I was surprised to see this lens in the shop I visited just now.
More than a few are speculating on how it performs. Here are some crude test shots. All images are shot RAW with a 10D converted using DPP standard parameter, all other settings are untouched. Camera is placed on the shop counter and timer on, OS is turned off, ISO 100, 200 mm, 100% near centre crop.
f/6.3 (wide open)
f/8
f/11
This shot is to test the effectiveness of the OS, by no means objective, just to give you guys an idea.
1/30 sec, f/6.3 (wide open), ISO 800, 200 mm, handheld (of course)
Edited by Navyblue on Jun 18, 2007 at 12:00 AM GMT
How did the lens "handle"? How are the other shots that you (presumably?) shot with the OS feature on? How about wide open from 18mm through, say, 100mm? I suppose the short question is: were you impressed, considering it as perhaps a light travel lens (in addition to primes), with its image quality for the price?
I was in fact looking for a light travel lens. I only have primes and lugging a bagful of primes and having to swap lens relatively often aren't really something that would enhance my travelling experience. My primary consideration are size, weight and reasonable IQ.
Sorry I didn't play much with the lens. I have a few more shots taken at 18 mm and wide open, they aren't too different from the above. The 18 mm one is probably somewhat less sharp, but that could be due to the larger aperture (f/3.5) or user error.
Construction wise is similar to the 18-125 and the older 18-200, may be feels a tiny tad more solid, and has the EX style crinkle finish.
IQ wise, I'd say it exceeded my expectation as a super zoom (I expect softer pictures at extreme ends), not L zoom or prime quality (not a fair thing to compare anyway), but I can be comfortable with it.
Focusing wide seems to be spot on with my 10D in a typical interior lighting. Speed wise is quite ok for me (of course not USM grade).
Weight wise, it isn't what I'd call very light, I'd call it medium weighted lens. But considering the huge range and the OS, it is pretty light. This is a major aspect for me. If I were to end up another lens, I am quite certain that this other lens is a lighter lens than this one.
Pricing wise, I think it is of a good value, but I have trouble revealing to my other half that I need to shell out just under $500 for it, especially for a Sigma non EX lens.
Thanks for the samples. I have had one on order since my camera shop listed it & a price (have the non OS version now) and am anxiously awaiting it. Those samples look fine for my use.
Thanks for the samples! The handheld shot of the bar codes came out surprisingly good for an 11X zoom at 200mm. I was expecting something softer. Now I'm interested to see how it performs at 18mm.
A.Y. wrote:
Thanks for the samples! The handheld shot of the bar codes came out surprisingly good for an 11X zoom at 200mm. I was expecting something softer. Now I'm interested to see how it performs at 18mm.
Does the lens partially block the build-in flash?
Yep, that was what I thought too. I didn't expect wide open shot at its extreme end being so decent. And at a shutter speed of 1/30 sec, and I'm sure it made it a more than a usable lens at 200 mm.
Sorry I really didn't thought of the flash part, but again, almost WA any lens with a hood would cast a shadow with my 10D's relatively low profile pop up flash.
The samples are sharpened to hell, and while being decent photograhs imho, the 100% crops really aren't very impressive. Well they're way too sharpened to my eyes/monitor, so can't really judge on that... But you easily tell the difference, IMHO, from this superzoom when compared to regular zooms... But that said, resized, they don't look bad at all. Pretty decent IMHO for 18-200, the shots in this page also look good, but again it's not 100% crops. Overall, I think it depends on print size or which resolution you're going to view them. But for websize, smaller prints, looks great to me.
I have a trip to europe mid july.... pick one up or not........... hmmmm.... What say you?
For some reason, the shot looked more noisy than a typical ISO 400 that I'm used to see with my camera. The barrel distortion is pretty visible.
I think it looks pretty good, given it's an 18-200 and at f3.5. It should get sharper as you step down. I believe it's noisier because the pic is underexposed.
[edit] well, problem partially solved, already out of stock at bh! That took what, one day?
inMtl wrote:
... the shots in this page also look good, but again it's not 100% crops. Overall, I think it depends on print size or which resolution you're going to view them. But for websize, smaller prints, looks great to me.
I have a trip to europe mid july.... pick one up or not........... hmmmm.... What say you?
What do you mean? All except one of the shot (the one showing the distortion) on this page are 100% crop.
If you can only bring one lens and need the reach I'd say go for it. This is a one of a kind lens in the EOS land.
I have a potential trip to Europe later this year too (not decided on the destination). I don't have a zoom lens, and I figure I need to have a light weight zoom lens for travelling. But I can't decide on which lens to get yet. This lens looks good to me, the thing is it isn't what I'd call light (610g). The other lens that I'm looking at is the Canon 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 which is lighter but with not so great range and no IS. The Canon 17-85 IS seems overpriced for what it is and the Sigma 17-70 focusing speed leaves room for desire and the Tamron 17-50 feels a little short to me. (Yes, I'm fussy )
, the shop name is "John 3:16" Located at Funan Centre.
