Sigma 18-200 3.5-6.3 OS are you happy with it?

I'm looking at getting all rounder lens simply for holidays and non important photos. (ie non paid work)

I tried it out in a shop and I was quite impressed with the OS (image stabiliser) which is a must if you are required to shoot at f6.3 @ 200mm I was able to get steady shots 1/20th . I was also impressed with the AF speed. Which seemed much better than the Sigma 24-70 2.8 EX I have.

I guess I'm interesting to read what others think of this lens, if you required lens calibration or not. I'd also appreciate it if you can put of some images taken with this lens.

Cheers

You can download several full file as shot samples from mine here.
http://picasaweb.googl​e.com/cicopo/LensSampl​es
And I am very happy with mine, which hasn't had any re calibration done. It's a very good value due to both the OS and the range covered.

In terms of IQ, it will not be sharp wide open. Center sharpness is acceptable while it gets softer towards the corner. Color and contrast is pretty good but don't compare it to your L lens. That said, it's very nice to go from 18 to 200 without changing lens. The OS is pretty damn good and for a general walk around, I feel it offers tremedous value. If you won't be printing 8x10 pictures or the pictures at maximum resolution, I definitely feel it's acceptable and to most people (non photog), it's very good. Working indoor with the OS is a godsend too. For it's price, OS and focal range, it's a pretty piece.

Here are some recent threads:
https://photography-on-the.net …14&highlight=si​gma+18-200
https://photography-on-the.net …00&highlight=si​gma+18-200
https://photography-on-the.net …22&highlight=si​gma+18-200

Thanks for the links. I think this lens will suit its purpose well.

I was a little hesitant because the sigma 24-70 EX I own gave me all sorts of problems.

Cheers

byso wrote in post #5267132
I'm looking at getting all rounder lens simply for holidays and non important photos. (ie non paid work)

I tried it out in a shop and I was quite impressed with the OS (image stabiliser) which is a must if you are required to shoot at f6.3 @ 200mm I was able to get steady shots 1/20th . I was also impressed with the AF speed. Which seemed much better than the Sigma 24-70 2.8 EX I have

It's a solid lens that delivers exactly what it was intended to do. You can spend an hour or two reviewing plenty shots and crops at my site on this lens:

http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/zoomzoom
http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/1785isv18200​os
http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/1os2is
http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/norcalpics

Great resource lightrules I think i'm sold on it.

From what I see not many complain about front or back focusing issues. So thats a big plus.

Sounds like you've made your decision, but I will pipe in a bit, too. I just got mine on March 20th (see my sig) specifically for an upcoming family vacation to Disneyworld. Too many people said to use just one lens, and I chose this lens.

I got the lens in time for a short trip to Seattle and Tacoma and a nice day trip to the Oregon coast last Sunday. Plus just regular old testing around town. I've already racked up several hundred photos with it as I get to know the ins and outs prior to our trip.

I am extremely happy with the lens. Being able to go from 18-200 is a thrill. And the OS seems to work quite well. Overall, it will definitely meet the needs of a family vacation. The image quality is good, but varies on focal length and, of course, aperture. The center is best, and gets progressively fuzzy on the edges. I really like 18mm. The images appear the sharpest and clearest from center to edge.

The 200mm end for me is a bit odd. I am still trying to figure things out. Center is good. But as you move to the edges, it can get pretty bad and fuzzy. I have been testing this with flat plaques where the distance of the entire image is constant, and some of the edges (at 200mm) are inconsistenly shaky looking (like I can see double). I took a 200mm shot at the dirt that looks pretty good overall, but an odd, shaky look happened in one corner (and nowhere else). I am not sure if my problems stem from the OS (is it normal for the edges to be shaky with OS?) the lens, or me.

In some cases, I also get like an oil painting look, where what SHOULD be a straight line is wavy and smudgy. But, not ever having a 200mm lens before, maybe this is due to haze or something? I don't know. But I notice it happening only when taking photos of a building way off in the distance. As I move closer, the oily look disappears.

One of these days I'll post some examples and see if anyone can explain it or if it is just the lens.

My plan is to send the lens in after the trip or at least spend some more time and figure out if the problem is me or the lens. But at this point, I am well enough pleased that I can wait. Plus, I'll probably still carry around the Tamron just for those key important moments.

As LightRules said, it is a fine lens, pretty good optics with awesome range and effective stabilizer. Just be careful with it because it will not sustain any abuse that the flimsy looking kit lens would take (talking from experience).
Anyway, here are some full size test images I took with this lens. All are straight out of the camera, no pp/sharpening etc. infact, the first bird pic is 100% out of the camera, all the rest I re-saved with gimp at 90%-95% quality jpg in order to save space.
http://www.pbase.com/k​atzer/sigma18200os

SS2000, you might want to download this image to compare with what you are seeing. It sounds like there are some simularities.
http://picasaweb.googl​e.com …photo#516917826​1398100226
There are some others that the left arrow can take you to with the lens on my 40D but that's the worst of the set.

Cicopo, that is very much like what I see. I had actually run across that photo of yours earlier in the week and it made me feel somehwat better. But my concern is a 5x7 may have some of that visible blur. The really strange case for me are some shots which are good in the center, but some edges show what look like camera shake. In one case it isn't even a smooth transition. It just goes right to shaky (seeing double). I'll have to post some of these in another thread.

The thing is, for a vacation, I will probably tend to use the wider side, taking pictures of my family and getting wide landscape shots. So I'm not too concerned. For the telephoto end, I'll just be careful. Right now, it's the only telephoto lens I have.

Overall, though, I am extremely happy with the lens and definitely recommend it for the right circumstances. It is a pleasure to use.

I may try to shoot a few more shots of that house tomorrow to see if I can duplicate the effect. The weather is much nicer now so I won't be freezing as I try to hold still. I'll just use the 40D though, and try something closer as well. So far I have only noticed the problem with distant objects & have shot with the lens long enough to be satisfied that it meets my needs.

I did some more testing today and from what I can tell the softness on the left sides of my 200 mm shots is an AF issue. Either the AF is having a hard time with the contrast of the building or it's selecting something in the foreground. I used a tripod & carefully focused manually as best as I could (old man eyes that do use reading glasses) and the left side is noticably sharper. Samples are at the end on my album already listed in post #2.

Very interesting cicopo. Thanks.

I did some more tests today but threw in a new twist, my Kenko Pro 1.4 TC. I of course had to rely on manual focus & there is some CA but the results are surprisingly better than I expected. I will be adding several samples to my album but here's a crop from one. (shot wide open, OS on.)
http://picasaweb.googl​e.com …photo#518699096​9634147874
Samples will be added later tonight, (full file as shot)

I bought this lense as my first lense with my XTI body. I generally like it as far as what i have, but after buying my 16-35 , 50 (1.4) , and probally a 24-105, there is not much need.

The lense feels pretty well built, only thing i dont like is the comments when im zooming lol, people call it a damn telescope, i wish it was a faster lense up top though, the 6.5 hurts when you want to do somewhat of a DOF or anything in dark lighting.