Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS [Archive]

mercurial

24-09-2008, 12:59 PM

I just came across this beauty. I think this will be my first lens that I will get after I get the dSLR. Price is not too bad. R4899 at sacamera.co.za.
Linky (http://www.sacamera.co.za/productdetail/SIGL-C18-200OSH/Sigma-18-200mm-F3.5-6.3-DC-OS--for-Canon.html)

It's for Canon dSLRs.

Thoughts? I think this will be in direct competition with the new Canon EFS 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 IS (http://www.sacamera.co.za/productdetail/CAN18200/Canon-EFS-18-200mm-F3.5-5.6-IS.html), which is R7300.

marine1

24-09-2008, 01:01 PM

I really think this lens is awesome. For travel and just about anything, the range is amazing. I also want one but was told that the Sony one was much better quality.

mercurial

24-09-2008, 01:03 PM

I really think this lens is awesome. For travel and just about anything, the range is amazing. I also want one but was told that the Sony one was much better quality.

Cool man. I think it's a great lens and it's cheaper than the Canon brands.

ldmelsa

24-09-2008, 01:09 PM

yes, it's very good
smart choice!

mercurial

24-09-2008, 01:11 PM

yes, it's very good
smart choice!

Thanks!

marine1

24-09-2008, 01:12 PM

Thats my next toy however this has been an expensive month so I will have to wait.
Looking at going ot the US in December so maybe then. :D

mercurial

24-09-2008, 01:13 PM

Thats my next toy however this has been an expensive month so I will have to wait.
Looking at going ot the US in December so maybe then. :D

Nice. I sense a B&H visit is imminent :D

marine1

24-09-2008, 01:18 PM

ROFL :D

bwana

24-09-2008, 01:25 PM

marine1

24-09-2008, 01:27 PM

If I was you I'd focus (pun - geddit :)) on full frame lenses.

Full frame? What do you mean?

mercurial

24-09-2008, 01:29 PM

If I was you I'd focus (pun - geddit :)) on full frame lenses.

I geddit :D but why would you recommend this?

Full frame? What do you mean?

EF and not EF-S :)
EF is for full frame sensor dSLRs. EF-S lenses are for APS-C (crop) cameras, such as the ones you guys already have :)

marine1

24-09-2008, 01:34 PM

But then what would be the difference between the full frame and that 18-200, sorry dont get it. We all use DSLR's

bwana

24-09-2008, 01:38 PM

I geddit :D but why would you recommend this?IIRC you've in the past expressed a desire to be something other than an amateur shutterbug so a fullframe camera would certainly be on the cards. Why buy lenses now that wont fit? Glass lasts longer than the cameras anyway. :)

But then what would be the difference between the full frame and that 18-200, sorry dont get it. We all use DSLR'sT Lenses designed for a crop camera - the EFs and the sigma DC - cannot be used on a full frame camera - as the larger mirror gets in the way. At least this holds true for canon - not sure about other brands.

mercurial

24-09-2008, 01:38 PM

I think bwana would be able to explain it better than I can. bwana :D

mercurial

24-09-2008, 01:38 PM

IIRC you've in the past expressed a desire to be something other than an amateur shutterbug so a fullframe camera would certainly be on the cards. Why buy lenses now that wont fit? Glass lasts longer than the cameras anyway. :)

I did, but I'm still indecisive :o

bwana

24-09-2008, 01:43 PM

I did, but I'm still indecisive :oI know but since we're talking about a hypothetical lens for a hypothetical camera why not think a few steps ahead . . . . hypothetically speaking of course. :)

mercurial

24-09-2008, 01:43 PM

I know but since we're talking about a hypothetical lens for a hypothetical camera why not think a few steps ahead . . . . hypothetically speaking of course. :)

Lol.

koffiejunkie

24-09-2008, 01:47 PM

I had the Canon 18-200 under hands this morning. I took four quick shots, but neglected to set my camera up properly (I was shooting in the dark before), so my test shots came out at ISO1600 and very slow shutter speeds hand-held, so it's not too sharp. I'll do this again (properly) if I get a chance. What I can tell you is has really nice contrast. AF is very quick and quieter than I expected. It feels solid, and doesn't weigh too much either.

marine1

24-09-2008, 01:49 PM

Cool, thanks Koffie

koffiejunkie

24-09-2008, 01:51 PM

marine1, I'm going away for two weeks, so don't wait for me. See if you can get hold of one yourself and try it out.

marine1

24-09-2008, 01:52 PM

:):)
Enjoy, be safe

bwana

24-09-2008, 01:59 PM

marine1, I'm going away for two weeks, so don't wait for me. See if you can get hold of one yourself and try it out.Why would he - I dont think that canon lens will fit on his sony. ;)

Have a great trip :)

marine1

24-09-2008, 02:00 PM

Why would he - I dont think that canon lens will fit on his sony. ;)

:D:D

koffiejunkie

24-09-2008, 02:06 PM

Why would he - I dont think that canon lens will fit on his sony. ;)

AAh damn, the other M... :D

sdd

29-09-2008, 11:15 AM

I too was thinking of getting it for situations where I would not have to be changing lenses often or would have to carry many at the same time.

Does anyone have this lens ...? Opinions?

bwana

29-09-2008, 11:37 AM

I too was thinking of getting it for situations where I would not have to be changing lenses often or would have to carry many at the same time.

Does anyone have this lens ...? Opinions?I dont have this particular Sigma lens but I do shoot on a regular basis with the 28-300 and love it.

mercurial

29-09-2008, 11:42 AM

bwana

29-09-2008, 11:46 AM

photozone.de (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/321-sigma-af-18-200mm-f35-63-dc-os-canon-test-report--review) says barrel distortions are heavy at 18mm but beyond 18mm, it's fine. But all in all, the results are mixed. I'd rather invest in the Canon EF 70-300mm.The Canon 70-200 L (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) series are better. :)

mercurial

29-09-2008, 11:48 AM

The Canon 70-200 L (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) series are better. :)

Indeed, but we're all not as rich as you bwana :D

mercurial

29-09-2008, 11:50 AM

Actually, my apologies bwana. I see the price is only a few hundred rands more :eek:

bwana

29-09-2008, 11:52 AM

Indeed, but we're all not as rich as you bwana :DI wish I was rich - if I was I'd have a bag full of lenses rather than the few that I do have.

I also intentionally spent less on the disposable aspect - the body - and concentrated on the bit that should last me a life time. :)

mercurial

29-09-2008, 12:04 PM

I wish I was rich - if I was I'd have a bag full of lenses rather than the few that I do have.

I also intentionally spent less on the disposable aspect - the body - and concentrated on the bit that should last me a life time. :)

AKA glass :p

ldmelsa

29-09-2008, 01:02 PM

I wish I was rich - if I was I'd have a bag full of lenses rather than the few that I do have.

If I were a rich man,
Ya ha deedle deedle, bubba bubba deedle deedle dum.
All day long I'd biddy biddy bum.
If I were a wealthy man.
I wouldn't have to work hard.
Ya ha deedle deedle, bubba bubba deedle deedle dum.
If I were a biddy biddy rich,
Yidle-diddle-didle-didle man.

photozone.de (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/321-sigma-af-18-200mm-f35-63-dc-os-canon-test-report--review) says barrel distortions are heavy at 18mm but beyond 18mm, it's fine. But all in all, the results are mixed. I'd rather invest in the Canon EF 70-300mm.

Get the IS version - it's sharp
On a crop factor cam, I could not tell the deference between this and the 70-200 f4 IS. (I would take the 70-300, because it has an extra 100mm)
On the 5D the 70-200 had marginally better corner sharpness at f4.
Canon EF 70-300mm f4.0-5.6 IS USM (http://www.sacamera.co.za/productdetail/0345B003AA/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f4.0-5.6-IS-USM-STABILISER-with-FREE-Hoya-UV-Filter%21.html)

mercurial

29-09-2008, 01:11 PM

Get the IS version - it's sharp
On a crop factor cam, I could not tell the deference between this and the 70-200 f4 IS. (I would take the 70-300, because it has an extra 100mm)
On the 5D the 70-200 had marginally better corner sharpness at f4.
Canon EF 70-300mm f4.0-5.6 IS USM (http://www.sacamera.co.za/productdetail/0345B003AA/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f4.0-5.6-IS-USM-STABILISER-with-FREE-Hoya-UV-Filter%21.html)

Thanks. This is the lens that I am quite interested in :)

bwana

29-09-2008, 01:14 PM

AKA glass :pYeah - glass. I'm always going to choose higher quality glass over IS any day but then the ability to handhold at slower shutter speeds seems to be a dying art (http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=136657). :o

koffiejunkie

29-09-2008, 05:19 PM

I'd rather invest in the Canon EF 70-300mm.

The Canon 70-200 L (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) series are better. :)

Not exactly great all-round travel lenses :( That said, my 70-300 did get some work today. Picks will hit flickr (if they are any good) when I get home.

Yeah - glass. I'm always going to choose higher quality glass over IS any day but then the ability to handhold at slower shutter speeds seems to be a dying art (http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=136657). :o

I'll have to take my statement re: 1/10s back. I did a few today, and even a 1/4. There's not a hell of a lot of light going around when your main source is incense.... Again (disclaimer), I'll do proper pixel peeping when I get home.

bwana

29-09-2008, 06:52 PM

Hey - hope you're enjoying your trip koffiejunkie.

stix

30-09-2008, 10:02 AM

// My fav lens funnily enough is a fixed focal 50 mm 1.8
// I use it loads for Bwana dying art :D

koffiejunkie

30-09-2008, 12:10 PM

I like my 50mm f/1.8 lots for what it is, but on a crop body I find 50mm (80mm field of view) not a very useful focal length. It's too narrow for most things. I like my 35mm f/2 way more in that regard. It's closer to what a 50mm is on a film body - kinda nice focal length all round. I might even trade it for a 28mm if I can find a nice fast one for a good price. But then, I like the wider ones :)