Review on 📸 High-quality Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: A Comprehensive Photography Solution by Daryl Fitch

I buy a lot of products based on reviews from other users. This is also the case with this lens. I bought my Nikon D40 about 3 months ago (after 10 years of point and shoot use including my beloved Canon S2is Superzoom) with the 18-55mm kit lens, I also have a Nikon 55-200 Bought a mm VR lens. I love VR lenses, but traveling around Europe for 2 1/2 weeks has shown me that I hate changing lenses. This is inconvenient and can potentially contaminate the inside of the camera body. So I started looking for something I could use as a versatile lens. I like the wide angle perspective of the 18mm end, while the telephoto lens needs at least 200mm. I liked the idea of the Tamron 18-250mm, but it lacks the very important image stabilization for a telephoto lens. So back to Sigma. I read a review of an unstabilized Sigma 18-200mm from Camera Labs and it was positive. So I figured the new stabilized version would be at least as good and possibly better. I haven't used this lens much in the past few weeks, but I've found that (with a few exceptions) it focuses at least as fast as a Nikkor 18-55mm kit lens, if not faster. The operating system works great and takes handheld shots at 200mm. The only thing I didn't spend much time on was the interior photography. I've been shooting indoors with the built in flash and they seem to be working fine. I haven't had much luck getting clear telephoto shots indoors, but I have to admit I didn't try very hard. I'll update this later when I have more experience. From what I know now, I don't regret buying this lens at all. I had a really hard time deciding between this and the [MUCH more expensive] Nikkor 18-200mm, but this lens seems worth the money. Focus/OS noise doesn't bother me at all (it's actually nice to hear the camera trying to focus etc.). The only thing I wish the Sigma could do is auto/manual focus the lens without having to flip the switch from auto to manual, which the Nikkor can do. However, as long as it autofocuses reliably, I don't think it's going to make much of a difference. The zoom ring is a little tight at the moment, but I suspect it will loosen up over time (hopefully not to the point where you need to engage the lock). I also like the large manual focus ring; Nikkor is much smaller. Don't be fooled by the 72mm diameter (which I originally was). It doesn't matter much. Yes, it's a bit heavier and larger than the standard lens (or even my Nikkor 55-200mm), but not by much. Actually, the camera feels better in the hand because I find the handle of the D40/40x/60 too small. I was concerned that the built-in flash would be blocked by the lens, but that doesn't seem to have any effect. I see no shadow. I will keep you informed of the progress of my current review. Happy shooting! Update: September 19, 2008 - I still love this lens. The ONLY thing that bothers me (as someone mentioned in another review) is that the zoom and focus rings are too close together. If I pass this on to my wife or son, I have to remind them which one is the zoom ring and not touch the focus (btw it makes a grinding noise if you move the focus ring without moving it in the manual - Not good, because the lens doesn't seem to hurt). The built-in flash will be slightly shadowed at any magnification above 18mm. However, I rarely use the built-in flash. I have a Nikon SB-400 flash which is absolutely necessary to line it up there (read Ken Rockwell's review at [.] I didn't put an 18-55mm kit lens on this camera as I have an 18 -200 had). I have a very old model Nikon G 50mm f1.8 that I can use (without metering or autofocus) for indoor, low-light photography without a flash, where the Sigma isn't at its best (although it's very good nonetheless ).