Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Canon fit lens £151.38 @ Amazon - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
304Expired

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Canon fit lens £151.38 @ Amazon

£151.38 @ Amazon
I found this deal today and I think its HOT! The price was £329.99 now its £151.38 thats 54% off with free delivery in UK. Manufacturer's Description Excellent Optical Performance A Special L… Read More
Virgojavier Avatar
7y, 1d agoFound 7 years, 1 day ago
I found this deal today and I think its HOT!
The price was £329.99 now its £151.38 thats 54% off with free delivery in UK.


Manufacturer's Description
Excellent Optical Performance
A Special Low Dispersion (SLD) lens and three aspherical glass elements provide excellent correction for all types of aberrations and produce a high level of optical performance throughout the entire zoom range. The super multi-layer lens coating reduces flare and ghosting. It also produces an optimum, neutral colour balance.

Close-up photography
This lens has a minimum focusing distance of 45cm (17.7) throughout the entire zoom range and a maximum magnification of 1:5.3, making it very convenient for taking close-up pictures.

Inner focusing system
An inner focusing system provides high performance and convenience. The non-rotating lens barrel perfectly suits the matched petal-type lens hood (supplied) and circular polarising filters.

Zoom lock switch mechanism
A zoom lock switch mechanism is provided to prevent the lens from creeping due to its own weight.
Box Contents
# Lens Hood
# Front and Rear Caps
# Instruction Manual
# 1 Year Warranty Card
Deal Tags:
More From Amazon:
×
Get the Hottest Deals Daily
Stay informed. Once a day, we'll send you the deals our members voted as the best.
Failed
Virgojavier Avatar
7y, 1d agoFound 7 years, 1 day ago
Options

All Comments

(51) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
banned#1
#2
Should be a good lens, it has been superseded by the Sigma 18-250mm lens which is a great all rounder. To be honest the difference at the top end is not as noticeable so this is a bargain price!
#3
sounds good, but here's the catch: NO OPTICAL STABILIZATION !
believe me, to do anything hand-held over 100mm requires nerves of steel...or a tripod

I'm not picking on it...I wish I can find an all rounder that performs as good as the 18-55 and the 55-200 :(

I'm from the enemy camp btw, aka Nikon camp :)
#4
You can get the optical stabilization version on ebay for between £50 and £100 more. I've owned both of these lenses and believe me there is a world of difference. The quality of the build, the quality of the glass and the quality of the pictures is so much superior in the optical stabilization version. I wouldn't both with this because like wnofal said you will really struggle to get sharp pictures without a tripod on anything over 100mm.

Either stick with the standard lens or save for the OS version.
#5
That's an over simplification in my opinion. The Sigma OS is worth 2 stops max, so for example on this lens you'd need about 1/400s at 200mm to get fairly consistent results, with OS you could get the same results at 1/100s assuming you're subject isn't moving (which OS won't help with).

Anyway next cheapest is £209 so this is a good price.
#6
wnofal
sounds good, but here's the catch: NO OPTICAL STABILIZATION !
believe me, to do anything hand-held over 100mm requires nerves of steel...or a tripod

I'm not picking on it...I wish I can find an all rounder that performs as good as the 18-55 and the 55-200 :(

I'm from the enemy camp btw, aka Nikon camp :)


While OS or IS can be handy at times, it certainly isn't the deciding factor in obtaining a sharp handheld shot at focal lengths of 100mm or longer.

Simply use a shutter speed at least as fast as the focal length of your lens, or field of view equivalent if you're not using a full frame camera. For instance a shutter speed of at least 1/400 for a 400mm lens, 1/250 for a 250mm etc

Nice simple rule anyone with a body to attach this to should know, and even a Nikon user should be able to grasp :whistling:
#7
I find that the flux capacitor on the 18-200mm lens struggles if the trains are going at more than 60mph !! :-D
#8
Bought it to give it a go. Should be useful on hols when I have no time nor willingness to mess about with lenses. Yes, it looks slow, but again there's plenty of light during the summer to handle an 8-10f during the day.

Hope the images are vaguely crisp but not expecting that much.
#9
This was on offer a while ago, so I did some research, and eventually got the canon 55-250 IS....No go, obviously, if you need the short end....but go one from HK off fleabay for about the same money....
#10
wnofal
sounds good, but here's the catch: NO OPTICAL STABILIZATION !
believe me, to do anything hand-held over 100mm requires nerves of steel...or a tripod

I'm not picking on it...I wish I can find an all rounder that performs as good as the 18-55 and the 55-200 :(

I'm from the enemy camp btw, aka Nikon camp :)


100% agree zoom lens without Optical Stabilization is not suitable for hand held photography i have the one with OS and it's great lens by spending £100 more you can get with OS version one
#11
I've had one of these for a few years now & it's a decent enough walkabout lens.

As for the notion of it being unusable hand-held over 100mm... :roll:
#12
akexuk
Bought it to give it a go. Should be useful on hols when I have no time nor willingness to mess about with lenses. Yes, it looks slow, but again there's plenty of light during the summer to handle an 8-10f during the day.

Hope the images are vaguely crisp but not expecting that much.


I have got this lens for years now. The wide range is pretty useful in outdoors but this lens is not that useful in indoor situation!! :w00t: Lack of IS is a killer and you might want to bring along a light short range lens such as cannon efs 18-55 IS(a very cheap lens that I bought 3years ago) which comes much more useful in indoors and images are way sharper and crisp:santa:
#13
cannon efs 18-55 IS HORRID! i used mine twice and then reboxed it and stuck it in the attic lol. went back to my sigma 50-500mm.
anyhows This lens is a good price for whats it is. as for hanheld you should NEVER shoot under 180 suhhter unless you have hands like rocks and just as steady. but then thats what iso is for. even in broad daylight you can shoot at 400 as long as you dont underexpose. i say grab this lens while ya can at a bargain price.
H and R added.
#14
Just amazing how Nikon/Canon managed to have the OS mantra into many otherwise reasonable heads.
#15
MrPercent
This was on offer a while ago, so I did some research, and eventually got the canon 55-250 IS....No go, obviously, if you need the short end....but go one from HK off fleabay for about the same money....


OT: but did you get stung for import duty? The prices on ebay would seem to me to only be competitive if you get away with duty.

-Peter
#16
Goood price, I have this lens in Nikon fit mode and it works fine. It is only for amateurs, if you are looking to get professional shots then you are in the wrong place.

As regards OS, at 200mm without a tripod this is good, not perfect but then again look at the price.

Hot from me.
#17
sportz
OT: but did you get stung for import duty? The prices on ebay would seem to me to only be competitive if you get away with duty.

-Peter


I did the same thing when this was on offer and ended up going for the Canon 55-250 with IS as well. Its £158 delivered from simply electronics (so no import duty and proper warrenty) and got £3 Quidco too.

This is still a good price for this lens though, although I'm very happy with the one I went for :)
#18
kiwikeen
While OS or IS can be handy at times, it certainly isn't the deciding factor in obtaining a sharp handheld shot at focal lengths of 100mm or longer.

Simply use a shutter speed at least as fast as the focal length of your lens, or field of view equivalent if you're not using a full frame camera. For instance a shutter speed of at least 1/400 for a 400mm lens, 1/250 for a 250mm etc

Nice simple rule anyone with a body to attach this to should know, and even a Nikon user should be able to grasp :whistling:


Sounds great on paper and in sunny stagnant conditions, but once you're out doing landscape (somewhere like...ummm let me think...what do they call a place that's windy and rarely sunny? ummm..aaah, remembered..the UK) then you're going to need every thing your kit can offer...

I quote here a great old saying: "Every little helps!", Tesco, 2001

So even 2 or 3 stops down would mean that you can go from 1" to 1/4" (i.e. tripod needed to hand-held possible)

Believe me, there's nothing I wish for than a cheap and cheerful all rounder that gives decent output because many enthusiasts cannot afford experimenting with lenses. Usually one would set on a couple of lenses and starts saving to buy them.

Nikon, Canon, or even Pentax...we're all on the same side
#19


I think we get the idea now, you are posting this on every single amazon deal!
#20
akexuk
Just amazing how Nikon/Canon managed to have the OS mantra into many otherwise reasonable heads.


Not really. At 200mm OS/IS/VR is really nice to have.



Hot deal anyway, like someone said cheapest elsewhere is about £210.
.
#21
Dantooine;8693617
I think we get the idea now, you are posting this on every single amazon deal!


Not everyone looks at every deal. This is the first time I've seen this posted and I'm grateful for the heads-up.
#22
os or no os, if you r a crap photographer, you still take crappy photos. :-)

I paid just under £150 3 yrs ago fr japan. suffice to say, it;s a good general lens for all occasion. No, mine does not perform magic tricks :-)
#23
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4062/huk21.jpg

I guess the confused look is because I shot this handheld at 1/250 at 320mm without IS, what was I thinking :?

http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/8315/huk2crop12.jpg

Terribly blurred because of the lack of IS , looks like this lens is destined for the bin ;-)
#24
again you prove my point :) 320mm @ 1/250 that is quite fast ...sky is clear (almost) and light condition seems quite fine...and from the dof I'd say you're using the widest available aperture, say 6.3??

Or, you're a man with nerves of steel :)
Actually can you see the disappointment in the giraffe's eyes? they look sad...may be because you weren't using OS ?

btw, very good shot ..I guess Canon isn't that bad after all :)
#25
Precisely, kiwikeen. I guess that's another example where a picture is worth a hundred words...
#26
Thanks for those pictures. Going to Yellowstone in June so looking to get a new lens, since I only have the standard 18-55 and I really don't find it sufficient, as it is. Just debating whether I would rather add some extra £ for IS. Ah, decisions!
#27
mohikan22
cannon efs 18-55 IS HORRID! i used mine twice and then reboxed it and stuck it in the attic lol. went back to my sigma 50-500mm.
anyhows This lens is a good price for whats it is. as for hanheld you should NEVER shoot under 180 suhhter unless you have hands like rocks and just as steady. but then thats what iso is for. even in broad daylight you can shoot at 400 as long as you dont underexpose. i say grab this lens while ya can at a bargain price.
H and R added.


Did you just compare a £70 lens to one that is over £1000? :?

The Canon 18-55 is a poor lens though. However the IS version is quite good and is a vast improvement over the 18-55 non IS.

An alternative to this Sigma would be the Canon 55-250mm IS it can be had for around £160 and is fantastic for the price. It isn't an all rounder lens and I do find myself swapping it on and off often though when I am out and about as the starting 55mm focal length isn't very useful for landscapes/buildings.

Having IS does help and I pity the fool who says otherwise but it isn't the be all and end all. On bright days it hardy matters at all and on dull days make use of the higher ISO settings.
#28
wnofal;8692092
sounds good, but here's the catch: NO OPTICAL STABILIZATION !
believe me, to do anything hand-held over 100mm requires nerves of steel...or a tripod

I'm not picking on it...I wish I can find an all rounder that performs as good as the 18-55 and the 55-200 :(

I'm from the enemy camp btw, aka Nikon camp :)


why do you need IS? you only needs IS if you have the shakes or are permanently drunk
#29
kiwikeen;8693923
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4062/huk21.jpg

I guess the confused look is because I shot this handheld at 1/250 at 320mm without IS, what was I thinking :?

http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/8315/huk2crop12.jpg

Terribly blurred because of the lack of IS , looks like this lens is destined for the bin ;-)

lol, totally agree, rubbish photographers or drunks (or those with medical probs) need IS - you dont need it if you know what you are doing...my main lens is the canon 24-70L which is awesome - got it for a bargain £700 (rrp £1299).....looking at getting a slightly smaler lens too - either the 17-40 or 17-55
#30
wnofal
sounds good, but here's the catch: NO OPTICAL STABILIZATION !
believe me, to do anything hand-held over 100mm requires nerves of steel...or a tripod


What a load of nonsense! It depends what shutter speed you're able to use. I've taken plenty of photos at 1000mm without a tripod and they came out fine.
#31
akexuk;8693410
Just amazing how Nikon/Canon managed to have the OS mantra into many otherwise reasonable heads.

but alot of the time its not needed and there are some that believe IS can ruin a picture (or improve it)...not done any tests myself so cant comment
#33
wnofal
sounds good, but here's the catch: NO OPTICAL STABILIZATION !
believe me, to do anything hand-held over 100mm requires nerves of steel...or a tripod

I'm not picking on it...I wish I can find an all rounder that performs as good as the 18-55 and the 55-200 :(

I'm from the enemy camp btw, aka Nikon camp :)


why not get the 24-70 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L IS, lol
#34
Moka-Bear;8695103

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-is-lens-review.aspx

Review here, though bear in mind this site will always say buy the L series lens if you can afford it. Like Duh, we all would if we could! :whistling:
#35
royals
lol, totally agree, rubbish photographers or drunks (or those with medical probs) need IS - you dont need it if you know what you are doing...my main lens is the canon 24-70L which is awesome - got it for a bargain £700 (rrp £1299).....looking at getting a slightly smaler lens too - either the 17-40 or 17-55



Geee some people talk a load of crap - your 24-70L £700 lens is a F2.8 - you wont need image stabilisation when the lens is that fast, and the glass is made to a much higher specification.
It is arguably the best lens in the Canon range - and the wedding photographers preffered lens.

This cheapo Sigma lens has a pathetic F6.3 at 200mm which is pretty rubbish, you need plenty of light to get a good shot with those settings without a tripod.
*edit: F6.3 instead of F6.2
#36
Bigfootpete
Geee some people talk a load of crap - your 24-70L £700 lens is a F2.8 - you wont need image stabilisation when the lens is that fast


I for one would disagree. Even at f/1.2, there are circumstances where stabilisation would have been useful. People who actually go out and take photos (instead of merely talking about taking photos) might notice that daylight does not last 24 hours...
#37
paul_merton
What a load of nonsense! It depends what shutter speed you're able to use. I've taken plenty of photos at 1000mm without a tripod and they came out fine.


Did you read my other posts? or just got this one and decided to devour ? :?

My whole point is that if you need an all-rounder, then you'll probably be on the move, hence the need for minimal equipment, and that necessitates additional aid from IS, otherwise why would you just sacrifice quality for a wide-range?

And FYI, go and read some reviews and tests about it, you'll see the inconsistent performance over mid range. works ok on 18mm, best on 50mm, large drop at 80mm, then up again towards the near end.
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma_18-200_3p5-6p3_os_n15/

IS doesn't do miracles, it just gives you 2~4 stops which can be quite handy if you're not shooting in daylight in sky-clear sunny africa. Kiwi's sample is very good as I mentioned, but look at the ambient conditions! Do you really prefer to leave it to weather/light to control your output?

Actually now that people mentioned why the hype about IS/VR/OS/VC , may be we should be asking, why need a zoom lens at all? I'm sure you can do well with a 50mm prime...controlling the size can be achieved by means of approaching your target or moving away from it....doable, innit?

All of a sudden, PROs decided to take their wrath out on someone and seems I'm the chosen one :roll:
#38
wnofal
again you prove my point :) 320mm @ 1/250 that is quite fast ...sky is clear (almost) and light condition seems quite fine...and from the dof I'd say you're using the widest available aperture, say 6.3??

Or, you're a man with nerves of steel :)
Actually can you see the disappointment in the giraffe's eyes? they look sad...may be because you weren't using OS ?

btw, very good shot ..I guess Canon isn't that bad after all :)


Just trying to dispell the myths often used by salesmen to sell people an IS lens. Providing you have the light, there is no problem shooting handheld with lenses with large focal lengths.

You're much better spending a couple of hours working out what sort of speeds you can handhold at, rather that paying a premium for a feature you may not need. The focal length/shutter speed is a good rough guide, but does vary from person to person, it pays to have a bit of a play and see what works for you.

IS is a great feature, I just ditched my old 70-200mm and shelled out for the latest 70-200mm II because for me the 2+ stop advantage it gives, is well worth the premium. Just make sure you know what you are paying a premium for, as it will only improve things when used with a bit of knowledge.

You're not too far off with the aperture, I stopped down a couple to 7.1, both of Canons super zooms suffer quite badly wide open at the long end, but stopped down a couple produce great results considering the huge range they cover.
#39
wnofal
Did you read my other posts? or just got this one and decided to devour ? :?


Sorry, what you said back there was just wrong :) I was just pointing out that stabilisation is not always necessary, although if you have it, you obviously have more flexibility. Once you've bumped the ISO and aperture up as far as they can go, every little does indeed help.
#40
kiwikeen
Just trying to dispell the myths often used by salesmen to sell people an IS lens. Providing you have the light, there is no problem shooting handheld with lenses with large focal lengths.

You're much better spending a couple of hours working out what sort of speeds you can handhold at, rather that paying a premium for a feature you may not need. The focal length/shutter speed is a good rough guide, but does vary from person to person, it pays to have a bit of a play and see what works for you.

IS is a great feature, I just ditched my old 70-200mm and shelled out for the latest 70-200mm II because for me the 2+ stop advantage it gives, is well worth the premium. Just make sure you know what you are paying a premium for, as it will only improve things when used with a bit of knowledge.

You're not too far off with the aperture, I stopped down a couple to 7.1, both of Canons super zooms suffer quite badly wide open at the long end, but stopped down a couple produce great results considering the huge range they cover.


7.1 and you get that dof? 8 to 11 should get a very deep dof (i.e. everything's in focus)
when you say 320, is that the 200m with the 1.6 crop factor?

I've been on the hunt for a telephoto (as my kit 18-55 VR II (Nikkor) is really serving me nicely except for the rotating front element which bothers me with the cir-pol, but that's easily compensated by re-adjusting after I focus..so after all I'm not that /\ N /\ |_ :P )and was about to get the APO DG 70-300 but for all the reviews and tests still put me off it...now going for Nikon's own 55-200 vr

Had it been this way, why are we so keen on AF then? I'm sure anyone can adjust the focus manually..... it's just that we should be making use of every possible addition they can offer....

Mind you that DSLR photography is attracting a lot of enthusiasts (like myself) who at start should not be put off by poor output due to their lack of skill/control/knowledge of how stuff works....

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!