New Sigma 18-200mm OS or Nikon 18-200mm VR???


Status
Not open for further replies.

tengcc

New Member
Jul 31, 2006
165
0
0
#1
Hi Bros,

Sigma's latest OS (optical stabalizer) 18-200mm new toy will be out this year. I heard the RPP is under SGD950 as compared to the much sort after Nikon's 18-200mm VR.

My question will be, should I consider buying this new OS lens as the price diff is quite substantial, considering the RPP for Nikon lens is around SGD1300-SGD1400. Do you think it is worth taking the risk for this non-tested lens from Sigma?? I mean SGD300-400 difference is to be quite substantial. Moreover, there are alot of creeps and abbreviation issues discussed on the Nikkor and for me if I had a choice to pick a walk-around lens, it will be a heartache to pay such a high price for a "jack of all trade, master of non" kind of lens.

Yr comments appreciated. :think: :dunno: :sweat:
 

DeWei

New Member
Jun 9, 2006
640
0
0
#2
I think the extra stop benefit(f6.5 sigma vs f5.6 nikkor) does not really make a big different, but AF-S will do, Nikkor have its 2nd generation of VR installed on 18-200mm where as OS technology is pretty new to Sigma, my guess is it is worth to get 18-200mm. You can find a 2nd hand Nikkor 18-200 in B&S around $1100.
 

ExplorerZ

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2006
7,752
0
36
West Legion
hkchew03.deviantart.com
#3
I think the extra stop benefit(f6.5 sigma vs f5.6 nikkor) does not really make a big different, but AF-S will do, Nikkor have its 2nd generation of VR installed on 18-200mm where as OS technology is pretty new to Sigma, my guess is it is worth to get 18-200mm. You can find a 2nd hand Nikkor 18-200 in B&S around $1100.
AFS yes... but f6.3 and f5.6 is barely 0.3stop off, as for Sigma OS, they actually have that for a pretty long time (but only installed on their 80-400). Tho I believe nikkor VR2 have an edge, how much I dono. :dunno:
and imho if one can live with a 3rd-party brand + slower focusing, sigma might be a better buy
 

tengcc

New Member
Jul 31, 2006
165
0
0
#4
AFS yes... but f6.3 and f5.6 is barely 0.3stop off, as for Sigma OS, they actually have that for a pretty long time (but only installed on their 80-400). Tho I believe nikkor VR2 have an edge, how much I dono. :dunno:
and imho if one can live with a 3rd-party brand + slower focusing, sigma might be a better buy
Thanks bros for yr comments.

- I don't reall mind 3rd party brand provides the quality and the specs are not too that
great. Yes, I know I have to pay that extra $$$$ to get a better make lens but if
the difference in quality and specs are not too great, I am now seriously considering
waiting for the new Sigma OS 18-200 lens to be available in S'pore this year. And to think
of paying so much more and to tahan the "creep" and abbreviation problem, forgive me to
comment that I am puzzled and surprised that Nikon 18-200 lens are so much sort-after.

- I am currently using Nikon D50 cam with 18-55 kit lens. In order to reduce frequent
change-lens situation to avoid dusting the sensor, It was stated on many occassions
that the best travelling lens would be 18-200mm range. Besides, Nikon and Sigma,
can any bros enlighten me what other makes would be a better option to consider.

Thanks
 

#6
i own the nikkor 18-200mm. i got it at $1250. if say the sigma is $950. i would rather pay the $300 more for the nikkor. i feel that in order for sigma to compete they would have to lower their price abit. wat sway consumers to get the third party 18-200 mm(s) was they cost half the price of the nikkor.
 

poh6702

New Member
May 8, 2004
999
1
0
#7
i own the nikkor 18-200mm. i got it at $1250. if say the sigma is $950. i would rather pay the $300 more for the nikkor. i feel that in order for sigma to compete they would have to lower their price abit. wat sway consumers to get the third party 18-200 mm(s) was they cost half the price of the nikkor.
I don't think it is right comparison, because the RRP for Nikon is $1488, and we are able to get it for around $1288, if the RRP for Sigma is $950,(and it is still unsure) then what is the price we can get from our regular shop? Looking at the pricing structure of Sigma as compare to Nikon, I don't think they will position the price too close to Nikon.
 

ihub88

New Member
Mar 3, 2007
586
0
0
#8
- I am currently using Nikon D50 cam with 18-55 kit lens. In order to reduce frequent
change-lens situation to avoid dusting the sensor, It was stated on many occassions
that the best travelling lens would be 18-200mm range. Besides, Nikon and Sigma,
can any bros enlighten me what other makes would be a better option to consider.

Thanks
dust will get in no matter you less frequent change the lens.

For the price of sigma, It better to pay a bit more to get the nikkor one.

but as you know, the quality of the nikkor 18-200 suffer due to it range very badly.
 

Mac123

New Member
Mar 4, 2007
68
0
0
#9
dust will get in no matter you less frequent change the lens.

For the price of sigma, It better to pay a bit more to get the nikkor one.

but as you know, the quality of the nikkor 18-200 suffer due to it range very badly.
Go for Nikon. Original lense. Don't try to save that little $..:)
 

tengcc

New Member
Jul 31, 2006
165
0
0
#10
Go for Nikon. Original lense. Don't try to save that little $..:)

Yes, 80% of my heart says Nikonnnnnnnnn. Bal. 20% says not worth the high price becos of the creep and abbreviation and also not very sharp lens (jack of all trade, master of none lens). I just could'nt believe you guys will pay SGD1000+++++ for so-so lens. Why don't everyone don't buy any lens for 1 months and I think all the lens prices will dropppppppppp like share prices. How about my suggestion ???????? :thumbsup: :bsmilie: :sweatsm: :cool:
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#11
Go for Nikon. Original lense. Don't try to save that little $..:)
I agree.

To get decent shots, you're likely to be using it at f8 anyway (1 stop above the maximum wide open). And for the sigma, you'd probably need f9 and above...

And this is a good piece mainly for travels when you're lazy to bring along other lenses. If you are able to, do try getting other pieces, like say a 17-50 f2.8 Tamron and a 70-300VR instead... you'd get good shots for the everyday stuff and still be able to get the distance with the zoom.

Total cost is about $1500?? 600 + 900
 

tengcc

New Member
Jul 31, 2006
165
0
0
#12
I agree.

To get decent shots, you're likely to be using it at f8 anyway (1 stop above the maximum wide open). And for the sigma, you'd probably need f9 and above...

And this is a good piece mainly for travels when you're lazy to bring along other lenses. If you are able to, do try getting other pieces, like say a 17-50 f2.8 Tamron and a 70-300VR instead... you'd get good shots for the everyday stuff and still be able to get the distance with the zoom.

Total cost is about $1500?? 600 + 900
Zach, thanks for yr enlightenment, appreciate it.
 

cheersjy

New Member
Jul 1, 2003
917
0
0
Hougang
www.pbase.com
#13
I just could'nt believe you guys will pay SGD1000+++++ for so-so lens.
Not as bad as what you said lah, i own one and still very happy with it :) To out-perform it, you may need a lens that cost more than twice this price.
Just for your fun read: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm
 

posez

New Member
Mar 23, 2007
283
0
0
#14
Yes, 80% of my heart says Nikonnnnnnnnn. Bal. 20% says not worth the high price becos of the creep and abbreviation and also not very sharp lens (jack of all trade, master of none lens). I just could'nt believe you guys will pay SGD1000+++++ for so-so lens. Why don't everyone don't buy any lens for 1 months and I think all the lens prices will dropppppppppp like share prices. How about my suggestion ???????? :thumbsup: :bsmilie: :sweatsm: :cool:
Have you tired the lens for a longish period of time yourself? The problems are there, but all lenses have their issues (except maybe thebtrusty and fabulous and super cheap 50mm f/1.8). But this lens really is a good one to have. The optics are of course not as sharp as your f/2.8 pro lenses, esp the 17-55mm. But then again, it is an incredible 18-200! Very few lenses go from wide to telephoto and perform as well. In fact, I don't think I've seen any other lens that does as well over so long a range. Ken Rockwell apparently thinks so if you follow the link provided above. It is highly sought after for a reason.

I'm of course slightly biased, since I am a Nikkor all the way person. But I would really suggest that you read all the reviews as they come up before making your decision. I am sure that there will be sites that do comparison tests soon. I for one would gladly fork out the extra money if it means better glass, esp since this is probably going to be your walkabout lens.

Good luck! ;)
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#15
Have you tired the lens for a longish period of time yourself? The problems are there, but all lenses have their issues (except maybe thebtrusty and fabulous and super cheap 50mm f/1.8). But this lens really is a good one to have. The optics are of course not as sharp as your f/2.8 pro lenses, esp the 17-55mm. But then again, it is an incredible 18-200! Very few lenses go from wide to telephoto and perform as well. In fact, I don't think I've seen any other lens that does as well over so long a range. Ken Rockwell apparently thinks so if you follow the link provided above. It is highly sought after for a reason.

I'm of course slightly biased, since I am a Nikkor all the way person. But I would really suggest that you read all the reviews as they come up before making your decision. I am sure that there will be sites that do comparison tests soon. I for one would gladly fork out the extra money if it means better glass, esp since this is probably going to be your walkabout lens.

Good luck! ;)
Even the 50mm f1.8 has issues... ;) I'm a user too, i know.

Anyway, take wat KRW says with a LARGE pinch of salt... Go for a standard zoom of 3 x the original length, super-zooms all have their problems.

If you want quality pieces, then stick with the trinity, enuff said.
 

ihub88

New Member
Mar 3, 2007
586
0
0
#16
Have you tired the lens for a longish period of time yourself? The problems are there, but all lenses have their issues (except maybe thebtrusty and fabulous and super cheap 50mm f/1.8). But this lens really is a good one to have. The optics are of course not as sharp as your f/2.8 pro lenses, esp the 17-55mm. But then again, it is an incredible 18-200! Very few lenses go from wide to telephoto and perform as well. In fact, I don't think I've seen any other lens that does as well over so long a range. Ken Rockwell apparently thinks so if you follow the link provided above. It is highly sought after for a reason.

I'm of course slightly biased, since I am a Nikkor all the way person. But I would really suggest that you read all the reviews as they come up before making your decision. I am sure that there will be sites that do comparison tests soon. I for one would gladly fork out the extra money if it means better glass, esp since this is probably going to be your walkabout lens.

Good luck! ;)
I have own and tried the lens myself, its horrible.

I also have the 50mm f1.8, its not a bad lens but it still have its bad points.
 

#17
its horrible meh. i find the optics decent leh. nt v sharp but good enuff. and zoom creep.... u put it to 18mm then wouldn creep liao lor.

sometimes muz consider the len's purpose leh. its meant for convenience nt pro shots. for assignments dats wat i use my 50mm for.
 

mcn

New Member
Oct 6, 2005
1,265
0
0
#18
nikon 18-200mm , anytime :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

but let me tell you this; i don't own one to justify my statement above
 

trd2970

Senior Member
Jun 8, 2005
5,310
1
0
#19
A bit off-topic, but I suppose the Sigma 18-200 OS would be a potential hit with Canon/Olympus users since there's no equivalent Canon/Olympus lens with similar features (i.e. 18-200 & image stabilisation).
 

cheersjy

New Member
Jul 1, 2003
917
0
0
Hougang
www.pbase.com
#20
I have own and tried the lens myself, its horrible.

I also have the 50mm f1.8, its not a bad lens but it still have its bad points.

Probably there is copy to copy variation? I love mine :lovegrin: and i dun find day and night difference in sharpness when compared to 50f1.8 (which is generally considered very sharp)

...or perhaps i am not a very picky person.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom