Nikon 18-200 VR vs Sigma 18-200
- Thread starter Monkey
- Start date
NorthernNikon
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,032
- Name
- Barney
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What Digital Camera rated the Sigma with HSM as better than the Nikkor.
They rated the OS version of the lens as better than the Nikkor. The non-OS version is completely different kettle of fish.
NorthernNikon
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,032
- Name
- Barney
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes, sorry should have made that clearer, it's the version with OS which would also I presume have HSM that is the one to go for.
Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Lens is the cheap version, Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS is the better version.
OP
Monkey
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,254
- Name
- Craig Denton
- Edit My Images
- Yes
ive just read the reviews on what digital cameras website, and im shocked.
Im 99% sure im going to get the OS Sigma, much better review than the nikon.
puddleduck
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,776
- Name
- Andy Drake
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This question is the photographic equivilant of
"Would you rather a knee in the ********, or a nipple twist?"
Just buy a GOOD lens, and have done it, non of these wannabe P&S things
DSLRs have an interchangeable mount for a reason, and plonking a 11x zoom on it, its really not the way foreward IMHO
"Would you rather a knee in the ********, or a nipple twist?"
Just buy a GOOD lens, and have done it, non of these wannabe P&S things
DSLRs have an interchangeable mount for a reason, and plonking a 11x zoom on it, its really not the way foreward IMHO
OP
Monkey
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,254
- Name
- Craig Denton
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This question is the photographic equivilant of
"Would you rather a knee in the ********, or a nipple twist?"
Just buy a GOOD lens, and have done it, non of these wannabe P&S things
DSLRs have an interchangeable mount for a reason, and plonking a 11x zoom on it, its really not the way foreward IMHO
I get mixed opinions about this, and i do take your point.
2 days ago, Shak said his 18-200 VR was as sharp as his 70-200 f2.8 VR, which makes you think again.
What lenses do you run for that range?
the 18 - 200 seems to be a good lens, although as with any "budget" lens there are good and bad builds
some people have complained that it struggles at wide, but my mentor swears by his I have been heavily considering getting the Os version.
They are by (almost) all acounts great walk about lenses.
some people have complained that it struggles at wide, but my mentor swears by his I have been heavily considering getting the Os version.
They are by (almost) all acounts great walk about lenses.
puddleduck
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,776
- Name
- Andy Drake
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Shak said his 18-200 VR was as sharp as his 70-200 f2.8 VR, which makes you think again.
He's mental then
I've got loads of lenses - I do think one of these lenses has their place at times, but on a D40 not a D300. The camera is too good to saddle it with mediocre jack-of-all-trades glass.
He's mental then
I've got loads of lenses - I do think one of these lenses has their place at times, but on a D40 not a D300. The camera is too good to saddle it with mediocre jack-of-all-trades glass.
allanm
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,727
- Name
- Allan
- Edit My Images
- No
I`ve seen a couple of reviews for the Sigma, most rate it as good as the Nikon, some better, some worse :shrug:. General concensus seems to be that the Sigma seems better built and is a little sharper, the Nikon is quieter and produces less distortion.
My advice on cost alone would to go for the Sigma at almost half the price as long as there are no QC issues. For me, I bought the Nikon.
Either lens would be sharp and fast enough to use as a walkabout lens and maybe the best choice to keep on the camera on a day out if you don't want to risk losing a shot while changing lenses.
Primes would give you better shots if you have the time to select the appropriate lens and set the shot up, but theres no point walking around with a bag full of expensive lenses if you keep missing the shots!
But, I tend to agree with Puddleduck ( but only this time!
) about Shaks findings that Nikons 18-200vr is as sharp as a 70-200 f2.8. :nono: I used a 70-200 and it was far sharper and faster. Now, if he meant the Sigma 70-200 f2.8? well thats a different kettle of fish, my Nikon 18-200vr definately gave me sharper and nicer shots than the Sigma in almost all circumstances, so, it ( the Sigma ) went back to the shop.
Allan
My advice on cost alone would to go for the Sigma at almost half the price as long as there are no QC issues. For me, I bought the Nikon.
Either lens would be sharp and fast enough to use as a walkabout lens and maybe the best choice to keep on the camera on a day out if you don't want to risk losing a shot while changing lenses.
Primes would give you better shots if you have the time to select the appropriate lens and set the shot up, but theres no point walking around with a bag full of expensive lenses if you keep missing the shots!
But, I tend to agree with Puddleduck ( but only this time!
) about Shaks findings that Nikons 18-200vr is as sharp as a 70-200 f2.8. :nono: I used a 70-200 and it was far sharper and faster. Now, if he meant the Sigma 70-200 f2.8? well thats a different kettle of fish, my Nikon 18-200vr definately gave me sharper and nicer shots than the Sigma in almost all circumstances, so, it ( the Sigma ) went back to the shop.Allan
DavidUK
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 473
- Edit My Images
- No
I've been considering the Nikon 18-200 VR for a few years now, but I bought the Sigma 18-200 OS from Jessops two weeks ago, used it on two different days shooting so far, seems a very capable lens.
kalibre
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,121
- Name
- Doug
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Will the Sigma HSM OS 18-200 AF on a D60 body?
I think I have just found my next lens
If my understanding is correct you shouldn't have any problems with any body and AF because it's HSM equipped. Wait till someone confirms till you push the button though
Shak
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 833
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I suppose I better throw in my tuppence... 
My Nikkor 18-200 sharpness wise is as good as they get for walkabout/general lenses. Forgetting user error; I never have a soft image, or have to overly correct any colours in Photoshop, etc. My 70-200 will always out-perform the 18-200 for motorsport but if I was only using f5.6 or more/less (depending how you look at it lol) then the 18-200 works just as fantastic on super bright days.
I recently tried out a few long zoom Sigma OS HSM lenses... and I was a bit disappointed.
The OS was cack compared to VR, and the images always had an air of softness to them. The HSM wasn't as fast or quiet as AF-S and it even had moments of hunting! Perhaps some of it was down to user error but hey, s**t happens.
My Nikkor 18-200 sharpness wise is as good as they get for walkabout/general lenses. Forgetting user error; I never have a soft image, or have to overly correct any colours in Photoshop, etc. My 70-200 will always out-perform the 18-200 for motorsport but if I was only using f5.6 or more/less (depending how you look at it lol) then the 18-200 works just as fantastic on super bright days.
I recently tried out a few long zoom Sigma OS HSM lenses... and I was a bit disappointed.
The OS was cack compared to VR, and the images always had an air of softness to them. The HSM wasn't as fast or quiet as AF-S and it even had moments of hunting! Perhaps some of it was down to user error but hey, s**t happens.
- Messages
- 2,820
- Name
- Alex
- Edit My Images
- No
my gf has the sigma and i've got the nikon and i'd say the nikon is better, the only thing it's missing is a catch to stop lens creep when it's being held upside down.
for all it's limitations i find it quite a bright sharp lens, not on a par with primes etc but it's definately worthy especially if you're after a walk around and it's the lens i leave on my camera the most.
however if you're just using it for snaps etc the sigma is still worthy.
for all it's limitations i find it quite a bright sharp lens, not on a par with primes etc but it's definately worthy especially if you're after a walk around and it's the lens i leave on my camera the most.
however if you're just using it for snaps etc the sigma is still worthy.