Nikon 18-200VR or Sigma 18-250 to replace lost l

--



http://www.redbubble.com/people/ronaldbegg/portfolio/art

Hi all, mucked up the heading on my iPad!

Meant to say.......Lost D7000 with 18-200VR while on holiday!

So, do I replace the lost lens ( and camera, will buy another D7000) with the same Nikon, or, as the opportunity presents......go for a Sigma 18-250 OS or a Tokina 18-270 PZR??

Both well reviewed on DPR and many other sites.....photozone etc..... But I do like to stick with Nikon, although I do have the excellent Sigma 150-500OS!

The Sigma would seem to have an edge over the Tokina!

What do you folks think. Clarity and sharpness are critical to me..... Some place the Sigma above the Nikon!!

Over to you

Ron.....in Queensland.......see my other post in the D300 Forum



http://www.redbubble.com/people/ronaldbegg/portfolio/art

All three of these lens are basically more or less the same. All super zooms are design with compromises because of the long focal lenght involve . Apart from this all three are fast to focus and are pretty good at the wide end loosing at the long end. I have seen nice pics taken with all of them . I personally have the Sigma 18-200mm OS HSM which is basically the same as the 18-250mm and it is a nice lens , sharp at the wide end at the center and a bit soft at the long end but I admit that it is nice to have a lens you don't have to be changing in order to get the shot.

PS...if you don't use the long end that much I recommend to go with the D7000 kit lens , 18-105mm VR . It is truly an overachiever . Then afterward go for the 70-300mm VR and you'll be set from 18-300mm with very good optics.

Oddly enough, very close to my thinking!
But, about the Sigma 18-250, anyone out there with first hand experience?

I am looking at purchasing the replacement D7000 with a 18-105 VR and either the 18-200VR or the Sigma 18-250 0S

Really appreciate some additional feedback.....Nikon stuff is so good, but the 18-250 Sigma?

My 150-500 Sigma OS, is such a great lens I can use it hand held!!!

Ron...still on holiday in Queensland

ps thank goodness for my wife's excellent Samsung P&S!!!

Mannypr said:

PS...if you don't use the long end that much I recommend to go with the D7000 kit lens , 18-105mm VR . It is truly an overachiever . Then afterward go for the 70-300mm VR and you'll be set from 18-300mm with very good optics.

Click to expand...

--



http://www.redbubble.com/people/ronaldbegg/portfolio/art

golfer1 said:

Really appreciate some additional feedback.....Nikon stuff is so good, but the 18-250 Sigma?

My 150-500 Sigma OS, is such a great lens I can use it hand held!!!

Ron...still on holiday in Queensland

ps thank goodness for my wife's excellent Samsung P&S!!!

Mannypr said:

PS...if you don't use the long end that much I recommend to go with the D7000 kit lens , 18-105mm VR . It is truly an overachiever . Then afterward go for the 70-300mm VR and you'll be set from 18-300mm with very good optics.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Hullo again all, could someone PLEASE throw their 10 cents in re the Sigma 18-250 OS.

On the cusp on making a decision, but need confirmation that the Sigma will do a fine job, or should I jump in an buy the classic....Nikon 18-200VR?

Surely there are some Sigma 18-250 users out there!

Ron......still hurting over the loss of the D7000 and 18-200VR11

golfer1 said:

Click to expand...

http://www.redbubble.com/people/ronaldbegg/portfolio/art



http://www.redbubble.com/people/ronaldbegg/portfolio/art

I haven't tried the Sigma, but my 2 cents.
I would stick to the Nikon.

From all the many tests I have read the Nikon is the better lens. It will be easily as sharp and focus faster than any of the opposition.
Check out the reviews on dslrgear.com

The Sigma is NOT a real HSM (unlike Sigmas EX series lenses) it is bigger and heavier and the sharpness sucks from 80-250mm.

The tamron is small light very plastic. The new PZD motor is still slower and still doesn't allow instant MF overide (just like the sigma its not a true AFS/HSM/USM/AFS type lens). The tamron is not that sharp either.

Both the Sigma and Tamron are also f6.3 lenses at the long end and will most likely really struggle to get focuas as the light levels drop.

I havn't tried the Sigma or the Tamron but I know some who have and their reports are not positive when comparing to the Nikon.

PS I'm not against these brands overall. I have a Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 and its a very nice lens.

Darin

Not to be disrespectful but the HSM motor in my sigma is a HSM . It is quick to focus , allmost as fast as my Nikons and extremely quiet . I could be your refering to a more updated type of HSM , in that case I have no knowledge but the motor , at least in my 18-200mm OS HSM is an HSM motor . Sigma has different models of this lens , one does not have the hsm motor in it which would be the first model that came out and the other one has it . Both have OS .

Mannypr said:

Not to be disrespectful but the HSM motor in my sigma is a HSM . It is quick to focus , allmost as fast as my Nikons and extremely quiet . I could be your refering to a more updated type of HSM , in that case I have no knowledge but the motor , at least in my 18-200mm OS HSM is an HSM motor . Sigma has different models of this lens , one does not have the hsm motor in it which would be the first model that came out and the other one has it . Both have OS .

Click to expand...

Yes it is callled on HSM lens....but to clarify what I mean.

From what I understandthe 18-250mm is HSM just like the Nikon 18-55mm kit is AF-S.
ie Not really.

Nikon has various different AF-S systems. The Kit 18-55 and 55-200mm lenses are slower to focus and don't allow instant manual focus overide. They use a MICRO Motor. The rest of Nikons lineup tend to use either a ROD type or RING type AF-S motor which allow instant manual focus overide. These are all generally faster (to varying degrees) and quiter.

Sigma is exactly the same. They call them all HSM (if they use an internal focus motor), but a lot of the lower end stuff just uses a cheaper MICRO motor (they fact that they don't allow instant MF overide is the giveaway again). The real HSM ring type motors are used in their higher end lenses.

Canon is to my knowledge the only one who only uses their USM desciption on true USM lenses.

Darin

golfer1 said:

What do you folks think. Clarity and sharpness are critical to me..... Some place the Sigma above the Nikon!!

Click to expand...

I don't think the Nikon 18-200vr is all that great for sharpness. Probably the least sharp Nikon they make. And I'd suspect any of the superzooms are about the same.

If you want a sharper combination, at less cost, just get the 18-55vr and 55-200vr combo.

If you want better than that, get the 16-85vr / 70-300vr combo, and have more focal range to boot.

If you can live without the width, the 28-300vr is supposed to be better than the 18-200, but you'd probably want a cheap 18-55vr to go wide when you need it.

--
Craig
http://www.cjcphoto.net

By what I gather that would be fraud . One thing is a micro motor and another is a hyper sonic motor as Nikons silent wave motor or Canons ultra sonic motor . To name a micro motor HSM being by what there have said a specially design motor that is very fast to focus and extremely silent. would be fraudalent . If in reality my 18-200 has a micro motor then it most be the fastest and the most silent micro motor in existence as my sigma lens is super fast to focus and for all intents inaudible. I do admit that Nikons SWM do have different versions of said lens because they do tend to focus a different speeds depending on if it's a low cost or high cost lens.

In the sigmas 18-200mm review right here in dpreview it says the following :

" In somewhat curious fashion, the Nikon mount version also sports an ultrasonic-type 'HyperSonic Motor' (giving rise to the HSM tag,) while the Canon and Sigma mount models use a conventional micro-motor for focusing."

And then it goes on the say :

The Sigma 18-200mm F3.6-6.3 OS is unusual in that it comes in two flavours, with the Nikon version under test sporting an HSM badge (which signifies an ultrasonic-type 'HyperSonic Motor'), but the Canon and Sigma mount variants having to make do with a standard micromotor instead. The hypersonic motor on the Nikon mount model is however of the micro- rather than ring-type, SO THE TWO APPROCHES ARE OPERATIONALLY VERY SIMILAR ; in both cases the focus ring rotates during autofocus, and no full-time manual AF override is available (only the Nikon 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 VR provides such an option in this class of lenses).

So it seems to some extent we are both right . It is a HSM motor with the caveat that it is a smaller variant of the HSM . That's why my Sigma is so fast and silent to focus . Thank you for the information .

Mannypr said:

And then it goes on the say :

The Sigma 18-200mm F3.6-6.3 OS is unusual in that it comes in two flavours, with the Nikon version under test sporting an HSM badge (which signifies an ultrasonic-type 'HyperSonic Motor'), but the Canon and Sigma mount variants having to make do with a standard micromotor instead. The hypersonic motor on the Nikon mount model is however of the micro- rather than ring-type, SO THE TWO APPROCHES ARE OPERATIONALLY VERY SIMILAR ; in both cases the focus ring rotates during autofocus, and no full-time manual AF override is available (only the Nikon 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 VR provides such an option in this class of lenses).

So it seems to some extent we are both right . It is a HSM motor with the caveat that it is a smaller variant of the HSM . That's why my Sigma is so fast and silent to focus . Thank you for the information .

Click to expand...

Read it carefully and "between the lines"........

"Canon and Sigma mount variants having to make do with a standard micromotor instead. The hypersonic motor on the Nikon mount model is however of the micro- rather than ring-type,"

Not quite correct. They are both micromotors, the nikon version just says HSM.

Sigma simply use the HSM badge to show that these particular Nikon versions will AF on the lower end Nikons. Cannon dosn't have this issue as none of their bodies have a built in AF motor so they don't need to use the HSM name.

and ........

"in both cases the focus ring rotates during autofocus, and no full-time manual AF override is available"

Correct, as they are micromotors.
Its simple worsmithing. the Canon and Nikon ones are in fact the same.

They are both Micro motors. Why would sigma use a different motor? The fact that you do not have instant MF overide is the giveaway. Micromotors are mechanically coupled to the lens AF elements. True HSM/UFS/SWM are not.

and ......

" (only the Nikon 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 VR provides such an option in this class of lenses)."

Correct even Canons 18-200 is not USM

Dirrectly from Sigmas website.

"What is the difference between built-in HSM lens and DC-motor lens?

With conventional auto-focusing, auto-focus is driven by electromagnetic force of a DC-motor, gear and shaft mechanism. However, Ultrasonic Oscillation Energy operates the HSM lens and creates high-torque drive. Since this motor has no reduction gears, it has much quicker response to start and stop compared to DC- motor lenses. HSM system has virtually silent auto focus function, very quick responsive auto focus function and "full-time" manual focus, wherein AF can be overridden without disengaging the AF mode altogether."

So by their own definition any lens that does not offer full-time manual focus overide is NOT a true HSM lens.

To respond to your question about a sigma user (18-250). I have had a lot of experience with this lens, both the good and the bad. I am currently on my third version of this lens and about to trade that in so I can get a faster and sharper 2.8.

To explain my journey though, the first incarnation of the 18-250 I got was generally a pretty good lens. Not as sharp as my 18-105 but good for the extra range. This lens went OK until after about 2500 shots and I found that the aoutfocus motor started to fail and the OS became faulty. This was still within 30 days of purchase so the good people at the camera store swapped it for another. The second version I got worked well re focus and OS but was rediculiously soft past 50mm, even when closed up to f8.0. Took this one back after a week and was given another (3rd) lens. This third lens works OK but is in the middle of the other two sharpness wise. Because of my background I am particularly fussy regarding images and focus and struggle with using this lens. I have had it now for about the last 12 months and am about to move it on. For me I have unfortunately not been particularly happy with the shots this lens has taken throughout that time.

I won't argue that this lens is no good as for the range that it offers and for the versatility it provides it is good. It is just not a lens that suits me. I shoot a lot of pictures indoors and in situations where light is of a premium and have found that this lens is just too soft. I like to see crisp strands of hair when I shoot portrait and torso shots.

Milkins said:

To respond to your question about a sigma user (18-250). I have had a lot of experience with this lens, both the good and the bad. I am currently on my third version of this lens and about to trade that in so I can get a faster and sharper 2.8.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that, my extensive research, since posting the original, suggests, overall, the 18-250 is a good, to excellent performer!

I do hope so, I have one on order from Amazon!!

I think Nikon stuff generally is very good and I have quite a few Nikon lenses.

I also have a Tamron 10-17,......awesome, and a Sigma 150-500, the same adjective applies!!

One poster mentions that the 18-200VR could offer better focus....I have not found the lens wanting in this regard!

I will order a new body........either the D7000 or D5100...what's this about 7000s?......and also buy the very well reviewed 18-105 VR, (Thom and others...incl DPR)......so for sharpness I will be fine...the Sigma...I also have the 150-500OS Sigma..........will be very handy to supplement to the smaller Nikon lens

Ron



http://www.redbubble.com/people/ronaldbegg/portfolio/art

Based in my experience with Sigma (2 defective lenses, one good one), I'd stick with Nikon. Tamron could also be considered.