My Sigma 18-200 Lens Test Photos

[GovtLawyer]

I have posted the photos I took to test the Sigma 18-200. The link will follow this explanation of how I conducted the test of this lens. I am sure there will be some who say my test was flawed; it may be.

I went up to my roof and took pictures of the Empire State Building, which is approximately one mile away. There were a number of buildings, and in the widest lens test there were trees from the middle of the block, all between my vantage point and the building. I took all of the shots hand-held, braced against the roof for as secure a support as I could. I took three shots at 4 different focal lengths , 18MM, 59MM (the middle shot was mistakenly taken at 48MM), 144MM, and 200 MM. Each shot was at wide open, at F14 and F22. All were in autofocus, but I am not sure if I used a center focus or the auto.

Here is where I may have srewed up the test results. The files were too big to upload, so I cropped each one at approximately the same point, in the center; trying to make sure some of the foreground as well as the ESB were in the crop. I saved it for the web at 75% JPG. They are still large files.

The following is the link. I am not a paid PBASE member, so the link is to the gallery as opposed to each picture. I may not have hypertexed the link, so just copy and paste it.

Let me know hoe you found the test, and if it confirms any of the contraversy surrounding this lens.

http://www.pbase.com/govtlawyer/sigma_18200

[shortie]

Hi

What is your initial view of the lens

I am saving for a DSLR and that lens is one I am thinking about as an all round walk about lens

Cheers

Shortie

[vespaindiana]

How much did you pay for that lens Govt?

Vespaindiana

[GovtLawyer]

Hi

What is your initial view of the lens

I am saving for a DSLR and that lens is one I am thinking about as an all round walk about lens

Cheers

Shortie

My initial view is that I like it. However, I don't have too much to compare it too, other than anecdotal responses and the reputation of "L" glass, which I can't afford. That's why I posted the test. What seems OK to me might be critically panned by someone else. It appears to focus fast, although I can't compare it to anything else.

[GovtLawyer]

How much did you pay for that lens Govt?

Vespaindiana

I believe I paid $369.00

[vespaindiana]

Thank you for sharing the results of your test, Govt.
I was asking you the price 'cause I could'nt find any shop selling that lens in Italy ("too new"!). I found it on the Internet (http://www.ilfotoamatore.it/Scheda_Avanzata.asp?ID=2606&art=sg746) and I am very tempted to place an order! (a bit more than what you paid for it, but in euros :))

Cheers

Vespaindiana

[shortie]

thanks for the feed back

[Cadwell]

It's hard to tell much from the shots at the long end, they look a little "soft" but that could well be down to atmospheric haze.

The wide (18mm) shots show some very pronounced barrel distortion though.

[EOSAddict]

Hi

What is your initial view of the lens

I am saving for a DSLR and that lens is one I am thinking about as an all round walk about lens

Shortie,

Depends what range you want. Go have a look at the Sigma but also the Tamron same range and 28-300. I have the latter and I think its a great lens for most uses. I do miss the wider end so am keeping the kit lens (which I think is much better than most) until I can upgrade - possibly to the Sigma 18-125.

If you want it as a 'walk round' lens, choose one with zoom lock! Great invention.

[mkh]

The thing I like most about your test is that it shows the image size of different focal lengths. Sometimes it's hard for me to mentally get my head around the differences between how close an item appears at different focal lengths. I realize an object will appear closer/larger at 200mm than at 50mm but how much bigger/closer is hard for me to grasp. Your test graphically solves this problem.

[shortie]

EOSAddict

Thanks for the input

[Paul Carpentier]

Samples, anyone?

http://www.pixagogo.com/6255155219

Paul