answers: 89

  1. Alexander
    16.03.2016

    Thanks for the review! But after him, my choice became even more complicated. What is more correct to take:
    Sigma C 18-200mm F / 3.5-6.3:
    Nikon 18-105mm f / 3.5-5.6G AF-S ED DX VR
    Nikon 18-140mm f / 3.5-5.6G ED VR DX

    Reply

    • Lynx
      16.03.2016

      looking for what

      Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      16.03.2016

      These are all dark zooms. Choosing Sigma - there will be at least the largest coverage of focal lengths.

      Reply

  2. Lynx
    16.03.2016

    pfff ... 5,6 or 6,3 - only 1/3 of a stop.
    Fujiks have a choice for telephoto zoom - 3,5-4,8 or 4,5-6,7!

    Reply

  3. Alexander
    16.03.2016

    I have the previous version, which I got from hands for ridiculous money. I shot them on the D90, now on the D7100. Very good wagon. I like the speed and accuracy of autofocus. It works without misses. At medium focal lengths and apertures it gives a very sharp picture over the entire field of the frame. You can safely and with a small marriage to use for family and picnic fishing reports.

    Reply

    • Gaijin
      09.05.2022

      For some reason, auto focus does not work on my D7100 😏😏😏 I took this lens from a friend for a test ..

      Reply

      • Victor
        09.05.2022

        Because your 7100 firmware is updated to 1.04+

        Reply

      • Gaijin
        09.05.2022

        Can I rollback the firmware? Or what other options are there?

        Reply

      • Victor
        09.05.2022

        Yes it is possible. As far as I remember, firmware .03 and .02 were found on the network at least.

        Reply

      • Gaijin
        09.05.2022

        Thanks a lot for the info 🤝🤝🤝

        Reply

  4. Olegjan
    17.03.2016

    I don’t know how sharp it is better than Nikon. They are similar in picture.

    Reply

  5. Anton
    17.03.2016

    And how does this lens behave when shooting video? And what is better for the video: this lens, Nikon or something else in this price category?

    Reply

    • Anton
      17.03.2016

      For D5300 Camera

      Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      17.03.2016

      The video shoots / focuses like any other native lens.

      Reply

  6. Andrei
    17.03.2016

    I always said that third-party manufacturers are no worse or uncritically worse, otherwise they would have closed long ago

    Reply

    • Pastor
      17.03.2016

      Sometimes it's even better. For example, Tamron 15-30 2.8vs is better than any Canon shirik, while being cheaper. Even in tests it is sharper than the Nikon 14-24 2.8, which has been an icon of sharpness in super-wide zooms for several years in a row. The same sigma art is very cool, Nikon's fifty dollars and nothing at all against 50 1.4 art can not do. Canon has at least 1.2L, but it is inferior in sharpness to sigma. Another new tamron 70-200 2.8vs is very cool, judging by the tests at the level of Nikon 70-200 2.8vr2 and only slightly inferior to 70-200 2.8 lis2. Considering its price, it's a fairy tale. So I agree that third-party glass manufacturers are not just floundering somehow afloat, but are developing quite interestingly. True, in my opinion, I haven't heard anything for a long time, the last thing I noticed was 11-20 2.8 and that's it. No zooms and even less fixes. But sigma, tamron and samyang are developing, now the yungnuo are still connected.

      Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        17.03.2016

        Tokina 14-20 / 2.0 DX recently released, too, an interesting beast.

        Reply

      • Pastor
        17.03.2016

        Oh thanks! With sigma 50-100 helped, now with tokino :) Something I don't follow the news at all. The aperture, of course, is steep, but the focal ones are somehow not impressive. I still scolded 11 mm tokinu at a wide angle, but here it is 14 ... But in any case, a cool lens. Something all third parties began to produce something unique, then sigma with its high-aperture zooms, then tamron with stabilized fixes. In general, it is interesting when Nikon or Canon will release their zoom with aperture of 2.0. And what price will it have :)

        Reply

      • anonym
        17.03.2016

        When a zoom appears with such a speed from Nikon and you know its price, the interest will immediately disappear by itself.)

        Reply

      • Pastor
        18.03.2016

        Well, why, suddenly it will be something really good, for which money is not a pity. For example, 70-150 2 BP. I would take this at a price slightly higher than the current 70-200 2.8vr2. Well, many would have taken, I think. And for some 24-50 2 bp, I think there would be buyers.

        Reply

      • anonym
        17.03.2016
      • Maksim
        18.03.2016

        I wonder if anyone will shoot at super wide at aperture 2.0?
        :)
        For me, Tokina 12-24 f4 is beyond praise.

        Reply

      • fotika
        18.03.2016

        you are mistaken, you can shoot at 1.4 if the lens is good, at infinity width can be after 1 meter.
        http://evtifeev.com/37653-progulka-obzor-zeiss-otus-28-1-4-ze.html

        Reply

      • Andrei
        18.03.2016

        12-24 was a great lens, but already a museum -)
        here is a 12-28 song! same quality, but super wide and staff in one bottle

        Reply

      • Andrei
        18.03.2016

        Fotica But how does infinity depend on the quality of the glass?
        I think Maxim meant the width of the rip, and it depends only on the aperture value, focal length and focusing distance.
        Strong blur on the width still can not be achieved, then it would be better if everything is in focus. So that everything in focus should be pressed aperture. And why do you need a huge expensive lens, if you still shoot on a preloaded one? It may be better to have an inexpensive and small one, but in order to shoot it was possible in the open?

        Reply

      • Andrei
        18.03.2016

        Fotica gives me aperture 4 and enough for portraiture. It’s better to have honest 90/4 than conditional Jupiter-9

        Reply

      • anonym
        18.03.2016

        fotika, according to your link 28mm is not at all 20mm, like the new tokina and the aperture ratio of 1,4 and 2.0 are also 2 big differences. + there is a fix, and tokina is a zoom, so its sharpness at 2.0 will not be comparable to that which this Zeiss gives

        Reply

      • fotika
        18.03.2016

        it was not about a specific lens but about aperture! don't take words out of context. Read carefully Maxim’s message and my answer. Who will shoot at super wide and at aperture 2.0?
        I gave an answer.

        P / S, most of the landscapes were shot at infinity, if you do not vkurse)))

        and judging by your answers you are a little off topic. read carefully everything from beginning to end on the link that I gave above. if you take 200 f 1.8 and focus on infinity you will see everything in sharpness. even at 1.8. and the hole is pressed due to the fact that most lenses are technically unable to provide a sharp picture, read about diffraction for example. it will be useful.

        Reply

      • Andrei
        18.03.2016

        I also do not understand who will shoot at a hole 2,0.
        For a full frame, I do not see the advantages of 28 / 1,4 over 28 / 2,8.
        At infinity, on an open rip start at about 15m, at the second with 20m. In the daytime without a tripod, you can easily remove it from an open one. At night, any tripod is needed. In the morning, in most cases, also needed. If you cover, then there is no difference at all.
        But the difference in price and mass will be huge.
        If you take a wider angle, the benefits will be even less, and the price and weight even more.

        And why should I read about diffraction? with the exception of macro, I don’t squeeze a hole stronger than 10, and with such a hole, even on a crop, diffraction will not make itself felt.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        18.03.2016

        F / 1.4 is needed for those who know a lot about business. For example, to just shoot a... + TOP shirik is TOP shirik + if it has 1.4, then at 2.8 it will be brutally good, unlike 28 / 2.8, which is good at 2.8, but no more, for small-pixel cameras it is critical. The question is not in the depth of field, the question is in the tasks solved by the lens.

        Reply

      • Andrei
        18.03.2016

        bye. for 28 \ 2.8 from about 10m the rip will begin

        Reply

      • Peter Sh.
        19.03.2016

        In fact, on open apertures they shoot in the dark, with hands.

        Reply

      • Koba
        11.09.2017

        And the new Tokina 24-70 / 2.8 kilogram in terms of testma in the internet and, in general, bypasses analogs in picture quality and resolution ... And the Chinese Laowa walk and manual, but with the quality there everything is in order and with manufacturing ... So there are interesting lenses in the world, not only brands ...

        Reply

  7. anonym
    19.03.2016

    Why write about the “vacuum cleaner effect” in every review? Are you a humanist, Arkady?

    Reply

    • anonym
      19.03.2016

      Let me explain the elementary mechanics in the camera body 2 things are sensitive to dust: a mirror and a sensor. Which clean elementary and over time, and so it is necessary.
      There are 16 dust-sensitive glass elements in the lens housing, and if the rear lens is static, then when zooming, the lens itself will suck in air. Disassembling the lens for cleaning is not as trivial and cheap as you might think.
      So I recommend that you stop focusing on this detail in future reviews.

      Reply

      • anonym
        19.03.2016

        * attention in negative quality

        Reply

      • BB
        19.03.2016

        with the viewfinder is not so simple, especially with the pentazerkal. A dusty pentamirror must be replaced (not cleaned). So this is a very controversial point.

        Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      19.03.2016

      I do not focus. This is the same property of the lens as the others.

      Reply

      • anonym
        19.03.2016

        Arkady, what if, looking down and blushing slightly, I begin to assert that Tokina 11-16 by 2,8 is just “outrageously good”?

        Reply

      • Alexey
        19.03.2016

        RAV can lay out? to see how "brutally good"?

        Reply

      • anonym
        20.03.2016

        What can surprise a happy owner with a width of 1,4!)

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        19.03.2016

        can blush :)

        Reply

      • anonym
        20.03.2016

        The blush disappeared and bewilderment appeared on my face. You really should hit one bank. "And the aperture ratio is not always so important for the width." (From the review of Tokina 11-16 by a very respected photographer.)

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        20.03.2016

        Indeed, it is not always as important as they say about it, nevertheless, it is important. About the sharpness of the lens 24 1.4 by 2.8 and tokens 11-16 / 2.8 - think for yourself :)

        Reply

      • anonym
        20.03.2016

        I’ll cover the aperture on Tokin to 5.6 and you and I will be equal in sharpness. Only the shutter speeds will be different.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        20.03.2016

        So you yourself wrote about the difference. F / 2.8 and F / 5.6 are two stops difference, shutter speed will differ by 4 times with other settings being equal. If I can do sharp frames for 1/20 of a second without any problems, then for the same sharpness with Tokina I will have to use 1/5 of a second.

        Reply

      • Michael
        20.03.2016

        And at 24MPix, at f / 5.6, the diffraction threshold (for crop) is already there, and if you close it further, the sharpness drops again ... So you can't cover it too much

        Reply

      • Oleg
        20.03.2016

        Lenses that are cutting at aperture value of 2.8 when focusing on infinity have one minus - they are damn expensive

        Reply

      • Peter Sh.
        20.03.2016

        Samyang 35mm f / 1.4 will be sharper and more contrast than any Nikon shirik for any money. I have one, I speak absolutely objectively.
        It costs absolutely nothing (comparatively of course).
        But he only has one manual autofocus, and is not calibrated for infinity.
        None are calibrated, I don't know why. They say that it is very dreary, that the Korean does not bother.

        Reply

      • Oleg
        21.03.2016

        It’s not very bad that Samyangs help us out

        Reply

      • Michael
        21.03.2016

        The question is mainly in the price, otherwise everyone would have shot at 24-70 2.8, 24-35 2.0, etc. etc., and even better at 24 1.4)))

        Reply

  8. Andrei
    23.03.2016

    “In 2016, it is a terrible sin to save on the number of diaphragm blades, as well as on their rounding.” - all manufacturers would think so !!!

    Reply

  9. ASP
    04.04.2016

    The numbers “013” and “014” (as well as “012”, “015”, “016”) on Sigma lens bodies indicate the last three digits of the year the lens was launched, ie. “012” is 2012, “013” is 2013, etc. (These numbers are only on the new Sigma Global Vision lenses, which began to appear in 2012).
    I think this was introduced in order to distinguish between lenses of different years of release, because one and the same object may well undergo minor changes in design over the years of production, and there is no reason to assign it a new designation (the optical scheme is the same, but the control board, electric drive, etc. were changed).

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      04.04.2016

      Thank you!

      Reply

  10. Sergei 02
    21.04.2016

    Having sold my Nikor16-85, I already found Nikorr18-200, but then I received a newsletter with this review. I liked the photo from it. After looking at the market, I found this lens. For 19k with delivery, I bought a new one, and Nikonovsky wanted to buy a used one for 20k. I had a lot of different lenses, Nikorov’s zooms (I tried fixes, not mine) and Sigma 30 1.4 (I didn’t like it, because of the unpredictability of focusing) . And this one is even nothing, the focus is accurate, the focus motor is quiet, like Nikors. As for the vignettes and other things, I'm not worried about the dark either (it helps SB 900). It is pleasant in the hands, not heavy. Kontru also tolerates well, like a bowl. I practically do not use the speed, I prefer the shutter speed shorter. In a word, the lens pleases. Even the opinion of sigma has changed for the better.

    Reply

  11. Sergei
    04.10.2016

    Good afternoon, after reading on your site about the sigma 18-200 lens, I came to the conclusion that this is a good lens. And he decided to purchase. After the purchase, I was a little redistributed since it does not focus through the screen and video either. Only manually can focus through the screen. (((

    Reply

    • Misha
      05.03.2017

      It focuses on me.

      Reply

      • Koba
        04.08.2017

        This lens is the sharpest of all superzoom. It has only two drawbacks - it is darker than Nikon's on the long end, and there is also no elastic band on the bayonet for basic dust and moisture protection. But there is also a plus - it stands at the level of the first Nikon 18-200 on the secondary market in a new state.

        Reply

  12. Jeanne
    16.01.2018

    Hello Arkady, is it worth taking this lens with your hands? They sell for about 3500 in rubles. Is this a normal price? And what to look for in this lens? Where can shoals usually be?

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      16.01.2018

      Yes, the lens itself is good. Check everything you can pay attention to.

      Reply

  13. Lamer
    23.06.2018

    zoom ratio 8,2.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      23.06.2018

      what?

      Reply

  14. A quark
    10.07.2018

    Something this lens is praised, IMHO. Test results https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigma-18-200-3p5-6p3-os-n15/3 They speak not in his favor. There is a sharpness gap of 80 mm, even though covering the diaphragm, and sharpness is not so good at the long end. Tamron 16-300 and even better.

    Reply

  15. Cart
    10.10.2018

    After reading the review, I fired up buying this lens. Finally bought (new) and was unpleasantly surprised. It gives the most mediocre result, nothing unusual. Nothing is better than the old Pentax SMC 18-250mm 3.5-6.3 (aka Tamron) which was not very flattering on the same site. As for me, Pentax will be brighter and sharper. I regret the purchase, I do not need two almost identical lenses.

    Reply

  16. Nicholas
    15.02.2019

    why is it written in the table - “DC - the lens is designed for SLR cameras with APS-C sensor, in this case it is analogous to 'Nikon DX'” and then they write - “Focal length-18-200 mm, EGF for Nikon DX cameras is 27 -300 mm ”why 27-300 mm if the lens is designed for cropped cameras then it will be 18-200 mm, explain how?

    Reply

    • Novel
      15.02.2019

      Same. The field of view of this lens will be the same as that of a 27-300 lens at full frame. The EGF recalculation was invented for those who are used to film (full frame) and, when switching to crop, expects 18mm to be wide enough (but in fact not so much).

      Reply

    • Valery A.
      15.02.2019

      Bast-wet ... Arkady, probably, should write a separate article about EGF and place it in a prominent place. The fact is that the idea of ​​the viewing angles of the lens is usually learned from their work on the FF (of which there were very many in the film era, but few crops). You and I know that, say, 28mm on FF is quite wide, 18mm is super wide, and 50 is a normal fix. Someone put a zoom 18-200 on some unknown crop, we are interested in what angles it gives on this crop, what is there you can see, what kind of EGF? And, 27-300, this is cool, this is the entire focal range (almost) on our FF. And the fact that the lens is designed for a crop of 1,5 means that it gives a spot of light covering the sensor 25 * 17mm, but not 36 * 25, on which it will draw a circle (or a strong vignette). And if you put fifty dollars on a crop of 1,5, it will give a viewing angle of 1,5 times Narrower than on FF, the EGF will be 75mm, the same, by the way, as 50mm on any zoom lens on a crop.

      Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      15.02.2019

      This is the most common question for beginners :). He will be 18-200 with an EGF of 27-300

      Reply

  17. Gleb
    05.09.2019

    Gentlemen comrades! I re-read many reviews and comments, but did not make a definite conclusion for myself. For shooting objects and jewelry I need an 80-500 type lens with MDF <35cm, and very sharp. But, unfortunately, they don't. So I'm looking for two lenses. Can anyone advise the sharpest lens at a focal length of 300-500 with at least 35cm MDF, and such a universal macro zoom? The sharpest. Pretty bokshechki are not interested. You need a very sharp picture at closed apertures. For Pentax. If something is not produced for it, then for Nikon.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      05.09.2019

      Very sharp and versatile and macro and zoom - very difficult to find. Very sharp, for example, Nikon 200/4 micro, versatile - this one in the review.

      Reply

      • Gleb
        05.09.2019

        Arkady, how is this lens sharpened compared to Pentax 18-135, 18-250 and 18-270?

        Reply

      • B. R. P.
        06.09.2019

        Why for a piece of jewelry zoom, and even 80-500? For increases greater than 1: 2, 1: 1? Take a macro lens + ring or macro converter. Or macromech, after all.

        Reply

      • Valery A.
        06.09.2019

        Have you considered macro lenses? Pentax has both 50 / 2,8 and 100 / 2,8. Although it depends on the wallet and requirements. I like the macro from an inexpensive Nikon 28-105, MDF 22cm, I stole it. 1: 2. Can Pentax have something like that?

        Reply

      • Gleb
        06.09.2019

        Macro needs 400 or 500 focus distance, they don't. And if you remove the ring 100, then one edge is sharp, the other is not sharp, or the stone is sharp, and the edges of the ring are both not sharp. You need to shoot not from the side, but in isometric view. Even on diaphragms 22-32, the grip is very small and the whole ring cannot be made sharp. Usually photographers shoot two frames with different focusing points, and then combine them in Photoshop. But on large volumes - not an option

        Reply

      • Valery A.
        06.09.2019

        Then, probably, to you for a shooting survey. Here, either stitch frames shot from a tripod with a manual focus shift through the program, or in modern Olympuses (maybe someone else, I heard from the d850), a stack photo is taken inside the camera.

        Reply

      • Valery A.
        06.09.2019

        P.S. stacking survey.

        Reply

      • B. R. P.
        06.09.2019

        If the flu is 100mm small, then the hypothetical 500mm will be even smaller.

        Reply

  18. Still
    07.11.2020

    Does it make sense to replace the 1st series with it, or is it better to Nikkor 18-200?

    Reply

  19. Denis
    05.12.2021

    Advise, what is better to take a Canon for crop: Sigma 18-200 or Canon 18-135 STM?

    Reply

  20. Gaijin
    09.05.2022

    Hi everybody!
    I took this lens from a friend for a test, but for some reason autofocus does not work on my D7100 .. 😏😏😏 Everything is clear in manual mode ..
    Wanted to buy it..

    Everything works with other lenses.

    Reply

    • Sergey
      29.10.2022

      Doesn't work in live view or doesn't work at all?

      Reply

  21. Victor
    15.01.2023

    Sorry for the question, are the lens hoods of this lens interchangeable for different camera systems?

    Reply

    • B. R. P.
      15.01.2023

      If the mounts are the same - yes.

      Reply

  22. Anatoly
    08.05.2023

    Tell me, can this lens be converted to Nikon?

    Reply

    • Andrii
      08.05.2023

      After reading a glance before him, how do you put food? Look at the first photo and think about how stupid your food is.

      Reply

    • B. R. P.
      08.05.2023

      He is under Nikon)

      Reply

  23. Anatoly
    09.05.2023

    I sell for CANON

    Reply

    • B. R. P.
      09.05.2023

      Can't be changed. Search for Nikon.

      Reply

  24. Anatoly
    10.05.2023

    Thank you

    Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer