Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-14-2012, 08:11 AM   #16
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
TER-OR's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dundee, IL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,873
There's going to be a big variation on any lens - even shooting the same subject outdoors there's so many variables to consider. Where was the metering point? How fast was the shutter - is the lack of sharpness due to movement etc.? Was the lens stopped down efficiently for sharpness?

Eventually you're going to have to make a decision. Is WR important? If so, that narrows your decision greatly - kit lens or 18-135 essentially. If I were replacing the 16-45, I'd have to make some choices as well - and would likely go for wide-end (though the 10-17 fisheye is a lot of fun and quite handy) like a Sigma 10-20 or that DA 12-24. I have longer end covered very well, and now with the 18-135 I have a convenient walkaround lens. I'll still take the 55-300 to the parks though - that reach is invaluable.

I just got the 18-135 and will compare it to the 16-45 in a (mostly) controlled environment. For me, the 16-45 works fine, I've taken some great shots with it. The WR factor is very important, though, because I'm out in the snow with the dogs a lot. I also miss opportunities because there's a chance of rain and I don't want to take chances with expensive gear - so I'll use the little Olympus SW camera and take what I can get. I'm excited to put the 18-135 through its paces.

03-31-2012, 12:38 AM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Slovenia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,181
Bump bump kaboink

Since the lens is a dual-cam design, does it let in water when zoomed?
03-31-2012, 06:29 AM   #18
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,572
My copy of the 18-200 Sigma forced my copy of the DA18-135 to the sales block; IQ was not nearly enough of a contest for WR to trump. I hated that result but the DA needed far more work for a nice image, the Sigma just a bit of sharpening. All other copies may/will vary, but that was my result.

I'm hopeful that the roadmap lens due later this year will be what I seek, but we have no clues as to WR, XS, focus type... anything more than it being 20ish-200something. I look forward to its announcement, but that won't help you in the short term.

Given my experience I'd choose the Sigma, a plastic bag and two rubber bands.
03-31-2012, 07:38 AM   #19
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,726
QuoteOriginally posted by zosxavius Quote
Hmmm....from looking at some real life 18-135 samples, I see a lot of variation in quality. Some shots look great at 18mm....some look awful, including this sites own review. The corners are pretty soft from what I can tell. I realize most 18mm zooms won't have great corners at 18mm, but that's really where I want it sharpest personally.
My 18-135mm does reasonably well at 18mm. Better than my DA L 18-55 and DA 18-250. Here is a set vs the DA 15mm and 16-45. (Click on the magnifying glass and + a couple of times for full resolution.)

https://picasaweb.google.com/bonhommed/Comparo?authkey=Gv1sRgCLOD9LjmoOKTlAE#

Both lenses are better, but the superzoom is good enough for most of my shooting, at any focal length. The only area of performance I'm disappointed with is vignetting. Barrel distortion is high as expected, but still lower than the 18-250. Sharpness, flare, colour & contrast and CA are good for a zoom, excellent for a superzoom. I LOATHE a zoom lock. Fortunately the 18-135 doesn't have and doesn't need one. I gave the 18-250 to my wife. I kept the 18-55 solely for resale when I sell the camera. I find Sigma lenses frustrating because the zoom and focus rings turn in the opposite direction to Pentax. I would have bought a DA 17-70 ages ago, if it had been WR. I expect to sell the 18-135 and buy the DA* superzoom next year. I will always have an all-purpose WR lens in my bag.

Here are a couple of DA 18-135 samples at 18mm:





More samples here: https://picasaweb.google.com/bonhommed/DA18135Jpegs#

03-31-2012, 08:36 AM   #20
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
The 17-70 has a rubber gasket around the mount. Perhaps it's semi-WR.
03-31-2012, 08:47 AM   #21
Veteran Member
westmill's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Stoke on Trent
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,146
well it will certainly keep the cameras WR intact !
04-07-2012, 01:42 PM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Somewhere, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 453
@audiobomber: I looked through your comparison shots. Its very interesting. Your copy of the 16-45 is a very good performer in the corners @18mm, while the 15mm showed a lot of severe softness and distortion, especially in the lower right corner, though I wouldn't rule out SR possibly causing some blur as I am guessing this might be handheld. I think I am going to probably pick up a WR 18-55 since they are half decent lenses and pretty cheap and later get the 17-70 as I would really miss the 50-55mm end of the kit lens. On my copy of version 1 its pretty sharp @ 50mm.
04-07-2012, 06:45 PM   #23
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,726
QuoteOriginally posted by zosxavius Quote
@audiobomber: I looked through your comparison shots. Its very interesting. Your copy of the 16-45 is a very good performer in the corners @18mm,
Actually the 16-45 photo was shot at 16mm, not 18mm.

QuoteOriginally posted by zosxavius Quote
while the 15mm showed a lot of severe softness and distortion, especially in the lower right corner, though I wouldn't rule out SR possibly causing some blur as I am guessing this might be handheld.
I didn't use a tripod for this test because shutter speeds were good. How would SR cause blurring in one corner of an image? Either it causes blur everywhere, or it doesn't at all. I don't believe that SR causes blur. I have tested for this many times, and found no evidence that SR causes a problem at high shutter speeds. The only time I disable SR is with a tripod, as per Pentax recommendations.

QuoteOriginally posted by zosxavius Quote
I think I am going to probably pick up a WR 18-55 since they are half decent lenses and pretty cheap and later get the 17-70 as I would really miss the 50-55mm end of the kit lens. On my copy of version 1 its pretty sharp @ 50mm.
My 16-45 is sharper than either of my 18-55's when used at 45mm and cropped to 55. It's also a stop faster at the long end.


Last edited by audiobomber; 04-08-2012 at 05:38 AM.
04-08-2012, 07:59 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Somewhere, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 453
I'm convinced that shake reduction causes blurring in the corners at moderate shutter speeds as the shake reduction is moving in conjunction with movement that may or may not accelerate during the course of exposure. I've tossed a few decent shots that had really soft halfs even. I can't assume my lens is suddenly unsharp in a fraction of my shots. I don't see how it could perform that wildly. No, the only thing I can reduce it to is over or under compensation from SR in combination with lower shutter speeds (under 200). Most shots over 250 are tack sharp unless I am swinging the lens wildly.
04-08-2012, 08:43 AM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 691
Thanks audio bomber for those samples,the 16 45 is amazing!
04-08-2012, 10:16 AM   #26
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,726
QuoteOriginally posted by zosxavius Quote
I'm convinced that shake reduction causes blurring in the corners at moderate shutter speeds
I looked in your User Panel to see which camera you have. Some (or maybe all?) K-7's have been shown to suffer shutter-induced blur at speeds around 1/100s. I use a K20D, which is known not to have this problem, and a K-x, where a few cameras seem to be afflicted. I've done testing with my K-x and it is clean. So, it's quite possible that your K-7 has a blur problem at moderate shutter speeds.
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!
advice, choice, combo, da, da 18-135 wr, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, range, sdm, sigma, slr lens, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
XR Rikenon 135/2.8 OR Carl Zeiss Jena 135/3.5 (zebra) adicaciula Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 02-20-2012 02:29 AM
Takumar 135 2.5 vs Super Tak 135 3.5, both bayonet mount, which is better? chongmic Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 04-09-2011 11:55 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:55 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