Delivering a focal range equivalent to 27-300mm, the Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3
DC is a highly versatile lens. Its massive 11.1x zoom range allows you to capture
both wide landscape shots and decent close-ups of distant subjects such as wildlife
without worrying about carrying additional lenses.
Unsurprisingly a lens with this kind of focal range is rarely going to perform
as well as one with a shorter range, but we were impressed overall by the results
possible. Certainly unless you're into extreme wide or telephoto work, or demand
the ultimate quality, you could really be very happy with one of these lenses.
Indeed many photographers could fit one and never take it off again - and that's
not only highly convenient but also greatly reduces the potential for dust to
enter the camera body.
So an 18-200mm could be the ideal lens for you, but since the Sigma and Tamron
models essentially cost the same, which one should you go for? Or is it really
worth spending double on the Nikkor version?
Looking at the Sigma and Tamron results first, both lenses scored similarly
in many respects: their macro, fringing, geometric distortion and vignetting
results were essentially the same with only slight variations. Where they differed
were in our outdoor and corner sharpness results.
As can be seen on our corner sharpness results page,
the Sigma clearly doesn't perform as well as the Tamron in the extreme corners
at both their 18 and 200mm focal lengths. Switch to the outdoor test taken at
a focal length of 35mm though, and the Sigma clearly takes the lead over its
rival. Comparing their
physical characteristics, the Sigma's a little smaller and lighter than the
Tamron, while its focusing was slightly quieter. They're subtle differences
Ultimately there's not a great deal between the Sigma and Tamron 18-200mm lenses.
A couple of our results favoured one over the other, but neither took a decisive
lead overall. Since the prices are essentially the same, we therefore have to
call it a draw between the Sigma and Tamron models, and leave the ultimate decision
between which personally looks and feels better in your hand.
Which brings us to the Nikkor. It may offer the same focal range, but sports
three key differences. Most importantly, there's the inclusion of Vibration
Reduction which as we illustrated in our Nikkor 18-200mm review,
effectively combats camera shake. Secondly there's the slightly optically faster
focal ratio of f5.6 at the telephoto end. Third, the Nikkor model boasts noticeably
superior build quality which extends to the smoothness of the mechanics and
silence of its focusing. In terms of our results, it also took the lead in corner
sharpness and vignetting at wide angle, although the macro reproduction was
The Nikkor 18-200mm is clearly a superior lens in many respects, but only you
can decide if its benefits justify paying twice the price of the Sigma or Tamron.
While we at Cameralabs believe its worth spending the extra on the Nikkor if
you can afford it, anyone on a tighter budget can't fail but be impressed by
the sheer value of the Sigma and Tamron lenses. They both offer a very impressive
deal for the money and come recommended.
Highly versatile 11.1x zoom range
Relatively small and light - great travel lens
Polariser-friendly internal focusing
Tamron version very similar
Pricier Nikkor version has anti-shake
Pricier Nikkor version is optically faster
Pricier Nikkor version has better build quality
(relative to other zooms)
17 / 25
19 / 25
20 / 25
22 / 25