Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC lens, anyone?

[DoctorIt]

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=WishList.jsp&A=details&Q=&sku=373748&is=REG): I can't find a single review for this lens via Google. Anyone out there in dgrin land have any experience or even a link to a buried review by someone else? I've been happy with middle-of-the-road Sigma glass in the past...

I'm looking for a new all-purpose travel/motorcycle lens. I know the Nikkor 18-200VR is a great piece of walk-around glass, but I'd have to trade my 70-200VR straight up for it. I'd rather sacrifice some quality for a cheaper len$. Remember, this one will be stuffed in a motorcycle case and only has to give me marginally better performance on my D70 than a little point/shoot.

[Stustaff]

Exactly what I have, exzctly what I use it for!

I've been really happy with it so far, it works fine noticed a bit of light drop off in the corners, but havent had any real expensive lenses to compare it to!

here are some photos with it so you can see for yourself

http://stuarthill.smugmug.com/photos/59528750-L.jpg

http://stuarthill.smugmug.com/photos/73130822-L.jpg


http://stuarthill.smugmug.com/photos/80319835-L.jpg


http://stuarthill.smugmug.com/photos/80323446-L.jpg

[SpeshulEd]

I had the 18-125 and the two are supposed to be similar. Its a bit soft, but other than that, I didn't have too many complaints. I sold it though because I wanted something sharper.

here's a review for the 18-200
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sigma18200mm/index.shtml

and here's another discussion on it too...
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-7524.html

[DoctorIt]

Exactly what I have, exzctly what I use it for!

I've been really happy with it so far, it works fine noticed a bit of light drop off in the corners, but havent had any real expensive lenses to compare it to!

here are some photos with it so you can see for yourself

http://stuarthill.smugmug.com/photos/80323446-Th.jpgSome great shots, especially the last - looks more than acceptable when handled correctly. :nod

[DoctorIt]

I had the 18-125 and the two are supposed to be similar. Its a bit soft, but other than that, I didn't have too many complaints. I sold it though because I wanted something sharper.

here's a review for the 18-200
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sigma18200mm/index.shtml

and here's another discussion on it too...
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-7524.htmlI see your googling powers are more developed than mine - excellent review by camera labs, thanks! :thumb


Now another question... Stu, you have the lens so can probably answer easily: how close can you go with the lens? As in, does it have a "macro" mode as many Sigma's do?

[Stustaff]

Thanks will be getting lots of practice soon so hope to get a real good idea of just what its capable of.

That last shot is at 18 with the horse maybe two feet away.

dont do much work closer than that :) No specific macro mode afaik.

[DJ-S1]

Interesting article on camera labs here (http://www.cameralabs.com/features/18200_issue/) which says that the field of view of lenses with a large zoom range like 18-200mm may not be what you expect.

[DoctorIt]

Interesting article on camera labs here (http://www.cameralabs.com/features/18200_issue/) which says that the field of view of lenses with a large zoom range like 18-200mm may not be what you expect.That's pretty common based on the focus. In the end, however, its negligible.

[DJ-S1]

yeah, I wasn't trying to imply that it was something specific to this lens, I just wasn't aware of it.

[pathfinder]

Doc,

These 10 to 1 zooms are asking an awful lot optically.

I'm not giving any secrets away here.

Most of them suffer from poor resolution or Chromatic aberration.

They are fine for snapshots - I used a Tamron 28-200 several years ago, but there definitley was CA in some shots.

The Nikon 18-200 I think may be an exception. But, I'll bet it is not anywhere as good a good Nikon primes either.

It comes down to convenience versus quality.

[DoctorIt]

Doc,

These 10 to 1 zooms are asking an awful lot optically.

I'm not giving any secrets away here.

Most of them suffer from poor resolution or Chromatic aberration.

They are fine for snapshots - I used a Tamron 28-200 several years ago, but there definitley was CA in some shots.

The Nikon 18-200 I think may be an exception. But, I'll bet it is not anywhere as good a good Nikon primes either.

It comes down to convenience versus quality.yup, of course. I'm just finding myself needing some convenience in my kit. A 50mm and big 70-200VR really don't make a great motorcycle travel set.

[Stustaff]

I finish my road trip across the US and canada on holiday in boston in about 2 months you can have a look then if you like? ;)

[pathfinder]

My trip over Hagerman Pass from Basalt to Leadville was on a GS, with a 20D and a Tamron 28-85 f2.8 Di. It rode in my tank bag every day.

Next week, I plan on carrying a 5D and a 24-105 F4 IS L, and a Tamron 200-500 for roadside wildlife shots, through Colorado, New Mexico, and hopefully part of Arizona. I'll be riding an ST1300 this trip. I think I will bring my RRS ground tripod so I'll have a stable platform to shoot from if needed.

If I didn't own the 24-105, I might consider the 28-135 IS from Canon, that's a pretty nice travel lens also.

The Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Autofocus Lens, looks like a great choice for Nikonians. That is what I'd take. - http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=277219&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

[ziggy53]

yup, of course. I'm just finding myself needing some convenience in my kit. A 50mm and big 70-200VR really don't make a great motorcycle travel set.
Just thinking outside the box. (Nikon didn't have anything like this.)

[DoctorIt]

Just thinking outside the box. (Nikon didn't have anything like this.):rofl

[BigAl]

I can't comment on the Sigma 18-200, but I played around with a Tamron 18-200 this weekend, and the IQ is not as good as the Sigma 18-125. Even though it takes a bit of effort to get focus spot on with the Sigma the results were better in my tests. The Tamron hunts quite a lot too.

I must say that I really like the focal length on the Sigma. All I used on a recent trip to Europe and seldom found I needed anything more than the 125. I'm still working on the galleries, but have a look at some of these snaps:
http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/gallery/1695888
http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/gallery/1675651

[jthomas]

If you don't need to go really wide, you might consider the Nikkor 28-200G.

I have one and I'm well pleased. It is small, light, and relatively inexpensive.