Steve'sDigicams

bernabeu · Nov 16, 2005, 7:37 AM

ANY 18 mm will give the mentioned distortion

Hards80 · Nov 16, 2005, 7:41 PM

the sigma handles distortion quite well only approx 1.2% at 18mm, which is better than the canon 17-40 at 17mm and the sigma 18-50 at 18mm.. 2 highly regarded lenses..

most of what i have read rates the sigma at 170-180, never seen a rating of 155..

most reviews favor the sigma, but obviously not all, so what that tells me is that these two lenses are very close, and that copy variability is a bigger difference than the variability between the two lenses... so get which ever one is cheaper or more readily available..

brashquido · Dec 2, 2005, 7:48 PM

Very interested in seeing a three way comparision of these lenses. Nikon have their new 18-200 which is about to be released, and the MTF charts look pretty impressive considering the range of the lense. I think I'd still prefer a 5D over a Nikon D70s though, and upgrading from an A1 means I don't have to spend up on spare batteries as they both take the same NP-400. I'm wanting to get this camera in the next few weeks, so I think I might just go with the Tamron as my walk around lens, as the less than advertised range of the Sigma will leave me coming up a little short on what I'm after.

bernabeu · Dec 3, 2005, 8:48 AM

converging parallel lines at extreme wide angle when taking 'architectural' shots IS NOT DISTORTION but a property of ANY lens when not shooting 'square' to the subject

seven-d · Dec 23, 2005, 11:03 AM

I've just bought a Minolta DT 18-200mm lens for my new 7D and i am quite impressed with it, I got it from digistor, http://www.digistor.co.uk/?lid=6448at £249.99 it was miles cheaper than anyone else and about the same as a tamron or sigma version. I did have a Sigma 18-200 a while back on a D70 but personally I thought that was awful, I switched back to a 18-125 which was much better. This minolta lens was one of the reasons I switched from the D70, I did look at the Nikon 18-200 VR lens but it is so heavy and almost twice the length of the Minolta one

tombell1 · Jan 20, 2006, 11:47 AM

Just to say that I have used the Sigma 18-200 for some 4 months now on my Pentax *1st DS .. i have been very pleased with it. i have found that it focuses fairly quickly ... but is a little noisy.

I think it is better at 18 and quality eases off at the telephoto end. On balance that suits me.

I usually use primes ... and have a habit of wandering around for a day with one prime .... how would i use this here etc. the quality of results is measurably better. On the other hand going away for a while with minimal gear .. i think the sigma is great value :-)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Nov 16, 2005, 7:37 AM	#11
bernabeu Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 815	ANY 18 mm will give the mentioned distortion

Nov 16, 2005, 7:41 PM	#12
Hards80 Super Moderator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Cleveland, OH Posts: 9,050	the sigma handles distortion quite well only approx 1.2% at 18mm, which is better than the canon 17-40 at 17mm and the sigma 18-50 at 18mm.. 2 highly regarded lenses.. most of what i have read rates the sigma at 170-180, never seen a rating of 155.. most reviews favor the sigma, but obviously not all, so what that tells me is that these two lenses are very close, and that copy variability is a bigger difference than the variability between the two lenses... so get which ever one is cheaper or more readily available..

Dec 2, 2005, 7:48 PM	#13
brashquido Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 4	Very interested in seeing a three way comparision of these lenses. Nikon have their new 18-200 which is about to be released, and the MTF charts look pretty impressive considering the range of the lense. I think I'd still prefer a 5D over a Nikon D70s though, and upgrading from an A1 means I don't have to spend up on spare batteries as they both take the same NP-400. I'm wanting to get this camera in the next few weeks, so I think I might just go with the Tamron as my walk around lens, as the less than advertised range of the Sigma will leave me coming up a little short on what I'm after.

Dec 3, 2005, 8:48 AM	#14
bernabeu Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 815	converging parallel lines at extreme wide angle when taking 'architectural' shots IS NOT DISTORTION but a property of ANY lens when not shooting 'square' to the subject

Dec 23, 2005, 11:03 AM	#15
seven-d Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 6	I've just bought a Minolta DT 18-200mm lens for my new 7D and i am quite impressed with it, I got it from digistor, http://www.digistor.co.uk/?lid=6448at £249.99 it was miles cheaper than anyone else and about the same as a tamron or sigma version. I did have a Sigma 18-200 a while back on a D70 but personally I thought that was awful, I switched back to a 18-125 which was much better. This minolta lens was one of the reasons I switched from the D70, I did look at the Nikon 18-200 VR lens but it is so heavy and almost twice the length of the Minolta one

Jan 20, 2006, 11:47 AM	#16
tombell1 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 4	Just to say that I have used the Sigma 18-200 for some 4 months now on my Pentax *1st DS .. i have been very pleased with it. i have found that it focuses fairly quickly ... but is a little noisy. I think it is better at 18 and quality eases off at the telephoto end. On balance that suits me. I usually use primes ... and have a habit of wandering around for a day with one prime .... how would i use this here etc. the quality of results is measurably better. On the other hand going away for a while with minimal gear .. i think the sigma is great value :-)