Sigma 18-200mm OS reviews seem as rare as the lesser-spotted honest politician. It’s my birthday in a couple of weeks. Added to that I will be flying to Hungary. Being the camera nut I am these two facts combine to form a photography gear hunt. In particular this elusive beast. 
As a swiss-army-knife everything in one package walkabout lens it seems perfect. 18-200mm, good range, would only need the one lens 3/4 of the time. Optical stabilisation so no need for a tripod in a pinch. Not hugely bad f-stop (3.5 at best) but not brilliant I admit.
Warehouseexpress has it for £439.99. Can I buy something that expensive without seeing any decent reviews? Not likely.
OK, there seem to be fans amongst forum posters, and some pictures in the wild seem to suggest decent enough performance, but I want more than just “some guy on the net says so” kind of advice.
Anyone had their hands on this bad boy?
9 Comments
f3.5 is all you’re going to get at the long end on a superzoom because of the optics. The real problem is at the other end> f6.3 is quite slow, especially when you consider that the Nikon 18-200VR is 3.5-5.6, and only about £70 more. This lens might be attractive for Canon/Pentax shooters, but it’s hardly making itself a good competitor to that prized Nikon specimen. f6.3 + OS isn’t so bad, but it’s still quite a narrow aperture for the long end of a telephoto.
I don’t have that lens but the 28 – 300 mm (but without Optical Stabilistion). I’m really satisfied with the lens and love it for its versatility. It’s great when you don’t want to carry more than one lens around with you.
I also have a smaller Sigma lens and I’m very satisfied with both of them. Their quality is about the same as that of original Canon lenses (I’m using an EOS 350D).
Hope that helps you a bit.
I haven’t yet played with this version of the now-ubiquitous 18-200mm zoom range lens, but my experience with the Nikon 18-200mm VR has been nothing short of phenominal.
Other than slight barrel-distortion, the pictures throughout the zoom range are excellent (with some softening at the long-end).
My recent experience with the Tamron 18-250mm lens (non-Image stabilized) was really surprising. Picked up as a cheaper alternative to my (favorite) Nikon 18-200 (in case it were to dissapear during my recent Europe trip), I was really surprised at the image-quality of this lens.
Distortion was more pronounced than the Nikon (a redily identifiable “sine” distortion which can be harder to fix in Photoshop), and lens-creep affected both lenses, but, all in all, a perfectly good travel-lens.
Just a side note, just last week it seemed that B&H photo (in New York) was finally able to fulfill the back-orders for the long-lost Nikon 18-200 VR and we were able to pick up a second one for my wife. Maybe the pipeline is finally being filled.
Rumour has it that is has an archaic AF system, so its slow and nothing near the HSM, SWM or anything equilv. I have the 18-200 Nikon and its far superior to it, the original 18-200 sigma had terrible optics and had distortion at every length except 50mm or so.
I am not saying it’s not a cheaper alterantive and you can’t get everything in one lens, but it’ll suffice to do a lot of travel work.
@tom – I am a Canon shooter so am deprived the Nikon lens. I’m not over fussed about the f numbers seeing as it would mostly be a “cut down on the hand luggage” lens but it would have been nicer if it was in the 4/5 range
@Jenni – It does help, thanks. Damian has the non OS 18-200mm and a few others and is happy but you never know if he was just lucky
@Slightly Out Of Focus – It’s about time, hopefully that means they will have VR stock for the Christmas market too
@Eric – Yeah as a travel companion it will do I think. Closer to home or for longer trips I can take the full kit bag
Hi! I’ve had the lens for couple of weeks, and I have liked it. It’s not the sharpest and barrel-distortion on the wide end is quite heavy. But that is understandable because of the large zoom range. Only problem I’ve had is that the autofocus on 200mm hunts in low light, because of the 6,3 aperture. But overall great lens for my use, I like the fact that one lense for all purposes. Color it reproduces is nice, much like sigma’s 17-70dc – if you’ve seen it. OS is great, it helps a lot in low light.. I prefer this much more than the canon’s 17-85IS.. Much more versatile… …well only lens that I’ve used since I bought it…
That’s very helpful, thanks
I think I would end up using the wide and middle ranges most, as 90% of the time I have my Canon 10-22mm attached. The 200mm would be useful to have as an option but will probably not see much action.
i tried this for quite a while in a shop in japan and the build quality was much better than my Canon 17-85IS. i think the iQ seemed about the same.
Focusing was no where near as fast as the Canon and not as quiet either.
i think it would be a good travel lense, however i have the 70-200 IS which is a beauty and if i got the sigma then i really wouldnt use the 70-200 which would be a real shame as the results are stunning
I have the 70-300mm IS but I *think* I would still use it