Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS

lizzy23

lizzy23

Messages
2,167
Name
Liz
Edit My Images
Yes
Just after any opinions on the above lens, have seen a couple on MPB at a reasonable price, for a lens with a reasonable focal range
 
Hi Liz,

I have this lens on a 40d and I must say its a great walkabout lens ! In good light its great and the OS works well, ok its not "L" quality but it saves changing lenses every five mins! Took this with it.

OWL
 
Last edited:
Had one on a Nikon a couple of years ago - good overall but can suffer at the the upper focal lengths with edge distortion. I don't think it's limited to individual examples, just the entire construct.
 
I have one as my walkabout lens, (the Nikon version) it very rarely comes off the camera because its so versatile.

D3S Had one on a Nikon a couple of years ago - good overall but can suffer at the the upper focal lengths with edge distortion. I don't think it's limited to individual examples, just the entire construct.
Click to expand...

Not noticed any edge distortion though at any focal ranges :thinking:
you might have had a bad copy.
 
D3S said:
Had one on a Nikon a couple of years ago - good overall but can suffer at the the upper focal lengths with edge distortion. I don't think it's limited to individual examples, just the entire construct.
Click to expand...

That's kinda funny considering the 18-200mm isn't a Full Frame lens :lol:

If you had put it on your D3S then what can you expect? it's not designed for it...
 
Great lens with a build quality that puts the big boys to shame IMO:).
 
When I had the lens I was in D300/D300S territory, chaps. Ron may be right with the 'bad copy' statement which, despite many an internet myth, isn't just limited to Sigma
 
This was my first lens on a Nikon D80.
Very verastile and decent results in good light (fortuanatly plent of sun down here!! lol).
Suffered quality in dimmer light situations and at certain focal lengths...like most/all lenses it has its "sweet spots".
As a so called walkabout lens then it's an ideal buy.
Reading other reviews, I wonder wether my copy isn't one of the better ones!
 
I have also had my eye on this lens, could anyone tell me how it shapes up against the Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC , I know the Tamron is abit more, would you say it is worth the extra ?

Hope this isn't going away from OP topic!
 
Avix46 said:
I have also had my eye on this lens, could anyone tell me how it shapes up against the Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC , I know the Tamron is abit more, would you say it is worth the extra ?

Hope this isn't going away from OP topic!
Click to expand...

not at all, have also been looking at this one
 
Ive had this as my walk about lens on the 20D since some theiving scrote stole my 28-135 IS - and yeah its okay - not as good as the one it replaced ( I bought it before the insurance came through - then bought a 10-20 with the insurance money :lol: ) but its alright, and for what it costs a bargain.

with regard to the tamron ive not used that lens , but i used to have a 28-300 and that suffered badly from both pincushion and barrel distortion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top