Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-26-2011, 04:33 PM   #196
Pentaxian
gtxtom's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Philly
Posts: 395
Here's another one from me




07-02-2011, 07:38 AM   #197
Site Supporter
LaurenOE's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,487
I recently bought this lens and I also found the negative Photozone review of it. To be honest, it doesn't matter to me what the edges of a lens do since I rarely ever use the entire frame of any image I ever take. I am ALWAYS cropping at least 10-20% of the outside edges of an image. I was wondering then, who consistently is looking to use the entire image? I love this lens so far, so I don't understand the fuss over the negative review about the edges of the lens? Classic "measurebation"?
07-02-2011, 08:52 AM   #198
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,880
QuoteOriginally posted by LaurenOE Quote
I recently bought this lens and I also found the negative Photozone review of it. To be honest, it doesn't matter to me what the edges of a lens do since I rarely ever use the entire frame of any image I ever take. I am ALWAYS cropping at least 10-20% of the outside edges of an image. I was wondering then, who consistently is looking to use the entire image? I love this lens so far, so I don't understand the fuss over the negative review about the edges of the lens? Classic "measurebation"?
Landscapes?
07-02-2011, 11:40 AM   #199
Site Supporter
LaurenOE's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,487
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
Landscapes?
Ok, landscapes is a good example. However, when I do landscapes, I either use a prime, 12-24mm or my 645 film. I don't think there is a zoom out there that is perfect in all ranges. I don't think I ever expected an 18-135 for panoramic landscapes. With a 16mg sensor I can afford a little crop to get rid of the unsharpness at the edges.

07-02-2011, 11:43 AM   #200
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by LaurenOE Quote
Ok, landscapes is a good example. However, when I do landscapes, I either use a prime, 12-24mm or my 645 film. I don't think there is a zoom out there that is perfect in all ranges. I don't think I ever expected an 18-135 for panoramic landscapes. With a 16mg sensor I can afford a little crop to get rid of the unsharpness at the edges.
Also, keep in mind the 18-135 does much better in terms of across the frame sharpness/resolution at the lower focal lengths. It's really in the second half of the focal length range that the 18-135 starts having some corner/edge issues. Most of the time if I'm shooting in the 70-135mm, I don't care as much about perfect sharpness across the entire frame. YMMV.
07-02-2011, 07:53 PM   #201
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,684
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
Also, keep in mind the 18-135 does much better in terms of across the frame sharpness/resolution at the lower focal lengths. It's really in the second half of the focal length range that the 18-135 starts having some corner/edge issues. Most of the time if I'm shooting in the 70-135mm, I don't care as much about perfect sharpness across the entire frame. YMMV.
Most tele stuff ends up in the center of the lens anyway. Center sharpness with soft borders was a much sought after feature in portrait lenses. http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/technical-report/19...ortrait-lenses

Frankly I don't see the softness with my 18-135mm. I must have an exceptional copy.

Last edited by audiobomber; 07-02-2011 at 08:16 PM.
07-02-2011, 08:41 PM   #202
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
Most tele stuff ends up in the center of the lens anyway. Center sharpness with soft borders was a much sought after feature in portrait lenses. Six of the best portrait lenses - British Journal of Photography

Frankly I don't see the softness with my 18-135mm. I must have an exceptional copy.
That was basically my point about center sharpness at longer focal lengths. The minor "weaknesses" of the 18-135 are non-issues to me. Then again, maybe I have a pretty good copy too, as I'm pretty impressed with the IQ of the lens and really have had no complaints.

Last edited by dgaies; 07-03-2011 at 08:08 AM.
07-03-2011, 07:36 AM   #203
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,684
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
Then again, maybe I have a pretty good copy too, as I'm pretty impressed with the IQ of the lens and relate have had no complaints.
I have seen ugly CA and weak borders from some 18-135's. Unfortunately one of them was sold to Klaus, and then Pentax neglected to replace it. A bad example can happen with any lens, but more common with zooms and probably more likely with superzooms.

I've done testing vs my other consumer zooms. The 18-135 is in the middle, slightly better wide open than 18-55 II and 18-250, slightly worse than 55-300mm. It needs +10 AF adjustment on my K20D and I can't use it on the K-x so I'll be sending it in for repair with the proviso that I want it repaired, not replaced.

07-03-2011, 08:19 AM   #204
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,880
I mentioned landscapes because I think that's a genre where edge sharpness can be important.

I agree that a photog would be better off using a "landscape lens" for such work. Of course, depending on budget/wisdom/noobishness/laziness(!) that may not be an option.

I'd submit that it is up to the photographer to know the strengths, weaknesses and peculiarities of his(her) equipment an operate accordingly. And if this means cropping the edges or composing in a different manner to accommodate the DA 18-135, then that is what you should do. I completely understand and agree with this. It's just a shame that there are so many of these types of discussions about a $500 WR kit lens.

Last edited by luftfluss; 07-03-2011 at 09:00 AM.
07-03-2011, 09:05 PM   #205
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
Even single shot landscape shots are not too bad off with this lens, my real issue using this lens for landscape shots is the vignetting makes panoramic shots taken with this fall between useless and far too much work in PP to want to bother with.
07-03-2011, 10:32 PM   #206
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,880
QuoteOriginally posted by Chex Quote
Even single shot landscape shots are not too bad off with this lens, my real issue using this lens for landscape shots is the vignetting makes panoramic shots taken with this fall between useless and far too much work in PP to want to bother with.
Depending on what software you use for PP, the vignetting could be easy to take care of. I use Photoshop CS5 and it's only a few seconds work.

Looking at the lenses listed in your sig, I'd use the SMC Takumar 28mm f3.5 and shoot in portrait orientation for panos. If it's anything like my Pentax M 28/3.5, it's a lovely lens.
07-04-2011, 12:01 AM   #207
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
my 28 f3.5 is nice for pano's but I prefer the 43mm Ltd, I don't mind stitching the extra shots to cover it all, and it's sharper than the 28mm. As soon as I find somewhere I can get prints done large enough I'll be doing pano's using my Tamron Adaptol lenses at their longest focal lengths (210 and 300) and stitching the 30+ pictures.
07-04-2011, 04:57 AM   #208
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,684
QuoteOriginally posted by Chex Quote
my 28 f3.5 is nice for pano's but I prefer the 43mm Ltd, I don't mind stitching the extra shots to cover it all, and it's sharper than the 28mm. As soon as I find somewhere I can get prints done large enough I'll be doing pano's using my Tamron Adaptol lenses at their longest focal lengths (210 and 300) and stitching the 30+ pictures.
It sounds to me like you wouldn't be satisfied with any standard zoom for panos.
07-04-2011, 08:52 AM   #209
Veteran Member
bobell69's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Courtenay BC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 422
When I purchased my K5 I also purchased the 18-135. Unfortunately my K5 had to be returned to have the sensor replaced (stains) so I took my K10D and the new 18-135 with me on my Hawaii vacation. I was really impressed with the lens and continue to use it as my walk around lens. It's focus speed and image sharpness really appeals to me.

There have been some not so positive reviews on this lens and perhaps from a purely technical review it may have weaknesses, however from a users view it is very good.

I always shoot in RAW and I also process my photos in Adobe Raw, which I have programmed to automatically make lens adjustments to each photograph. Works perfectly.
07-04-2011, 10:34 PM   #210
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
Actually I picked up an older sigma 35-70 Zoom Master that doesn't seem to be too bad it's pretty sharp at f2.8 and doesn't have much vignetting that I've noticed. I also picked up a Takumar-A 28-80 Macro that has some damage (focus ring can spin right out past it's stops and you can unscrew the lens.. good for cleaning.. but..) and even it seems to be not too bad for vignetting.. I'm guessing this is because these were both made for film bodies and they may have had vignetting issues in full frame, but not when cropped down for APS-C.

I sure wouldn't mind trying out a Sigma 17-50mm, or a Tamron 17-50 or 28-75 even.

Last edited by Chex; 01-31-2012 at 02:08 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, lens, pentax da, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Scanner Questions/Discussions...Where Do They Belong? stevebrot Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom 22 09-27-2010 01:08 PM
Suggestion Recent discussions (List of) hcc Site Suggestions and Help 6 04-26-2010 12:09 PM
Takumar 135mm f/2.5 - samples ajuett Pentax Film SLR Discussion 12 04-24-2009 06:56 AM
50-135mm - looking for low light samples Duh_Vinci Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 04-15-2008 03:23 AM
PENTAX-DA★ 50-135mm Samples Collection and Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 07-29-2007 05:44 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:23 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top