ClickClick Senior Member 801 posts Likes: 5 Joined Jan 2006 More info | Mar 31, 2008 10:04 | #1 Basically I would just like to know if the IQ is any different on the Sigma 18-200 models with and without the OS feature? A camera.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
elysium "full of stupid banter"  11,619 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jul 2007 Location: Harrow/London/UK/GB/That Part Of The World/Next To France More info | Mar 31, 2008 10:06 | #2 Not really seen a side by side of these two lenses. Since this is my next purchase, will keep an eye out. Everyday, a programmer finds a way of creating an idiotproof program. Everyday, the universe spits out another idiot.....So far, the universe if winning
LOG IN TO REPLY |
LightRules Return of the Jedi  9,911 posts Likes: 5 Joined Jun 2005 More info | Mar 31, 2008 10:09 | #3 I would highly recommend you get the OS version of this lens. It's better than most biases against superzooms might lead you to believe. And the OS unit is highly effective (e.g., I personally was able to get what I deem to be shake-free images at 5-6 stops).
LOG IN TO REPLY |
elysium "full of stupid banter" 11,619 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jul 2007 Location: Harrow/London/UK/GB/That Part Of The World/Next To France More info | Mar 31, 2008 10:14 | #4 LightRules wrote in post #5230138  I would highly recommend you get the OS version of this lens. It's better than most biases against superzooms might lead you to believe. And the OS unit is highly effective (e.g., I personally was able to get what I deem to be shake-free images at 5-6 stops). Read a few reviews where it stated it was great for 3 stops but 5-6 stops is great. The Sigma 24-70 is great even when wide open but I have a feeling this lens needs to be stopped down a bit? Everyday, a programmer finds a way of creating an idiotproof program. Everyday, the universe spits out another idiot.....So far, the universe if winning
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mar 31, 2008 10:21 | #5 LightRules wrote in post #5230138 I would highly recommend you get the OS version of this lens. It's better than most biases against superzooms might lead you to believe. And the OS unit is highly effective (e.g., I personally was able to get what I deem to be shake-free images at 5-6 stops). I would really love the OS version, but the $$ is a bit out of my range right now and this is a lens that will get only occassional use. Most of my images come from the tamron 17-50 2.8 as I do a lot of nightclub shots and stuff. A camera.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
cicopo Goldmember  More info | Mar 31, 2008 10:23 | #6 The difference is very minor, but if you want to see it for yourself download my samples from this album, it has some from both lenses. A skill is developed through constant practice with a passion to improve, not bought.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is AlainPre 1243 guests, 140 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
