Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Other Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 17, 2008, 10:59 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
hercules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
Default

Firstly i didn't know where to post these, these are comparison shots of the Sigma 18-200 OS that i just bought so i decided to compare it to my 17-85 and 70-300, why because i have them too just need your opinions, along with these three lenses i also have the 50 1.8 ll and EF-S 10-22 i don't need all of them but either the 17-85, 70-300 have to go or the sigma needs to go, my gut feeling thinks i should hold on to the 17-85 and 70-300 because to my eye's they are much sharper than the sigma, anyway click on thumbnail and when the page opens look on your tab browser, it will show you which lens and which aperture, Ah and they are all 100% crop



















hercules is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 18, 2008, 5:49 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
bahadir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
Default



Arkadaş, I think the results are a mixed bag comparing the 18-200 and 70-300! For example I find the 18-200 superior for the firstset of portrait oriention and the thirdset oftiles ( here the 17-85 looks better than the 70-300!), whereas the fourthset of tank pictures (here the 70-300 is even better than the17-85!)and the last pair(however, here the 18-200 looks a bit out of focus too! ) 70-300 looks sharper :?As you said these are 100% crops, so the difference would be negligiable in the big picture, especially if you used a tripod.

Anyway, the 18-200 has a very useful rangehard to give up for a traveller!Would like to see further shots at varying focal lengths throughout its range at a fixed target, say anedifice or sth!

Thanks for sharing your experience which is so useful
bahadir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2008, 8:38 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
hercules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
Default

bahadir wrote:
Quote:

Arkadaş, I think the results are a mixed bag comparing the 18-200 and 70-300! For example I find the 18-200 superior for the firstset of portrait oriention and the thirdset oftiles ( here the 17-85 looks better than the 70-300!), whereas the fourthset of tank pictures (here the 70-300 is even better than the17-85!)and the last pair (however, here the 18-200 looks a bit out of focus too! ) 70-300 looks sharper :?As you said these are 100% crops, so the difference would be negligiable in the big picture, especially if you used a tripod.

Anyway, the 18-200 has a very useful rangehard to give up for a traveller!Would like to see further shots at varying focal lengths throughout its range at a fixed target, say anedifice or sth!

Thanks for sharing your experience which is so useful
My friend, i think the Sigma is not a bad lens btw since i have the 10-22 and the 50 1.8 maybe i should sell the 17-85 and 70-300 here are 3 pictures that i just shot and the colors on the sigma look better they where shot at f/9 1/200.



hercules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2008, 8:47 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
hercules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
Default

And here's 2 more 18-200 and 70-300 shot at 200mm then cropped again looks about the same.


hercules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2008, 9:02 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
hercules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
Default

And 2 more from the 18-200 and 70-300 here with my son.


hercules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2008, 10:59 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
musket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,782
Default

I cant see much difference if any between the three

hard to choose between them, a wide angle and a

good telephoto shouldbe okmost use.............musket.
musket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2008, 10:59 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
musket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,782
Default

double send
musket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 18, 2008, 3:59 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
bahadir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
Default



Especially, with your last series I'm convinced that the 18-200 is a keeper

So, I can't see whyone shouldn't agree with musket's expression below ; )
Quote:
...hard to choose between them, a wide angle and a

good telephoto shouldbe okmost use
...which makes the the other two as obselete as television on honeymoon :Gsince you already have a pretty nice wide angleand an all rounder zoom now!

One more lens I'd consider (after having sold thetwo) would be the Bigma orSigma 50-500 ; )
bahadir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2008, 7:40 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
hercules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
Default

Well i think i have found the problem to why the 18-200 was really soft, i took a couple test shots today in Auto focus and manual focus and that is the problem, when shooting in Manual focus the images were sharp, now with the canon either in AF or M i didn't matter, now if i can get the sigma fixed to why it doesn't focus good in AF then i will be convinced it's a keeper, here are a few more 100% crops the first 2 are 17-85 and 18-200 auto focus.

and this one is 18-200 Manual focus.


hercules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2008, 8:05 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
hercules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
Default

Just a few more 100% crops sigma f5.0 and canon f5.6.



hercules is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:35 PM.