Pentax DA 18-135mm, general discussions and samples

jeffrey r · 04-22-2011, 05:00 PM

Well, here are a few shots from my Caribbean vacation. These are JPEG's straight from the camera with no post-processing (I took too many photos to do this, with little free time to do it anyway). 16MP, three star quality. There were also a lot of family photos from the trip that came out really nice.

**Biff** · 04-22-2011, 07:32 PM

I've been reading these 18-135 threads with interest. I bought one to simplify: replace my 18-55WR, 35-70 and 16-45 with a single lens, one that is solid, WR, relatively fast focusing, and not SDM (sorry, just don't trust it yet). While I knew I was paying somewhat of a premium this lens seemed to fit the bill, and had pretty good initial reviews.

I don't have the patience or know-how to run the technical tests. If I'm more likely to grab a camera because this lens is on it and conditions are variable, then that's a good thing. I hope I don't rue the decision because of image technical quality. I have been happy with the handling and color and contrast after the few images I've taken so far. Time will tell. Guess I could send it in for calibration, just in case. I've never done that with a lens (I probably shouldn't admit here).

Chex · 04-22-2011, 07:45 PM

I really like the color rendering and it seems ok for CA's and such.. I'm just not impressed with how soft it is.. for $600 I should have put it towards a D FA 100mm WR Macro.

the swede · 04-25-2011, 02:05 AM

Gave this lens a work out the other day, leaving my Ltd's at home. This was not my intended use for this lens, but i thought i'd give it a chance at least. I find the results OK, but not any more, kinda like a kitlens. I guess im really spoiled by Ltd's. In every other aspect its a great lens to have as a single zoom, on day to day trips with the family leaving the camera bag at home.

So this set was taken purely to see how it would work where i use my Ltd's. Looking for sharpness, contrast, colors. They are all PP'ed to my liking and my taste, wich i think makes sence. There is no sharpening at all though, and the pictures look softer than they are because of Photobucket.
There is also vignetting added to many of the pictures, because i like it. So dont faint when looking at them. Thats my taste of PP.
Dont see the need to post clean Jpeg's from RAW. We want to see the end result dont we?

So... starting of at 135mm.
This was shot on tripod at f8. The soft corners are visible here.

also 135mm at f8, this is more of an isolated subject shot.

53mm at f8

60mm at f6,3

The rest is at 18-20 from f8 to f10. Here we also se the soft corners and that they never catch up regarding sharpness. I however find the WA results OK.

Shooting candids with the lens is however much better, the colors, clarity, bokeh and isolated sharpness i great to have in combination with the range and AF. Great for family stuff Imho.

Again. Potential byers must ask themselves if its all worth the price tag.

Last edited by the swede; 04-26-2011 at 06:58 AM.

GeneV · 04-25-2011, 06:30 AM

I would honestly have to say that is a little hard to judge the corners as they may have resulted from lens resolution on those first two 135mm shots.

As it is displayed on my screen, the first shot is not all that sharp in the middle, either. Where was the point of focus, perhaps on the house on the right?

The second 135mm shot has a nice, crisp center, but the corners don't seem to be within the expected depth of field, so it is difficult to say how much softness the lens performance contributed.

the swede · 04-25-2011, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by GeneV

I would honestly have to say that is a little hard to judge the corners as they may have resulted from lens resolution on those first two 135mm shots.

As it is displayed on my screen, the first shot is not all that sharp in the middle, either. Where was the point of focus, perhaps on the house on the right?

The second 135mm shot has a nice, crisp center, but the corners don't seem to be within the expected depth of field, so it is difficult to say how much softness the lens performance contributed.

The first shot was focused at the midle of the picture, this must be at least 200 meters away. I guess (without knowing to much about it) that it would not have mattered where i focused in that particular frame.

So i guess with "lens resolution" you mean that its so far away, that sharpness i difficult to avhieve (with this lens that is)?

When i think about it, it was quite warm that day so there might be thermal movement above the ground. Still... the corner softnes is there no matter what

Yes, the second shot is nice and crisp in the center, as i wrote: "this is more of an isolated subject shot". So the point in that picture was not to show any softness but merely the sharpness in the center at 135mm.

Chex · 04-25-2011, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by the swede

Gave this lens a work out the other day, leaving my Ltd's at home. This was not my intended use for this lens, but i thought i'd give it a chance at least. I find the results OK, but not any more, kinda like a kitlens. I guess im really spoiled by Ltd's. In every other aspect its a great lens to have as a single zoom, on day to day trips with the family leaving the camera bag at home.

I would say we are very much in the same boat... I feel like this lens is a rain/snow lens only.. dry days it can stay at home holding down some papers. I guess thats what I get for not waiting for enough reviews to hit before I ordered it. Wish Photozones review was done when he got the lens, then updated later.. instead of withheld.
Here are some quotes from the Photozone review:

" The biggest problem of the lens is its pricing which is simply not in line with the optical performance. Better consider the Pentax DA-SMC 17-70mm f/4 SDM instead which is a far better lens."

"Just to mention again - we couldn't believe the rather poor performance so we asked the local Pentax service in Hamburg/Germany for an assessment of the situation. Result: the lens is within factory specifications."

"After the friction this has caused in the community I will request a statement from Pentax once again why they think that this is a valid sample."

GeneV · 04-25-2011, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by the swede

The first shot was focused at the midle of the picture, this must be at least 200 meters away. I guess (without knowing to much about it) that it would not have mattered where i focused in that particular frame.

So i guess with "lens resolution" you mean that its so far away, that sharpness i difficult to avhieve (with this lens that is)?

When i think about it, it was quite warm that day so there might be thermal movement above the ground. Still... the corner softnes is there no matter what

Yes, the second shot is nice and crisp in the center, as i wrote: "this is more of an isolated subject shot". So the point in that picture was not to show any softness but merely the sharpness in the center at 135mm.

I'd guess some thermal issues were at play in the shot of the farm field, because the center is not nearly as crisp as the next one. The farm is almost impressionistic.

asdf · 04-25-2011, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by GeneV

I'd guess some thermal issues were at play in the shot of the farm field, because the center is not nearly as crisp as the next one. The farm is almost impressionistic.

The "thermal issues" seem especially evident in the two bottom corners.

audiobomber · 04-25-2011, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by asdf

The "thermal issues" seem especially evident in the two bottom corners.

Clearly the front corners would be in the defocussed area. DOF is not infinite you know.

the swede · 04-25-2011, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by asdf

The "thermal issues" seem especially evident in the two bottom corners.

Agreed...

If one want better corner sharpness in a zoom at 135mm and if the inteded use would be shots where sharpness need to cover the whole frame. Then...dont buy it.

Chex · 04-25-2011, 01:06 PM

At ranges beyond 70mm if I want corner sharpness I use my Tamron SP Adaptol 70-210mm or my SMC Tak 200mm. The 18-135mm renders color very nicely, but IMHO colors and contrast can be done in PP where as sharpness can't.

asdf · 04-25-2011, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by audiobomber

Clearly the front corners would be in the defocussed area. DOF is not infinite you know.

The corners are blurrier than the bottom border in the middle. The area in focus is not always flat, either -- there may be field curvature. However, that photo confirms photozone's observations (abysmal performance in the extreme areas) and photozone claimed to account for field curvature. I don't have the lens so I can't confirm any of this personally.

GeneV · 04-25-2011, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by audiobomber

Clearly the front corners would be in the defocussed area. DOF is not infinite you know.

I would agree. The entire foreground is less sharp on my screen, though the corners may be somewhat more so. I keep waiting for the brick wall shot.

GeneV · 04-25-2011, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by asdf

The "thermal issues" seem especially evident in the two bottom corners.

Is that what you think it is?

When nothing in the shot is in crisp focus, it is not the best shot to compare the sharpness of different areas.

04-25-2011, 02:11 PM	#134
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by audiobomber Clearly the front corners would be in the defocussed area. DOF is not infinite you know. I would agree. The entire foreground is less sharp on my screen, though the corners may be somewhat more so. I keep waiting for the brick wall shot. Last edited by GeneV; 04-25-2011 at 02:21 PM.

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	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	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

04-22-2011, 05:00 PM	#121
jeffrey r Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: New Jersey, USA Posts: 337	Well, here are a few shots from my Caribbean vacation. These are JPEG's straight from the camera with no post-processing (I took too many photos to do this, with little free time to do it anyway). 16MP, three star quality. There were also a lot of family photos from the trip that came out really nice.

04-22-2011, 07:32 PM	#122
Biff Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: SF Bay Area Photos: Albums Posts: 1,081	I've been reading these 18-135 threads with interest. I bought one to simplify: replace my 18-55WR, 35-70 and 16-45 with a single lens, one that is solid, WR, relatively fast focusing, and not SDM (sorry, just don't trust it yet). While I knew I was paying somewhat of a premium this lens seemed to fit the bill, and had pretty good initial reviews. I don't have the patience or know-how to run the technical tests. If I'm more likely to grab a camera because this lens is on it and conditions are variable, then that's a good thing. I hope I don't rue the decision because of image technical quality. I have been happy with the handling and color and contrast after the few images I've taken so far. Time will tell. Guess I could send it in for calibration, just in case. I've never done that with a lens (I probably shouldn't admit here).

04-22-2011, 07:45 PM	#123
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	I really like the color rendering and it seems ok for CA's and such.. I'm just not impressed with how soft it is.. for $600 I should have put it towards a D FA 100mm WR Macro.

04-25-2011, 02:05 AM	#124
the swede Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 2,310 Original Poster	Gave this lens a work out the other day, leaving my Ltd's at home. This was not my intended use for this lens, but i thought i'd give it a chance at least. I find the results OK, but not any more, kinda like a kitlens. I guess im really spoiled by Ltd's. In every other aspect its a great lens to have as a single zoom, on day to day trips with the family leaving the camera bag at home. So this set was taken purely to see how it would work where i use my Ltd's. Looking for sharpness, contrast, colors. They are all PP'ed to my liking and my taste, wich i think makes sence. There is no sharpening at all though, and the pictures look softer than they are because of Photobucket. There is also vignetting added to many of the pictures, because i like it. So dont faint when looking at them. Thats my taste of PP. Dont see the need to post clean Jpeg's from RAW. We want to see the end result dont we? So... starting of at 135mm. This was shot on tripod at f8. The soft corners are visible here. also 135mm at f8, this is more of an isolated subject shot. 53mm at f8 60mm at f6,3 The rest is at 18-20 from f8 to f10. Here we also se the soft corners and that they never catch up regarding sharpness. I however find the WA results OK. Shooting candids with the lens is however much better, the colors, clarity, bokeh and isolated sharpness i great to have in combination with the range and AF. Great for family stuff Imho. Again. Potential byers must ask themselves if its all worth the price tag. Last edited by the swede; 04-26-2011 at 06:58 AM.

04-25-2011, 06:30 AM	#125
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	I would honestly have to say that is a little hard to judge the corners as they may have resulted from lens resolution on those first two 135mm shots. As it is displayed on my screen, the first shot is not all that sharp in the middle, either. Where was the point of focus, perhaps on the house on the right? The second 135mm shot has a nice, crisp center, but the corners don't seem to be within the expected depth of field, so it is difficult to say how much softness the lens performance contributed.

04-25-2011, 09:08 AM	#126
the swede Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 2,310 Original Poster	Originally posted by GeneV I would honestly have to say that is a little hard to judge the corners as they may have resulted from lens resolution on those first two 135mm shots. As it is displayed on my screen, the first shot is not all that sharp in the middle, either. Where was the point of focus, perhaps on the house on the right? The second 135mm shot has a nice, crisp center, but the corners don't seem to be within the expected depth of field, so it is difficult to say how much softness the lens performance contributed. The first shot was focused at the midle of the picture, this must be at least 200 meters away. I guess (without knowing to much about it) that it would not have mattered where i focused in that particular frame. So i guess with "lens resolution" you mean that its so far away, that sharpness i difficult to avhieve (with this lens that is)? When i think about it, it was quite warm that day so there might be thermal movement above the ground. Still... the corner softnes is there no matter what Yes, the second shot is nice and crisp in the center, as i wrote: "this is more of an isolated subject shot". So the point in that picture was not to show any softness but merely the sharpness in the center at 135mm.

04-25-2011, 10:29 AM	#127
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	Originally posted by the swede Gave this lens a work out the other day, leaving my Ltd's at home. This was not my intended use for this lens, but i thought i'd give it a chance at least. I find the results OK, but not any more, kinda like a kitlens. I guess im really spoiled by Ltd's. In every other aspect its a great lens to have as a single zoom, on day to day trips with the family leaving the camera bag at home. I would say we are very much in the same boat... I feel like this lens is a rain/snow lens only.. dry days it can stay at home holding down some papers. I guess thats what I get for not waiting for enough reviews to hit before I ordered it. Wish Photozones review was done when he got the lens, then updated later.. instead of withheld. Here are some quotes from the Photozone review: " The biggest problem of the lens is its pricing which is simply not in line with the optical performance. Better consider the Pentax DA-SMC 17-70mm f/4 SDM instead which is a far better lens." "Just to mention again - we couldn't believe the rather poor performance so we asked the local Pentax service in Hamburg/Germany for an assessment of the situation. Result: the lens is within factory specifications." "After the friction this has caused in the community I will request a statement from Pentax once again why they think that this is a valid sample."

04-25-2011, 12:15 PM	#128
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by the swede The first shot was focused at the midle of the picture, this must be at least 200 meters away. I guess (without knowing to much about it) that it would not have mattered where i focused in that particular frame. So i guess with "lens resolution" you mean that its so far away, that sharpness i difficult to avhieve (with this lens that is)? When i think about it, it was quite warm that day so there might be thermal movement above the ground. Still... the corner softnes is there no matter what Yes, the second shot is nice and crisp in the center, as i wrote: "this is more of an isolated subject shot". So the point in that picture was not to show any softness but merely the sharpness in the center at 135mm. I'd guess some thermal issues were at play in the shot of the farm field, because the center is not nearly as crisp as the next one. The farm is almost impressionistic.

04-25-2011, 12:17 PM	#129
asdf Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Canada Posts: 1,252	Originally posted by GeneV I'd guess some thermal issues were at play in the shot of the farm field, because the center is not nearly as crisp as the next one. The farm is almost impressionistic. The "thermal issues" seem especially evident in the two bottom corners.

04-25-2011, 12:37 PM	#130
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by asdf The "thermal issues" seem especially evident in the two bottom corners. Clearly the front corners would be in the defocussed area. DOF is not infinite you know.

04-25-2011, 12:54 PM	#131
the swede Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 2,310 Original Poster	Originally posted by asdf The "thermal issues" seem especially evident in the two bottom corners. Agreed... If one want better corner sharpness in a zoom at 135mm and if the inteded use would be shots where sharpness need to cover the whole frame. Then...dont buy it.

04-25-2011, 01:06 PM	#132
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	At ranges beyond 70mm if I want corner sharpness I use my Tamron SP Adaptol 70-210mm or my SMC Tak 200mm. The 18-135mm renders color very nicely, but IMHO colors and contrast can be done in PP where as sharpness can't.

04-25-2011, 01:39 PM	#133
asdf Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Canada Posts: 1,252	Originally posted by audiobomber Clearly the front corners would be in the defocussed area. DOF is not infinite you know. The corners are blurrier than the bottom border in the middle. The area in focus is not always flat, either -- there may be field curvature. However, that photo confirms photozone's observations (abysmal performance in the extreme areas) and photozone claimed to account for field curvature. I don't have the lens so I can't confirm any of this personally.

04-25-2011, 02:21 PM	#135
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by asdf The "thermal issues" seem especially evident in the two bottom corners. Is that what you think it is? When nothing in the shot is in crisp focus, it is not the best shot to compare the sharpness of different areas.