Comparison of photographs. DA 18-135mm/3.5-5.6 , DA 70mm, Carl Zeiss 28, 50, 100mm

Fl_Gulfer · 11-27-2010, 09:42 AM

This lens may not have the IQ that some people want but there isn't another lens "I've" ever owned that focuses as fast as the 18-135 and the WR is just the thing most people want. I say this is the best walk-around they offer right now.

GeneV · 11-27-2010, 11:32 AM

It really would be interesting to see this lens go head to head with the 18-250. Other reviews have the 18-250 pretty close to the 18-55 in resolution. Adam's tests seem to show the 18-135 is sharper than the 18-55, so I'm curious how that pans out against the 18-250 lenses. That is really the "walkaround" lens with which this lens competes both in price and features. Compared to the 18-250ish lenses, the new lens is smaller and lighter, slightly faster at the long end, weather resistant and offers fast, silent DC focus. If the IQ is as good or slightly better than the 18-250, then it is a worthy walkaround alternative IMHO.

audiobomber · 11-27-2010, 12:49 PM

Originally posted by GeneV

It really would be interesting to see this lens go head to head with the 18-250.

Photozone should weigh in soon, but unfortunately the results won't be comparable to the existing lens tests due the K-5. The comparators to me would be the 18-250 and the DA 17-70.

Fl_Gulfer · 11-27-2010, 01:23 PM

I have both lenses but not sure how to do a proper test. theDA 18-135 & DA 18-250 (& Tamron 18-250 but it's box up for shipping since it maybe sold)
But if you give me a idea how to do a proper test,, I'll do it tomorrow outside.

audiobomber · 11-27-2010, 04:12 PM

Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer

I have both lenses but not sure how to do a proper test. theDA 18-135 & DA 18-250 (& Tamron 18-250 but it's box up for shipping since it maybe sold)
But if you give me a idea how to do a proper test,, I'll do it tomorrow outside.

Here's what I would do; tripod, ISO 100, 2s delay, wide open and f8, 18mm, 70mm, 135mm, 250mm, default jpeg settings, shoot in AF and MF, use the sharpest result. Place a colourful cereal box in the center of the frame (move the tripod out as you zoom in, make sure it's square to the target). Have something to show bokeh in the background. Post full size and 100% crops of the center and a corner or two. It's a lot of work and some people will bitch about the method, no matter what method you use.

I'd sure like to see it, but it's a lot of effort so feel free to do something less weighty.

Here's an example I did to test my normal lenses:
Picasa Web Albums - Dan Bonhomme - Resolution - ...

Mr. A.S. · 11-29-2010, 04:09 AM

Dear Sirs.
I returned this lens. It is not sharp.
I regret the fact that I started talking about it here.
Sorry.

gtl · 11-29-2010, 05:16 AM

Originally posted by Mr. A.S.

Dear Sirs.
I returned this lens. It is not sharp.
I regret the fact that he started talking about it here.
Sorry.

Who is 'he'?

bdery · 11-29-2010, 05:55 AM

Originally posted by Frogfish

If the 18-135 is not a huge improvement on the Sigma (I was hoping it was going to be) then I don't see the point (for me) and I would rather pay the extra and go for a DA* lense.

The purpose of this lens is NOT to replace the DA* or Limiteds, or it would be labeled as such.

This lens is a weather resistant, high-quality lens, perfect for travel, hiking, or any situation where changing lenses is risky.

First look at its size. Almost no bigger than the kit lens.

Better optics than the kit lens, a little below the Sigma 17-70 but in the same league.

As fast as the Sigma at almost all apertures except wide open. Faster or as fast as the Pentax 17-70.

Should I repeat weather sealed?

This lens is a perfect package for when you only want/can carry one lens.

If I didn't have the Sigma 17-70 and the WR kit already, I'd be tempted with that lens. Heck, I'm tempted right now! When I put on my WR kit, I accept harsher contrast, and a slight decrease in sharpness, but I can an absurdly light lens, and I can stop worrying about rain or snow.

One lens for each purpose

Mr. A.S. · 11-29-2010, 06:39 AM

2 bdery
100% thought the marketing department of Pentax.

In my opinion, the main purpose of a good lens is not to interfere with a computer camera that tries to make a good picture.

Fl_Gulfer · 12-02-2010, 02:59 PM

I have no clue why you are complaining to us about the bad lens you received. Sorry for your loss. But the copy I received seems to be well woth the $500 I spent on it. And the photo's I have taken are all as good as any other lens it that range I have owned.
You should have just got another copy. Or switch to another brand of camera.

farfisa · 12-02-2010, 03:26 PM

I'm a little disappointed that this DA zoom used wide open didn't perform as well as the DA 70 limited and various Carl Zeiss primes stopped down...

But hey, can't have it all!

Mr. A.S. · 12-04-2010, 08:00 AM

2 Fl_Gulfer

I have my own criteria of quality lenses. On the list that you've seen (DA 70mm, Carl Zeiss 28, 50, 100mm) yet is the following lenses: DA*200mm/2.8 and Jupiter-9 85mm/2. This is my full kit + K20D.

I was waiting for the lens DA 18-135mm/3.5-5.6 and return it.

"You should have just got another copy. Or switch to another brand of camera."

You right. Now I think about Canon 60D + kit 18-135mm.

ivoire · 12-04-2010, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by Frogfish

Thanks for posting these. Between these, Adam's review and other shots I've seen I think the 18-135 fails to deliver sharp enough shots for my liking and I'm going to skip it.

I'm in agreement. I'd hoped this lens would exceed the 55-300 IQ. It just seems that a $200 price diff for "seals" and similar IQ is a bit much. From samples I've seen the IQ is not up to my expectations. Perhaps forthcoming samples will alter my opinion. Fl_Gulfer or anyone with this lens care to post samples?

**rparmar** · 12-04-2010, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer

You should have just got another copy. Or switch to another brand of camera.

That is the wrong conclusion, since no megazoom lens is going to perform to the standards of a fine prime. Brand has nothing to do with it.

Rather, one should not have unrealistic expectations in the first place. This new Pentax zoom is fine for those who want wide focal length coverage with weather sealing at relatively slow maximum apertures. It is never going to compare with the DA70.

Whether it is priced reasonably for what it delivers is up to the individual to assess.

But certainly the OP has unreasonable expectations.

GeneV · 12-04-2010, 09:35 AM

Originally posted by Mr. A.S.

You right. Now I think about Canon 60D + kit 18-135mm.

IQ on the Canon 18-135 is reported to be mediocre and the price is within 10% of the Pentax, but YMMV..... Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - Review / Lab Test Report - Analysis

11-29-2010, 04:09 AM	#21
Mr. A.S. Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 401 Original Poster	Dear Sirs. I returned this lens. It is not sharp. I regret the fact that I started talking about it here. Sorry. Last edited by Mr. A.S.; 11-29-2010 at 06:22 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Carl Zeiss Jena vs Pentax M @ 135mm f3.5, which one has the better IQ?	HoBykoYan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	02-26-2012 12:16 AM
re Jena zoom 11 macro Carl Zeiss F =35-70mm 1:3.5~4.8	albrechtnamatdurer	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	07-21-2009 10:39 AM
re Jena zoom 11 macro carl zeiss F =35-70mm 1:3.5~4.8	albrechtnamatdurer	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	06-05-2009 05:33 PM

11-27-2010, 09:42 AM	#16
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	This lens may not have the IQ that some people want but there isn't another lens "I've" ever owned that focuses as fast as the 18-135 and the WR is just the thing most people want. I say this is the best walk-around they offer right now.

11-27-2010, 11:32 AM	#17
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	It really would be interesting to see this lens go head to head with the 18-250. Other reviews have the 18-250 pretty close to the 18-55 in resolution. Adam's tests seem to show the 18-135 is sharper than the 18-55, so I'm curious how that pans out against the 18-250 lenses. That is really the "walkaround" lens with which this lens competes both in price and features. Compared to the 18-250ish lenses, the new lens is smaller and lighter, slightly faster at the long end, weather resistant and offers fast, silent DC focus. If the IQ is as good or slightly better than the 18-250, then it is a worthy walkaround alternative IMHO.

11-27-2010, 12:49 PM	#18
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by GeneV It really would be interesting to see this lens go head to head with the 18-250. Photozone should weigh in soon, but unfortunately the results won't be comparable to the existing lens tests due the K-5. The comparators to me would be the 18-250 and the DA 17-70.

11-27-2010, 01:23 PM	#19
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	I have both lenses but not sure how to do a proper test. theDA 18-135 & DA 18-250 (& Tamron 18-250 but it's box up for shipping since it maybe sold) But if you give me a idea how to do a proper test,, I'll do it tomorrow outside.

11-27-2010, 04:12 PM	#20
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer I have both lenses but not sure how to do a proper test. theDA 18-135 & DA 18-250 (& Tamron 18-250 but it's box up for shipping since it maybe sold) But if you give me a idea how to do a proper test,, I'll do it tomorrow outside. Here's what I would do; tripod, ISO 100, 2s delay, wide open and f8, 18mm, 70mm, 135mm, 250mm, default jpeg settings, shoot in AF and MF, use the sharpest result. Place a colourful cereal box in the center of the frame (move the tripod out as you zoom in, make sure it's square to the target). Have something to show bokeh in the background. Post full size and 100% crops of the center and a corner or two. It's a lot of work and some people will bitch about the method, no matter what method you use. I'd sure like to see it, but it's a lot of effort so feel free to do something less weighty. Here's an example I did to test my normal lenses: Picasa Web Albums - Dan Bonhomme - Resolution - ...

11-29-2010, 05:16 AM	#22
gtl Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 349	Originally posted by Mr. A.S. Dear Sirs. I returned this lens. It is not sharp. I regret the fact that he started talking about it here. Sorry. Who is 'he'?

11-29-2010, 05:55 AM	#23
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,357	Originally posted by Frogfish If the 18-135 is not a huge improvement on the Sigma (I was hoping it was going to be) then I don't see the point (for me) and I would rather pay the extra and go for a DA* lense. The purpose of this lens is NOT to replace the DA* or Limiteds, or it would be labeled as such. This lens is a weather resistant, high-quality lens, perfect for travel, hiking, or any situation where changing lenses is risky. First look at its size. Almost no bigger than the kit lens. Better optics than the kit lens, a little below the Sigma 17-70 but in the same league. As fast as the Sigma at almost all apertures except wide open. Faster or as fast as the Pentax 17-70. Should I repeat weather sealed? This lens is a perfect package for when you only want/can carry one lens. If I didn't have the Sigma 17-70 and the WR kit already, I'd be tempted with that lens. Heck, I'm tempted right now! When I put on my WR kit, I accept harsher contrast, and a slight decrease in sharpness, but I can an absurdly light lens, and I can stop worrying about rain or snow. One lens for each purpose

11-29-2010, 06:39 AM	#24
Mr. A.S. Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 401 Original Poster	2 bdery 100% thought the marketing department of Pentax. In my opinion, the main purpose of a good lens is not to interfere with a computer camera that tries to make a good picture.

12-02-2010, 02:59 PM	#25
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	I have no clue why you are complaining to us about the bad lens you received. Sorry for your loss. But the copy I received seems to be well woth the $500 I spent on it. And the photo's I have taken are all as good as any other lens it that range I have owned. You should have just got another copy. Or switch to another brand of camera.

12-02-2010, 03:26 PM	#26
farfisa Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Toronto, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,274	I'm a little disappointed that this DA zoom used wide open didn't perform as well as the DA 70 limited and various Carl Zeiss primes stopped down... But hey, can't have it all!

12-04-2010, 08:00 AM	#27
Mr. A.S. Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 401 Original Poster	2 Fl_Gulfer I have my own criteria of quality lenses. On the list that you've seen (DA 70mm, Carl Zeiss 28, 50, 100mm) yet is the following lenses: DA*200mm/2.8 and Jupiter-9 85mm/2. This is my full kit + K20D. I was waiting for the lens DA 18-135mm/3.5-5.6 and return it. "You should have just got another copy. Or switch to another brand of camera." You right. Now I think about Canon 60D + kit 18-135mm.

12-04-2010, 08:26 AM	#28
ivoire Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,381	Originally posted by Frogfish Thanks for posting these. Between these, Adam's review and other shots I've seen I think the 18-135 fails to deliver sharp enough shots for my liking and I'm going to skip it. I'm in agreement. I'd hoped this lens would exceed the 55-300 IQ. It just seems that a $200 price diff for "seals" and similar IQ is a bit much. From samples I've seen the IQ is not up to my expectations. Perhaps forthcoming samples will alter my opinion. Fl_Gulfer or anyone with this lens care to post samples?

12-04-2010, 09:03 AM	#29
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer You should have just got another copy. Or switch to another brand of camera. That is the wrong conclusion, since no megazoom lens is going to perform to the standards of a fine prime. Brand has nothing to do with it. Rather, one should not have unrealistic expectations in the first place. This new Pentax zoom is fine for those who want wide focal length coverage with weather sealing at relatively slow maximum apertures. It is never going to compare with the DA70. Whether it is priced reasonably for what it delivers is up to the individual to assess. But certainly the OP has unreasonable expectations.

12-04-2010, 09:35 AM	#30
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Mr. A.S. You right. Now I think about Canon 60D + kit 18-135mm. IQ on the Canon 18-135 is reported to be mediocre and the price is within 10% of the Pentax, but YMMV..... Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - Review / Lab Test Report - Analysis