didn't have anything like this.)
    rolleyes1.gif
    Erik
    moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]

  • BigAlBigAl Registered Users Posts: 2,294 Major grins
    edited August 30, 2006
    I can't comment on the Sigma 18-200, but I played around with a Tamron 18-200 this weekend, and the IQ is not as good as the Sigma 18-125. Even though it takes a bit of effort to get focus spot on with the Sigma the results were better in my tests. The Tamron hunts quite a lot too.

    I must say that I really like the focal length on the Sigma. All I used on a recent trip to Europe and seldom found I needed anything more than the 125. I'm still working on the galleries, but have a look at some of these snaps:
    http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/gallery/1695888
    http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/gallery/1675651
    Birds
    Bugs
    Spiders
    Flowers
  • jthomasjthomas Registered Users Posts: 454 Major grins
    edited August 30, 2006
    If you don't need to go really wide, you might consider the Nikkor 28-200G.

    I have one and I'm well pleased. It is small, light, and relatively inexpensive.
Sign In or Register to comment.