txbonds
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #14 · Sigma 18-50 vs Nikon 18-200 photo fixed | |
My experience with the 18-200vr has been good. In fact, so far with my copy, the only differences in pictures between my 17-55dx and the 18-200vr has been with barrell and pincushin distortion and with CA. The 18-200vr doesn't handle CA quite as well as the 17-55dx did, but is easily fixed in NC 4.4. It also has slightly more distortion primarily around 18mm and when shooting straight vertical lines like fences or railings or whatnot.
My copy for the types of things I shoot, as long as I don't flub up the shot, has been pretty good. Good enough in fact that I've sold my 17-55dx to a fellow FM'er.
Now, that said, would I like to have kept my 17-55dx and had VR? Well, heck yeah.
Would I like to have had say a 18-125 f4 vr lens? Heck yeah.
But, for my needs which are mainly walk around shooting these days, the 18-200vr is fitting the bill.
Would I every expect to take the lens to a dark event indoors and shoot like you could with an f2.8 zoom? No.
I think we are going to see sample variation just like with every lens, but maybe even a little more with this due to the design elements and what not. Is there a sharper copy out there than mine........ probably, but that's okay.
If I want ultimate sharpness in a shot, I will use my 50 f1.4, or another prime.
If I ever get back into covering lots of events, I'll be looking for an f2.8 zoom. But, you have to accept and live with the 18-200vr for what it is. An all arounder for day to day or travel purposes.
It's replacing a heck of a range in my bag, and with the D200, 18-200vr, and a 50 f1.4 in a tamrac velocity 7, I'm finding that I'm carying the camera every day now. I never did that with the 17-55, as it was always too short of the need at the time, and/or it was too heavy, and when I put the 70-200 with it, now we are talking about trekking a back pack all day long.
However, I'd like to see your above test with 3 or 4 shots of each. At different distances, and what not. I found that my 17-55dx could focus closer than the 18-200vr, even though the 18-200vr was a "macro" designated lens. The 17-55dx can get really close, and the 18-50 sigma may be the same way. you might have been outside/inside the focus capabilities of the 18-200vr. I'd give it a day of good testing, and then if it still doesn't seem sharp, swap it for another copy.
Just my 2 cents.
|
?? Maybe I'll exchange it for a new one?
