Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS

[superdiver]

Lets see the shots of your 18-200 OS lens. Also include the basic exif data if you can...

[Tony-S]

Here's one shot wide open at 115mm, 1/250". Full frame and crop. (Note the damned hot pixel! )

Exif Properties

Aperture Value 5.310699
Color Space 65535
Custom Rendered 0
Date Time Digitized 2007:07:28 09:28:16
Date Time Original 2007:07:28 09:28:16
Exif Version 2.2.1
Exposure Bias Value 0
Exposure Mode 0
Exposure Program 3
Exposure Time 0.004
Flash 16
FlashPix Version 1.0
FNumber 6.3
Focal Length 115
Focal Plane Resolution Unit 2
Focal Plane X Resolution 3959.322
Focal Plane Y Resolution 3959.322
ISO Speed Ratings 400
Metering Mode 5
Pixel X Dimension 533
Pixel Y Dimension 800
Scene Capture Type 0
Shutter Speed Value 7.965789
White Balance 0

[Tony-S]

And another, this one relying upon the OS. Shot at 200mm, 1/80", f/11.

Exif Properties

Aperture Value 6.918869
Color Space 65535
Custom Rendered 0
Date Time Digitized 2007:07:28 09:49:15
Date Time Original 2007:07:28 09:49:15
Exif Version 2.2.1
Exposure Bias Value 0
Exposure Mode 0
Exposure Program 3
Exposure Time 0.0125
Flash 16
FlashPix Version 1.0
FNumber 11
Focal Length 200
Focal Plane Resolution Unit 2
Focal Plane X Resolution 3959.322
Focal Plane Y Resolution 3959.322
ISO Speed Ratings 400
Metering Mode 5
Pixel X Dimension 800
Pixel Y Dimension 532
Scene Capture Type 0
Shutter Speed Value 6.32193
White Balance 0

[cicopo]

I had already put this in another 18-200 OS message, but besides those samples there are links to a few crops too, just read the previous page to find any other messages with attachments.
If anyone wants a couple of full file as shot samples plus a comparison shot from my 17-40L I uploaded them to the 20D forum at Imaging Resource where we are allowed to use full file shots. You can download & save them to your computer to examine & compare at whatever resolution you want just as though you took it yourself, and the EXIF should be intact. They are attached to messages on this page, & include a brief explination of the shot set up. (messages 1164, 1170, & 1171 are full file as shot)
http://www.photo-forums.com/WebX?7@6...@.ee9ad5e/1181

[LightRules]

Originally Posted by superdiver

Lets see the shots of your 18-200 OS lens. Also include the basic exif data if you can...

I was going to start this "image archive" for this lens, but it looks like you beat me to it Anywho, I'm heading up to SF/NorCal for a week at the end of this month and will be taking this lens along. So I'll post back here thereafter (probably early to mid Sept) a bunch of pics to contribute. That will be my first "real outing" with the lens apart from street signs and peeping. It's a nice lens.

[superdiver]

Great, I will look forward to them!

tony-S, what are your overall impression of this lens...These pictures look pretty good for less the $600! And a nice wide range with OS to boot. Is the Sigma OS very good?

[In2Photos]

Tony-S sent me the link so I put it in the archive. Thanks guys.

[Tony-S]

Originally Posted by superdiver

ony-S, what are your overall impression of this lens...These pictures look pretty good for less the $600! And a nice wide range with OS to boot. Is the Sigma OS very good?

I'm very happy with it so far. The OS is really good. I've not owned an IS lens, but here's a handheld example of the Siggy; 200mm at 1/10" with and without the OS.

[LightRules]

Originally Posted by superdiver

tony-S, what are your overall impression of this lens...These pictures look pretty good for less the $600! And a nice wide range with OS to boot. Is the Sigma OS very good?

My review is here http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/sigma18200os

And my recent 1785IS and 18200OS test http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/1785isv18200os

As for the OS unit, comparing it to the 1785IS and 1755IS, the OS lens upon initial start up (when you first press the shutter half way), it is more "jumpy" and sometimes can harshly "pop" the VF image, but it quickly settles down and in practice, the stabilization is as good or better than the IS units. But initial "smoothness" goes to the IS units.

[cicopo]

Samples of the OS on or off at 200 mm, the text on the poster is 5/16" high in real life, and these are 100% crops at 800 X 600 pixels F6.3, 1/25 second
http://links.pictures.aol.com/pic/a6...T5MKO6BL_l.jpg
http://links.pictures.aol.com/pic/a6...g7UDAwS1_l.jpg
these are at F8, 1/13 sec
http://links.pictures.aol.com/pic/a6...Lvd*LQlj_l.jpg
http://links.pictures.aol.com/pic/a6...1r-TdaZS_l.jpg

[jsfpa]

I bought the 18-200 OS because I thought it might be a nice walk around lens. It came the other day but have not had much of a chance to play with it. I took it with me when I went out to get a cup of coffee tonight and took this quick shot. This is at 200 mm F 6.3 @ 1/100 sec.

[jsfpa]

Here's another.

134mm f 5.6 @ 1/50 sec

[cicopo]

Very nice shots. Too bad some purist will condemn then because they aren't as good as those from a lens that costs 10 times as much mounted on a tripod. I really want to see what those type of people drive, they must all own Rolls Royces and have private jets standing by. The most important thing I have learned about how good most lenses are when reading the negative remarks is that they come from people who READ it was bad, or own cheapest body it can fit and haven't mastered how to use either properly.

[superdiver]

Well, I dont think we have reached that level of negativity here yet. In fact I would say that everyone so far has had positive things to say about it...

[dawei213]

Most of these shots are at the telephoto end. How about at the wide angle 18mm end? Good color reproduction and sharp?