Replacing the 18-135 WR?

JayX2A · 03-28-2013, 05:18 AM

I have yet to use the 18-135 WR extensivly, but I think I want something faster.

Was considering the 24-70 f2.8 as do not go wide very often. I am also considering the 70-200 f2.8 at a later date.

Any other fast zooms I should look in to?

Gray · 03-28-2013, 05:29 AM

I have the 18-135 and Tamron 28-75/2.8. I highly recommend the Tamron - fast, sharp, light, excellent value - and beats the 18-135 in IQ - I use if for landscape and general purpose - it's always in my bag. I use the 18-135 in bad weather or for hiking.

dboeren · 03-28-2013, 07:36 AM

I've heard really good things about the Tamron 28-75mm too, although I wish it went a little wider.

Pentax has a ~16-85mm on their roadmap that sounds perfect to me but it's not out yet and it's also a DA* which means it will be pricy...

bdery · 03-28-2013, 09:55 AM

You will loose WR if you leave the 18-135 behind, that might or might not be a problem for you, but something to remember. I think lenses like the 18-135 live well together with other lenses. Their purpose is not great IQ, it's to be always on, dependable in all situations and relatively compact.

That being said, I don't really own a lens serving the purpose the 18-135 serves, I use several lenses for that

kenafein · 03-28-2013, 10:37 AM

The Tamron 28-75 is awesome. It's true that 28 isn't wide on APS-C, but I always found it to be a good walk around lens. The Tamron 17-50 can be had for a good price also. The 70-200 is excellent, but huge.

magkelly · 03-28-2013, 04:33 PM

Fast is nice but being covered for shooting in the rain, dust, et all? Priceless. If the image quality is good I'd keep it. Better a little slow and that range than unprotected. I've been coveting that kit kind of, the K30 and the 18-135. I'm seeing a fair amount of griping about slowness on here but I'm thinking it sounds like a very useful lens otherwise. Likely when I do upgrade to a WR DSLR I will get that lens for it used if I don't get the kit. It's got the perfect range for walking around shooting and portraits, I think.

SpecialK · 03-28-2013, 05:50 PM

The Tamron 28-75 was not wide enough for me - I was always backing up, or trying to. The 17-70 range works better for me for a single lens choice. The IQ is better than the kit but not as good as the 28-75. If you need WR, try a plastic bag and rubber bands.

JayX2A · 03-28-2013, 11:15 PM

I'm just looking for a higher quality of lens. Trying to get some more jobs at events and maybe weddings and I don't think the 18-135 is good enough in that respect.

I may end up keeping it in my bag for any bad conditions a well us upgrading to a higher quality of lenses.

onggie · 03-29-2013, 12:54 AM

I just received my Tammy in the mail Yesterday after debating whether to go the 18-135 or 28-75. The Tamron has great IQ autofocus is a bit loud but other than that, I think it comes out on top.

StephenHampshire · 03-29-2013, 01:44 AM

Originally posted by magkelly

Fast is nice but being covered for shooting in the rain, dust, et all? Priceless. If the image quality is good I'd keep it. Better a little slow and that range than unprotected. I've been coveting that kit kind of, the K30 and the 18-135. I'm seeing a fair amount of griping about slowness on here but I'm thinking it sounds like a very useful lens otherwise. Likely when I do upgrade to a WR DSLR I will get that lens for it used if I don't get the kit. It's got the perfect range for walking around shooting and portraits, I think.

The 18-135 is a bit addictive - the IQ is pretty reasonable in most situations, it has great contrast and centre sharpness, the build is great and the af snappy, but what keeps it on my camera is the WR. I can shoot in pretty much ant conditions without worrying about swapping lenses. On a recent photo charter in the rain (good old English weather) a fellow participant with a 5DMkII had problems with the motors several of his lenses giving up the ghost in the wet! Mind you he was also toting a Pentax 6x7 film rig!
My k5 and 18-135 kept going.

Token Exchange | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

bdery · 03-29-2013, 05:20 AM

Originally posted by JayX2A

I'm just looking for a higher quality of lens. Trying to get some more jobs at events and maybe weddings and I don't think the 18-135 is good enough in that respect.

you're right, in difficult lighting conditions your 18-135 won't cut it.

Originally posted by JayX2A

I may end up keeping it in my bag for any bad conditions a well us upgrading to a higher quality of lenses.

Or replace it with a faster zoom and a 18-55 WR for difficult conditions.

NitroDC · 03-29-2013, 05:31 AM

If you're going to be shooting in low light then obviously you need a faster lens than the 18-135. However I wouldn't be so sure about actually "replacing" it. I'd probably end up buying another zoom and keeping both since WR is pretty indispensable to me. However if you never shoot in bad weather and don't plan to, then replacement is a pretty obvious choice because there are a few great zooms that will deliver better IQ in that range. Namely Sigma 24-70, Tamron 28-75, or a Tamron/Sigma 17-50 if you're okay with the shorter (but wider) range.

AlexeySe · 03-29-2013, 07:48 AM

I have Tamron 28-75, but now waiting 18-135

28 is too narrow, especially in street photo or in small room. It's good lense, but I'm planning replace it with new Sigma 17-70.
And I have to say that 28 on Tamron not so good. Beginning from 33 everithing is ok. But 2,8 you can use only from f/4-4,5. If you plan in future buying 70-200, then 17-70 will be optimal choice.
P.S. Sorry for awful English, I'm not native

JayX2A · 03-29-2013, 12:19 PM

The 17-70 is no quicker than the 18-135? Would not see that as an upgrade?

AlexeySe · 03-29-2013, 02:05 PM

Originally posted by JayX2A

The 17-70 is no quicker than the 18-135? Would not see that as an upgrade?

I mean the new Sigma 17-70/2.8-4. I tested it on Nikon comparing Tamron 28-75. I can say that it is little faster or the same.

03-28-2013, 05:18 AM	#1
JayX2A Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 120	Replacing the 18-135 WR? I have yet to use the 18-135 WR extensivly, but I think I want something faster. Was considering the 24-70 f2.8 as do not go wide very often. I am also considering the 70-200 f2.8 at a later date. Any other fast zooms I should look in to?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax 18-135 WR - Is it worth the $400-500?	reivax	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	43	03-24-2013 10:10 AM
K5 II - 18-135 WR or 15-55 & 50-200 WR	JayX2A	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	02-11-2013 08:11 AM
18-55 vs 18-135 WR-ness	Giklab	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	04-19-2012 10:56 AM
Better low-light performance: Tamron 18-250 or Pentax 18-135 WR	wedge	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	09-06-2011 02:14 PM
WR lenses (not the 18-135)	kyteflyer	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	03-27-2011 07:38 PM

03-28-2013, 05:29 AM	#2
Gray Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Cape Town Photos: Gallery Posts: 536	I have the 18-135 and Tamron 28-75/2.8. I highly recommend the Tamron - fast, sharp, light, excellent value - and beats the 18-135 in IQ - I use if for landscape and general purpose - it's always in my bag. I use the 18-135 in bad weather or for hiking.

03-28-2013, 07:36 AM	#3
dboeren Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Marietta, GA Photos: Albums Posts: 148	I've heard really good things about the Tamron 28-75mm too, although I wish it went a little wider. Pentax has a ~16-85mm on their roadmap that sounds perfect to me but it's not out yet and it's also a DA* which means it will be pricy...

03-28-2013, 09:55 AM	#4
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,360	You will loose WR if you leave the 18-135 behind, that might or might not be a problem for you, but something to remember. I think lenses like the 18-135 live well together with other lenses. Their purpose is not great IQ, it's to be always on, dependable in all situations and relatively compact. That being said, I don't really own a lens serving the purpose the 18-135 serves, I use several lenses for that

03-28-2013, 10:37 AM	#5
kenafein Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Southern California Photos: Albums Posts: 4,082	The Tamron 28-75 is awesome. It's true that 28 isn't wide on APS-C, but I always found it to be a good walk around lens. The Tamron 17-50 can be had for a good price also. The 70-200 is excellent, but huge.

03-28-2013, 04:33 PM	#6
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	Fast is nice but being covered for shooting in the rain, dust, et all? Priceless. If the image quality is good I'd keep it. Better a little slow and that range than unprotected. I've been coveting that kit kind of, the K30 and the 18-135. I'm seeing a fair amount of griping about slowness on here but I'm thinking it sounds like a very useful lens otherwise. Likely when I do upgrade to a WR DSLR I will get that lens for it used if I don't get the kit. It's got the perfect range for walking around shooting and portraits, I think.

03-28-2013, 05:50 PM	#7
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,481	The Tamron 28-75 was not wide enough for me - I was always backing up, or trying to. The 17-70 range works better for me for a single lens choice. The IQ is better than the kit but not as good as the 28-75. If you need WR, try a plastic bag and rubber bands.

03-28-2013, 11:15 PM	#8
JayX2A Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 120 Original Poster	I'm just looking for a higher quality of lens. Trying to get some more jobs at events and maybe weddings and I don't think the 18-135 is good enough in that respect. I may end up keeping it in my bag for any bad conditions a well us upgrading to a higher quality of lenses.

03-29-2013, 12:54 AM	#9
onggie New Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 24	I just received my Tammy in the mail Yesterday after debating whether to go the 18-135 or 28-75. The Tamron has great IQ autofocus is a bit loud but other than that, I think it comes out on top.

03-29-2013, 01:44 AM	#10
StephenHampshire Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Winchester Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,523	Originally posted by magkelly Fast is nice but being covered for shooting in the rain, dust, et all? Priceless. If the image quality is good I'd keep it. Better a little slow and that range than unprotected. I've been coveting that kit kind of, the K30 and the 18-135. I'm seeing a fair amount of griping about slowness on here but I'm thinking it sounds like a very useful lens otherwise. Likely when I do upgrade to a WR DSLR I will get that lens for it used if I don't get the kit. It's got the perfect range for walking around shooting and portraits, I think. The 18-135 is a bit addictive - the IQ is pretty reasonable in most situations, it has great contrast and centre sharpness, the build is great and the af snappy, but what keeps it on my camera is the WR. I can shoot in pretty much ant conditions without worrying about swapping lenses. On a recent photo charter in the rain (good old English weather) a fellow participant with a 5DMkII had problems with the motors several of his lenses giving up the ghost in the wet! Mind you he was also toting a Pentax 6x7 film rig! My k5 and 18-135 kept going. Token Exchange \| Flickr - Photo Sharing!

03-29-2013, 05:20 AM	#11
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,360	Originally posted by JayX2A I'm just looking for a higher quality of lens. Trying to get some more jobs at events and maybe weddings and I don't think the 18-135 is good enough in that respect. you're right, in difficult lighting conditions your 18-135 won't cut it. Originally posted by JayX2A I may end up keeping it in my bag for any bad conditions a well us upgrading to a higher quality of lenses. Or replace it with a faster zoom and a 18-55 WR for difficult conditions.

03-29-2013, 05:31 AM	#12
NitroDC Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 342	If you're going to be shooting in low light then obviously you need a faster lens than the 18-135. However I wouldn't be so sure about actually "replacing" it. I'd probably end up buying another zoom and keeping both since WR is pretty indispensable to me. However if you never shoot in bad weather and don't plan to, then replacement is a pretty obvious choice because there are a few great zooms that will deliver better IQ in that range. Namely Sigma 24-70, Tamron 28-75, or a Tamron/Sigma 17-50 if you're okay with the shorter (but wider) range.

03-29-2013, 07:48 AM	#13
AlexeySe New Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 4	I have Tamron 28-75, but now waiting 18-135 28 is too narrow, especially in street photo or in small room. It's good lense, but I'm planning replace it with new Sigma 17-70. And I have to say that 28 on Tamron not so good. Beginning from 33 everithing is ok. But 2,8 you can use only from f/4-4,5. If you plan in future buying 70-200, then 17-70 will be optimal choice. P.S. Sorry for awful English, I'm not native

03-29-2013, 12:19 PM	#14
JayX2A Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 120 Original Poster	The 17-70 is no quicker than the 18-135? Would not see that as an upgrade?

03-29-2013, 02:05 PM	#15
AlexeySe New Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 4	Originally posted by JayX2A The 17-70 is no quicker than the 18-135? Would not see that as an upgrade? I mean the new Sigma 17-70/2.8-4. I tested it on Nikon comparing Tamron 28-75. I can say that it is little faster or the same.