Sigma 18-200 C thoughts/reviews please

En Ell

En Ell

Messages
8
Edit My Images
No
Greetings all. I have a Nikon D3000 at present which I might perhaps be upgrading to a D750 in a few months time (assuming I can upgrade my skill level to justify it!). My lenses are the kit 18-55 Nikkor, a Sigma 10-20 (which I am still exploring) and a Sigma 150-500 which is on the camera more often than not - I love it. The numerate amongst you will notice there's a gaping hole in my bag so I wonder if the 18-200 C would suit my needs both now and when/if I treat myself to the posh body. My subject matter is wide and varied, the likes of wildlife and motorsport are catered for by the biggie, so a versatile zoom sounds about right to me.

Just about every review that I've seen seems to be for an older version, so I would be most grateful for your views/comments. Whilst I am very happy with my Sigmas I would consider a Nikkor equivalent if it is markedly better. Price has less bearing on my decision within reason. Many thanks in advance.
 
Bump! I find it hard to believe there's nobody here on what claims to be Britain's largest photog forum who hasn't tried out this sigma and/or won't venture an opinion?!? Come on, peeps, help me out!
 
Opinion wise (as I haven't used the lens in question), the Sigma 18-200 will be like most superzoom lenses - fine for day to day casual use, but not stellar in performance. It's very difficult to make a lens that covers that large zoom range be good at everything, you'll pay for the convience of the all-in-one zoom lens principle, and not for outright performance.

Given you have a 18-55, and are considering an upgrade to FX, then I would think more along the lines of a 70-300 (either the Nikon VR or Tamron VC one) as those lenses are FX compatible and could be used if you upgraded to FX.
 
Thanks guys. This does confuse me, I was under the impression that the 18-200 would work on both full frame and crop, becoming effectively 27-300 on the latter. Can I use my existing lenses on the D750?

I don't really need a large overlap at the high end so 200 max, maybe only 140 would be better? Is the kit 18-55 good enough to keep with the D750? (assuming it works - how do I tell what works and what doesn't?).
 
The only lens you have that'll fully work on FX cameras is the 150-500 (but will effectively have less reach on the D750). All the other lenses will only work in DX 10 megapixel mode on the D750, so they'll work but its a bit pointless. The 18-55 is a bit average on the DX 24mpx sensors so I dread to think what it would be like on the 750.

With the Nikon lenses, they have DX stamped on them somewhere. Sigma use, I think, the DC label.

Just to confirm, the 18-200 only works on full frame cameras when you enter the cropped mode.

Unfortunately, upgrading to a FX camera means a big lens upgrade bill too. When I went to FX, I also spent £1,600 on lenses that would work properly with it.
 
No, the 18-55 won't work on FX, the Nikkor 18-55mm will say DX on the body, this means it is specifically designed for DX bodies and won't work on FX

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/zoom/normalzoom/af-s_dx_18-55mmf_35-56g_vr2/

Can i ask your reasons for wanting to move up to an FX (Full Frame) camera as it seems like quite a jump going form a bottom rung DX for FX, especially if you like Wildlife and Motorsport as going to FX you will lose quite a bit of reach, and you will then have to shell out quite a bit more money on lenses to get this reach back

I know this as i have already made the jump from DX to FX....... and then back again as i found it not right for me, i now have the D7100 which i find much more suited to Wildlife shooting

EDIT: Beaten to it by Stu ;)
 
If you are definately going to the D750 and want a long walkabout zoom, you need to be looking at the Nikon 28-200, 28-300mm. Ususally FF zooms start at 24 or 28mm to help you look (except wide angles). When you look at DX lenses they usually tie in with the equivalent FF lenses with the 1.5 crop factor. eg 18mm on crop is the equivalent of 27mm (18mm x 1.5crop) on FF when using the crop mode.

I have the D750 and it's a fantastic camera and if I was you I would wait and buy the D750 with the 24-120mm F4 lens as a kit, which gets some excellent reports on here.
 
I see (I think). Thank you all for your most constructive input. Can I throw one more question into the fray, please? What effect would a teleconverter have when combined with the 10-20 & the D750? Or to put it another way, would that make the lens viable or would I be better getting an fx wide angle and denting the bank balance?

Re: my 150-500, I may well miss the extra zoom for wildlife on occasion but for motorsport I find myself composing more for scenes/contextual shots than nailing the whites of the drivers' eyes. Even the likes of Slitherstone offers some good relatively close viewing over the catch fencing.
 
I think you should take a seriously look at what you want to achieve out of upgrading your current setup as most people will tell you that it is the lens that makes the most difference to your photos outcome, not the camera body

You should only need to upgrade your body once you find the limit of your current body, be it burst rate, buffer size, focus capability etc
 
En Ell said:
I see (I think). Thank you all for your most constructive input. Can I throw one more question into the fray, please? What effect would a teleconverter have when combined with the 10-20 & the D750? Or to put it another way, would that make the lens viable or would I be better getting an fx wide angle and denting the bank balance?

Re: my 150-500, I may well miss the extra zoom for wildlife on occasion but for motorsport I find myself composing more for scenes/contextual shots than nailing the whites of the drivers' eyes. Even the likes of Slitherstone offers some good relatively close viewing over the catch fencing.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't even try a TC on a 10-20, you'd probably cause damage to the rear element for one. And it won't suddenly make it work on FX.

From everything you've said, I would look at a D7100 or D7200 before you even consider the D750.
 
En Ell said:
Just about every review that I've seen seems to be for an older version, so I would be most grateful for your views/comments. Whilst I am very happy with my Sigmas I would consider a Nikkor equivalent if it is markedly better. Price has less bearing on my decision within reason. Many thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

While I can't help at all on the Nikon front - dedicated Canon shooter here - I can on on the Sigma 18-200 C - which I have in Canon fit and use as my all-purpose lens. I've also used the Canon EFS 18-200 before getting the Sigma due to lighter weight and reports of better IQ.

I love the Sigma, it's my main travel lens. It's sharp, well stabilised and autofocus is efficient. Personally for the convenience of carrying 18-200 in a really light package it's fabulous.

15703443864_f1aee13d37_c.jpg



Everything on my flickr should be tagged here - https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=97736438@N00&sort=date-taken-desc&tags=sigma18200&view_all=1. Slightly older images taken with the canon are here - https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=97736438@N00&sort=date-taken-desc&tags=18200&view_all=1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top