p.5 #4 · Sigma 20-200mm f3.5-6.3 C - Sample Images
grahamgibson wrote:
Tough decision, I agree. I keep thinking of different lens options I'd take with each. Honestly, even on my last trip where I had my Tamron 17-28, I used that lens at 17mm quite a bit (even stitching a few times), which makes me wonder how often I'd be satisfied with just 20mm. If opting to bring a wider lens anyways, it somewhat negates the advantage of the Sigma, though avoiding lens changes is always a benefit.
I'm right there, too. Have the 28-200 and 17-28. "Generally," as in not "urban," almost never to the 17-28. Heavily urban trips, used it a lot, even stitching some. So I'd also anticipate 20mm may not be wide enough although infrequently and overall a small percent of shots. I added a 20-70/4 and 14/4 before the 20-200 came out.
The 20-200 could be closer to a one lens answer for some. Expanding to more than one lens and/or body at a carry remains an interesting set of choices. For me, more likely to swap to a 50-300 from my 70-350 than try to adjust around and fit in the 20-200. My mix will probably vary with the trip.
p.5 #5 · Sigma 20-200mm f3.5-6.3 C - Sample Images
My main travel kit - when I am not expecting wildlife - has been the 20-70G and 50-300; I am looking at this as a one lens walk around pollution so I do not change between the two. Also looking at the 25-200. I had the 28-200 and loved it, picked up an early copy of the 25-200 and got a dud. Probably should have tried another copy, but returned it instead.
p.5 #6 · Sigma 20-200mm f3.5-6.3 C - Sample Images
This is an excellent review of the Sigma 20-200 - with great photos - and easy to translate using google translate (if, like me, you cannot speak Polish). Cannot quite figure out if he's biased towards Sigma as a brand (as an ambassador); as a lot of his reviews are of Sigma lenses. I personally feel like the Petapixel guys are biased given how they have gravitated towards all things Sigma; not that I haven't been impressed with the creation of a 20-200 and the performance of the 200/2, 135/1.4, 35/1.2 II and even the 500/5.6
p.5 #8 · Sigma 20-200mm f3.5-6.3 C - Sample Images
I don't feel like DA is biased - and quite like his reviews - although I sometimes find he is a little more favorable towards 3rd party lens AF than what I find. I want to buy these lenses, but I feel neither will be perfect for me - I found my copy of the 25-200 super disappointing - and will probably make do with the two lens solution a bit longer.
p.5 #9 · Sigma 20-200mm f3.5-6.3 C - Sample Images
Sorry to keep the non picture comments running but what was wrong with your Tamron 25-200?
TravelinBriNY wrote:
My main travel kit - when I am not expecting wildlife - has been the 20-70G and 50-300; I am looking at this as a one lens walk around pollution so I do not change between the two. Also looking at the 25-200. I had the 28-200 and loved it, picked up an early copy of the 25-200 and got a dud. Probably should have tried another copy, but returned it instead.
p.5 #10 · Sigma 20-200mm f3.5-6.3 C - Sample Images
My Tamron lacked in fine detail - or perhaps could not achieve focus. I simply could not get sharp, in focus photos with it even at high shutter speeds.
So I picked up the Sigma 20-200 today. I had sold one lens and had store credit that mostly covered it, and if I can make it work for me, it is such a great focal length.
Initial impressions are not fantastic - it does not appear to be sharp enough for me; but I will give it a few more days to see.
Initial photos from today (editing and sharpening applied):
p.5 #19 · Sigma 20-200mm f3.5-6.3 C - Sample Images
i had and loved the 28-200 and sold it simply in anticipation of the 25-200 release. i was pretty sure i would get that lens as a foregone conclusion. as reviews came out about the 20-200 and 25-200 it seemed more people were stoked on the image quality of the 25-200 and people who chose the 20-200 simply stated the range as the reason why.
i went into my local samy's camera on a rainy day and spent an hour shooting both of these lenses out the door into the parking lot. i pixel peeped the best i could on the back LCD of my a7rv. i honestly thought i would leave with the tamron, but i left with the sigma. it seemed a hair better than the tamron at the edges based on these very informal "tests" in the store. this did not match my expectations based on the reviews i had seen. honestly it was a super impulse decision and maybe i wasn't testing them properly or the individual copies just played out this way, but i questioned if i was making a mistake while leaving.
a few days later i took the lens out for the day and just shot with it and i only half reviewed the images on my 5k mac display, but it is good! i love sigma's warm colors (i like sony GM colors too... different, but both good). contrast was good. flare resistance was very good (sigma seems to be the best at this after testing the sigma 28-105 vs the 24-70 gm ii recently). sunstars were decent. and images generally look pretty good into the edges of the frame. and 20mm is really just fun! i have always had an UWA zoom in the mix, but i was surprised how much i was using 20mm as someone who doesn't really feel limited by zooms that start at 28mm. i rarely NEED more than 28mm, but if you can drop down to 20 without a second of delay, you can get quite creative with it.
my complaints are: whyyyyyyy reverse zoom ring?! zoom action is also very, very stiff (it will never creep though). and af-c on people subjects is definitely, definitely not on sony level (and in my experience not on tamron level either). as a primarily light landscape/travel lens, action shots of people are not a top priority, but worth mentioning. overall it's a keeper though
p.5 #20 · Sigma 20-200mm f3.5-6.3 C - Sample Images
Your sharpness experience is in line with what Sony Alpha Blog said recently when comparing the Sigma with the Tamrons. There obviously is copy variation, so Dustin Abbott comes to other conclusions.
And my experience is: If your first purchased copy is weak, try another. I needed 3 tries to get a good Tamron 28-200.
