18-200mm lenses

[Tink10]

I can't decide ....Which would you choose for a walk-around lens at WDW & why?

 

[Kelly Grannell]

if you want for range: 18-200 but the picture quality is not as good as 18-125
if you want a balance between picture quality range: 18-125

 

[disneyfan551]

Excuse me for hijacking the thread...Kelly, I just bought the 18-200 for my new D50 yesterday. Is the quality extremely different? I'm wondering if I'll regret my decision now... oh, and THANKS for all of your advice you give people on this board!!!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

For casual use and 4x6 to 8x10 prints, the lens is okay, but just like any zoom of any brand, the more zoom capability a lens has, the more distortion and colour abberation it will have too. For me personally, the 18-125 is my limit of the balance between distortion and picture quality, my eyes can't tolerate more distortion (both barrel distortion and pincushion distortion) than that.

Another caveat of 18-200, starting at the 125 to 200, the aperture is f/6.3, this renders the lens to be somewhat useless (at the 125-300 range) in a low-light situations. Outdoor, bright area shots such as Kilimanjaro Safari will be fine. Fantasmic will be useless. Again, this is only from the 125 to 200 end only.

Now answering your question "is the quality extremely different?". To me and my eyes, yes. However, if you're happy with the purchase, it's all that matters.

I honestly wish that I can't see ISO noise so I can be happy even with the cheapest Kodak P/S. I wish I can't see CA and distortion that easily so I can buy the 18-200 and other cheaper lens. I wish I can't see CA and vignetting so easily so I can buy Canon 17-85 IS lens.

I guess, Disney is taking care of the "Wishes" (pardon the bad pun)

Kelly

 

[safetymom]

I have the latest Nikon 18-200 VR lens and I love it. Many pros have commented on the quality of th pictures and have bought that lens. I don't think you can go wrong if you buy this lens.

 

[handicap18]

I have the latest Nikon 18-200 VR lens and I love it. Many pros have commented on the quality of th pictures and have bought that lens. I don't think you can go wrong if you buy this lens.

I can't wait to hit the lottery so I can buy this lens. I would absolutly love to have this for my D50, but it is out of my price range at $750+.

For the basic amerture who has a dSLR, I think the Sigma 18-125 is a great single lens to have. Gives just enough wide angle and just enough reach for your basic photography (family candids, holidays, kids sporting events, family weddings, etc...). If you get into more of the other photography stuff (landscape, larger sporting events, birds, macro, wildlife, etc...) then you'll want more of a reach and probably faster lenses. But then again your wanting spending hundreds and hundreds if not thousands of dollars on a lens.

 

[captaincrash]

Hello,

You might want to read the reviews on Photo zone http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html for some interesting test results and commentary. Also, there is a review series with ratings by 42 individuals at http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=257&sort=7&cat=37&page=2 and their rating is currently a 7.2 out of 10. Of course, your milage will vary with personal experience - but these comments may be of interest to you.

From casual observation, experience with a Tamaron 18-200 (an identical lense to the Sigma 18-200 in terms of basic specification) and skimming these reviews I do have an opinion as well. Foremost - is that with my Tamaron I had a few beautifuly tack sharp photos with decent color. More so than with my Canon KIT lense or the poorly rated Canon 28-200 I had been using. But then on the other hand I had a strange series of photos where the focus missed entirely! There were far more missed focus events than I had seen with the KIT or 28-200. So - after about 40 days (I bought it just before a ong trip - just my luck, eh?) I sold it on Ebay. Of course, I had purchased it on ebay to begin with (not a good sign, eh?) and I got more for it then I paid. SO I had no net losses.

And on the reviews... they comment on the Sigmas having missed focus events. This sort of make me wary in encouraging anyone towards these lenses. So yeah... the 18-125 has decent performance with better speed then the 18-200 - except for vignetting at 18 and 125 with f3.5 and f5.6 among other mild weaknesses.

TO be candid - as soon as I read of the missed focusing performance I sort of stopped reading and started skimming faster. So - I might suggest you look hard at the alternatives before you buy.

If this is the best option in your price range - then be certain of your return options in case you get a bad sample - as you might just end up with a jackpot "good" sample!

Good luck - sorry to be so glum about these otherwise impressive looking lenses....

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Dunno about the misfocusing thing. I've got the later batch of 18-125 (actually I have two of them, one for back up) and although they sometimes misfocus, it's not bad at all.

I've printed a lot of 20"x30" (to sell at several galleries) pictures of sceneries etc using that Sigma lens.

Is it a perfect lens? far from it, but as a walkaround lens. This one is close to perfect (as perfect as an all-around lens could be)

 

[Tink10]

Thank you all so much!

I ended up with the Sigma 18-200, a Canon 50mm 1.8 & a Canon 70-300 IS. I'm still waiting on the last 2 lenses to arrive, but all I can say so far is "WOW!".

There's such an incredible difference between my old Sony P & S and dSLR. I've picked things up pretty well so far but I can see that I have so much to learn. I can't wait to get out this weekend!!!

I'm sure as time goes on I'll have plenty of questions.....

Thanks Again!!

 

[Charade]

I leave in 1 1/2 weeks to WDW and I can't wait to give a good working out!! I made a few test shots already and the VR works really well. I think I'm just taking my 50mm 1.8 and the 18-200. I'd like to travel a little lighter this time although I might bring along my monopod. I'll be solo so I'll have PLENTY of time to take pics and NOT hear "Would ya hurry up and take the pic already!!"

 

[ducklite]

Awesome! I played with that lens at a photography expo a few months back--one thing I really liked about it was the weight of it was very manageable for such a versatile lens. Let us know how it works out for you--can't wait to see the pictures!

Anne

 

[tinksdad]

Been pretty happy with mine! It's a bit soft wide open, but with that kind of range it's a perfect lens for travel!!

Have fun!!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

congrats on the purchase... now go out and have fun!

 

[Charade]

So far I'm pretty impressed. Could use a little more reach at times but overall I think it's a keeper! These are only resized. No post processing at all.

 

[Nik's Mom]

Very nice!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

drool inducing (waiting for Canon to release the same thing)

 

[Anewman]

Nice, great colors.

Is that Dust(sensor) in the EX-Everest pic?

 

[PixieDust32]

Nice!

 

[Charade]

Nice, great colors.

Is that Dust(sensor) in the EX-Everest pic?

Yes, it is. That's my first dust blob that I know of.

 

[captaincrash]

Which body were you using? Your images look quite nice. We can only see limited resolution here - but the illumination looks uniform and colors snappy - as Nikons are commnly expected to output. I would be interested in seeing what some of these histograms looked like. But to the casual eye these look simply wonderful as is.