Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-12-2012, 12:26 AM   #61
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 93
You'll have to compare it against a 55-300 or 50-200, to be fair. The 18-55 can't reach out and touch someone the way 135mm does...

05-12-2012, 01:20 AM   #62
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 307
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by GSiGuy Quote
You'll have to compare it against a 55-300 or 50-200, to be fair. The 18-55 can't reach out and touch someone the way 135mm does...
center sharpness/contrast is one of the pluses for this lens. I think you either need to adjust your lens or get a better copy.
05-12-2012, 04:34 AM   #63
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 93
That bad huh? Thought the 1st one was ok... i figured the rest is soft bec of LR's noise reduction from iso800... didn't think it was a lens issue... what do you guys reckon? lens or PP?
05-12-2012, 07:55 AM   #64
Senior Member
Ameiji's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North Caucasus
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 205
QuoteOriginally posted by GSiGuy Quote
You'll have to compare it against a 55-300 or 50-200, to be fair. The 18-55 can't reach out and touch someone the way 135mm does...
Can't disagree on your point, but I assume that it is a lens of a higher class and thus should deliver better results disregarding focal distance. Maybe I'm asking too much

05-12-2012, 08:03 AM   #65
Senior Member
Ameiji's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North Caucasus
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 205
QuoteOriginally posted by GSiGuy Quote
That bad huh? Thought the 1st one was ok... i figured the rest is soft bec of LR's noise reduction from iso800... didn't think it was a lens issue... what do you guys reckon? lens or PP?
It's hard to tell, but second one seems better to me, the necklace and letters on a shirt look sharper than face, maybe a back-focus issue? 1st and 3rd are pretty washy, and 1st also shows noticeable CA.
05-12-2012, 09:24 AM   #66
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,480
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
Exactly! And if you're using an all-in-one zoom it's going to be even more of a compromise!
We all have our tolerance levels and a unique body-lens combo to judge by; in my case the 18-135 was not a keeper. Mine was a compromised compromise, as it suffered in comparison to the elder 18-200 Sigma. If mine were the only copy with sharpness and fringing issues I'd have sent it in for work, but having heard it wasn't alone I decided its compromises were not the ones I wished to accept. The WR alone is great, the DC drive is great - these things alone can offset other issues for many. It's just not for me, and that's OK.
05-12-2012, 09:32 AM   #67
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oaxaca, Mexico; Shohola PA, USA
Posts: 219
QuoteOriginally posted by Ameiji Quote
Would be so cool if any of you guys in possession of 18-135, posted some portraits made at longer ends.

These were casual snaps at an outdoor concert. The first was at ISO 3200, so that should be taken into account. Both photos are from raw with the K-5, processed in LR4. Sharpening: 40, 0,8, 50. LR auto lens correction. Default LR color noise reduction only.

My opinion: For general photography, the 18-135 is fine. Most of the photos that I take do not need exceptional resolution across the frame.

135mm; ISO 3200; 1/320; f/6.3



100% crop


135mm; ISO 1600; 1/400; f/5.6


100% crop center


100% crop near edge



Jeff
05-12-2012, 09:48 AM   #68
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
QuoteOriginally posted by jimr-pdx Quote
If mine were the only copy with sharpness and fringing issues I'd have sent it in for work, but having heard it wasn't alone I decided its compromises were not the ones I wished to accept.
You tried a sub-par 18-135, and so did some others. But you can't seem to accept that you had a bad copy and should not judge all 18-135's based on a poor sample. Mine slightly outperforms my DA L 18-55 and DA 18-250, both of which are considered slightly better than your 18-200.

I went through the same line of thinking as you when I bought a K-5. It could not focus properly under tungsten light and a firmware upgrade didn't help. I returned the camera, because a lot of people had the same trouble, and I wasn't confident that the issue would be resolved. The difference is, I don't jump into every K-5 thread and claim it's a crap design. I had a bad one, not everyone does. If your results don't match the results of the test done in Pentax Forums, blame Pentax for your bad copy, but at least admit that it was a bad copy.

There are quite a few happy owners by now. The idea that we're novices who just don't know good from bad is bullshit. It's a consumer zoom, with IQ right in the middle of all my other consumer zooms. Better than the 18-55 and 18-250, not as good as the 55-300 or 16-45. I would never bother changing the 18-135 to mount another of my consumer zooms. If I need special performance, I mount a prime. I actually don't use any other zoom at this point, just the superzoom and primes and will probably always build my kit this way. For that reason, I intend to replace the 18-135 with the roadmapped DA* extended zoom.

I don't have a lens that would show a better result than this:



05-12-2012, 10:16 AM   #69
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,480
Wow - guess the 'not for me and I'm OK with that' line did not catch your eye. I'm happy for those whose copies are better than mine.
Signing off this post as I'm not providing value.
05-12-2012, 11:15 AM   #70
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 93
QuoteOriginally posted by Ameiji Quote
It's hard to tell, but second one seems better to me, the necklace and letters on a shirt look sharper than face, maybe a back-focus issue? 1st and 3rd are pretty washy, and 1st also shows noticeable CA.
Time to pull out the focus charts...
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!
18-135mm, copy, corners, da*, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, sdm, slr lens, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bad lens or bad polerizer TRAINUT Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 3 04-30-2012 12:43 PM
Help, new lens is bad? Kitty Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 8 01-10-2012 06:26 PM
Tips on how to objectively rate photos Zafar Iqbal Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 37 01-02-2012 07:44 AM
135mm Takumar Bayonet Ain't So Bad warpedwoof Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 04-25-2009 01:18 AM
Tamron Adaptall... Bad lens or bad adapter Okami Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 05-01-2008 06:52 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:34 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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