DA 18-135 WR, Show us what it can do

Zorglub · 03-17-2013, 02:34 PM - **1 Like**

Sometimes I wonder why I got this lens. Then it's time for WR again and I remember.

**mattb123** · 03-17-2013, 08:22 PM - **1 Like**

Fun powder day today with my son

szmatefy · 03-28-2013, 04:03 AM

Fantastic images. I am considering to replace my Tamron 28-75 with this one due to the focus range, and the WR. For financial terms I have to sell my Tammy, what I like a lot, because of the 2.8

Does anybody know if there are any comparison images between these two lenses? It'd make my life easier to see if the 18-135 is not that bad compared to the Tammy...

Thanks,

Szabolcs

**mattb123** · 03-28-2013, 08:02 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by szmatefy

Fantastic images. I am considering to replace my Tamron 28-75 with this one due to the focus range, and the WR. For financial terms I have to sell my Tammy, what I like a lot, because of the 2.8

Does anybody know if there are any comparison images between these two lenses? It'd make my life easier to see if the 18-135 is not that bad compared to the Tammy...

Thanks,

Szabolcs

I have both and that would be a tough call! I've wished these lenses could be combined into a 18-135 2.8 WR but I imagine that might be big and heavy.
I guess it depends on how you use your Tamron. I like mine for low light situations like a dance recital or other evening events. It's a good FL range for groups of people as well as individuals and it's very sharp stopped down and still good wide open.
The primary use for my 18-135 is in harsh conditions like skiing or the desert where I want a flexible FL range so I don't need to changes lenses out in the elements. It's sharp stopped down and just ok wide open. It also sometimes vignettes noticeably so it's definitely got it's trade-offs. I wouldn't want to use it at a dance recital without a flash as it would just be too slow and I don't like to use a flash at an event like that. But I feel confident in a snowstorm or at sand dunes that my camera will stay sealed which is important. Otherwise I might just leave it in the bag or in the car.

szmatefy · 03-28-2013, 08:48 AM

Matt, thanks for the info. Could yo do me a quick test? Could take few shots of the same subject with the Tammy and the Pentax lens, and send me to study? Unfortunately I'm on a budget, and if I want to buy the WR lense, I have to sell the Tammy...

Last week I was shooting a squirrel, and I really missed the 135...

Thanks

Szabolcs

**mattb123** · 03-28-2013, 09:51 AM

Sure, I'll try to do it in the next day or so.
Before I got the 18-135 I solved the issue of wanting more reach (and staying fast) with a $40 eBay purchase of a Sears 135mm f/2.8 "macro" prime. The macro feature is crap (although some like the glow effect) and it's not as sharp as a nicer lens would be but for portraits and concerts (and probably squirrels) it's pretty good!

Of course if you don't need the thin DOF or low light performance then it's probably a fair trade-off for WR and more reach. It's just that in my case I was using those features of the Tamron.

audiobomber · 03-28-2013, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by mattb123

I solved the issue of wanting more reach (and staying fast) with a $40 eBay purchase of a Sears 135mm f/2.8 "macro" prime. The macro feature is crap (although some like the glow effect) and it's not as sharp as a nicer lens would be but for portraits and concerts (and probably squirrels) it's pretty good!

You have a choice, just stop down. The Sears 135mm glow only shows in the macro range and is gone by f5.6.

**mattb123** · 03-28-2013, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

You have a choice, just stop down. The Sears 135mm glow only shows in the macro range and is gone by f5.6.

Yes, I figured that out right away! Glad I did or I would have gotten rid of that lens.

szmatefy · 03-28-2013, 11:22 AM

I understand the reasoning. My problem is that I don't want to change lenses on the fly...So the question is that is the 18-135 that bad in comparison to the Tammy? I have seen many beautiful and sharp images with the 18-135, and in my experience at 2.8 the Tammy is soft, above that it's exceptional, but the fun ends, when I need the FL beyond 75mm....aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh

**mattb123** · 03-28-2013, 11:41 AM

It's not bad at all! But it just doesn't excel at the same things as the 28-75.

Here's a 18-135 Photo from Monday evening at 18mm.

szmatefy · 03-28-2013, 11:51 AM

Thanks Matt!

I think, I'll give it a try, because the WR and the FL so temptating...

CP140 · 03-28-2013, 08:36 PM

Originally posted by szmatefy

Thanks Matt!

I think, I'll give it a try, because the WR and the FL so temptating...

I realize I'm joining the thread a wee bit late, but I recently got the 18-135 and had the chance to "test" it on a trip to Australia. You can see a bunch of compressed (for web viewing) images here...

Australia - a set on Flickr

...there are a few non-pentax shots in that set mind, but ignore the images whose file names start with "P" and you'll be good to go. All of the images taken with my K-30 on that trip were with the 18-135.

Regards

magkelly · 03-28-2013, 11:44 PM

Originally posted by Dirtistasty2

^vignetting added in post

Absolutely loved this shot. Perfectly vintage, and I just love that hat!

szmatefy · 03-29-2013, 02:00 AM

Thansk CP, I think they are really convincing. I think, I'll buy this one, and keep the Tammy, if I can...

cali92rs · 03-29-2013, 05:30 AM - **2 Likes**

This is not the sharpest shot ever, but it is not something i would not have attempted with another lens due to the WR:

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

03-17-2013, 02:34 PM - 1 Like	#121
Zorglub Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Photos: Albums Posts: 486	Sometimes I wonder why I got this lens. Then it's time for WR again and I remember.

03-17-2013, 08:22 PM - 1 Like	#122
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,872	Fun powder day today with my son

03-28-2013, 04:03 AM	#123
szmatefy Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 77	Fantastic images. I am considering to replace my Tamron 28-75 with this one due to the focus range, and the WR. For financial terms I have to sell my Tammy, what I like a lot, because of the 2.8 Does anybody know if there are any comparison images between these two lenses? It'd make my life easier to see if the 18-135 is not that bad compared to the Tammy... Thanks, Szabolcs

03-28-2013, 08:02 AM - 1 Like	#124
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,872	Originally posted by szmatefy Fantastic images. I am considering to replace my Tamron 28-75 with this one due to the focus range, and the WR. For financial terms I have to sell my Tammy, what I like a lot, because of the 2.8 Does anybody know if there are any comparison images between these two lenses? It'd make my life easier to see if the 18-135 is not that bad compared to the Tammy... Thanks, Szabolcs I have both and that would be a tough call! I've wished these lenses could be combined into a 18-135 2.8 WR but I imagine that might be big and heavy. I guess it depends on how you use your Tamron. I like mine for low light situations like a dance recital or other evening events. It's a good FL range for groups of people as well as individuals and it's very sharp stopped down and still good wide open. The primary use for my 18-135 is in harsh conditions like skiing or the desert where I want a flexible FL range so I don't need to changes lenses out in the elements. It's sharp stopped down and just ok wide open. It also sometimes vignettes noticeably so it's definitely got it's trade-offs. I wouldn't want to use it at a dance recital without a flash as it would just be too slow and I don't like to use a flash at an event like that. But I feel confident in a snowstorm or at sand dunes that my camera will stay sealed which is important. Otherwise I might just leave it in the bag or in the car.

03-28-2013, 08:48 AM	#125
szmatefy Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 77	Matt, thanks for the info. Could yo do me a quick test? Could take few shots of the same subject with the Tammy and the Pentax lens, and send me to study? Unfortunately I'm on a budget, and if I want to buy the WR lense, I have to sell the Tammy... Last week I was shooting a squirrel, and I really missed the 135... Thanks Szabolcs

03-28-2013, 09:51 AM	#126
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,872	Sure, I'll try to do it in the next day or so. Before I got the 18-135 I solved the issue of wanting more reach (and staying fast) with a $40 eBay purchase of a Sears 135mm f/2.8 "macro" prime. The macro feature is crap (although some like the glow effect) and it's not as sharp as a nicer lens would be but for portraits and concerts (and probably squirrels) it's pretty good! Of course if you don't need the thin DOF or low light performance then it's probably a fair trade-off for WR and more reach. It's just that in my case I was using those features of the Tamron.

03-28-2013, 10:10 AM	#127
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by mattb123 I solved the issue of wanting more reach (and staying fast) with a $40 eBay purchase of a Sears 135mm f/2.8 "macro" prime. The macro feature is crap (although some like the glow effect) and it's not as sharp as a nicer lens would be but for portraits and concerts (and probably squirrels) it's pretty good! You have a choice, just stop down. The Sears 135mm glow only shows in the macro range and is gone by f5.6.

03-28-2013, 10:25 AM	#128
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,872	Originally posted by audiobomber You have a choice, just stop down. The Sears 135mm glow only shows in the macro range and is gone by f5.6. Yes, I figured that out right away! Glad I did or I would have gotten rid of that lens.

03-28-2013, 11:22 AM	#129
szmatefy Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 77	I understand the reasoning. My problem is that I don't want to change lenses on the fly...So the question is that is the 18-135 that bad in comparison to the Tammy? I have seen many beautiful and sharp images with the 18-135, and in my experience at 2.8 the Tammy is soft, above that it's exceptional, but the fun ends, when I need the FL beyond 75mm....aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh

03-28-2013, 11:41 AM	#130
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,872	It's not bad at all! But it just doesn't excel at the same things as the 28-75. Here's a 18-135 Photo from Monday evening at 18mm.

03-28-2013, 11:51 AM	#131
szmatefy Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 77	Thanks Matt! I think, I'll give it a try, because the WR and the FL so temptating...

03-28-2013, 08:36 PM	#132
CP140 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Greater Vancouver Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 190	Originally posted by szmatefy Thanks Matt! I think, I'll give it a try, because the WR and the FL so temptating... I realize I'm joining the thread a wee bit late, but I recently got the 18-135 and had the chance to "test" it on a trip to Australia. You can see a bunch of compressed (for web viewing) images here... Australia - a set on Flickr ...there are a few non-pentax shots in that set mind, but ignore the images whose file names start with "P" and you'll be good to go. All of the images taken with my K-30 on that trip were with the 18-135. Regards

03-28-2013, 11:44 PM	#133
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	Originally posted by Dirtistasty2 ^vignetting added in post Absolutely loved this shot. Perfectly vintage, and I just love that hat!

03-29-2013, 02:00 AM	#134
szmatefy Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 77	Thansk CP, I think they are really convincing. I think, I'll buy this one, and keep the Tammy, if I can...

03-29-2013, 05:30 AM - 2 Likes	#135
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	This is not the sharpest shot ever, but it is not something i would not have attempted with another lens due to the WR: