Sigma 18-125 vs 18-200 vs Tamron 18-200

Zplus · 13th April 2005

Interesting comparison found here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=13016648

Daniel Nielson · 13th April 2005

I believe this is something quite a number of people (myself included) wanted to know.

As a Sigma 18-125 user, I like it being very usable wide open (so is my other only Sigma lens 70-300), and good sharpness at extreme ends, at that price I think it is very good value, definitely an upgrade from the kit lens in terms of image quality, build quality and the extended range.

Zplus · 13th April 2005

More samples from a Jap site:
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2005/04/07/1335.html

These tiny hyperzooms are fun! Small and handy.

For those coming from p&s cameras.....
18-200 => 11x zoom
18-125 => 7x zoom

ricleo · 13th April 2005

I just bought the 18-125 today, the build and optical quality is definitely heads and shoulders above the kit lens. However, in low light, the AF really hunts quite abit. Haven't had the chance to try it in good light as of yet, but since I already expected less than perfect AF in poor lighting conditions, I'm reasonably satisfied with the lens so far.

waiyean · 16th April 2005

Any idea whether the Sigma 18-200 is already available locally? Where can I find it, and how much does it cost?

Dennis · 17th April 2005

Sigma and Tamron 18-200 are already in Singapore since last week.
In fact I have seen both and already using the Tamron 18-200.
The Tamron 18-200 seems to have better contrast than the Sigma 18-125 (not sure of the 18-200).
In low light although at f6.3 it seems to be able to focus on my D70 without problems so far. A bit noisy in terms of focussing. Lens is also usable with the build in flash (not with the hood) although slightly longer than the Sigma.
Although I have the Tamron for only a short while but I feel that the Tamron is very usable in all focal length and f stop.
In terms of build quality I prefer the Tamron over the Sigma also the Tamron comes with a 3 yesrs warrenty.
Tamron 18-200 is over $600 and the Sigma 18-200 is below $600. Price difference is about $70

obrag · 18th April 2005

I tried the Sigma 18-200 with my 20D at a shop (with files written to my CF card).

Anyway, here's some prelim observations from shots taken (as compared to the Sigma 18-125 which I used to have):

1) Far more obvious pin-cushioning (70-200mm end) and barrel distortion (18mm end) on the 18-200.

2) Corner sharpness is defintely softer on the 18-200 (for 70-125mm), even at f11. There's no comparison here with the 18-125 at the 125-200 range, but its soft anyway.

3) Center sharpness of 18-200 at 200mm@f6.3-f8 is too soft for my liking. IMHO its much much softer than the 18-125 at its 125mm end. Not exactly a good egg-egg comparison, but it only means it render the 200mm not very useable unless stopped all the time from f11 onwards.

4) Contrast on 18-200 is slightly better than the 18-125.

5) The initial zoom barrel action is stiffer on the 18-200.

6) Focus hunt is about the same as the 18-125; hunting is worst at 200mm end since its max f-stop for tele end is f6.3.

7) Focus noise on 18-200 sounded (in shop) softer than the 18-125's.

8) External finish on 18-200 is more like that rough texture you get on the 350D/XT.

My 2-cents...

cheers,

Daniel Nielson · 18th April 2005

Obrag,

Thought you giving up digital? 20D is your new toy?

obrag · 20th April 2005

Originally Posted by Daniel Nielson

Obrag,

Thought you giving up digital? 20D is your new toy?

Haha... 20D not new toy liao. I use DSLR as "pseudo-polaroid back" and image backup for my 4x5, remember? Still shooting film for my pinhole work though. Anyway, was at shop buying other stuff and decided to kay-po and try out the 18-200.

BTW, shot good stuff with the 18-125? After I sold it to you, really regret leh

. Was comparing past images with various lenses' recently and realised its actually a pretty good copy...

Daniel Nielson · 21st April 2005

Originally Posted by obrag

Haha... 20D not new toy liao. I use DSLR as "pseudo-polaroid back" and image backup for my 4x5, remember? Still shooting film for my pinhole work though. Anyway, was at shop buying other stuff and decided to kay-po and try out the 18-200.

BTW, shot good stuff with the 18-125? After I sold it to you, really regret leh . Was comparing past images with various lenses' recently and realised its actually a pretty good copy...

Done a side by side comparison with 50 mm f1.8 II at similar apperture, and the prime is just a tiny weeny tad sharper at 100% crop which is unlikely be detected in A4 sized print. So I have to say it is a very decent lens especially looking at the price.

Also have to thank you for honouring your promise despite there were higher offer.

There is one problem though, I am still quite confused of what lenses combination should I own. Thinking of getting the Sigma 28-135mm that allows 1:2 macro but the range will severely overlap.

obrag · 21st April 2005

Originally Posted by Daniel Nielson

There is one problem though, I am still quite confused of what lenses combination should I own. Thinking of getting the Sigma 28-135mm that allows 1:2 macro but the range will severely overlap.

Running the risk of turning this thread into something else, I will just give a short 2-cent comment

Why not get the Sigma 70-300 APO that also gives 1:2 macro? That lens is pretty good: not a fast-focusing item but the image is good from f8 onwards. Not Canon L quality, but its only $400+/- (1/3 cost of Canon 70-200L f4). At least overlap is only in the 70-125 range.

grantyale · 21st April 2005

A little over lapping isn't bad at all :-D
But too much sounds like a waste of money though.

Daniel Nielson · 21st April 2005

Originally Posted by obrag

Running the risk of turning this thread into something else, I will just give a short 2-cent comment

Why not get the Sigma 70-300 APO that also gives 1:2 macro? That lens is pretty good: not a fast-focusing item but the image is good from f8 onwards. Not Canon L quality, but its only $400+/- (1/3 cost of Canon 70-200L f4). At least overlap is only in the 70-125 range.

I also have a Sigma 70-300.

. Quite happy with it, but I have a complain (yes I am fussy

), 300 mm for macro is a bit too long for me, and hard to handheld. Though I have to admit it is a nitpick.

(guilty of OT, running away

)

ray_stinger · 21st April 2005

I would suggest in that case get a dedicated macro lens like the Sigma 105mm. Sturdy built quality coupled with extremely sharp optics. The only con is the AF ability.

Daniel Nielson · 21st April 2005

Yea, that will be ideal, but at the moment my wallet doen't allow me for a "real" dedicated macro lens. I am considering the Sigma 50 mm 1:1 lens in the future as I prefer short working distance, thought this lens is quite little heard.

lightning · 21st April 2005

Hey I am quite interested in getting the Tamron 18 - 200 mm lens. What is the selling price now? And which shop is selling it? The Tamron lens is the one with DI II ?

Thanks for any advice.

lightning · 22nd April 2005

Just went to Sim Lim and asked a few shop for Tamron 18-200 f3.5 - 6.3 DI II, and lowest I can get is $661.5 Cash or Nets.

Are there better price else where?
The sigma is coming in middle of May.

obrag · 24th April 2005

Originally Posted by lightning

Just went to Sim Lim and asked a few shop for Tamron 18-200 f3.5 - 6.3 DI II, and lowest I can get is $661.5 Cash or Nets.

Are there better price else where?
The sigma is coming in middle of May.

Wah, how come such a strange figure? $661.50? BTW, MSColor has it as well - call and ask them.

ness96 · 24th April 2005

Yes, Sigma 18-200 is available at CP. They do not have Tamron. Selling at about $570 (inclusive of GST)

AP have Tamron. They do not have Sigma yet. Bought my 20D from them with the Tamron lens. At first quoted $660. They give a good discount as I have bought it with the body.

Tested the len yesterday and today. So far, pictures are sharp and good.

Originally Posted by lightning

Just went to Sim Lim and asked a few shop for Tamron 18-200 f3.5 - 6.3 DI II, and lowest I can get is $661.5 Cash or Nets.

Are there better price else where?
The sigma is coming in middle of May.

khuancc · 24th April 2005

Hi all, which lens do you guys think will produce a sharper image?

Sigma 18-200, Tamron 18-200, or the canon 28-135 IS? Thinking of getting one of them.. but dunno which one to get.

13th April 2005	#1
Zplus Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Some equitorial, tropical isla Posts: 2,368	Sigma 18-125 vs 18-200 vs Tamron 18-200 Interesting comparison found here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=13016648

21st April 2005	#14
ray_stinger Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: behind my camera Posts: 2,007	I would suggest in that case get a dedicated macro lens like the Sigma 105mm. Sturdy built quality coupled with extremely sharp optics. The only con is the AF ability. __________________ this\|is\|me - I'm primed, 75%. 24L II, 35L, 85L II, 24-105L

21st April 2005	#16
lightning Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Punggol Posts: 3,959	Hey I am quite interested in getting the Tamron 18 - 200 mm lens. What is the selling price now? And which shop is selling it? The Tamron lens is the one with DI II ? Thanks for any advice. __________________ My stock photos victor.shutterbug.sg

22nd April 2005	#17
lightning Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Punggol Posts: 3,959	Just went to Sim Lim and asked a few shop for Tamron 18-200 f3.5 - 6.3 DI II, and lowest I can get is $661.5 Cash or Nets. Are there better price else where? The sigma is coming in middle of May. __________________ My stock photos victor.shutterbug.sg

13th April 2005	#2
Daniel Nielson Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 794	I believe this is something quite a number of people (myself included) wanted to know. As a Sigma 18-125 user, I like it being very usable wide open (so is my other only Sigma lens 70-300), and good sharpness at extreme ends, at that price I think it is very good value, definitely an upgrade from the kit lens in terms of image quality, build quality and the extended range.

13th April 2005	#4
ricleo Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Eastern Singapore Posts: 2,135	I just bought the 18-125 today, the build and optical quality is definitely heads and shoulders above the kit lens. However, in low light, the AF really hunts quite abit. Haven't had the chance to try it in good light as of yet, but since I already expected less than perfect AF in poor lighting conditions, I'm reasonably satisfied with the lens so far.

16th April 2005	#5
waiyean Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 122	Any idea whether the Sigma 18-200 is already available locally? Where can I find it, and how much does it cost?

17th April 2005	#6
Dennis Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 3,864	Sigma and Tamron 18-200 are already in Singapore since last week. In fact I have seen both and already using the Tamron 18-200. The Tamron 18-200 seems to have better contrast than the Sigma 18-125 (not sure of the 18-200). In low light although at f6.3 it seems to be able to focus on my D70 without problems so far. A bit noisy in terms of focussing. Lens is also usable with the build in flash (not with the hood) although slightly longer than the Sigma. Although I have the Tamron for only a short while but I feel that the Tamron is very usable in all focal length and f stop. In terms of build quality I prefer the Tamron over the Sigma also the Tamron comes with a 3 yesrs warrenty. Tamron 18-200 is over $600 and the Sigma 18-200 is below $600. Price difference is about $70

18th April 2005	#7
obrag Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 854	I tried the Sigma 18-200 with my 20D at a shop (with files written to my CF card). Anyway, here's some prelim observations from shots taken (as compared to the Sigma 18-125 which I used to have): 1) Far more obvious pin-cushioning (70-200mm end) and barrel distortion (18mm end) on the 18-200. 2) Corner sharpness is defintely softer on the 18-200 (for 70-125mm), even at f11. There's no comparison here with the 18-125 at the 125-200 range, but its soft anyway. 3) Center sharpness of 18-200 at 200mm@f6.3-f8 is too soft for my liking. IMHO its much much softer than the 18-125 at its 125mm end. Not exactly a good egg-egg comparison, but it only means it render the 200mm not very useable unless stopped all the time from f11 onwards. 4) Contrast on 18-200 is slightly better than the 18-125. 5) The initial zoom barrel action is stiffer on the 18-200. 6) Focus hunt is about the same as the 18-125; hunting is worst at 200mm end since its max f-stop for tele end is f6.3. 7) Focus noise on 18-200 sounded (in shop) softer than the 18-125's. 8) External finish on 18-200 is more like that rough texture you get on the 350D/XT. My 2-cents... cheers,

21st April 2005	#12
grantyale Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Pioneer Posts: 1,463	A little over lapping isn't bad at all :-D But too much sounds like a waste of money though.

24th April 2005	#20
khuancc Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 282	Hi all, which lens do you guys think will produce a sharper image? Sigma 18-200, Tamron 18-200, or the canon 28-135 IS? Thinking of getting one of them.. but dunno which one to get.