Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 "OS" DC Review

Well I also am not happy with you either, now I need to add a new lens to my wish list

At least it is far from the most expensive.

WMS

uuggh, had this lense on my wishlist at B&H for a few weeks now... waiting.. and waiting..

now I went there to get it.. and its out of stock..

thats about right.

Wobble wrote in post #3472249
uuggh, had this lense on my wishlist at B&H for a few weeks now... waiting.. and waiting..

now I went there to get it.. and its out of stock..

thats about right.

A good number of people have stated this lens is out of stock from their normal retailer (probably B&H as you mention also). But places like Amazon.com, Norman Camera, BuyDig, BeachCamera, Sigma4Less --- they all have it in stock for the same or better price than B&H. FWIW.

Wobble wrote in post #3472249
uuggh, had this lense on my wishlist at B&H for a few weeks now... waiting.. and waiting..

now I went there to get it.. and its out of stock..

thats about right.

Well, I can tell by your username that you really don't need OS. Why don't you buy my non-OS version of this lens and I'll use your money to get the OS version?

HAHAHA.

Next up is Hiroshi Suzuki of Tokina I guess

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

farrukh wrote in post #3472844
Next up is Hiroshi Suzuki of Tokina I guess

Where'd you find that, Farrukh? Nice one! I looked all over for Tokina's Man. But you apparently beat me to it. I got to go find Mr. Quantaray now...

http://images.google.c​om.pk …oe=UTF-8&um=1&sa=N&tab=wi

Lightrules, I completely concur with your test findings. I had been interested in the Tamron and Sigma 18-200 lenses for some time, but the lack of stabilization was a deal killer for me for a downtown and around town walking lens, and I stuck with the Canon 17-85IS. When the 18-200mm OS was announced last September, I began my wait. When it was announced again in November and again in February, I continued waiting. Finally got one from Canoga last week for $548--one dollar less than B&H, who had them in stock for almost one full day!

My testing is consistent with yours, and I have to say that your assessment of the favorable impression of the appearance and feel of the lens is exactly right. Compared to the all-plastic-looking Canon 17-85 and 28-135, this lens just seems better, more solid. The supporting inner sleeve is aluminum rather than plastic, and there is no slack or wobble zoomed all the way to 200mm.

I'm not as steady as I was back when I carried a Nikon F around Vietnam, so the digital modified traditional minimum handhold speed (1.6 times the focal length) no longer applies to me. Maybe 2.5 times the focal length is more like it, and with longer lenses, even more. With stabilization, I do a little better, but around 2x+ is the best I can get generally. For example, with the 100-400IS at 400mm, about 1/320 is my slowest consistent handheld speed with IS turned on.

With this lens, I find that I can get consistently sharp images at about 1/100 or faster at 200mm. This is a little better than I get with the Canon lenses, so I am happy with it.

Tamron 1.4x extender (standard, not Pro). AF in bright sun works...slowly. In dim light, I mostly get hunting all the way in to all the way out. Once I get focus, however, either through AF or manual, the resulting image is surprisingly sharp. I have only shot a nearby office tower and a bunny in the back yard (rainy afternoon through a window pane!) and got more than acceptable results. The Tamron 1.4x is a very compact extender, easily carried in a pocket, so you can have a 280mm F9 available in a pinch.

One other focus comment. With my Rebel XT, and a low contrast subject with low light, AF has a hard time at 200mm. On the 20D, though, it is much better.

This lens is an excellent value. Good quality for a good price. I'm really happy to see Sigma expand its OS line. Now, how about a new Bigma 50-500 OS? Or a 300-800mm OS?

A 50-500 with OS would sure tempt me also.

WMS

Thanks for your review. I've been looking for exactly that for my travels - a (relatively) light and small zoom lens with a wide range of coverage, image stabilizer and high optical quality. It's much nicer to carry just the camera body and one lens attached - saves a lot of back / shoulders pain and makes the trip a lot more enjoyable.

Thanks again

Oh how this confuses me even more. I was just about convinced to get the 70-200 L (non-is). But after reading this I dont know any more. I love the idea of Jack of all Trades Lens. My last vacation I was constantly changing lens. And I am not extremley happy with my Sigma 70-300 APO. So many choices

wburychka wrote in post #3474488
Tamron 1.4x extender (standard, not Pro). AF in bright sun works...slowly. In dim light, I mostly get hunting all the way in to all the way out. Once I get focus, however, either through AF or manual, the resulting image is surprisingly sharp. I have only shot a nearby office tower and a bunny in the back yard (rainy afternoon through a window pane!) and got more than acceptable results. The Tamron 1.4x is a very compact extender, easily carried in a pocket, so you can have a 280mm F9 available in a pinch

I have yet to try it with a 1.4x, but your experience seems right and what I'd expect from this lens with 1.4x. I haven't tried it yet mainly because 200mm f6.3 is dark enough as it is. Thanks for reporting.

WMS wrote in post #3474546
A 50-500 with OS would sure tempt me also

You're preaching to the choir. People have been asking for this for a long time now (or adding HSM to their 80-400 OS). But it can't hurt to keep dreaming, I suppose.

Olegis wrote in post #3476307
Thanks for your review. I've been looking for exactly that for my travels - a (relatively) light and small zoom lens with a wide range of coverage, image stabilizer and high optical quality. It's much nicer to carry just the camera body and one lens attached - saves a lot of back / shoulders pain and makes the trip a lot more enjoyable.
Thanks again

I wouldn't say this lens delivers "high optical quality", but it is still very good. I think for what it is, it's quite impressive. It isn't in the same league as the f2.8 standard zooms or 70-200's, but it's nonetheless a superlative travel lens. I see Klaus has done the Tamron 18-250 in Nikon mount recently and the results look similar to what I've found with this 18-200 OS: good overall IQ, but strong distortions at the wide end and strong light fall off http://www.photozone.d​e …8250_3563_nikon​/index.htm

AussiePup wrote in post #3476705
Oh how this confuses me even more. I was just about convinced to get the 70-200 L (non-is). But after reading this I dont know any more. I love the idea of Jack of all Trades Lens. My last vacation I was constantly changing lens. And I am not extremley happy with my Sigma 70-300 APO. So many choices

FWIW, the 70-300 APO DG is better in its overlapping focal lengths (viz., 70-200mm) than this 18-200 OS. Not a lot better, but better nonetheless. So just realize what you're getting with an 11x zoom here. You will love, however, not having to change lenses as much.

Thanks for the comments everyone.

Thanks for the review. Any comments as to how this compares to the Sigma 17-70 as a walkabout lens.

troutfisher wrote in post #3480578
Thanks for the review. Any comments as to how this compares to the Sigma 17-70 as a walkabout lens.

IMO the 1770 is slightly better both in sharpness and distortion control in the overlapping focal lengths (at equivalent apertures). But again, the 18-200 OS isn't that far off and has its own strengths (viz., 70-200mm, OS). Again we see how each lens choice is a compromise of some sort. If you're happy with the range of the 1770, I don't see the need to move to the OS lens. But if you would like to give up a little IQ for convenience and OS, then the move is a good one.