QQ - Sigma 18-200mm

Eventer · Sep 4, 2011

Looking for somthing in the mean time untill i can afford to step up to the f2.8 70-200mm
Ive found the Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 which i am wanting to use for sports/ horses in the mean time. Will f6.3 be fast enough to shoot galloping/ jumping horses? The nikon version is 5.6 instead but significantly more expensive. Will this sigma lens to the job? Sigma 18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 DC OS Nikon AF | Trade Me this is what im looking at

Thanks in advance!

Lskaggs · Sep 4, 2011

I shoot with canon but tried a sigma lens a few years ago it only worked for about a year. When I adjusted the zoom it would come loose from the camera. Since then I have only purchased canon lenses. I know it's more expensive but worth it in the long run.

Eventer · Sep 4, 2011

Yeah i wasnt orginally going to go with a sigma but a cheap new one has come up and untill i can fish aout a couple thousadn for the nice 2.8 70-200 im looking for somthing in the mean time, still no good you think?

Netskimmer · Sep 4, 2011

If it's speed you are concerned with you could try one of these:

Amazon.com: Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VR Nikkor Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Amazon.com: Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR: Electronics

They are both Nikon brand and faster on the far end than the one you posted but I don't know how they would compare regarding image quality. The 55-300 is a DX lens but I have one and I like it.

Here is an image taken with the 55-300mm at the fair, don't mind the dust. (or the limited skill of the guy taking the pic:mrgreen

orb9220 · Sep 4, 2011

Yep the all-in-ones are already hampered by design limitations and usually the slowest to AF thru the range and struggle in lower light for action shots. Good light is essential even on suggestions of the 70-300vr or 55-300vr. But you are going to have to pay for the better lenses and didn't mention your budget? But outdoor action wouldn't be too concerned with my 70-300VR as a proven performer.

55-300VR optically identical to the 70-300VR but a tad slower on AF speed. For cheapest bang for the buck zoom is the Nikon 55-200VR for under $200 new. And my general walkabout which I have used for wildlife and sports but many times it will come a tad short at 200mm for some distance problems. But have gotten some decent shots at a distance with it.
.

Eventer · Sep 4, 2011

I was going to get the 70-300 but I quite like the fact that sigma went right out wide to 18mm which would be rather handy. So is the difference of speed between 5.6 and 6.3 noticable?

tirediron · Sep 4, 2011

f6.3 will be adequate, outside, on a reasonably bright day. it will NOT work well in any sort of indoor setting. My feeling is that you will not be terribly happy with this lens in the long run, especially for your stated purpose. I would suggest renting as required until you can save up enough money to get at least the 70-300.