18-200mm lenses

[handicap18]

The superzooms don't have lightning fast focus, but with a little practice on you should be able to make due for sports. I think the Tamron is at f5.6@200mm, so daytime shots shouldn't present a problem. You will find the extra 65mm of focal length to be a lifesaver.

The Tamron is f/6.3 at 200mm (probably starting around 160mm). So its really only good outside during the day at the long end and the longer you go on the long end the slower it will focus. Same goes for the Sigma version.

These are good lenses to get someone who hasn't used SLR's in past a decent start. Over the long haul you'll need to add other lenses. This is where one of the biggest debates happen with dSLR's now. A lot of people who never used SLR's in the past are now moving up to dSLR's and are used to the long zooms that the P&S's offer and are finding it hard to duplicate that. Thing is the majority of SLR zoom lenses are 3x to 4x zooms. Thus the need to have at least 2 lenses to cover a greater distance. I believe there are only 3 "super zooms" out there, Sigma 18-200, Tamron 18-200, and Nikon 18-200 are 11x zooms. Sigma and Tamron make an 18-125mm and Nikon makes an 18-135 which come in around 7x. There are rumors of I believe Tamron coming out with an 18-250mm, but if the 18-200mm version is a decent lens at $400 then what is the 18-250 going to be like. It would have to be a huge lens thats very expensive or a low quality still kind of pricy and have f/7.1 at the long end? I don't know. Canon still hasn't put their feet in the super zoom category.

The lens debate will go on forever and each person will have their pick. As always, YMMV, different strokes for different folks, one mans trash is another mans treasure and all those other phrases.

 

[rtphokie]

Any opinions on the Sigma 18-200 lens vs. the Tamron 18-200? They are similarly priced but I'm hearing conflicting opinions on the two. I'd love to hear some more opinions before I make up my mind.

-Tony

 

[handicap18]

Sigma is coming out with a new 18-200mm that will have OS (Optical Stabilization, their version of IS and VR). I've heard mixed reviews on both, neither is particularly great at the long end as they are only f/6.3. Will be find for outdoors, but indoors may pose some problems at that aperture. I think with Sigma's new version (which is priced around $500) will help with indoor stuff if the subject is not moving.

In my limited travels through the net looking at these 2, I've seen more positive reviews for the Sigma than the Tamron.

 

[KaitlinsMom]

Kyle, do you know when that Sigma is coming out?

Karen

 

[handicap18]

Kyle, do you know when that Sigma is coming out?

Karen

Amazon and B&H Photo are taking pre-orders right now. The B&H Photo site is saying June and July arrivial depending on which camera system you have.

Sigma officially announced the lens on 9/28/06. I would have thought that it would have been out by now. I talked to a Sigma rep at a local store a few weeks ago and he said it would be available very shortly. They have already discontinued the 18-125 and the older version of the 18-200.

 

[fis]

For only $200 to $250 more, spring for the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6g VR lens. I know $200 may be a lot of money difference, but this lens will last a lot longer than your camera body so you should at least consider it. The faster maximum aperature combined with the VR technology makes a WORLD of difference. I shoot handheld with this thing in low light at speeds as slow as 1/60, even when fully extended. You may have 2nd thoughts about the Sigma or the Tamron but I guarantee you will never regret buying the Nikon. And if for some strange reason you hate it, you can probably sell it on ebay for more than you paid for it.

 

[fis]

I took the Nikon VR lens on a recent Disney Magic cruise and here are some of the shots that really stretched its capabilities:

This one was hand held for a full 2/5 second!

A speeding coast guard boat, handheld panning @ 1/15 second

Twice Charmed @ 1/125 second with available light

Fully extended to 200mm, handheld from a fast-moving tender boat!

 

[handicap18]

For only $200 to $250 more, spring for the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6g VR lens. I know $200 may be a lot of money difference, but this lens will last a lot longer than your camera body so you should at least consider it. The faster maximum aperature combined with the VR technology makes a WORLD of difference. I shoot handheld with this thing in low light at speeds as slow as 1/60, even when fully extended. You may have 2nd thoughts about the Sigma or the Tamron but I guarantee you will never regret buying the Nikon. And if for some strange reason you hate it, you can probably sell it on ebay for more than you paid for it.

True the Nikon version is the best of them out there, though I don't recall what camera the OP uses (Nikon, Canon or Pentax). Also, to get a copy of the Nikon for only $200 to $250 is very difficult. Granted the list price is $750, however to get one at that price takes a very long time. Minimum 6 weeks, but average is closer to 4 -5 months. Unless you want to spend $850 to $1000.

Thats why I went with the Nikkor 18-135mm. Had Nikon not come out with that lens I was leaning towards the Sigma 18-125mm. Though that lens has now been discontinued.

 

[fis]

I will respectfully disagree with you regarding availability. These lenses are more available now. They're just not so plentiful that you'll find deals at any of the online stores. The best deals on this lens are in the least likely place.

Walk into a reputable local camera store, pay the full price in advance, and you should get to the top of the list and pick up a Nikon 18-200 for $749.00 with no more than 2 weeks wait.

 

[alan]

Hi all,

I don't recall how much of this saga I have related here - my purchase of a new 350D just before I went to Disneyworld, buying a Sigma 18-200mm on International Drive, my utter disappointment at the photos. Why weren't they as good as my Pro1 could do?

Then I bought an L lens and realised how good a DSLR could be. Then my Pro1 failed, and the insurance company delcared it "beyond economic repair". I bought a Panasonic FZ18, and then I understood why people were so down on compact cameras - there was no detail there! After that I returned the FZ18 and tried a G9, and realised that I really really wanted that 28mm equivalent wide end.

So that left me with a pocket digicam, and a DSLR. My infintely flexible Pro1 was gone, and Canon has shown no sign of offering us an 18-200 (or even 18-125; I'm not greedy) at PMA. So I thought I'd give it another go, and bought the (apparently considerably enhanced) Sigma 18-200mm OS.

(Why? Because I want decent picture quality - hence an SLR - but I want flexibility without having to carry around and frequently change my lens).

(We're at the content of the post now, I'm glad to say)

Based on previous experience, I was very nervous about this lens. I checked twice in the shop that I could return it if I wasn't happy. That was yesterday. So far I've managed about five minutes to take photographs...

Here's one. This is at the wide end of the zoom range. Only adjustment, as in all these pictures, is levels.

(Don't let me start ranting about the builders....)

A 100% crop of this looks like this:

Then, just as I was about to go to the rehearsal for the show I'm doing just now, I snapped off a couple. I don't have them here, because I don't want to put too much emphasis on them. They stank. But to be fair, that was hand-held at 200mm zoom; there isn't a lot of light to be had in Scotland just now and the air is very heavy with rain (we've had a lot in the last few days).

So when I got back home I snapped off a couple more, with flash, at the long end of the zoom. Here's DD8:

And a 100% crop:

To me, that's not too shabby. And when I apply a touch of USM:

So far, I think I'm happy. I'm going to try to go out at lunchtime tomorrow and snap some more. I know it's never going to match my 24-105 or 70-200mm L, but I think it will do the job for holiday snaps.

Any thoughts?

regards,
/alan

 

[Steve's Girl]

I have had the Nikon 18-200 for a year now. I love the versatility of this lens. I don't have personal experience with the Sigma version, but your photos look very sharp and I have heard good things about that lens. I had always heard that IQ would suffer with a lens that covers that much of a focal range. But I have never been disappointed with the IQ of the Nikon version. I'm sure it would not compare to a "pro" lens. But for vacation/family photos the IQ and convenience is pretty darn good.

 

[alan]

Thanks! I've managed a few outside now; the weather wasn't great but it was okay, and I reckon that this lens will do just fine

regards,
/alan

 

[Metallicat]

I have the Sigma 18-200mm OS for Canon and I am very happy with it. I sold my Canon 28-135 IS to buy it and have no regrets whatsoever.
taken with the Sigma 18-200 OS

 

[Golf4food]

I have the Sigma 18-200mm OS for Canon and I am very happy with it. I sold my Canon 28-135 IS to buy it and have no regrets whatsoever.
taken with the Sigma 18-200 OS

Which Canon do you have and do you have more samples to share? I am considering a new Canon but would like the range offered by that Sigma... how is it outdoors, sun, low light, etc?

 

[PoohJen]

I have the Sigma 18-200mm OS for Canon and I am very happy with it. I sold my Canon 28-135 IS to buy it and have no regrets whatsoever.

What made you sell your Canon? My main lens is the Sigma 18-125, which I love well enough, but now it is broken and I need to decide whether it is worth sending (and paying) for repair or get a new one or get a new lens altogether...

I have a sigma 75-300, so I don't know if I "need" the 200 length. Would I lose anything in the wider range if I went with the 18-200?

 

[Metallicat]

Which Canon do you have and do you have more samples to share? I am considering a new Canon but would like the range offered by that Sigma... how is it outdoors, sun, low light, etc?

The range is what I got it for. for me, it is the perfect walk around lens. it doesn't focus very well getting really close up on things, so its definitely not a macro lens. I didn't use a tri-pod on any of my pictures or made any changes except cropping one. btw, my camera is the Canon Rebel XT digital SLR.

this was taken at night with a flash. this thing was way up in a tree and it was pitch black dark outside.

bright sunshiny day

sun set. we were on the ferry and it was moving along.

taking a shot at macro anyway. this was cropped.

outside. it was cloudy and overcast that day. the lady had on white makeup is why her face is so white.

it was about to rain..

taken from several feet away at a concert.

 

[Metallicat]

What made you sell your Canon? My main lens is the Sigma 18-125, which I love well enough, but now it is broken and I need to decide whether it is worth sending (and paying) for repair or get a new one or get a new lens altogether...

I have a sigma 75-300, so I don't know if I "need" the 200 length. Would I lose anything in the wider range if I went with the 18-200?

Well, the 28-135 wasn't wide enough. I also wanted a zoom lens. so, the 18-200 seemed like the right choice for an all in one lens for me. plus it has the Optical stabilizer which works like an IS on the Canon brands.

 

[PoohJen]

Well, the 28-135 wasn't wide enough. I also wanted a zoom lens. so, the 18-200 seemed like the right choice for an all in one lens for me. plus it has the Optical stabilizer which works like an IS on the Canon brands.

Sigma had an 18-125 that was popularly recommended on these boards for my XT about 18 months ago. I looked at the Sigma site today and see that it's no longer being offered. Hmmm..I really like the lens, I'll see how much it costs to fix

BTW, great picture!

 

[Golf4food]

Thanks, Metallicat. I am considering upgrading to Canon 40D by the summer and might just go with that 18-200. We have an 18-125 Sigma on our Pentax now for a walk around lense and I've been happy with it but would love a little extra range on the telephoto end for our trips to the zoo.

 

[Groucho]

Tamron's 18-250mm actually gets very good reviews, too, if you want even more reach. There's a Pentax-branded version as well which is probably just slightly better (better coatings, etc.)