Pentax 18-135 WR vs Sigma 17-70

loco · 08-06-2012, 11:37 AM

I'm pretty impressed with the 18-135 so far. Just got it in the K-30 kit last week, so not a LOT of use, but I think it's a lot sharper than people give it credit for at the long end. And the bokeh is superb. It's a really nice walkaround lens, not too heavy and a nice range. Plus, you can't go wrong with the WR (if you have a WR camera anyway). I think you will really enjoy it!

normhead · 08-06-2012, 03:01 PM

The DA 18-135 makes a lot of lenses redundant anytime convenience is an issue. But it's not a macro lens. This is completely a shooting style issue.

The 18-135 is a never miss a shot because you are changing lenses or because of weather type of lens.

I carry my DA*60-250... most of the time it doesn't get on the camera. The DA18-135 covers 95% of what I shoot. Of course if I have time to set up, I'll switch to a prime... the difference between 70 and135... that's a lot of reach. I wouldn't give that up. That's way more reach than say what I give up by getting the DA* 60-250 instead of the 200. That's almost like having a 2x converter on the lens, without the loss in IQ.

The 135 does tend to stay centre sharp even at 135... the Tamron not so much. The Tamron is better corner to corner after 60mm.. but isn't water sealed. The 18-135 @ 24 millimetres looks like it might be better than anything the Tamron might have to offer, but they are tested on different cameras.. so hard to know how relevant those numbers are. This is clearly a shooting style decision. If you like your camera at 135 centre sharp and expect bokeh at the edges the 18-135 is for you. Looking for a more even corner to corner resolution you're probably going to like the Tamron.

Skog · 08-06-2012, 03:19 PM

Using the 18-135 more and more. I will change to a limited when I have time and want best iq, but the ease of use, wr and the beautiful DC af motor of the 18-135 is hard to beat.. my copy is very sharp, especially in the Tele end. And at 135mmp you get nice closeups! Howewer my copy has quite bad PF, which is a shame:/

WA-surfer · 08-06-2012, 10:11 PM

Originally posted by simbon4o

For the price of the 18-135 you can get sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0 which is sharper everywhere compared to the pentax and some money will be saved for something else. If you are going to buy ultra zoom at least buy tamron 18-270 or something

it will have more zoom. For me the 18-135 is too expensive for it's performance!

Thanks for the reply.
I ordered the K30 and 18-135 bundle anyway. I figured the Pentax 18-135mm only cost me an additional $250 over the K30 body only price. I think at $250 the 18-135 is a very versatile option with WR compared to my 17-70. I'm likely going to on sell my Sigma 17-70mm anyway to cover the cost of the 18-135mm lens as I don't think I will keep both.

I just sold my Pentax K-x to partially fund and justify my K30 upgrade. Was very happy as it sold within 2 days on the second hand market.

simbon4o · 08-06-2012, 11:04 PM

For 250$ it is much better. Here in my country this lens costs about 650$ without body and I think that for that price the optical performance must be so much better! With the body it is about 360$ but even then I think that it is not worth it. My advice is to try it and if the Sigma is better sell the Pentax. I'm waitnig to try K30 myself and decide to buy it or migrate to nikon

. Here the price of the body is about 900$ and they don't have it in the town where I live still. I hope that the K30 will be good enough to stop me from selling everything.

Unsinkable II · 08-07-2012, 09:36 AM

Affordability is one thing and fair price another.

I will not pay an unfair price though I can afford it. It's principle and keeps me grounded.

I thought the 18-135 was a $400 lens. Now I use it, it's a $500-600 lens; that's how I feel. It helps that new bodies compensate for slower glass.

normhead · 08-08-2012, 08:28 AM

Re-inforcing it's reputaion as a great walk around lens. Paddling with clients I often don't have time to change lenses. I started the day with the DA 18-135 and it never came off the camera.

Cross post from post your photos and the Algonquin park group and general 18-135 thread.. if it's not good enough for you, just go to Nikon... where you're sure to find something better for cheaper.... not.

Heading into the canyon.

Daytrippers on the portage...

Playing at the falls...

Serious trippers...

Storm clouds gathering...

A hard rains going to fall.... fortunately we got back to the truck before it got really bad. Thank you WR.

Unsinkable II · 08-08-2012, 10:32 AM

Great stuff!

Very nice indeed. The only question I have is how come so much noise on the flower shot?

jimr-pdx · 08-08-2012, 05:45 PM

Thanks guys. I just ordered the K30 and 18-135 bundle, so im really looking forward to playing with it when it arrives!

With the bundled price you cannot lose. I have just picked up a fresh copy of the 18-135 from a new K30 owner who liked the lenses he already had, and this one is much better than the first copy I had. Yes one can torture-test it and find issues, but generally very good images in most typical scenes. I think you'll be happy, but if not you'll get a great return on your investment!

bass3587 · 08-08-2012, 06:24 PM

I hate threads like this

I feel torn between the Pentax 18-135, Tamron 17-50 2.8 and the Tamron 70-200 2.8! Why can't i just hit the lottery and get them all. I'm also torn between the Pentax DA 15mm and the Sigma 10-20 UWA lenses. So many choices arghhhhh!

Unsinkable II · 08-08-2012, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by bass3587

I hate threads like this

I feel torn between the Pentax 18-135, Tamron 17-50 2.8 and the Tamron 70-200 2.8! Why can't i just hit the lottery and get them all. I'm also torn between the Pentax DA 15mm and the Sigma 10-20 UWA lenses. So many choices arghhhhh!

Due to the extra stop or two of clean ISO these days, a 2.8 is becoming more of a DOF choice than a "I need light" choice, so I'd recommend the 18-135. The Tamron 17-50 used to be my default lens, now the 18-135 is.

Munki · 08-08-2012, 07:39 PM

The 18-135 really is a hard to beat outdoor lens. Extremely versatile and produces some great images. I bought mine from B&H, because the price is ridiculous here in Australia...

**southlander** · 08-09-2012, 06:37 AM

Lovely images Normhead, I think I have just been swayed towards the 18-135 when I get round to buying a K-30. I note your comments also Unsinkable II, will need to closely compare the Tamron 17-50 with the 18-135 after I pick one up. May have to consider the Tammy's future.

**TER-OR** · 08-09-2012, 08:44 AM

It's been a drought most of the year here, so I haven't had the chance to romp around in the rain with the 18-135 but I can say I'm quite happy with it. I am looking foward to wintertime, though, when we get to take the huskies to the parks again.
Black Pussywillow @135mm

normhead · 08-09-2012, 08:49 AM

Quote:

The only question I have is how come so much noise on the flower shot?

I'm shooting at 800 ISO with a K20D. YOu wouldn't see that kind of noise if I was shooting with a K-5, and you wouldn't see it if I'd taken a little more time in PP, but it's a web/photojournalism kind of shot and for that kind of shot, that amount of noise doesn't bother me. In my opinion, you are definitely pushing the limits shooting at ISO 800 on a K20D, although most of them turned better than that shot.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 with Sigma 17-70 vs 17-50 vs Pentax 18-135 vs Sigma 18-250	dr_romix	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	20	08-25-2012 07:19 AM
Pentax 50-135 and Sigma 50-150	Giklab	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	02-28-2012 08:03 AM
The 18-135 Pentax & Sigma 30/1.4	kshapero	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	12-15-2011 02:03 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax FA 135 2.8 and Sigma 2x TC <cheap!	atlnq9	Sold Items	2	10-18-2011 07:58 AM
Replace Sigma 18-125 with Pentax 18-135?	lawsonstone	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	12-04-2010 07:32 AM

08-06-2012, 11:37 AM	#16
loco Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,846	I'm pretty impressed with the 18-135 so far. Just got it in the K-30 kit last week, so not a LOT of use, but I think it's a lot sharper than people give it credit for at the long end. And the bokeh is superb. It's a really nice walkaround lens, not too heavy and a nice range. Plus, you can't go wrong with the WR (if you have a WR camera anyway). I think you will really enjoy it!

08-06-2012, 03:01 PM	#17
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	The DA 18-135 makes a lot of lenses redundant anytime convenience is an issue. But it's not a macro lens. This is completely a shooting style issue. The 18-135 is a never miss a shot because you are changing lenses or because of weather type of lens. I carry my DA60-250... most of the time it doesn't get on the camera. The DA18-135 covers 95% of what I shoot. Of course if I have time to set up, I'll switch to a prime... the difference between 70 and135... that's a lot of reach. I wouldn't give that up. That's way more reach than say what I give up by getting the DA 60-250 instead of the 200. That's almost like having a 2x converter on the lens, without the loss in IQ. The 135 does tend to stay centre sharp even at 135... the Tamron not so much. The Tamron is better corner to corner after 60mm.. but isn't water sealed. The 18-135 @ 24 millimetres looks like it might be better than anything the Tamron might have to offer, but they are tested on different cameras.. so hard to know how relevant those numbers are. This is clearly a shooting style decision. If you like your camera at 135 centre sharp and expect bokeh at the edges the 18-135 is for you. Looking for a more even corner to corner resolution you're probably going to like the Tamron.

08-06-2012, 03:19 PM	#18
Skog Inactive Account Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 167	Using the 18-135 more and more. I will change to a limited when I have time and want best iq, but the ease of use, wr and the beautiful DC af motor of the 18-135 is hard to beat.. my copy is very sharp, especially in the Tele end. And at 135mmp you get nice closeups! Howewer my copy has quite bad PF, which is a shame:/

08-06-2012, 10:11 PM	#19
WA-surfer Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 118 Original Poster	Originally posted by simbon4o For the price of the 18-135 you can get sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0 which is sharper everywhere compared to the pentax and some money will be saved for something else. If you are going to buy ultra zoom at least buy tamron 18-270 or something it will have more zoom. For me the 18-135 is too expensive for it's performance! Thanks for the reply. I ordered the K30 and 18-135 bundle anyway. I figured the Pentax 18-135mm only cost me an additional $250 over the K30 body only price. I think at $250 the 18-135 is a very versatile option with WR compared to my 17-70. I'm likely going to on sell my Sigma 17-70mm anyway to cover the cost of the 18-135mm lens as I don't think I will keep both. I just sold my Pentax K-x to partially fund and justify my K30 upgrade. Was very happy as it sold within 2 days on the second hand market.

08-06-2012, 11:04 PM	#20
simbon4o Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 258	For 250$ it is much better. Here in my country this lens costs about 650$ without body and I think that for that price the optical performance must be so much better! With the body it is about 360$ but even then I think that it is not worth it. My advice is to try it and if the Sigma is better sell the Pentax. I'm waitnig to try K30 myself and decide to buy it or migrate to nikon . Here the price of the body is about 900$ and they don't have it in the town where I live still. I hope that the K30 will be good enough to stop me from selling everything.

08-07-2012, 09:36 AM	#21
Unsinkable II Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 1,352	Affordability is one thing and fair price another. I will not pay an unfair price though I can afford it. It's principle and keeps me grounded. I thought the 18-135 was a $400 lens. Now I use it, it's a $500-600 lens; that's how I feel. It helps that new bodies compensate for slower glass.

08-08-2012, 08:28 AM	#22
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Re-inforcing it's reputaion as a great walk around lens. Paddling with clients I often don't have time to change lenses. I started the day with the DA 18-135 and it never came off the camera. Cross post from post your photos and the Algonquin park group and general 18-135 thread.. if it's not good enough for you, just go to Nikon... where you're sure to find something better for cheaper.... not. Heading into the canyon. Daytrippers on the portage... Playing at the falls... Serious trippers... Storm clouds gathering... A hard rains going to fall.... fortunately we got back to the truck before it got really bad. Thank you WR.

08-08-2012, 10:32 AM	#23
Unsinkable II Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 1,352	Great stuff! Very nice indeed. The only question I have is how come so much noise on the flower shot?

08-08-2012, 05:45 PM	#24
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	Thanks guys. I just ordered the K30 and 18-135 bundle, so im really looking forward to playing with it when it arrives! With the bundled price you cannot lose. I have just picked up a fresh copy of the 18-135 from a new K30 owner who liked the lenses he already had, and this one is much better than the first copy I had. Yes one can torture-test it and find issues, but generally very good images in most typical scenes. I think you'll be happy, but if not you'll get a great return on your investment!

08-08-2012, 06:24 PM	#25
bass3587 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 517	I hate threads like this I feel torn between the Pentax 18-135, Tamron 17-50 2.8 and the Tamron 70-200 2.8! Why can't i just hit the lottery and get them all. I'm also torn between the Pentax DA 15mm and the Sigma 10-20 UWA lenses. So many choices arghhhhh!

08-08-2012, 07:13 PM	#26
Unsinkable II Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 1,352	Originally posted by bass3587 I hate threads like this I feel torn between the Pentax 18-135, Tamron 17-50 2.8 and the Tamron 70-200 2.8! Why can't i just hit the lottery and get them all. I'm also torn between the Pentax DA 15mm and the Sigma 10-20 UWA lenses. So many choices arghhhhh! Due to the extra stop or two of clean ISO these days, a 2.8 is becoming more of a DOF choice than a "I need light" choice, so I'd recommend the 18-135. The Tamron 17-50 used to be my default lens, now the 18-135 is.

08-08-2012, 07:39 PM	#27
Munki Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 246	The 18-135 really is a hard to beat outdoor lens. Extremely versatile and produces some great images. I bought mine from B&H, because the price is ridiculous here in Australia...

08-09-2012, 06:37 AM	#28
southlander Site Supporter Join Date: May 2012 Location: Adelaide Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,364	Lovely images Normhead, I think I have just been swayed towards the 18-135 when I get round to buying a K-30. I note your comments also Unsinkable II, will need to closely compare the Tamron 17-50 with the 18-135 after I pick one up. May have to consider the Tammy's future.

08-09-2012, 08:44 AM	#29
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	It's been a drought most of the year here, so I haven't had the chance to romp around in the rain with the 18-135 but I can say I'm quite happy with it. I am looking foward to wintertime, though, when we get to take the huskies to the parks again. Black Pussywillow @135mm

08-09-2012, 08:49 AM	#30
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Quote: The only question I have is how come so much noise on the flower shot? I'm shooting at 800 ISO with a K20D. YOu wouldn't see that kind of noise if I was shooting with a K-5, and you wouldn't see it if I'd taken a little more time in PP, but it's a web/photojournalism kind of shot and for that kind of shot, that amount of noise doesn't bother me. In my opinion, you are definitely pushing the limits shooting at ISO 800 on a K20D, although most of them turned better than that shot.