[PALADIN85020]

I took this shot with the Pentax K-5 and the Pentax 18-135mmWR lens at 53mm. Taken on the Island of Maui, Hawaii last summer. F/4.5, 1/100 sec, ISO 400. We were having breakfast, and this egret swooped down to see if we had anything to share with him - totally fearless bird.

John

[Chex]

While I admit the DA18-135WR is a useful workhorse in poor weather conditions, I realistically find that my of my "keepers" that I get with it, few would be print worthy.. most of them come from other lenses like the 43Ltd, M 50 1.7, Macro lenses, DA 10-17 Fisheye etc..

I went out shooting last night in fairly heavy snow for some long exposure shots.. the 18-135 was my main workhorse until the snow let up.










This one is from early fall of last year, was easily accessible so I threw it in here too!

[normhead]

We currently have about 60 files in our folder of files to print... 12 of them were taken with the 18-135... 3 of them were taken with the 18-55 and would have been taken with the 18-135 if we'd owned it at the time.... we own, 8 lenses, so while you might have issues with the lens, overall, it's been a good performer. You can say it's lacking somewhat in IQ and dependability... but it makes up for it in "johnny on the spotness" whatever that might be. For every shot you get using a prime.. you'd miss 3 because you didn't have the zoom and needed a different focal length on your camera. You can always use the lens like a "lens finder" check what the best FL is and then select the closest prime from your bag, if you think that's the best use of your time. But often a sunset is different every few minutes. If you took a few minutes to change your lens, then you missed something. So do you get more good pictures or miss more good pictures? Based on my experience...I'd say you get more useable pictures, even though you may get a chance to do better by changing lenses.

[crewl1]

It was drizzling out so I used the 18-135 for this one of the Salt Lake Temple.

[cwhans]

Here are a few I took after I acquired this lens from another forum member. I really like the versatility of this lens and will use it as my primary walk around and travel lens.

[crewl1]

Huntington Beach, CA

[normhead]

There's been so much interest in this lens of late I thought I'd bring this back to the top. The strong point of this lens is definitely it's range.





















If what you're doing is walking around taking in the sites, it's hard to get this lens off the camera.

[Adam]

Here are some more photos from the 18-135mm: Post your photos! - PentaxForums.com

[GrahamDyke]

Hi all,

My first post on this forum, so hi...

I very recently purchased an 18-135 DA as my walk around family holiday lens and a 16-50 DA* to replace a Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4. I spent a while checking them both out, after receiving them, for BF/FF and general optical quality, which I normally do for all "new to me" lenses.

I was extremely happy with the 18-135, where no microfocus adjustment was required on my K5. The 16-50 however only just crept in to acceptable at +9 and it also exhibited some right side softness, so must be a little decentered.

Anyway I decided to take them both on my ski trip to Silverstar B.C. Canada a couple of weeks ago and have now had time to review the results. I used each lens equally over a two week period.

The 18-135 DA performed faultlesly and I am very pleased with the results. Sadly I can not report the same for the 16-50 DA*. Even after the microfocus adjustments on the K5 it still has a degree of BF and that right side softness is still visible. In fact the overall quality of the images doesn't come close to the 18-135 results.

I can't believe this is how the 16-50 DA* is supposed to be, if it is then its going straight back for a refund. Anyway I have packed it off to Pentax U.K. to get it checked out first and if there is no huge improvement it will be going back to SRS.

The other complaint I have is with Pentax Service, who have so far had the lens for 8 days. I have not received any contact from them at all, not even to say "We have your lens and will get to it asap". On phoning them up it appears that they have'nt even opened the box yet.

This is in complete contrast to Tamron Service in the U.K. (Intro2020) to who I recently sent a 17-50 f/2.8 for warranty service. They had inspected, repaired and returned the lens within 3 days and during that time sent me an email and postal confirmation of exactly what was going on. The lens came back with the stated issue fixed, but Unfortunately it was then so badly decentered that it was unusable and also went back for a refund, hense the 16-50 DA*.

With the quality of the 18-135 being so good it's left me wondering why I need the 16-50?
Answers on a postcard please?

Update: 29/03/2012
It's strange how magically people find time to do things when you complain at them, but have no time until you do! So I had a call from Pentax U.K. and they informed me that the 16-50 is now waiting for parts.

Waiting for parts!! The lens is brand spanking new. How can a lens that is less than a month old and has only shot 200 images need new parts? So I asked what parts it was waiting for? It's waiting for a new front element optic. This apparently is the cause of the Right Side Softness (Decentering) that I mentioned earlier. The BF issue can be fixed with a firmware calibration.

They now estimate new parts next week, watch this space...

[UdoG]

I spent a while checking them both out, after receiving them, for BF/FF and general optical quality, which I normally do for all "new to me" lenses.

How can I do such a test? Do you have some test pictures? I will receive the K-5 with the 18-135 lens in the next days and I want to perform such a test too.

Thanks!

[EricBrown]

I have been very happy with my 18-135mm. It makes a great walk around lens. Fast, quiet and WR. I did have the Sigma 17-70 and was happy with the IQ, but I wanted something with more reach. I found the IQ to be equal or better.

Check out one of my DC Cherry Blossom photos. It was a bit foggy, so thats why it looks fuzzy.

Cherry Blossoms 2012 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[normhead]

Anyway I decided to take them both on my ski trip to Silverstar B.C. Canada a couple of weeks ago and have now had time to review the results. I used each lens equally over a two week period.

What you came to Canada and didn't visit all us Pentaxians in Ontario? I can hardly believe it.

[GrahamDyke]

How can I do such a test? Do you have some test pictures? I will receive the K-5 with the 18-135 lens in the next days and I want to perform such a test too.

Thanks!

Hi, the technique I normally use to check BF/FF is:
1. In a well lit room (daylight, not artificial), or outside if you prefer.
2. Place a table against a wall.
3. Put some small colourfull boxes, or items on the table in a staggered, diagonal, equi-spaced, fashion, from front to back, 4-5 should be enough.
4. Switch off the cameras shake reduction, the shutter speed should be high enough for hand holding.
5. Set the camera to shoot RAW (PEF/DNG) images only, Jpeg's will be no good as sharpening is carried out.
5. Start with the lens set to max apperture and the shortest focal length (F/3.5 18mm).
6. Then from a distance that is just far enough away to fill the viewfinder with all the items on the table, focus on the first box/item and take a shot
7. Focus on the second box/item and take another shot.
8. Continue for all the other boxes/items from front to back.
9. Load the RAW images onto a computer for viewing at full size 100%.
10. It will now be obvious from the images exactly how much of the image (other boxes/items) is in focus both in front and behind the box/item that was the point of focus.
11. The depth of field (zone of sharp focus) will be approximately 1/3rd in front of the focal point and 2/3rd's behind.
12. You will see this as boxes/items in focus and out of focus. There should be more in focus behind, than in front.
13. Taking a shot at each box/item will make it easier for you to judge how far out the focus is, or is not if lucky.
14. If there is too much in focus in front of the focal point and/or the focal point is not in focus, then the lens is Front Focusing and will need some "-" minus adjustment.
15. If there is too much in focus behind the focal point and/or the focal point is not in focus, then the lens is Back Focusing and will need some "+" plus adjustment.
16. If adjustment is required, adjust and repeat.
17. When complete you may want to recheck with a smaler aperture and/or longer focal length (F/5.6 50mm) as things can change slightly with diferent combinations. So best to use the combinations that you most commonly use.

There is another method for checking BF/FF where you shoot at an angled target (45deg). I find this is best avoided as it is only accurate if you can guarentee that the actual focusing sensor matches exactly where the red dot is displayed in the viewfinder. If you can not it will lead to lots of false negatives and make any BF/FF even worse after adjustment.

In the method described above all the targets are perpendicular to the lens so it does not matter if the red dot does not match up exactly with the actual sensor.

I checked my K5 and the center red dot at least does not match exactly where the actual sensor is.

Hope this helps. I can't upload any images for this yet as they are all still RAW files.

[GrahamDyke]

What you came to Canada and didn't visit all us Pentaxians in Ontario? I can hardly believe it.

Ow, maybe next year. I'll likely be going back to Silverstar for another Ski Instructors course :-)

[normhead]

Ow, maybe next year. I'll likely be going back to Silverstar for another Ski Instructors course :-)

You visiting us in Ontario would be like us flying to England and then visiting you in Spain, actually it's probably further... I was just pulling your leg.