[kevinfox203]

The new Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM contemporary has garnered some decent reviews.
Sigma C 18-200 mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM review - Introduction - Lenstip.com
Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro Contemporary Lens Review
I'm considering buying it instead of my original choice, the Pentax 18-135mm. the Sigma has a lot longer reach, potentially sharper, nearly exact same weight, size and price(Canada), but no WR, which I can do without in exchange for better IQ.
Primary use: :dogs outdoors
Any thoughts, for or against, going with the Sigma? thanks

---

Last edited by kevinfox203; 12-06-2014 at 02:10 PM.

[outcast86]

Looks great for walk around lens, if u don't have one... I personally would like something faster on the 200 end if it's in the budget. What other lenses you have? For my self, one WR is a must in the kit wheather is the 18-55 or the 18-135. I don't have the 18-135 for pentax, but had it in canon mount and was my walk around lens paired with the 55-300, if I needed the extra reach and slightly faster at the 200/300 end

[kevinfox203]

Looks great for walk around lens, if u don't have one... I personally would like something faster on the 200 end if it's in the budget. What other lenses you have?

I was away from Pentax for a couple years but I'm just back in with new K5 11s and 40mm Ltd. A walk around zoom is next on my shopping list

I wonder if the Sigma's AF is as quick and accurate as the Pentax is reported to be.. No Pentax user reviews to be found

[outcast86]

Congratulations on the buy! 40mm Ltd., a great lens, but still, what else your budget can get you? I personally would love to have the Da*16-50 and Tam. 70-200 2.8, but so far it's way out of budget for the time being, that said I will take 2 fast zoom over the one slower walk around, also what is your most used focal range? What other brand camera/lenses are you coming back from? Ultimately it's entirely your decision what will serve you best

[kevinfox203]

The range I'd use the most is 50-150mm
Size and weight keep the Tamron 70-200 2.8 off my radar- I want something under 600g, relatively compact, quick AF and best possible IQ. I rather stay away from SDM lenses so that puts the 18-270 out of the picture too.
Anyone have other suggestions?

[Conqueror]

The range I'd use the most is 50-150mm

DA 55-300mm WR + 100mm DFA WR macro ... should give you pretty good cover and WR

[alaricxyz]

I have the pentax 18-135 and 55-300. I don't think there's a huge difference in field of view between 135mm and 200mm. I suggest the Pentax lens over the Sigma just because of the WR, which allows for more shooting opportunities especially around dogs.

[kevinfox203]

DA 55-300mm WR + 100mm DFA WR macro ... should give you pretty good cover and WR

Thanks for the suggestion. Both have good IQ and would fit my size requirements but AF isn't great on either, from what I've read.

[Conqueror]

I've found the 55-300mm DA (non-WR) metal mount AF reasonable... thought noisy... but that doesn't bother me

Haven't used AF much on the 100mm DFA WR

[formercanuck]

Interesting... a new Sigma 18-200mm OS.
I have the 'old' beater lens... Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC (not even APO!)

I have used it a LOT as my walk around / vacation lens. Its pretty beaten up (slight haze due to excessive moisture in Alaska rain + humidity condensation) and took a drop on my old K-x.

I can't speak for the newer lens, but I've used the DA 18-135mm WR, and I like it a lot (lens rental to Hawaii).
Personally, if I go back through 'all' of the pictures that I take, I don't use the 200mm (probably 100-200mm range) very much. I didn't even miss it on the 18-135mm when I used it. Mostly because in the middle of the 18-135mm WR, it was much sharper than my beaten Sigma, and the crop would do.

I did find in both cases (Sigma 18-200 DC and Pentax DA 18-135) the border/corners were mushy, and it wasn't always the best for landscape, but I do have some decent shots with it.
I do find myself leaning towards something sharper/faster more often. Eg. LA Autoshow - I took my manual Sigma 28mm f/2.8, and it did much better than the years in the past with the 18-200mm... just wish it was wider. Funny thing... the 28mm lens was $30.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/formercanuck/14744046850/

http://www.dslreports.com/pics/dimaging/1792675?folder=0