Hi guys...

Didn't really mean to start a replicate thread regarding the 17-70 and 18-200 Sigma lens.
But as I was browsing the previous threads, there were lots of info to digest and I can't
help but compare these two (cheap) walkabout Sigmas.

Aside from the f/2.8 and OS difference (plus 70-200 range gap), can anybody validate
further which lens is better in the long term? Which one is better for low-light conditions?
I'm considering an alternate walkabout lens and Sigma is quite a logical choice. Appreciate
more feedback from the Pro's here in DPP. :)

I would pick the 18-200 for flexibility. But the 17-70 does have 1:2 Macro, so if you don't need the range it would be a better choice.

For low-light, both are practically the same. The 17-70 has larger aperture but the 18-200 has the OS.

hi arvin. ive owned the 18-200 and presently owns the 17-70.

on the 17-70 range. the 17-70 clearly wins here. specially on low light situations. ofcourse this is between the 2 lens.

the advantage of the 18-200 is the reach. so thats 80-200 range advantage.

if you see yourself using that range then go with 18-200. its very good also. except for low light where it hunts to focus. i sold mine because of this reason. i usually use the cam on indoor parties or gatherings.

Thanks for sharing your viewpoints guys! Really appreciate it.... (" ,)