*Stabilized APS-C Superzoom* Official Poll

Who cares?

if im not going FF, i'll go with Tamron based on price and extended FL.

KarlosDaJackal wrote in post #6324007
All of these try to do too much and will end up doing it badly. This is a lens for the P&S generation used to 10x optical zoom. The same generation who will not mind the IQ from these lenses and would not know what to do with an FTM lens anyway.

Have you tried the 18-200 OS? It works actually quite well, it has part of the zoom range that needs to be stopped down a bit, but other than that, it is one very nice all-around lens. I don't knock a lens due to stereotypical issues that several people bring up about either a brand or the FL range. Amazingly enough, technology changes and alot of old stereotypes may no longer be true, whether by brand, type of lens, etc.

I wouldn't knock any of these until tried, and the only comment I would make is on the price at this point. I expect all of these to be really close in performance, so the differences will really come down to simply build quality and price.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #6325934
Have you tried the 18-200 OS? It works actually quite well, it has part of the zoom range that needs to be stopped down a bit, but other than that, it is one very nice all-around lens. I don't knock a lens due to stereotypical issues that several people bring up about either a brand or the FL range. Amazingly enough, technology changes and alot of old stereotypes may no longer be true, whether by brand, type of lens, etc.

I wouldn't knock any of these until tried, and the only comment I would make is on the price at this point. I expect all of these to be really close in performance, so the differences will really come down to simply build quality and price.

No kidding. Don't all these superzoom-haters know how versatile these buggers really are?!

For example: http://forums.dpreview​.com …rum=1029&messag​e=29349419 [Way to go, Romy! 900mm FOV]

I have tried one, while also trying out a 40D and I didn't not like the lens at all. Sure its versatile, but I don't see anybody selling everything in their collection between the focal length it covers and using just this.

Its not to my taste, then again most of the lenses I end up using are not that popular either, but thats why there are something like 100+ different lenses out there, we all like different things. No brand or stereotype issues. Just because someone does no like something you do, does not make them a hater.

Whats to hate, at the end of the day its just another lens. The good points for all these are that they are versatile and......

TeamSpeed wrote in post #6325934
Have you tried the 18-200 OS? It works actually quite well, it has part of the zoom range that needs to be stopped down a bit, but other than that, it is one very nice all-around lens. I don't knock a lens due to stereotypical issues that several people bring up about either a brand or the FL range. Amazingly enough, technology changes and alot of old stereotypes may no longer be true, whether by brand, type of lens, etc.

I wouldn't knock any of these until tried, and the only comment I would make is on the price at this point. I expect all of these to be really close in performance, so the differences will really come down to simply build quality and price.

I knock it because none of them have a fast AF!!!

_aravena wrote in post #6326741
I knock it because none of them have a fast AF!!!

No argument there, at least with the Sigma, I haven't tried the Tammys yet.

I don't think this poll is to decide who would sell all their lenses and just buy a superzoom. However, the most discussed point for these superzooms come from those that just want a single lens, or want a vacation/trip lens, etc. and these lenses will come through with flying colors, and it is not fair to say they do their job badly. What didn't you like, if you don't mind sharing? In my opinion, the build quality of the Sigma is good, the OS is good, the IQ is good in certain ranges, and in the others, you just have to step it down a tad. The AF is slow, and that was my only real gripe with it.

Oh, and these superzooms serve yet another niche. If you have a teen that wants to get into photography/DSLR, getting them just one lens to start with and learn the basics is priceless. Confusing them with 3 or 4 lenses is just not always appropriate, and an 18-200mm is just simply nice for a novice starting out, without investing alot of cash into lenses.

While I wouldn't mind one, I guess...idk. I've never had a problem taking my gear places but if I HAD to travel all of DC one day maybe taking the 18-50 F2.8 for general photography and the 18-200 OS for anything far away since it's small than other zooms. Still. Maybe 10-17 and that. I guess, but it's the last thing on my list unless given as a gift which once again, at that price I'd rather have a couple other things.

I don't like the handling of it or the build quality, stopping down all the time negates the benefit of IS/OS, also at the moment and as winter approaches in my part of the world stopping down past f/4 leaves you with very little shutter speed for most of the day even outdoors. By December I'd be stuck on a tripod all day outdoors and it would be near impossible to use indoors even in well lit venues.

Sure its versatile but so is a G9 and I'd get one of those for the price of one of these, its just as versatile has better IQ, has IS and is even easier to bring on holidays, and at the wide end it can do f/2.8.

If i lived in a sunny country these lenses would be passable, but I'd still rather have a G9 for the tasks you mentioned. But I'm sure the P&S hatters out there will disagree. Like I say, if you like it buy it. If I need something that versatile, I can borrow one or buy a G9, and I'd by the G9.

Some kudos goes to Canon for avoiding f/6.3, but marks taken off for the cardinal sin (in my humble opinion) of leaving off the ring USM. That could totally have been Canon's trump card in this category and without it, the price looks too steep next to the bargain Sigma or the longer Tamron.

But all that is a bit academic, to be honest, because I wouldn't throw money at any of them. I'd rather take a shorter range in a better lens if it came down to that.

Id like to say that I'm not a professional, and not even a serious enthusiast by this forum standard, but there are some places that I cant go (or want to go) with a backpack full of gear.
And believe me i love to take my camera everywhere.
This is a convenience decision that one takes consciously of the compromise you are getting with the lens
Id like to comment also that I have a friend photographer, doing very serious work with his Nikon 18-200 VR ( granted: and a bunch of lights and other lenses / equipment as well I might add ) but he is very happy with his "super" lens and does not hide the fact that he uses it on many occasions , I have also seen this VR as a portrait lens suggestion on various websites.
I don't know about that, but I'll be biting one of these lenses for sure
Cheers everyone

Since I own a G9 and a Sigma 18-200 OS plus used to own the non OS version I think it's fair to say that in my use the Sigma's are better wide open than the G9 at any setting. I bought the G9 for underwater use, but took it to a car show one weekend when I didn't feel like carrying anything heavy. I am sorry to say that was a big mistake because there was a really nice car I hadn't seen before, and the photos just don't cut it.
I won't vote because I have a slanted view, but do highly recommend the Sigma based on real world use, and I do also own L's in the range to know the difference in IQ.

I'd go for a G10 rather than a superzoom.

Good thing I put in the "superzooms suck" option

so how's gonne be ?
i reallly waiting for lightrulezz review of both lenses
especially the tamron cause it has better "macro" ability ?
recently i was travelling with my familly and i bought 3 lenses, 1 wide zoom, 1 50mm prime and one long zoom,
in the end i always use the wide zoom cause i simply have no time or it's simply not convinient to change lenses especially on a trip.
so i'm looking to buy 1 of theese theree

270 or 200mm doesnt bother me that much
what;s important is which one is the sharpest especially on the wide end, and which VCor IS is more efficient?

really looking forward for the review.