Sigma 28-200 3.8-5.6 UC Aspherical A-mount lens reviews

reviews found: 5   
reviewer#26526 date: Mar-17-2016
sharpness: 3.5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 3
flare control: 4
overall: 3.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I have experience with this lens
compared to:I don't have anything else to make a direct comparison with. Might compare well to other "superzooms".
price paid:
missing
positive:Versatile. Well made solid build, but not heavy. Compact. Bokeh.
negative:Soft. Lots of distortion.CA. minimum focus distance.
comment:I have always been a prime lens snob who subscribes to the idea that a zoom simply could not compete with them at the same focal length and aperture. That's not to say I don't appreciate a good zoom.

When my brother in law decided he was giving up photography and passed this lens on to us (gratis), I was certain that If i tried it out on full frame digital it would prove to be the worst lens I had ever tested. I was not disappointed. It is the worst SLR lens I've ever used.

Optically it behaves like a toy lens. It vignettes, the distortions are complex, obvious (most noticeably at 85mm with significant pin cushion), probably difficult to correct in pp (to be fair I have not tried to do this), chromatic aberrations a-go-go. It is soft throughout the zoom range at apertures down to f11 (didn't bother to try anything smaller). The minimum focus distance is an intergalactic starship defeating 1.5 meters - at all focal lengths.

And yet, having said all that, it's really not that bad. Designed in the film era for 35mm film SLRs, I doubt the designers imagined that anyone using it would be making enlargements any greater than 5"x7" (12x17cm). In fact, viewed full screen on my apple cinema display the images look OK. The colour balance is nice and contrast is reasonable. It's only when the image is magnified to 100% that the softness fully reveals itself . In fact, I'm irritated by how good the lens is, given all the compromises that have been made. It has no right to be as good as it is! It does better in high contrast situations. Used on a tripod with a flash you could almost say it's sharp. Nearly.

The images do have a sort of vintage look about them. Lens flare and veiling is well controlled when the sun is in or just outside the frame. Lens flares have a typical sigma orange tang. Maybe this lens would suit people who are into making vintage looking toy lens images. Perhaps with film?

Metasynthese in their review says "I like the bokeh". An apparently throw away remark that intrigued me. Let me tell you about the bokeh. It is big, round, squidgy and really rather attractive. In fact it is the best thing the 28-200 has to offer, and possibly a deal breaker for the bargain hunter.

Summing up. I would not go out and buy one of these unless it was very, very cheap. Even then I'd think twice now I know how it performs. But I've never been one to look a gift horse in the mouth. I don't know if we'll keep this lens or pass it on. It's really down to my partner to decide.
reviewer#11885 date: Jun-28-2014
sharpness: 4
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 3
overall: 3.8
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Sony 18-250
price paid:R50 ($5)
positive:Price, lightness, compactness, useful range
negative:Noisy AF
Hunts in low-light closeup
comment:I bid on a whim, and mine was the only bid so the bad news is that I was stuck with it. The good news is that I paid R50 (about $5). The shipping cost three times as much, so I definitely can't complain about price, even though it arrived without a hood and front cap.
I wasn't expecting much, especially after the earlier reviews, but I think that, while I'm no Sigma fan, and it's no masterpiece, it's had a bad rap in those assessments, especially the one below. Where there's a possibility of a used copy that was defective to start with, rating everything a "1", including aspects one hasn't tested, isn't helpful if those ratings are allowed to affect the overall rating; it simply distorts the Rating Summary. Rather not review, in those circumstances. I nearly passed on quite a decent lens at bargain price because of it.
As for my impressions: for the range it is very compact. The build is actually quite good-(metal mount, solid feel, lots of rubber), and I don't get the comment about the focusing ring; it's wider than most (inc. my 18-250 and any of my Minoltas) and rubber-gripped- are we talking about the same lens?
I tested it on my A65 in cloudy low-light conditions, and the AF worked fine although it sounds like a car crash. It was quick and precise except in low light close-up, where it hunts a lot, and noisily. But when I fitted the Sony for comparison, to my surprise it hunted almost as much for the same shot. Outside, the Sigma was not pin-sharp, and falls off a little more at full zoom, but it picked up some visiting Vervet monkeys reasonably clearly in dark foliage with decent sharpness considering the conditions, and the colour is also reasonably good. I couldn't check flare properly in the circumstances, but with 72mm glass right at the front, with no shading at all from the barrel, I suspect that flare might be a problem without a hood. But the range is useful, the size and weight are handy, and I think it's a decent lens as a first step up from kit lenses. The Sony has a better range at both ends, is definitely sharper, is more or less the same size and weight, and is my absolute choice for my on-camera lens at the moment, so there's no reason for me to keep the Sigma. At the price I'm happy to make a gift of it, but I won't feel embarrassed when I pass this on to the beginner who has just bought my A33. I think he'll get good use and some decent images out of it.
reviewer#10742 date: Nov-30-2012
sharpness: 1
color: 1
build: 1
distortion: 1
flare control: 1
overall: 1
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:I couldn't compare it to anything
price paid:$75
positive:Couldn't tell you
negative:AF dead on A300
Only worked in Manual Mode
comment:Would spin up but then the AF would not engage at any distance.
Switch to MF and it worked, but the focus ring is very clumsy and not easy to get right.

Very disappointed, but it brought me to this group as part of my problem search, so that was a good thing.
reviewer#10130 date: Apr-20-2012
sharpness: 3
color: 2
build: 4
distortion: 3
flare control: 3
overall: 3
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Beercan, tokina 70-210, minolta 35-70, sigma hf 28-80
price paid:60 US Ebay
positive:cheap
Nice build with lots of rubber to protect lens.
focus ring
negative:AF is almost useless
unusable wide open
heavy
comment:I was very disappointed with this lens, did not meet any of my expectations. AF was very slow and half of the time didn't focus or "hunted". using it on manual focus was the only way it was usable. pictures were very low contrast. Maybe it was just my copy but would not recommend anyone to buy this lens.
reviewer#8978 date: Apr-30-2011
sharpness: 3.5
color: 3
build: 3
distortion: 3
flare control: 3
overall: 3.1
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:Several 18-55, 35-105,...
price paid:50 € (used)
positive:-Price
-Range
-Compact
-Image quality does not loose much at 200mm
-I like the bokeh
negative:-Everything else
comment:It's okay for the price, nothing more.
reviews found: 5   

rating summary

lens image
  • total reviews: 5
  • sharpness: 3.00
  • color: 2.80
  • build: 3.20
  • distortion: 2.80
  • flare control: 2.80
  • overall: 2.92

to add your review
you need to login

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Find us on Google+