Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 5, 2008, 7:20 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2
Default

I'd be very appreciative of any advice someone could offer on this. At the moment, I have a Nikon D40X with an 18-55mm and55-200mm lenses. I've lost count of the times where I've missed a shot through trying to change one lense over for another, or where I've picked up dust bunnies because of the change-over, which have then appeared on each and every shot taken while on holiday (only being discovered after returning of course - luckily Photoshop Elements is great for removing these!).

I'm thinking about going for either the Nikon VR 18-200mm or the Sigma OS 18-200mm, but I've read good and bad reviews for both. Some reviews say the Nikon is awesome, others say that the Nikon isn't so good, a few say the Sigma is a lovely lense, and others say the Sigma is prone to faulty craftsmanship... the price difference for the Sigma is very attractive, but I don't know if it's worth spending the extra$$$ to get an $800Nikon lense off Ebay (which may still be a 'bad' individual lense), when I've seen the Sigma on sale for around $450-500.

Alternatively, I can stick with the 18-55 and the 55-200, but it's a pain having to change over lenses all the time.

Any suggestions or advise would be very welcome
dave_w is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 5, 2008, 7:45 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
ReneB3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 193
Default

I have the Nikon 18-200 but have never used or seen the Sigma. I have had a few Sigma lenses and still own one. All the Sigma lenses were a lower quality than the Nikon equivalent but still worked perfectly. Your skill at using the lens you chose will far outweigh any quality difference. I bought the 18-200 to take to Nascar events where not only is it a pain to change lenses but you have to live with the extra one in your pocket in the crowded stands. The Nikon 18-200 is awesome andwell worth the $$$ you pay for it. Especially when you can get them now for $550-600 or so new and a few bucks less at places like KEH or B&H. The VR also makes a difference over what you have now. I had the 18-70 and a 70-300, about the same as your situation. I sold the 18-70, with some regrets, but kept the 70-300D. It mostly sits in the bag. I think the cost of ownership will be the same for either lens. The Nikon costs more now but will sell for more when the next great lens catches your eye and you sell it.
ReneB3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2008, 9:13 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 129
Default

I have used the Nikon 18-200 and gave it to my wife to use when I upgraded my lens. It is a good all-around lens. The VR does help for low-light still photos, but not for action photos. It has some optical weaknesses as described in some reviews, but from daily use, those weaknesses are not visible to the average person.

The only quirky problem with the 18-200 is "lens creep." If you point the lens in a slightly downward direction, the lens may change focal length ever so slightly. In other words, the lens barrel may extend a little. If you hold the zoom ring in place with your hand, this will not happen. I am not sure if Nikon fixed that problem in later revisions. The lens creep problem is not as bad as it sounds, but it does bother some people.
Webapprentice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2008, 8:13 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
ReneB3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 193
Default

I bought mine last year around Christmas and it does not creap at all. I think they have fixed it or mine just doesn't do it.
ReneB3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 8, 2008, 5:03 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2
Default

I've decided to go with the Nikon over the Sigma. I've read reviews that the Sigma lense is a bit softer than the Nikon, while the Nikon has quieter, faster auto-focusing at the long end. I'd prefer to spend a little bit extra to get a lense I'll hopefully enjoy using for at least the next five years. Fingers crossed. The Sigma 50-500 is next on the christmas list.
dave_w is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2008, 10:20 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 477
Default

dave_w wrote:
Quote:
I've decided to go with the Nikon over the Sigma. I've read reviews that the Sigma lense is a bit softer than the Nikon, while the Nikon has quieter, faster auto-focusing at the long end. I'd prefer to spend a little bit extra to get a lense I'll hopefully enjoy using for at least the next five years. Fingers crossed. The Sigma 50-500 is next on the christmas list.
The Sigma 18-200mm lens is not one of its "EX" range of lenses, so it's not a particularly great lens.
On the other hand, the Sigma 50-500mm is an "EX", and it has very good performance.

If some people have found Sigma lens to be of lesser quality then the big brands, then they have probably be using the standard consumer grade lenses. These are similar quality to the kit lenses (18-55mm) produced by Nikon & Canon, and are not particularly great.
Try some "EX" Sigma lenses, and you'll find that they are very, very good.
dnas 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 11:10 PM.