Help with new lens

[marine1]

I want to buy the following:

1 (http://www.sacamera.co.za/productdetail/SON18250/Sony-DT-18-250mm-F3.5-6.3-Lens.html)
2 (http://www.sacamera.co.za/productdetail/SIGLEN066SO/Sigma-18-200-F3.5-6.3-DC-(Sony-mount).html)

Which one is better? Is the Sony really that much better?
I read that the Sigma is not metal mount.

Thanks

[ldmelsa]

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=559
http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=12785


_

[marine1]

Interesting, thanks, the Sigma looks better but dont know if thats correct.

[koffiejunkie]

I want to buy the following:

1 (http://www.sacamera.co.za/productdetail/SON18250/Sony-DT-18-250mm-F3.5-6.3-Lens.html)

This is a rebranded Tamron. Check:
Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 (http://www.sony.co.uk/product/ddl-zoom-lenses/sal-18250)
Tamron AF18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro (http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/18250_diII.asp)
and, for good measure:
Pentax DA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 ED AL [IF] (http://www.pentaxslr.com/lenses/lens_18_250)

Notice they all look the same. Little details, like the AF/MF switch, the positions of the distance/zoom markings, etc.

If it was a bad lens, Sony and Pentax wouldn't badge-engineer it.

That said, I don't have experience with either - just pointing out the above. Here are two reviews though. Not done on Sony, but at least they're done on the same body, so the results can be compared fairly:

Tamron AF 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical [IF] macro (Canon) - Lens Test Report / Review (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/293-tamron-af-18-250mm-f35-63-di-ii-ld-aspherical-if-macro-canon-lens-test-report--review)
Sigma Sigma AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC - Lab Test Report / Review (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/320-sigma-af-18-200mm-f35-63-dc-lab-test-report--review)

Going by those reviews, they look very comparable. The Tammy has worse barrel distortion on the wide end, and slightly worse vignetting, but has a longer range.

[marine1]

Thanks Koffie. The Sony is much more expensive so would like to know why that is. Cannot be just because it has a Sony badge.

[marine1]

How awesome is that Sony site? Lets you look mat the lens in 3D

[koffiejunkie]

Yip, over here the Sony is about £100 more expensive than the Tamron. So if you consider that lens, rather just get the Tamron.

[koffiejunkie]

Maybe consider the Tamron AF18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro (http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/18200_diII.asp) as a more direct competitor to the Sigma.

[marine1]

Who stocks Tamron in SA? Thanks Koffie

[koffiejunkie]

BTW, I posted the wrong report for the Sigma in my original post (18-125). Here's the correct one: Sigma Sigma AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC - Lab Test Report / Review (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/320-sigma-af-18-200mm-f35-63-dc-lab-test-report--review)

[marine1]

Koffie, in your expert opinion between the three makes of lenses, which one would you go for, solely based on make.

[marine1]

Regarding the Sigma: AF accuracy leaves something to be desired with this lens especially towards the long end of the zoom range.

[koffiejunkie]

Who stocks Tamron in SA? Thanks Koffie

No idea.

What would I go for? I'd wait for Canon's 18-200 IS :p

I don't expect stellar AF performance of either. They're slow at the long end, and both are screw driven, so they're bound not to be too great there. If you need to shoot in situations where you need fast accurate AF at 200mm, you should be looking at something like the Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G (http://www.sony.co.uk/product/ddl-zoom-lenses/sal-70200g) or Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO HSM (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3316&navigator=3).

But given these two reviews, you won't lose anything by going for the Sigma:
Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) XR macro - Test Report / Review (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/292-tamron-af-18-200mm-f35-63-di-ii-ld-aspherical-if-xr-macro-test-report--review?start=1)
Sigma AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC - Lab Test Report / Review (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/320-sigma-af-18-200mm-f35-63-dc-lab-test-report--review?start=1)

[koffiejunkie]

I'd get bwana's opinion on the Sigma - he actually has one.

[bwana]

I'd get bwana's opinion on the Sigma - he actually has one.I have a Sigma but not one of those. :)

[marine1]

Thanks so much :)

[koffiejunkie]

I have a Sigma but not one of those. :)

bummer - my mistake. I just remembered yours is the the 28 to something model :)

[marine1]

LOL, yeah just find that to be a great all round "travel" lens. That 70-300 is awesome, must cost a packet though. I have the 150-500 Sigma and the 105mm Macro Sigma, maybe I should stick with them

[bwana]

bummer - my mistake. I just remembered yours is the the 28 to something model :)28-300.

[marine1]

28-300?? Thats a great lens. Damn it they dont make one for Sony :(

[bwana]

28-300?? Thats a great lens. Damn it they dont make one for Sony :(They say they do (or at least did?) http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3305&navigator=2

[BigAl-sa]

Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) XR macro - Test Report / Review (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/292-tamron-af-18-200mm-f35-63-di-ii-ld-aspherical-if-xr-macro-test-report--review?start=1)
Sigma AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC - Lab Test Report / Review (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/320-sigma-af-18-200mm-f35-63-dc-lab-test-report--review?start=1)I have the Tamron 18-200, and I won't recommend it too loudly. As far as the Sigma 18-200 is concerned, the OS version could be worth considering:
http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/1785isv18200os

[marine1]

I have the Tamron 18-200, and I won't recommend it too loudly. As far as the Sigma 18-200 is concerned, the OS version could be worth considering:
http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/1785isv18200os

Thanks , not opening though.

[ldmelsa]

marine1, what make cam do you have?

[bwana]

marine1, what make cam do you have?Sony - A700 iirc.

[marine1]

Yes, thanks Bwana, I have the A700 and the A100.
Sigma 105mm Macro F2.8
Sigma 150-500
Sony 18-70
Sony 70-300

[arf9999]

@marine1. I've used the Sony 18-250 on an A700 and it's awesome. Fast focusing and very sharp. Some distortion at wide angle but hey, it's a super zoom! This lens is my first choice for a walkabout lens. The only negative that I can think of is that when the camera is off, and the camera is pointed down, the lens sometimes will extend (there is a switch to lock it though).

That said, it is a badge engineered Tamron, so if you can buy the Tamron for less I say go for it.

[ldmelsa]

I've used the Sony 18-250 on an A700 and...

it's cool that we have lenses like this these days
lots of flexibility there
it's nice that sony has the image stabilization in the cam (i like the idea that stabilization works with all lenses)

[marine1]

@marine1. I've used the Sony 18-250 on an A700 and it's awesome. Fast focusing and very sharp. Some distortion at wide angle but hey, it's a super zoom! This lens is my first choice for a walkabout lens. The only negative that I can think of is that when the camera is off, and the camera is pointed down, the lens sometimes will extend (there is a switch to lock it though).

That said, it is a badge engineered Tamron, so if you can buy the Tamron for less I say go for it.Awesome, thanks.

[marine1]

i like the idea that stabilization works with all lensesIt works so well. I love Sony :p