Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Lens for Minolta and Sony Digital SLR Cameras

I have read several of reviews for this lens, many are favorable and some not so favorable. I purchased this lens for the same reasons many others have, to have one lens to carry around. This lens is fantastic. I don't understand why some say the lens is no good. I have had no problems with anything.It seems that most of the favorable reviews are from amateur/hobbyist photographers and the not so favorable reviews are from so called "professional photographers" I fall into the amateur/hobbyist category. They throw around buzz words like chromatic fringing, vignetting, lens creep, soft corners, and image stabilization; I guess trying to impress someone. After goggling some of these words to find out more I have not experienced any of those things. What I don't understand is when they say stuff like "the lens has noisy autofocus" are you taking pictures of something or someone that you don't want them to know? I bet they are the ones that call a tire manufacture to complain about the road noise their tires makes while driving. Another is "No image stabilization" I do believe that the description is pretty clear that this lens does not have it. "Doesn't do well in low light and blur if you don't use a high shutter speed and hold it steady". Well duh! Again the description is pretty clear f/3.5-6.3 if you shoot everything in low light this may not be the lens for you. And you may want to invest in a tripod.I am no professional by any means but I do know how to operate my camera and how to adjust for low light conditions and how to avoid image blur at slow shutter speeds and how to focus the camera manually. So I wonder if they are really professionals or self proclaimed professionals!So many people have given in to the big marketing schemes by the manufactures. Just because something cost more does not mean it is any better you are paying for their big marketing budgets not a better product. For the most part all cameras will produce the same results. The only ways a manufacture can really improve on a DSLR and continue to sell them is up the megapixels and add HD video capability to the cameras. Don't know about you but I think they force the consumer to have that feature on their DSLR so they can charge more. I am a Photographer not a Cinematographer it is a function that I will never use but had to pay for. I have a friend that purchased one of the big name cameras with 21MP he has no plans for printing billboard signs and bought it because the sales person said it was what he needed if he wanted be taken seriously as a photographer; obviously my friend has more money than sense. I don't see any difference in picture quality with my $500 Pentax at 6MP besides the file size which took a week to ten days to download...

I buy many products based upon reviews from other users. That is also the case with this lens. I bought my Nikon D40 about 3 months ago (after 10 years of using point and shoots, including my treasured Canon S2is super zoom), with the kit 18-55mm lens, plus I bought a Nikon 55-200mm VR lens. I love the VR lens, but traveling through Europe for 2 1/2 weeks proved to me that I HATE changing lenses. It's inconvenient and potentially contaminates the inside of the camera body. So, I started looking around at something that I could use as a single walk-around lens. I love the wide angle perspective of the 18mm end, plus needed at least 200mm for the telephoto end. I liked the idea of Tamron's 18-250mm, but it's not image stabilized, which is really essential at the telephoto end. So, back to the Sigma. I read Camera Labs review of the non-stabilized Sigma 18-200mm, and it was favorable. So, I figured that the new stabilized version would be at least as good, and probably better.I have not used this lens much over the past couple of weeks, but have found that (with a couple of exceptions), it focuses at least as quickly as the 18-55mm Nikkor kit lens, if not faster. The OS works great, making hand-held photos rock solid at 200mm. The only thing that I haven't spent a lot of time doing is taking indoor photos with it. I have taken indoor photos with the onboard flash, and they seem to work fine. I have not had much luck getting sharp photos at the telephoto end indoors, but admittedly have not tried very hard. I'll update this later, as I get more experience. Based upon what I know now, I am NOT AT ALL SORRY that I bought this lens. I was really having a hard time choosing between this and the [MUCH more expensive] Nikkor 18-200mm, but this lens seems like it is well worth the money spent. The focus/OS noise does not bother me at all (In fact, it's reassuring to hear that the camera is trying to focus, etc...). The only thing I wish Sigma had done was to make the lens Auto/Manual focus without having to move the switch from Auto to Manual, which the Nikkor can do. However, if it auto-focuses reliably, I guess it won't be a big deal. The zoom ring is a little tight right now, but I imagine that it will loosen up over time (hopefully not to the point of requiring the lock to be engaged). I also like the large manual focus ring; the Nikkor's is much smaller. Don't be put off by the 72mm diameter (which I was initially). It's not a big deal. Yes, it is quite a bit heavier and larger than the kit lens (or even my 55-200mm Nikkor), but not overly so. In fact, it makes the camera easier to hold, since I think the D40/40x/60 grip is just a little too small. I was concerned that the onboard flash will be blocked by the lens, but it seems to have no effect. I'm not seeing any shadowing. I'll keep you advised on how my ongoing review is going.Happy shooting!Update: Sept 19, 2008 - I continue to love this lens. The ONLY thing that bothers me about it is (as someone mentioned in another review) that the zoom and focus rings are too close together. When I hand this to my wife or son, I have to remind them which one is the zoom ring, and not to touch the focus (BTW - It makes a gears-are-grinding noise when you move the focus ring without moving it to manual - Not good, although it does not seem to have hurt the lens). There is a slight amount of shadowing the on board flash when you are at any zoom over the 18mm. However, I rarely if ever use the on board flash. I have a Nikon SB-400 flash that is absolutely essential inside, where you can bounce it (read Ken Rockwell's review at [...] I have not put the 18-55mm kit lens back on this camera since I have had the 18-200, and probably won't. I have a very old Nikon G model 50mm f1.8 that I can use (no metering or autofocus) on those low-light non-flash indoor shots, where the Sigma is not at it's best (although it's still very good).

UPDATE: This lens ceased functioning 14 months after I bought it. The local repair shop could not fix it, and said it needed to go back to Sigma. Minimum repair price was $125, and likely higher than $150. Plus shipping. I changed my rating from 4 stars to 1 star because of this. I replaced it with a Nikon 28-200 that has been quite satisfactory, though I occasionally miss the extra wide reach of the Sigma. Call me an unhappy Sigma customer.ORIGINAL REVIEW: I have used this lens with my D40 for about a month. I was concerned about the relative slowness of the lens, especially at full zoom, but the OS makes up for it allowing me to shoot successfully at slower shutter speeds. Optically the lens seems fine to me. It DOES autofocus with the D40. Combined with a Sigma 30mm HSM prime lens, I have everything I need for most situations. This lens is significantly larger and heavier than the Nikon kit lenses. You will know that you have this 1-lb lens hanging around your neck! I am very satisfied with this lens. Recommended to replace both the 18-55 and 55-200 Nikon kit lenses.