 |
|
|
brockwhittaker
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 9, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 599
|
|
Review Date: Nov 25, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $359.95
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness from 18-50mm, Accurate Colour Reproduction.
|
|
Cons:
|
Bad Focusing past 85mm, Heavy Vignetting, Chromatic Aberration, and Noticeable distortion at 18mm.
|
|
|
I purchased this lens about 8 months ago to compliment my T3i. It is a nice step up from the 18-55mm Canon kit lens. It is definitely a lot sharper than the kit lens at 18mm, and still pretty sharp through 50mm. Though, past 50mm, the quality degrades pretty quickly. The images past 50mm are very flat, the contrast is not so great, and the focus does not lock on well. The focus is incredibly noisy with this! I'd recommend this for landscapes, not so much for the 135-200mm range.. If you stop it down to f/8 at 200mm, then you can get decent sharpness. The lens is slow at f/6.3.
Here's some sample pictures so you can judge for yourself:
18mm:http://www.flickr.com/photos/brockwhittaker/6362331599/in/photostream
50mm:http://www.flickr.com/photos/brockwhittaker/6394826959/in/photostream
144mm:http://www.flickr.com/photos/brockwhittaker/6299005187/in/photostream
200mm:http://www.flickr.com/photos/brockwhittaker/6312091943/meta/in/photostream/
There are full sizes of these photos if you click on "more sizes"
|
|
 Nov 25, 2011
|
|
Capeachy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 18, 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 9, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, cheap, versatile, good starter/learner lens
|
|
Cons:
|
Loud/slow AF, small apertures, IQ so-so.
|
|
|
This is a great upgrade from the kit lens that you get on the entry level DSLR. It is definitely a jack of all trades master of none type of lens. Which is great if you
-never want to change lenses (for travel)
-want to learn what you like to take
-don't need to shoot fast moving subjects
-want a cheaper lens that has OS.
However, if you do know what kind of pictures you will most likely take (focal lengths, apertures, AF requirements, low light, etc.) then skip this lens and go for nicer stuff.
For me, this was more of a "noob tax" type of lens and it performed its task nicely. Now I know what I'm going to shoot and what I need in a lens.
Keep in mind however, this lens will still let you clean the floor compared to any P&S.
|
|
|
Oct 9, 2011
|
|
piotrek636
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 10, 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 10, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $360.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
optical stabilizer, versatile
|
|
Cons:
|
soft wide open, long barrel at 200mm
|
|
|
Used on Canon. This lens is not bad at all. Good walkaround lens. As with most lenses, has to be stopped down to get good results. Optical Stabilizer works great. I wish it did not extend that far at 200mm setting.
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2011
|
|
Aputure
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 10, 2010
Location: China
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Jan 26, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
good build quality, effective OS, low barrel distortion, decent IQ, low price
|
|
Cons:
|
soft at certain focal lengths, especially the end
|
|
After four years of heavy use and several drops to the pavement, this lens is still trucking. It may not provide the best image quality on the market, but it gives you a durable lens with a versatile zoom range. While working for a newspaper, this was one of my go-to lenses; you can cover just about anything with it. I pushed this lens to the limit, shooting 200mm indoors in low light, and still came away with usable results. But in some situations, such as surf shots, there is no substitute for a longer lens, and you’ll do well with extra range.
For more and samples, see here: http://www.aputure.com/blog/2010/11/24/sigma-18-200-dc-os-f3-5-5-6-review-with-samples/
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2011
|
|
filmaze
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 18, 2010
Location: Philippines
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 18, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
cheap, nice OS, great walk around lens
|
|
Cons:
|
sometimes not the sharp...
Not that sharp.....
|
|
|
don.t expect too much from this lens..for critical work find a L lens : >
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2010
|
|
garybowers
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 18, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 8
|
|
Review Date: Sep 2, 2010
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Fairly sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
Zoom ring very stiff and hard to adjust. inconsistant focus.
|
|
|
Zoom ring is very stiff to turn esp. through 50mm to 135mm range. Hard to get zoom to land at the desired focal length. The AF would miss the target 5 out of 10 times. I had to focus manually many many times to get sharp focus. Ended up returning the lens and getting the Canon 28-135 which is sooo much better!
|
|
|
Sep 2, 2010
|
|
scottinash
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 10, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 246
|
|
Review Date: Oct 9, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $255.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very functional going from ~18 to ~200mm without having to change lenses. IS and AF work very well on my copy. Definitely a major step up for a novice as part of transition from the cheaper kit lens offered by entry DLSRs such as the Canon 400D, 450D, 1000D, etc.... Used prices are extrememly reasonable for the significant upgrade in respect to the cheaper plastic model zooms.
|
|
Cons:
|
Well, if you compare to more expensive L series, etc, then there are of course cons. However, I feel like I recieved great quality for a very good price when I upgraded to this lens.
|
|
|
I am very pleased with the performance of this lens. While on a family vacation through eleven states this past summer, this lens proved to be extremely portable and functional. The ability to move between ~18 to ~200 without changing lens is always easier to manage. I stitched many image series into pans and I was very happy with the results. I have seen many posts claiming that this lens can be soft around the edges but when doing the stitching, the vast majority were very sharp and blended well. Am I still looking for better glass? Well of course I am! Who isn't? This lens will be a hard one to let go of as I upgrade though.
|
|
|
Oct 9, 2009
|
|
hewcanon
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 26, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 25, 2009
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build, wide zoom range, good colour saturation and good anti-shake mechanism
|
|
Cons:
|
Inconsistent performance across the zoom range, being worst between 35-100mm, and not really 200mm except at infinity
|
|
|
After using the lens for several months I noticed several things that really irritated me and led to finally selling it off;
It is not really 200mm except at infinity, at nearer distances behaves as 130mm .. although Canon 70-200mm behaved differently .. checked with Sigma and they said the 200mm is calculated only at infinity
It is soft around the edges and that is consistently so at all focal lengths and becomes worse when distortions are obvious
Central sharpness is good and saturation good, but needs a lot of light and therefore resolution falls off very quickly in bad dull weather and low light and maybe focusing accuracy
Inspite of the big advantage of the zoom range I had to part with the lens because of all the inconsistencies that made good photos a matter of hit and miss and I deemed it was unreliable for my use.
|
|
|
Feb 25, 2009
|
|
camandcheese
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 31, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Jan 5, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Huge Zoom Range, price, image stabilization, no zoom creep, zoom lock
|
|
Cons:
|
opposite zoom ring rotation, loud OS, finish picks up dust easily
|
|
|
Got to use this with the Nikon D90 for a few days. It's a pretty good lens, but I think the overall features and build on the Nikon is better.
The copy I used had no zoom creep and had a zoom lock. But I just hate how the zoom ring rotates the opposite way (the Canon way). The Optical Stabilization is also very loud and sounds like gears grinding.
I'd rather have the Nikon than the Sigma, but if you are on a budget this lens is fine also.
|
|
|
Jan 5, 2009
|
|
2003Summit
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 21, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Nov 27, 2008
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $699.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build, solid feel, includes hood
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow & noisy AF, could be sharper, don't like the way the finish picks up dust.
|
|
|
I had a poor experience with my first copy which caused me to reevaluate my choice. Was looking for an all in one solution to replace several lenses for a longer vacation. A sales rep recommended this one.
First copy had focus issues which looked like hand shake at times, finally determined the OC was the problem. After taking about 100 lousy shots and 3 good ones, I finally put the camera on a tri-pod with live view on and I notice the OC was wondering around like a drunken sailor. It would just wonder quite erratically for about 10 seconds before stopping. Got much better shots with OC off. Took the lens back to shop and we got a copy which did not have this problem (every one is allowed a bad copy I guess).
However, even though the good copy performed much more adequately I still wished it was sharper, so I tried the slightly more expensive brand new Canon EF-S 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 IS and the Canon is much shaper, definitely worth the extra $ at this price level I felt.
With this Sigma I was worried I would not be able to safely put down the kit lens and a few others I had covering off the 18-200 range the Sigma would cover. The Sigma, even the good copy felt like too much of a compromise even compared with lower end glass (with less range of course). I have not been able to fully evaluate the Canon 18-200 lens but I can say it is much shaper and easily as sharp as the kit lens. I felt better counting on it for an all in one leaving the other lenses at home.
One positive, for some strange reason Canon’s Digital Photo Professional fully supported all lens abortion correction functions for this Sigma, at least my copy did. Strange but true.
|
|
|
Nov 27, 2008
|
|
hewcanon
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 26, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 29, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $299.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build, small at 18mm, and light.
Excellent colours, saturation and focusing, although can hunt a biy with low contrast subjects in low light..
Sharpness is a tad below L-lenses .. but acceptable for the FL range.
OS is effective and almost silent.
|
|
Cons:
|
None so far
|
|
|
Was waiting for the Canon 18-200 IS till it was out, but had such bad reviews, and was not cheap. I use L-lenses and therefore wanted a practical all-round lens for everyday shooting.
This lens has not failed my expectations, it is not an L-lens, but it is one of the best non-L lenses I have ever used. Worth every penny and would recommend without any resservations.
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2008
|
|
Lancej
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 2, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 2, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $435.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very good build quality
Good optical quality
OS works well
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow focus on close up subjects
|
|
|
I have had this lens for 2 weeks and have compared it to 2 of my Nikkor lenses. My 24-120VR and 18-55 kit lens. It performs a least a good if not better than both lenses.
The edge sharpness is somewhat soft at wide open aperture, but is very good at f11 and f16 throughout the focal range.
Autofocus works well except for close ups where it has trouble locking in. I recommend switching it manual which works well. OS works very well down to 1/30s.
Overall it is well worth the money for a do-it-all lens.
|
|
|
Aug 2, 2008
|
|
Saint Sigma
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 17, 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 422
|
|
Review Date: Jun 17, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great range, OS is killer, good contrast, good build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
noisy focusing, a bit soft wide open, slow
|
|
|
Bought this lens as I need an all around lens. Very happy with it so far. IQ is great, contrast is top notch. and for the price with OS is a great value.
Though it is a bit soft wide open, nothing that would entirely detract from the image.
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2008
|
|
james1977
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 11, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 11, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
|
I mainly shoot landscapes and wouldn't mind using this lens when wanting to go light and was wondering how this lens is stopped down to f11 onwards? Are the imaged acceptable?
|
|
|
May 11, 2008
|
|
mmari
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 20, 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 21
|
|
Review Date: Mar 20, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
range, OS, build, price
|
|
Cons:
|
not sharp wide open.
|
|
|
i bought this lens to replace 17-85IS kit of 400D. but sold it after a week. images are very sharp only when stopped down on the entire focal length.
softness is very noticable even on 350D's 1.8" lcd.
range and OS works very fine.
if you can live with f/5-9 to get sharp images, i would recommend this lens.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2008
|
|
gustabod
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 5, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Mar 14, 2008
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
|
In comparison with Canon's 28-135 IS lens. the IS of both about equal. The Sigma is a bit sharper.
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
33
|
170634
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
