Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 11 DC OS HSM Lens for Canon

Product Information

EF-S 18-55 IS; 18-200 has a better focus control, but has vignetting, same IQ, 18-55 is better at 18mm If I was working in nasty, dirty areas, I'd forget the cap, and use an uncoated 72mm Tiffen UV filter instead (or in 77mm). Uncoated filters are much easier to clean, but more prone to ghosting. I wasn't really sure what this 'walkaround' lens could offer at this price point; but, it performed fairly well.

The Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM lens shows a good resistance to chromatic aberrations, but it’s possible to see it occurring in some high contrast areas of images. Generally speaking, it’s not enough to be problematic for average printing or web sizes, being really only particularly visible when examining an image at 100%.

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS User Reviews

The image is sharp. Inside camera sharpening (level 3 or 4) is sufficient to make the picture very sharp. Very good resolution, no flares, good color saturation. Corner shading is fairly well-controlled in the 18-200mm IS. Wide-angle lenses typically show some form of light falloff, and while we see this phenomenon with the 18-200mm, it's not too severe: the corners are only 3/4 of a stop darker than the center, and only when used at 18mm and at ƒ/3.5. At any other focal length while using the lens wide open, corner shading is only 1/2 of a stop. As the lens is stopped down, corner shading falls to 1/4 of a stop by ƒ/8; when using the lens at a focal length of 80mm or greater, there is virtually no corner shading when the lens is stopped down to ƒ/11 or smaller. The quality of walk-around lenses is currently high enough for a large group of amateur photographers. It surprises me again every time how large the zoom range is and how similar the various 18-200 mm zooms are in terms of image quality and build quality. They’re also getting a bit better, but that applies for the more expensive lenses as well. Chromatic aberration is the lens' inability to focus on the sensor or film all colours of visible light at the same point. Severe chromatic aberration gives a noticeable fringing or a halo effect around sharp edges within the picture. It can be cured in software. The blue column represents readings from the centre of the picture frame at the various apertures and the green is from the edges. Averaging them out gives the red weighted column.

And if you don’t have these programs available: because the distortion between 28 mm and 200 mm is so constant, you can apply the same correction across the entire zoom range. With the DPP3.51,the Canon lens has no light fall off with my 50D and with the NX2, the Nikon lens has no CA with my D300. When using short focal length range zoom lenses, the widest and longest focal lengths are often utilized the most. The course of distortion is typical for a superzoom and runs from visible barrel-shaped distortion at 18 mm to pinchushion-shaped distortion at focal distances above 30 mm. In particular, the barrel-shaped distortion at the shortest focal distance is sometimes clear to see. Distortion for RAW files is simple (“with one press of a button”) to automatically correct with the lens correction profiles in Lightroom or Photoshop. When used on a Canon 1.6x camera, it gives angles-of-view similar to what a 29-320mm lens does when used on a film or full-frame camera.At 200mm, I am getting solid results at 1/20 sec. with some even longer exposures resulting in sharp images. The lens does not physically extend as fast above 135mm and the net change in angle of view from 170 to 200mm is very small. As is typical of ''vacation'' lenses, the 18-200mm must be stopped down to achieve optimal performance, however, instead of the usual ƒ/8 benchmark the 18-200mm does well at ƒ/5.6 pretty much across the lens' range of focal lengths. At telephoto settings (>135mm) you'll see the lens' best performances at ƒ/8 or ƒ/11. The lens hood is supplied with the lens and is very convenient, though beeing shaped to fit the FOV at 18mm it becomes less efficient on the long end." The 18-200mm, like all ''vacation lenses,'' must make concessions to balance optical performance, weight and price. In this regard the Canon lens is not immune. Our copy of the Canon 18-200mm ƒ/3.5-5.6 IS seemed to be very slightly out of alignment, with the effect most noticeable at 18mm (the sharpest region is at the bottom of the frame rather than the center).