Hello,
Has anybody owned this lens? Any feedback on its IQ, focus speed and distortion?

thanks

and for that matter, any reason why one should get this over the broader 18-200? perhaps better build, iq, sharpness, price, etc....

i have a friend who uses this on his canon 30D... pretty good tones and colors, though he complains about low-light focusing.

I own one and for its price I say its a good bargain, I have no complains in terms of its IQ, distortion and focusing speed. For its price, its IQ is excellent, specially when stopped down, the lens deliver sharp and contrasty photos. Its only catch is its AF performance, it has a tendency to miss focus and at times the lens just fails to acquire focus lock specially at low light situations. Anyway, below are some photos I took using the lens, so that you'll have an idea of its IQ. :D

18mm
----

http://static.flickr.com/49/191771921_1d9f2de515.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/40/155375469_0df9a38b74.jpg

34mm
----
http://static.flickr.com/69/206434322_3603e13104.jpg

87mm
----
http://static.flickr.com/56/148533134_7abba4893d.jpg


125mm
-----
http://static.flickr.com/45/148532182_d8bb89e794.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/60/194763063_06be6d900f.jpg

Unfortunately I can't photograph the lens' AF performance, you'll have to try out the lens to experience it. Its frustrating sometimes, it came to the point that I was already planning on selling the lens. But since Canon does not have a lens of similar range (18-125mm) I was forced to use keep it. So I can't say I'm totally happy with the lens, thats why I can't recommend that you get one. If you're a Nikon user, save your money and get an 18-200 VR or if you're on a limited budget, wait for its 18-135mm AF-S, I'm sure its going to be cheaper than that VR, perhaps half its price. If you're a Canon user, sell your cam and get Nikon. Just kidding... I suggest you join me in prayers, pray that Canon will release an EF-S super zoom, a Canon 18-200 IS USM would be nice. But in the mean time, you'll have to do penance and sweat a little. You'll be doing a lot of blind backward stepping with Canon's 28-135 IS USM since it not wide enough and some forward jogging with the 17-40 f4 L and 17-85mm IS USM. Anyway, hope that helps.

And before I forget below are links to more reviews on the Sigma 18-125, But I suggest you don't waste your time reading them since they all sound the same "Reasonable price, pretty sharp lens, good focal range, light weight, noisy focus, great walk around, difficult to AF at low light, sucks at low-light, AF perfomance is disappointing, AF performance of the lens isn't quite as promising, etc. etc., more AF performance complains". Anyway, if want to confirm here are some links.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_18125_3556/index.htm
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=257&sort=7&cat=37&page=2

For more photos of the Sigma 18-125mm, visit my gallery http://www.flickr.com/photos/ianong

You can also visit Ricky S. Santos gallery (http://www.pbase.com/arbil), he's the guy I asked about the Sigma 18-125mm when I was still thinking if I should get one. He has a lot of photos using his Sigma 18-125mm. You can ask him about the lens as well.

nice one on that ian :D

Thank you for the good insight. I'll probably wait for the nikon 18-135mm.

thank you for the very comprehensive description of what this lens is all about. helps a lot!

don't know if by getting the 18-200, i'll be getting a longer reach but compromised image quality...the 18-135's imaging capabilities, from the pics posted above, impressed me naman...

good one, ian!

i actually remember the first few weeks when he would go crazy with the focusing problems of this lens, but soon after, he must have adjusted to it and started taking amazing pictures. a case for the books - its the indian and not the pana?

cheers!

i have this lens, ok naman for the price (14.5 at JT) but thinking of disposing to get a canon w/ IS...but until i get the funds i use this as a walkaround lens

@ian_ong

Can you post 100% crops ? Those shots are great but cannot be use as a reference for IQ since they are resized.

Thanks

when i try to evaluate IQ i always look for 100% crops at widest setting. I think most lenses stopped down to 8 would be sharp more or less.....

Resurrecting an old thread isn't bad right?

Anyways, I had the chance to test this lens as I was testing the Sigma 30f1.4 EX so I did.

Honestly this lens was surprisingly sharp for its range. Maybe as sharp as the Nikkor 18-55mm in the same focal length except for 55mm (this lens is definitely sharper) .
I really can't complain at my sample shots wide open at different focal lenths since they looked fined. At @125mm , I can't complain either. Output was defintely acceptable.

Focusing wasn't as slow as some had complained - sure it isn't HSM so why expect speed anyways? It did hunt in low-light but it's expected .

This lens is small and light. It's like a soda can in circumference. The zooming is similar to the Sigma 17-70. Its not the EX type of painted coating on its body - its hard plastic like the 55-200mm. The mount is metal.

Did I mention the barrel distortion? quite obvious but in some shots there were'nt. Kinda weird.

Nikon has the new 18-135mm which according to reviews is freakingly sharp but more pricey.

My verdict : I will buy this if I can't get hold of the Nikkor.

Will post some pics.