DA 18-135mm Full-Length REVIEW

aaronius · 11-28-2010, 03:04 AM

Nice review Adam! Coincidentally, your review came out just 20 mins after I bought the 18-135mm! It is very reassuring to read the review and know that I didn't make the wrong choice.

I am now the proud owner of this super-fast focusing walkabout lens!

yusuf · 11-28-2010, 03:12 AM

Thanks Adam for the review...as far as lens is concern, it looks like a overpriced mediocre lens to me - is WR a valid reason to pay premium over 18-250 ? I am not for this.

GeneV · 11-28-2010, 12:08 PM

Originally posted by yusuf

Thanks Adam for the review...as far as lens is concern, it looks like a overpriced mediocre lens to me - is WR a valid reason to pay premium over 18-250 ? I am not for this.

How do you figure that there is a price premium? The DA 18-135 goes for an average of $460 online. That is about the same price as the Sigma 18-250. I believe the Sigma is the only 18-250 still made for the Pentax mount.

Fl_Gulfer · 11-28-2010, 02:28 PM

I have to agree with Adam. And also this is the FASTEST FOCUSING LENS I ever used by Pentax. It handles wonderfully and it looks great on the K-5.

Loren E · 11-28-2010, 03:30 PM

Gene V, isn't the price $529 right now? Where is it being offered for $460?

GeneV · 11-28-2010, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by Loren E

Gene V, isn't the price $529 right now? Where is it being offered for $460?

Run a Google Products search. It comes up around that price in several locations. My point is that the price range is about the same as if you run a search for the Sigma 18-250--anywhere from the mid $400s to the mid $500s.

Adam · 11-28-2010, 04:47 PM

All I'm going to say is that there's bound to be a big difference in iq beteween this 7x zoom and a 15x superzoom. This lens isn"t mediocre, it's perfectly fine unless you're a pixel-peeper. Stop it down to f8 and you'll be in business at all focal lenghts.

I'm going as far as taking this lens as my only lens during my winter travels, as I won't be afraid to use it outdoors due to the wr, and have no fear of its being damaged since you can always buy a new one. That put aside though, it's the af on this lens that sits the sigma down.

MrCynical · 11-28-2010, 05:24 PM

The one very noticeable omission from the review is a mention of how bad or otherwise the barrel distortion is. This, in my opinion, is quite an oversight for a review of a superzoom lens.

Blue · 11-28-2010, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by GeneV

Run a Google Products search. It comes up around that price in several locations. My point is that the price range is about the same as if you run a search for the Sigma 18-250--anywhere from the mid $400s to the mid $500s.

I generally don't send my money to places called "Cut Rate Bazaar." Even if they do turn out to have the lenses, good luck if you need to return it etc. Plus, there is something fishy when U.S. vendors like Ador can't keep it in stock and BH doesn't even have it yet nor does Pentax Imaging.

Blue · 11-28-2010, 05:47 PM

Originally posted by Adam

All I'm going to say is that there's bound to be a big difference in iq beteween this 7x zoom and a 15x superzoom. This lens isn"t mediocre, it's perfectly fine unless you're a pixel-peeper. Stop it down to f8 and you'll be in business at all focal lenghts.

I'm going as far as taking this lens as my only lens during my winter travels, as I won't be afraid to use it outdoors due to the wr, and have no fear of its being damaged since you can always buy a new one. That put aside though, it's the af on this lens that sits the sigma down.

Adam,
How would you rate it against the 17-70mm?

olenl · 11-28-2010, 05:47 PM

Nice review but it would be more helpful with border sharpness/CA 100% crops in addition to center comparison crops.

Also 17-70 shots for comparison would really help since many people are considering upgrade from that.

GeneV · 11-28-2010, 10:04 PM

Originally posted by Blue

I generally don't send my money to places called "Cut Rate Bazaar." Even if they do turn out to have the lenses, good luck if you need to return it etc. Plus, there is something fishy when U.S. vendors like Ador can't keep it in stock and BH doesn't even have it yet nor does Pentax Imaging.

No one says you should send your money to Cut Rate Bazaar. There are several others in the same price range, but none claim to have it in stock right now so I'm not sure that is fishy. They aren't claiming they have better stock.

I wouldn't pay about 90% of the price of the DA 18-135 for a Sigma 18-250 and call it a bargain. Concerns about a particular vendor aside, the point is that there is no cheap, well-tested 18-250 option being made for Pentax mount that makes this lens look like such a bad deal for the money. The only superzoom out there is the Sigma (for which I have seen no test in the Pentax mount), and it is pretty close to the same average price on the net and not that much cheaper comparing within Adorama or B&H.

GeneV · 11-28-2010, 10:15 PM

Originally posted by Adam

All I'm going to say is that there's bound to be a big difference in iq beteween this 7x zoom and a 15x superzoom.

You would think so, but that has been the problem with these lenses from other manufacturers so far--they weren't. The Sigma ~7x was no better performer than the Pentax/Tamron at 15x. The Canon was reputed to have fallen short in a similar way.

yusuf · 11-28-2010, 10:51 PM

Originally posted by GeneV

How do you figure that there is a price premium? The DA 18-135 goes for an average of $460 online. That is about the same price as the Sigma 18-250. I believe the Sigma is the only 18-250 still made for the Pentax mount.

Well, think of Tamron or DA 18-250 though discontinued for unknown reasons. Pretty good range and well respected and may be faster at 135 then 18-135mm. I am seriously failing to understand what is running in Pentax's mind.

At this moment, I am not going to put my money on this slow, limited focal range, overpriced piece of glass when my money can buy better stuff. But who knows, I may change my mind if the difference is exceptional which I strongly doubt at this moment.

@Adam, a comparison with other long zoom like 18-250 will certainly help, would you please include it in your review. Many would be having the same concern as I raised.

Class A · 11-28-2010, 11:50 PM

Originally posted by Adam

All I'm going to say is that there's bound to be a big difference in iq beteween this 7x zoom and a 15x superzoom.

Not necessarily in terms of IQ. There are a couple of lenses, including primes, that are worse than my Tamron 18-250 super zoom for a certain focal length (range).

Originally posted by Adam

Stop it down to f8 and you'll be in business at all focal lenghts.

Any lens stopped down to f/8 will get you into business. Few are weather-sealed but to perform at f/8 is not a recommendation, is it?

Originally posted by GeneV

Concerns about a particular vendor aside, ...

But isn't the rumour that the newer (cheaper) Pentax AF is more reliable than the old and slow SDM?

Sorry, but I don't like the Sigma bashing based on past years. Have a look at this comparison involving the Pentax 16-50, a Sigma 18-50 and the Tamron 17-50 and tell me the Pentax is the best. It surely doesn't come across like the best at all.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax K-5 Full-length Review by PentaxForums.com	Adam	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	79	12-14-2011 02:53 AM
Full Length Portraits 31mm or 35mm	candgpics	Photographic Technique	9	09-25-2009 06:51 AM
first Pentax K-7 full review w/ FW 1.0	jogiba	Pentax News and Rumors	125	08-18-2009 06:23 PM
Full length (super)telephoto portraits?	CSoars	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	12-01-2008 01:28 PM
News Our First Full-Length Reviews!	Adam	Site Suggestions and Help	10	01-17-2007 06:57 PM

11-28-2010, 03:04 AM	#31
aaronius Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 188	Nice review Adam! Coincidentally, your review came out just 20 mins after I bought the 18-135mm! It is very reassuring to read the review and know that I didn't make the wrong choice. I am now the proud owner of this super-fast focusing walkabout lens!

11-28-2010, 03:12 AM	#32
yusuf Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Palo Alto, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,497	Thanks Adam for the review...as far as lens is concern, it looks like a overpriced mediocre lens to me - is WR a valid reason to pay premium over 18-250 ? I am not for this.

11-28-2010, 12:08 PM	#33
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by yusuf Thanks Adam for the review...as far as lens is concern, it looks like a overpriced mediocre lens to me - is WR a valid reason to pay premium over 18-250 ? I am not for this. How do you figure that there is a price premium? The DA 18-135 goes for an average of $460 online. That is about the same price as the Sigma 18-250. I believe the Sigma is the only 18-250 still made for the Pentax mount.

11-28-2010, 02:28 PM	#34
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	I have to agree with Adam. And also this is the FASTEST FOCUSING LENS I ever used by Pentax. It handles wonderfully and it looks great on the K-5.

11-28-2010, 03:30 PM	#35
Loren E Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Washington and California Posts: 274	Gene V, isn't the price $529 right now? Where is it being offered for $460?

11-28-2010, 03:49 PM	#36
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Loren E Gene V, isn't the price $529 right now? Where is it being offered for $460? Run a Google Products search. It comes up around that price in several locations. My point is that the price range is about the same as if you run a search for the Sigma 18-250--anywhere from the mid $400s to the mid $500s.

11-28-2010, 04:47 PM	#37
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595 Original Poster	All I'm going to say is that there's bound to be a big difference in iq beteween this 7x zoom and a 15x superzoom. This lens isn"t mediocre, it's perfectly fine unless you're a pixel-peeper. Stop it down to f8 and you'll be in business at all focal lenghts. I'm going as far as taking this lens as my only lens during my winter travels, as I won't be afraid to use it outdoors due to the wr, and have no fear of its being damaged since you can always buy a new one. That put aside though, it's the af on this lens that sits the sigma down.

11-28-2010, 05:24 PM	#38
MrCynical Senior Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Glasgow, Scotland Posts: 132	The one very noticeable omission from the review is a mention of how bad or otherwise the barrel distortion is. This, in my opinion, is quite an oversight for a review of a superzoom lens.

11-28-2010, 05:46 PM	#39
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by GeneV Run a Google Products search. It comes up around that price in several locations. My point is that the price range is about the same as if you run a search for the Sigma 18-250--anywhere from the mid $400s to the mid $500s. I generally don't send my money to places called "Cut Rate Bazaar." Even if they do turn out to have the lenses, good luck if you need to return it etc. Plus, there is something fishy when U.S. vendors like Ador can't keep it in stock and BH doesn't even have it yet nor does Pentax Imaging.

11-28-2010, 05:47 PM	#40
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Adam All I'm going to say is that there's bound to be a big difference in iq beteween this 7x zoom and a 15x superzoom. This lens isn"t mediocre, it's perfectly fine unless you're a pixel-peeper. Stop it down to f8 and you'll be in business at all focal lenghts. I'm going as far as taking this lens as my only lens during my winter travels, as I won't be afraid to use it outdoors due to the wr, and have no fear of its being damaged since you can always buy a new one. That put aside though, it's the af on this lens that sits the sigma down. Adam, How would you rate it against the 17-70mm?

11-28-2010, 05:47 PM	#41
olenl Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 113	Nice review but it would be more helpful with border sharpness/CA 100% crops in addition to center comparison crops. Also 17-70 shots for comparison would really help since many people are considering upgrade from that.

11-28-2010, 10:04 PM	#42
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Blue I generally don't send my money to places called "Cut Rate Bazaar." Even if they do turn out to have the lenses, good luck if you need to return it etc. Plus, there is something fishy when U.S. vendors like Ador can't keep it in stock and BH doesn't even have it yet nor does Pentax Imaging. No one says you should send your money to Cut Rate Bazaar. There are several others in the same price range, but none claim to have it in stock right now so I'm not sure that is fishy. They aren't claiming they have better stock. I wouldn't pay about 90% of the price of the DA 18-135 for a Sigma 18-250 and call it a bargain. Concerns about a particular vendor aside, the point is that there is no cheap, well-tested 18-250 option being made for Pentax mount that makes this lens look like such a bad deal for the money. The only superzoom out there is the Sigma (for which I have seen no test in the Pentax mount), and it is pretty close to the same average price on the net and not that much cheaper comparing within Adorama or B&H.

11-28-2010, 10:15 PM	#43
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Adam All I'm going to say is that there's bound to be a big difference in iq beteween this 7x zoom and a 15x superzoom. You would think so, but that has been the problem with these lenses from other manufacturers so far--they weren't. The Sigma ~7x was no better performer than the Pentax/Tamron at 15x. The Canon was reputed to have fallen short in a similar way.

11-28-2010, 10:51 PM	#44
yusuf Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Palo Alto, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,497	Originally posted by GeneV How do you figure that there is a price premium? The DA 18-135 goes for an average of $460 online. That is about the same price as the Sigma 18-250. I believe the Sigma is the only 18-250 still made for the Pentax mount. Well, think of Tamron or DA 18-250 though discontinued for unknown reasons. Pretty good range and well respected and may be faster at 135 then 18-135mm. I am seriously failing to understand what is running in Pentax's mind. At this moment, I am not going to put my money on this slow, limited focal range, overpriced piece of glass when my money can buy better stuff. But who knows, I may change my mind if the difference is exceptional which I strongly doubt at this moment. @Adam, a comparison with other long zoom like 18-250 will certainly help, would you please include it in your review. Many would be having the same concern as I raised.

11-28-2010, 11:50 PM	#45
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by Adam All I'm going to say is that there's bound to be a big difference in iq beteween this 7x zoom and a 15x superzoom. Not necessarily in terms of IQ. There are a couple of lenses, including primes, that are worse than my Tamron 18-250 super zoom for a certain focal length (range). Originally posted by Adam Stop it down to f8 and you'll be in business at all focal lenghts. Any lens stopped down to f/8 will get you into business. Few are weather-sealed but to perform at f/8 is not a recommendation, is it? Originally posted by GeneV Concerns about a particular vendor aside, ... But isn't the rumour that the newer (cheaper) Pentax AF is more reliable than the old and slow SDM? Sorry, but I don't like the Sigma bashing based on past years. Have a look at this comparison involving the Pentax 16-50, a Sigma 18-50 and the Tamron 17-50 and tell me the Pentax is the best. It surely doesn't come across like the best at all.