gugs wrote:
I would redo the test, because I am concerned about the following:
- minimal focus distance of both lenses
- the lengths of the lenses being different, was the working distance comparable (this looks like a closeup)
- flash usage: since distance must have been different, you get reflections from the flash in different ways, influencing picture quality
- I would position a wireless flash at the same place wrt the object in both shots.
- CA is very clear with but could have been "enhanced" because of higher reflection of the flash + what kind of filters do you use ?
- the Nikkor picture also seems a bit out of focus, not just soft or is it me ?
Lots of comments just to say that I wouldn't draw a conclusion too quickly...
I am getting curious, I have ordered one a few days ago (delivery within 2 weeks...)
One was shot at 50mm and the other at 55. Yes I was pretty close to the box but given how similar those pics were in perspective and size at 100% resolution, they are pretty close to being the same. I was at least two feet from the box and probably three, well beyond minimum focussing distance. Whenever I am close, I always move in to where the camera won't focus and then back up a good distance to be sure.
I am sure the Nikon focussed fine as I have owned other lenses notorious for being soft that looked similar or worse. Today, weather permitting, I'll take some pics at a local motorcycle shop outdoors. It will probably be a dark gloomy day so I'll need the flash again, but that will also give VR a chance to do its thing.
Ihave been considering the VR 18-200, and I now own the Sigma 18-200. I registered just to respond to this test and dialog. The images are clearly not the same. Look at the shadows under the labels in the Sigma shot. There are no shadows at all in the Nikon shot. My amateur guess: The flash was not recharged in the Nikon shot, forcing it to a much higher ISO, which explains the grain and the CA.
Like many of the respondents, I have heard nothing but good things about this lens, and I look forward to getting mine. The VR will hopefully make it worth the difference.
One was shot at 50mm and the other at 55. Yes I was pretty close to the box but given how similar those pics were in perspective and size at 100% resolution, they are pretty close to being the same. I was at least two feet from the box and probably three, well beyond minimum focussing distance. Whenever I am close, I always move in to where the camera won't focus and then back up a good distance to be sure.
I am sure the Nikon focussed fine as I have owned other lenses notorious for being soft that looked similar or worse. Today, weather permitting, I'll take some pics at a local motorcycle shop outdoors. It will probably be a dark gloomy day so I'll need the flash again, but that will also give VR a chance to do its thing.
I still had a bad feeling, so I checked the exif data: the Nikon version has been shot @135mm and the Sigma 50mm. I see some CA in both pictures and I still think my previous comments are valid: the flash most probably caused different reflections (look at the red part), making the comparison difficult...
I just hope that the problem you show here is not representative and that your copy will give you a lot of very nice pictures under normal circumstances.
I still had a bad feeling, so I checked the exif data: the Nikon version has been shot @135mm and the Sigma 50mm. I see some CA in both pictures and I still think my previous comments are valid: the flash most probably caused different reflections (look at the red part), making the comparison difficult...
I just hope that the problem you show here is not representative and that your copy will give you a lot of very nice pictures under normal circumstances.
Guy
Guy,
I hope I didn't screw up that badly. With the 18-200 I took shots at many focal lengths, moving closer or further from the box as needed. If I indeed posted a 135mm Nikon then I am sorry for the big screw up. When I get home I'll take a look at all my images and see how this happened. But I have to tell you, they all look about the same.
It has been dark and dreary for over a month now but tomorrow I'll shoot regardless of conditions. I'll post back with whatever I come up with. Also, I'll make sure all comparison shots are at the same focal length.
Somehow I uploaded the wrong image. Lame on my behalf and sorry for that.
I have now fixed my original post and the Nikon image was taken at 56mm, f5.6 with flash. It is much more similar to the Sigma color wise, but still is way softer. OOF? I refuse to believe that. I took about 20 pictures that night and all the Nikon's look like the ones posted and all the Sigma's are sharp. If it is OOF it is because the D2X and 18-200VR aren't comunicating properly. It isn't my technique.
I will spend time this weekend shooting with both lenses and will post my results in a new thread.
