sigma 18-200 dc os. anyone got 1?

P

pro.wannabe

Messages
256
Name
michael
Edit My Images
Yes
i have this lens and i am really losing faith with it if anyone on here has 1 could you please show me some pics with exif so i can try and see what i am doing wrong
 
Took this with same lens.....any good to you?



2964513517_66f4bf6de1.jpg
 
stevetiler said:
Took this with same lens.....any good to you?



2964513517_66f4bf6de1.jpg
Click to expand...

you see thats a great image do you have any exif with it and did you use any filters on the lens?

i have had good images but i put them down to luck more than anything
 
any1 else with this lens and some sample images preferably with exif info
 
I've got one, i think it's ace, not quite as sharp as it could be (nothing that a touch of unsharpening in post-pro won't fix) but a crackin' lens. I use a hoya pro UV on it for the shots below.

Nikon D300, Sigma 18-200 @ 18, f/13, ISO400, 20seconds.





Nikon D300, Sigma 18-200 @ 65mm, f/5, ISO800, 1/100seconds.





Nikon D300, Sigma 18-200 @ 44mm, f/4.5, ISO200, 1/160seconds.

 
cheers i can now see its a very capable lens and that its just my skill i need to work on

i have a hoya uv filter but took it off after the advice on another site do you think it might help putting it back on?
 
I think it probably depends on which filter it is tbh, I use a hoya pro UV one which I'm more than happy with. I give it a clean regularly of course to make sure it's ok but never had a problem. I imagine i'd get sharper images with the UV filter off, but for the sake of using a touch of unsharpeing in post-pro, I leave it on there.
 
ok i will dig it out and see if i get any difference
 
Post a couple of shots you're not happy with, give the exif data and let some of the experts cast their eyes over them....
 
IMG_5829.jpg



give me a sec and i will find the exif data it should be embedded in the image though

Make = Canon
Model = Canon EOS 400D DIGITAL
Orientation = top/left
X Resolution = 72
Y Resolution = 72
Resolution Unit = inch
Date Time = 2009-04-18 13:24:34
YCbCr Positioning = co-sited
Exif IFD Pointer = Offset: 200

[Camera]
Exposure Time = 1/100"
F Number = F25
Exposure Program = Shutter priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 400
Exif Version = Version 2.21
Date Time Original = 2009-04-18 13:24:34
Date Time Digitized = 2009-04-18 13:24:34
Components Configuration = YCbcr
Shutter Speed Value = 6.64 TV
Aperture Value = 9.29 AV
Exposure Bias Value = +0.33EV
Metering Mode = Partial
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 51mm
 
That does look a touch soft it must be said (and you've got some dust bunnies :p), f/100 should have been ok to stop any movement, did you have OS on as well? Also do you shoot in RAW or JPG? Shooting in RAW gives you the ability to sharpen the image at the point you import your file as well as later in post-pro if you feel it needs it, could be an option if you're shooting in JPG.
 
the dust has been sorted and os was on as for raw i rarely use it tbh maybe i should give it another bash
 
Oh if you're shooting in JPG you need to check the sharpness options in camera too then, and check the quality, as if your camera's compressing your JPG files they will be blurry, i'd definitley start shooting in RAW if i were you, once you do you won't look back.
 
that looks soft to me
are the elements clean ? and have you tried a focus test on it?
I'm having problems with my sigma 50-150 at the mo, it need calibrating
 
yeah i tried the focus test and it looked ok to me if maybe very slighty front focusing

i have been playing with the in camera sharpening but didnt know anything about compression how do i alter that on a 400d?
 
Your exif says f25 for the aperture - that could have introduced some diffraction(?) which could soften the image.

Do you have any shots at 1 or 2 stops under the max for the lens?

Using a larger aperture will also mean you can lower the ISO (400 in your image) and increase the shutter speed - I have trouble hand holding at less than 1/125, regardless of what lens I use (not got steady hands) - so I tend to over use a tripod or higher shutter speeds to compensate.

Do you have any other lenses to compare it to? Have any buddies who could lend you one for a couple of hours while you fire off similar shots with your lens and theirs, allowing you to compare them on a PC later?
 
i would have to go looking through to find anything with a lower aperture so bare with me on that

would you recomend av instead of tv then? and drop the iso as i do tend to stay above 400
 
pro.wannabe said:
i would have to go looking through to find anything with a lower aperture so bare with me on that

would you recomend av instead of tv then? and drop the iso as i do tend to stay above 400
Click to expand...

I'm a Nikon person, so not sure of what AV and TV equate to - presumably aperture priority and shutter priority?

I'd try again with a mid sized aperture - or set something up that you can take loads of shots with various different settings and compare them to see which offers the best sharpness - don't forget you can add a little sharpness in post processing.

As for ISO, I guess that's more of a personal thing and also depends on how your camera copes with it - my D200 doesn't cope with anything higher than 400ISO, and I tend to stick with 100 for the most part where I can. The D40 handles it a little better and is acceptable up to 800ish. I hate noise/grain (unless I'm looking for a specific effect) so lower the better as far as I'm concerned.


The shot you posted looks like it was a pretty bright day with little cloud cover, so you could easily have lowered the ISO, which would have allowed you to choose a larger aperture and/or faster shutter speed.
 
OutLore said:
I'm a Nikon person, so not sure of what AV and TV equate to - presumably aperture priority and shutter priority?

I'd try again with a mid sized aperture - or set something up that you can take loads of shots with various different settings and compare them to see which offers the best sharpness - don't forget you can add a little sharpness in post processing.

As for ISO, I guess that's more of a personal thing and also depends on how your camera copes with it - my D200 doesn't cope with anything higher than 400ISO, and I tend to stick with 100 for the most part where I can. The D40 handles it a little better and is acceptable up to 800ish. I hate noise/grain (unless I'm looking for a specific effect) so lower the better as far as I'm concerned.


The shot you posted looks like it was a pretty bright day with little cloud cover, so you could easily have lowered the ISO, which would have allowed you to choose a larger aperture and/or faster shutter speed.
Click to expand...

yes it was a bright day i had the shutter priority set as it was a track day and i wanted to get the motion. i didnt really think about lowering the iso but thinking about it on the day i should have atleast gone for 200 or lower. its all starting to make sense now lol
 
well thanks for everyones help i have been out today and had a play with a few settings and shot in raw+jpeg setting and i can see the difference between the 2 the raw is a lot sharper than the jpeg and is a lot richer in colour

there are 2 different jpeg settings 1 with smooth edge and 1 with squared sharp edge what 1 should i use if shooting in jpeg? i have always used the smooth edge and stayed with it
 
pro.wannabe said:
well thanks for everyones help i have been out today and had a play with a few settings and shot in raw+jpeg setting and i can see the difference between the 2 the raw is a lot sharper than the jpeg and is a lot richer in colour
Click to expand...
It's normally the other way around - the JPEG should be sharper, and richer in colour as it will probably have had some amendments "in camera" to make the picture more acceptible to the eye. RAW is exactly that - the raw data as seen by the sensor, and therefore will need sharpening and possible colour enhancements in post processing...
 
OutLore said:
It's normally the other way around - the JPEG should be sharper, and richer in colour as it will probably have had some amendments "in camera" to make the picture more acceptible to the eye. RAW is exactly that - the raw data as seen by the sensor, and therefore will need sharpening and possible colour enhancements in post processing...
Click to expand...

lol not in my camera as i say i have 2 settings for jpeg what 1 should i use?

i will be away now to sort out the raw and jpeg files to show the difference but in dpp the raw shows sharper with more colour
 
RAW - unprocessed data - often dull and soft. Has the most potential

JPG - sharpened and given contrast and saturation boosts - looks best out of camera but less ultimate potential as data is already lost and unrecoverable.

With your example shot above shooting at f/25 will probably introduce diffraction, and ISO 400 is probably overkill for a shot that possibly be taken at ISO 100.

If I'm shooting JPG I'll use large JPG fine (the curved icon) over large JPG normal (the blocky icon) .
 
ok this is the jpeg straight out of the camera

IMG_6358.jpg


and this is the raw straight from conversion no edits

IMG_6358converted.jpg


Make = Canon
Model = Canon EOS 400D DIGITAL
Orientation = top/left
X Resolution = 72
Y Resolution = 72
Resolution Unit = inch
Date Time = 2009-07-01 16:38:16
YCbCr Positioning = co-sited
Exif IFD Pointer = Offset: 2322


[Camera]
Exposure Time = 1/2000"
F Number = F5.6
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
ISO Speed Ratings = 200
Exif Version = Version 2.21
Date Time Original = 2009-06-30 14:11:05
Date Time Digitized = 2009-06-30 14:11:05
Components Configuration = YCbcr
Shutter Speed Value = 10.97 TV
Aperture Value = 4.97 AV
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Metering Mode = Pattern
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 78mm
 
am i seeing right the raw does look the better image to me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top