 |
|
|
zimzam
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 3, 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
|
Can anyone compare Canon EF 28-135 IS USM to Sigma 18-200 DC OS pls. Equivalent IS and sharpness?
|
|
 Mar 3, 2008
|
|
TRENTPULL
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 4, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 482
|
|
Review Date: Feb 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $430.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent vacation lens. Very sharp in center at all focal lengths. Terrific build quality, fast focus, effective OS.
|
|
Cons:
|
Very slight off center focus but not enough to send the lens in for adjustment.
|
|
I bought this lens based on a review here http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/evfzz
The lens performs really well on my Canon 40D and I could not be more pleased. One incredible feature of this lens is that you can use a Kinko 1.5 TC with it to extend the range to 300mm and the IQ isn't really noticeably reduced! However, using the 1.5TC with the Sigma requires that I use a focus point other than the center three, top, center or bottom focus points to get proper focus on my 40D. It is reported that it works fine with other cameras. Knowing this limitation I simply choose one of the other focus points and it works perfectly even out at maximum zoom.
When using the the lens without the 1.5 TC auto focus works perfectly regardless of which focus point I use.
I also have a Nikon mount copy of this lens on my D200 and it is actually sharper then the Nikon 18-200VR and the OS was just as effective.
From a price performance perspective this lens has no peer and I highly recommend it to prospective buyers.
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2008
|
|
markskarpo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 9, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Feb 5, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Great focal length range and OS (obviously)
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft pictures compared to 18-125 non-OS
|
|
|
I ordered three of these (I always get more than one copy and pick the best) looking to replace my older Sigma 18-125 (which is exceptionally sharp). Extended range and OS sounds great, but I always compare IQ. A pixel peeping comparison with my 18-125 revealed my old lens significantly sharper at f4.5-f8, even at 125mm and 1/60sec times (using OS on 18-200). So, I returned 'em all. For me, this is my walk-around lens and I want best IQ. Yes, the OS version can shoot between 1/10 and 1/30, whereas my non-OS will have shake in that range, but only a limited number of my shots require this time range and I can usually crank up the ISO to 800-1600 on my Canon 30D to compensate. So, I'm keeping my 18-125 and practicing my flash technique!
|
|
|
Feb 5, 2008
|
|
skanter
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 31, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Jan 16, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent range, good IQ.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not as sharp as lenses costing 3X the price.
|
|
|
I had used the non-OS version for a year, found it to be quite good after some PP. I decided to buy the OS version, sold my old one on Ebay (for $75 less than I payed for it).
The OS version is better than I expected. IQ surpasses the old version, but the OS really makes a huge difference. First, I can shoot at 200mm (320mm) at 1/30 sec, while I wouldn't dare at less than 1/300 without OS. This makes the long shots far more usable, and they come out fairly sharp. The great thing is that I can usually shoot at f8 or f11 most of the time, giving far better quality. At wider focal lengths I can shoot at 1/15 or even 1/10th!
Another great benefit of this lens is that you can shoot with natural light indoors in almost any situation. I often shoot fellow musicians performing in dark clubs, also dance concerts here in NYC. No problem for the OS Sigma.
While not a fast lens (OS makes up for it), or a lens for pixel-peepers or the elite "L" set, this is a lens for the rest of us -- and there is nothing else quite like it for Canon cameras.
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2008
|
|
BudS
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 12, 2006
Location: Brazil
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Nov 21, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $465.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
OS, range, light weight, quiet
|
|
Cons:
|
it is not an "L" lens, but then you aren't paying for that either
|
|
|
for the price, you can not beat this lens. Is the image quality on par with an "L" lens? No way. But then, the price is not in that range either. This is a one lens when I can only take one lens solution. The range is awesome and the IQ is fine, esp if you can stop down to f8.
The other thing is that the price is the same as the Tamron 18-250, but Tamron has no OS. The IQ is significantly better than the Sigma 18-200 which had no OS.
I find that this is a good compromise lens and I am happy with the results I get. I recommend this lens as an excellent walk around solution.
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2007
|
|
veroman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Aug 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4468
|
|
Review Date: Oct 30, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 2
|
|
|
If you can agree that the core reason for the existence (and use) of a 18-200mm lens is to take you instantly from one extreme focal length to another (as well as everything in between) with a reasonable degree of uniformity and predictability across its focal range...then this lens is pretty much a failure.
With the Sigma 18-200 OS lens, there are focal lengths between that 18 and 200 that are downright poor compared to just about any modern lens you could purchase today, including cheap kit lenses. Just take a look at the resolution charts at photozone.com and you'll see what I mean. In fact, in terms of resolution, they called this lens "something of a roller coaster ride." It is.
Using this lens on a 1.6 crop camera you can pretty much forget shooting at a standard 50mm equivalent or at 100mm equivalent, two of the most useful and most used focal lengths. At those focal lengths, center resolution is pretty bad at just about any aperture setting and terrible at the borders.
The thing is, most users of lenses like this don't "set" the lens to a particular focal length ahead of time. Like me, they look through the viewfinder and adjust the focal length to suit the scene, not really knowing what exactly what focal length they're shooting at but still expecting some kind of uniformity when they view the results. Well, with this lens, forget the uniformity. IQ-wise it's all over the place, with the worst results at the most commonly used lengths. What good is that?
If you want to know how a lens like this is SUPPOSED to perform, rent a Canon 28-300L IS for a week (a reference standard for extreme zooms). You'll be blown away with each and every shot, regardless of focal length. No, I'm not suggesting that a lens costing a few hundred dollars should perform like a lens costing over $2,000, but it should at least emulate it in some ways...similar to the way the Tamron 28-75 emulates the Canon 24-70 or the way Canon's 70-300 IS emulates Canon's 70-200 IS.
Yes, the OS works ok on Sigma's 18-200.
Big deal.
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2007
|
|
Tigadee
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 4, 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Oct 22, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $480.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very good build, metal mount, good OS, fast if somewhat noisy AF even in low light, excellent useful range, internal focus (front of lens does not rotate), quite sharp esp. at 200mm with decent close-up macro of 1:39 at 45cm at full 200mm tele
|
|
Cons:
|
Nervous bokeh, OS engages a micro second slower than Canon's
|
|
|
For its price and design envelope, this lens is a real gem. I won't need to talk about the usefulness of 18-200mm or even OS, but the sharpness and very fast AF even in low-light was a surprise. Another bonus was the internal focusing which mean the front lens element does not rotate, making the lens suitable for CPLs and also for holding the lens hood when shooting at 200mm.
The sharpness is quite good for a lens of this type and price. 18mm at f3.5 isn't shockingly sharp but decent, and improves to f8 (possible handheld, thanks to OS). But it is impressively sharp at 200mm. What's more, it focuses close to 45cm even at 200mm with a macro ratio of 1:39 which doesn't sound great till you try it and with the big megapixels these days, you can get some really impressive macros! The AF is surprisngly fast too, and accurate even in low light, which is a delight. But as it is not a fast lens, flash or high ISO is recommended, my indoor zoo shots were taken at ISO 1600, outdoors at ISO 125.
Only thing I miss is a tripod ring so I can hold the lens better for full tele shots but a flat flash bracket screwed onto the tripod mount of the camera and pointing forward (under the lens) acts quite well as a makeshift tripod ring for steady handholding at 200mm. the bokeh from the lens isn't anything to shout about (understandably), as it is choppy and fractured.
Overall, I highly recommend this lens as the main lens for general purpose and switch to primes or fast lenses for other types of photography, i.e. portraits. I have this lens on a 40D, Tokina 12-24mm f4, and two primes of 50mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.8.
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2007
|
|
Remford
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Aug 7, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1392
|
|
Review Date: Sep 2, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
A terrific niche-filler, a stabilized single-lens grab 'n go solution previously unavailable to EOS digital shooters without having to split the baby of carrying more gear or making more lens changes than is desirable for a given scenaro or taking a step backward to a P&S.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nervous bokeh and lack of FTM and HSM focusing.
|
|
|
The 18-200 OS' best characteristic is it successfuly manages the many compromised required of a compact super zoom while adding the invaluable benefit of stabilization, a feature that is especially indispensible for a lens designed for such overwhelmingly handheld use and moderate speed.
It's very acceptably sharp, but it's biggest benefit isn't anything it does particularly well, but rather that it can do so much without perfoming poorly. It's a Swiss Army knife, not an artisan's Samurai sword... and there are times when a Swiss Army knife is far more suited to the task.
It's very robustly constructed with an excellent fit and finish that could easily be mistaken for one of Sigma's EX series lenses. The lack of FTM focusing is awkward given how generally ubiquitous a feature it has become, and though the lack of HSM is a shame, it's hardly slow to focus and does so swiftly and surely. It's rather frantic bokeh might benefit from a skilled hand during post processing.
Given its purpose and reasonable expectations of what it's supposed to be, I'm very pleased to own one, even alongisde my comprehensive arsenal of L-series optics.
|
|
|
Sep 2, 2007
|
|
Cicopo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 14, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 2251
|
|
Review Date: Aug 24, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Well built, OS works very well, size, range covered, price to versatility ratio, very useful for first time DSLR buyers as their first lens. More than meets my use.
|
|
Cons:
|
The only con I would ever have is that it wasn't available sooner.
|
|
|
I have had the non OS version since they became available and have got some great shots from it on my 20D. When I read that a stabilized version would be introduced I wanted it immediately. This lens far out does many more expensive ones in versatility, covering most of the range we need daily in just one single lens that is compact & light, but has a good feel to it. I highly recommend as a first DSLR lens instead of the kit lenses currently supplied, and the IQ from mine is well above what I got from my 17-85 IS, which frankly was a big disappointment. I own several L series lenses so do know what Canon's high end IQ looks like, and also a 1Dmklln, and 5D and yet for my normal use the 20D (soon to be replaced by a 40D which will make for a nice point & shoot with this lens) is my first choice, covering an effective range of 28-320 mm in a very compact & light package. I have tested my copy wide open at both ends of the range, and for me it is more than adaquately sharp.
In my eyes Sigma has hit a home run with this lens, and has proven that a third party manufacturer can build lenses which include a very good image stabilizer for less money than the OEMs
|
|
|
Aug 24, 2007
|
|
sdgphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 14, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 145
|
|
Review Date: Aug 22, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Focal range / Nice contrast and overall sharpness / Stabilization very effective / Build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
No hypersonic AF or full-time manual / Wish it were a 67mm thread (and not 72mm) / Wish it were a f5.6 at 200mm (and not f6.3)
|
|
|
What a nice lens. Performs well and has great range. The OS is very effective. Well done, Sigma.
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2007
|
|
louiepaul
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 15, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $580.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
The OS. Sharper than expected.
|
|
Cons:
|
Stiff zoom ring. Bokeh
|
|
|
After reading some reviews I expected soft images. Not so. I did tests wide open and was pleasantly surprised with the results. Unless you are doing poster sized prints, this lens works. What was great was the test on the OS. At a focal length of 200mm, I would normally never go below 1/400th of a second, or twice focal length. I shot first at 1/200th and down to 1/100th. I feel I could safely go with a slower shutter speed. This OS thing really works.
My only two complaints are 1: the bokeh, as reported in photozone, was abit unapplealing, but not on all shots...still basically usable; 2: the zoom ring in not smooth. I got used to my 70-200L f4
Overall, the OS with the 18-200 range is just fantastic. Since I got the lens, the other lenses have been in the bag. Oh one more thing, the lens is smaller than i expected which is great with the 400D. Its a great combination.
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2007
|
|
shamus1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 10, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 31
|
|
Review Date: Aug 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $549.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
A very good compromise for a walk-about lens. Good when you may need a wide shot and then a close-up in quick succession with only one body. Very well built. Reasonable price. OS works as advertised.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not an L lens, but not an L lens price.
|
|
|
I have several Canon bodies, including the 1DMkIII, 5D and 20D with multiple L lens for serious shooting. I use an XTi and 300D for casual photos.
I decided to purchase this lens for my XTi and 300D. Currently using the Canon 17-85IS and the 70-200 f4 on the XTi. These lens plus a 50 f1.8 and 550EX flash make a larger, heavier bag than I sometimes wish to carry. This lens allows me to take the camera and external flash in a small bag. The 300D has the terrible kit lens and a 55-200 - equally as bad).
Certainly not L quality, but it will allow a wide angle shot and then close-up in quick succession without a lens change or two bodies. Something very handy for casual shooting.
When not used with the XTi, it will rest on my 300D which is my beach and Jeep camera, a vast improvement over the original kit lens setup.
I am very satisfied with the build quality and price. I had purchased a Canon 28-200 last year and took it back the same day, as it was terribly soft. Much better with the Sigma (however all my other lens are Canon)
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2007
|
|
sds39
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9
|
|
Review Date: Aug 14, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $549.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great walk around lens. I have the Canon 28-135 IS, the Tokina 12-24 and the Sigma 70-300. This lens gives me a little of each of those. Great for a vacation lens when you don't want to keep changing lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
It is not a low light lens and you do get best results with good lighting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 14, 2007
|
|
William Austin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 30, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 3, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Quick Focusing, Build quality, quite sharp at 200mm
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft from 18mm through to 135mm, OS is a bit slugish
|
|
|
I bought this 2 days ago, I found that at 200mm with OS switched on the IQ was very good however the over all IQ from this lens was very poor, at 18mm it wasn't very good at all, I also have the Tamron 18-250mm and the IQ is much better through out the range.
The Sigma has better build quality and faster focusing than the Tamron but this isn't of much use if the image quality is this poor.
I have taken the Sigma back to the shop for a refund
|
|
|
Aug 3, 2007
|
|
jrscls
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 7, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2302
|
|
Review Date: Aug 2, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $549.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
One of a kind lens for Canon users at this time, Excellent range and OS works well.
|
|
Cons:
|
No ring HSM/USM
|
|
|
I sold a 17-85 IS and got the Sigma for my wife for her XT. The Canon 17-85 IS was (as is the Sigma) a compromise given the zoom range, although the USM focusing and IS were very nice. At the wide end, the Sigma seems sharper, less CA, etc. than the Canon. In the mid range, I don't notice much difference in practical use. Of course the Sigma wins from 86-200 where it seems to be surprisingly sharp (much better than the Sigma 70-300 APO for example and on par with Canon's 70-300 IS).
Wide open at 35mm this lens gives soft corners, but for our use as a general purpose and travel lens it isn't a problem. The good news is that the center is sharp at all FLs, the OS works great (good 3 stops), and AF is accurate, all in a 11X zoom at an affordable price.
My 17-55 IS and 70-200 f4 L IS costs around $2K and the Sigma costs 1/4 this amount so we really can't expect it to compare and be flawless. But, this lens is a one of a kind for Canon bodies until Canon sells a 18-200 IS that includes USM, better IQ, and likely a higher price tag, although I'm not sure I would want to pay any more for this type of lens.
IMO, the Sigma is a good alternative for the 17-85 IS and 70-300 IS combo at about 1/2 the price and all in one convenient travel package. In fact, we also tried the 70-300 IS and we weren't that impressed (build quality was poor and our copy wasn't that sharp above 200mm, but it could have been a poor copy. Couple the Sigma with a decent prime (50mm f1.8 for example) and you have a decent walkaround/travel lens setup.
|
|
|
Aug 2, 2007
|
|
SamDCruz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 12, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 95
|
|
Review Date: Aug 2, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Range, OS, Build Quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Distortion at Wide End, High F Number at Long End
|
|
|
Overall for what it is, a superb lense.
Dont expect quality compared to the Professional L range lenses, but compared to similar priced and even more expensive lenses in the Canon range, this equals the quality and you get more out of it.
The OS system seems to work on the Sigma as well or better than my Canon 17-85IS
Build quality is miles better than the 17-85IS
Focusing was slower and noisier than the 17-85IS (also the manual focus rings moves on the Sigma where as on the Canon the movement is internal)
- If you are not a professional photographer, get the Canon 400D and this Sigma 18-200OS lense and I doubt you would need anything else EVER!
|
|
|
Aug 2, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
33
|
170637
|
Nov 25, 2011
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
85% of reviewers
|
$467.33
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.57
|
8.21
|
7.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
