18-135mm disappointment - Alternatives?

theraven871 · 05-27-2014, 01:04 PM

I recently had an opportunity to play with a Pentax 18-135mm.
Its a good lens for its price range; But I'm looking for something with a bit better IQ.
Is there an alternative to this focal range for Pentax cameras?

The focal range doesn't have to be exact. I'm just trying to evaluate options.

cbope · 05-27-2014, 01:13 PM - **1 Like**

There are not any good all-in-one alternatives with the same focal length range. I ended up getting the Pentax DA* 16-50 f2.8 and DA* 50-135 f2.8 two lens combo to cover that range. But, it's a lot bigger and heavier kit than a single DA 18-135.

I've used a friend's DA 18-135 and I thought it was OK, perhaps a bit better than the kit DA 18-55 lens, but not significantly so. It would be a decent travel lens, but I use my DA* 16-50 for that and it's not significantly bigger or heavier than the DA 18-135. I rarely miss the extra reach since I mostly shoot landscapes/cityscapes.

hcc · 05-27-2014, 01:24 PM

The DA18-135mm is an all-around zoom lens. Like ALL all-around zoom lens, the lens design is a compromise over the range of focal lengths. And the all-around zoom lenses cannot yield the IQ standards of the best primes.

If you want the best IQ, you need to go primes.

If you want IQ at the best price, go for primes.

If you want IQ and have a budget, consider the DA* zoom lenses or alternatives. A few in-depth reviews include:
DA* 16-50mm vs. Sigma and Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 Comparison - Introduction - Pentax Camera Forums
Fast Sports Zoom Lenses for Pentax - 70-200mm Sigma & Tamron - Pentax Camera Forums
HD Pentax-DA 20-40mm Limited - Introduction - Pentax Camera Forums
https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-da-60-250mm/introduction.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-da-star-50-135mm-f28-lens/introduction.html

My 5 cents....

DSims · 05-27-2014, 01:30 PM

Correct - the DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 is the alternative.

Does anyone really make a great ~18-135 lens for any DSLR? I'm struggling to think of who that would be. Perhaps some are slightly better than Pentax' version, but none are outstanding. The best similar lenses that come to mind are Canon's 24-105/4 and Nikon's 24-120/4. Both are quite good, but they're Full Frame lenses, and 24mm is not at all the same as 18mm. For that matter, 105mm or 120mm isn't as long as 135mm. Perhaps the closest lens in a Pentax is the FA24-90/3.5-4.5.

The DA*50-135 is outstanding, and the DA*16-50 is very good to excellent. They cost much less used, if you're considering buying them.

theraven871 · 05-27-2014, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by cbope

There are not any good all-in-one alternatives with the same focal length range. I ended up getting the Pentax DA* 16-50 f2.8 and DA* 50-135 f2.8 two lens combo to cover that range. But, it's a lot bigger and heavier kit than a single DA 18-135.

I've used a friend's DA 18-135 and I thought it was OK, perhaps a bit better than the kit DA 18-55 lens, but not significantly so. It would be a decent travel lens, but I use my DA* 16-50 for that and it's not significantly bigger or heavier than the DA 18-135. I rarely miss the extra reach since I mostly shoot landscapes/cityscapes.

Your approach may be the best way to tackle this focal range.
As much as I would prefer 1 lens instead of 2, I just don't think I would be happy with the 18-135mm.

Biro · 05-27-2014, 01:33 PM

If the DA* 16-50 and 50-135 f/2.8 are too much money for you or you simply don't want glass that big and heavy, the next stop would be the DA 17-70mm f/4 or perhaps the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro HSM . Adam did a comparison review between the Pentax and two versions of the Sigma 17-70:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-sigma-17-70mm-comparison/introduction.html?src=lrdb

cbope · 05-27-2014, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by hcc

If you want IQ at the best price, go for primes.

Hmm... not sure this will hold up. How many primes are needed to fully cover the 18-135 range and how much would this set cost? If we are talking new lenses, not used, I'm pretty sure this is going to go way over the cost of two DA* zooms covering the same range.

I'm open to be proven wrong, but I just can't get my head around the numbers working out in favor of the primes. And then there is the weight and space issue...

I don't hate primes, but they have their place. I regularly carry 3-4 in my bag, but I find myself using them less and less as I get better zooms. Now they mainly come out only for special occasions... like macros, the lovely bokeh of my Super Tak 50/1.4, etc.

**savoche** · 05-27-2014, 01:38 PM

What hcc said. You don't get super IQ in a 5x zoom, and a fairly small one at that.

The 18-135 is good at a lot of things, excellent at none. I find it to be a brilliant travel lens, but if I want to play artist I'll use primes.

**crewl1** · 05-27-2014, 01:40 PM

I used an 18-135 in combination with a DA*300 on a birding trip earlier this year.
The WR came in handy as it was rainy, but I was disappointed as well with the IQ of the zoom for this nature focused excursion.
I usually use it for family snapshots as a one lens solution and it fits the bill well, but for more critical work it is lacking especially when compared to higher end glass.
I have since purchased a DA*50-135 as a companion for my DA*300 on these types of trips.

cbope · 05-27-2014, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by Biro

If the DA* 16-50 and 50-135 f/2.8 are too much money for you or you simply don't want glass that big and heavy, the next stop would be the DA 17-70mm f/4 or perhaps the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro HSM . Adam did a comparison review between the Pentax and two versions of the Sigma 17-70:

Pentax 17-70mm Lens Comparison - Introduction - Pentax Camera Forums

I was very close to buying the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 DC Macro HSM, but in the end went with the DA* due to WR, fixed aperture and quick-shift manual focus. In the end, it was worth the extra cost to go Pentax.

Adam · 05-27-2014, 01:44 PM - **1 Like**

If you want premium image quality, go for one of the 16-50 or 17-50 lenses from pentax/sigma/tamron, they're all quite good.

DSims · 05-27-2014, 01:55 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by theraven871

Your approach may be the best way to tackle this focal range.
As much as I would prefer 1 lens instead of 2, I just don't think I would be happy with the 18-135mm.

I went through the exact same process, and I realized I wasn't going to be happy with the IQ unless I split the range up. It's the same way with any manufacturer (the closest thing to an exception being the Canon and Nikon 24-105/120 lenses I mentioned).

I you look at the images from the DA*50-135 you'll quickly realize the trade-off is worth it. It's the best such lens on the market, and one of the best lenses Pentax has ever made, IMO.

Don't struggle too much with the DA*16-50 decision. You simply won't find the same level of IQ as the DA*50-135 (not even in other DSLR brands). So simply compare the DA*16-50 with the Tamron and Sigma 17-50/2.8, and make a decision. Some objective measurements say the Tamron is better, but subjectively I didn't like it enough. So just decide which is better for you, and realize this zoom range will be a compromise in IQ no matter what. For me the DA*16-50 was the only lens of the three that (just barely) exceeded my own personal minimum standard for IQ, so I bought it and am happy with it (even though it cost about twice as much as the Tamron, which I don't think I would have been happy with).

Two more points:

1) Don't let the SDM issues some owners have had scare you off, because these lenses deliver on the IQ, and you'd be missing out on many great photos

2) Neither of these lenses focuses quickly enough for most fast-moving sports. They'll work sometimes, but if you get close in with wide apertures like me, you'll be pulling your hair out in frustration some of the time. You'll need other lenses for this situation, and the ones that can really deliver the same IQ for sports are mostly screw-drive primes. So even though I consider this DA* zoom combo the best value on the market IQ-wise, they can't do everything.

Kozlok · 05-27-2014, 02:08 PM

For me, I don't need to cover every mm of every FL. I keep the18-135 around for traveling with the family. In the center, from 20-70, the IQ is really very good. When traveling, that meets my needs.

A truly great solution is the DA15 limited, a Sigma 30/1.4 and the Tamron 70-200. If you are feeling more inclusive, add the 21 limited and your favorite 50 to the mix. Maybe a dedicated macro as well.

theraven871 · 05-27-2014, 02:08 PM

Originally posted by DSims

I went through the exact same process, and I realized I wasn't going to be happy with the IQ unless I split the range up.
For me the DA*16-50 was the only lens of the three that (just barely) exceeded my own personal minimum standard for IQ, so I bought it and am happy with it now (even though it cost about twice what the Tamron would have cost me).

I don't have any issue splitting the range up.
As much as I would love to support pentax, I just don't see a large enough of a difference in the 16/17-50mm range over the Sigma and Tamron alternatives.
Is the DA* from Pentax? That would make more sense if it was.
Otherwise, the Pentax version seems wildly overpriced compared to the Tamron and Sigma.

That said, I'm not afraid to spend money on good glass. But not when the competition is offering identical quality for 1/3 the price.
I can get the Sigma/Tamron variants for $450-$550; whereas the Pentax is almost $1300.

Can anyone explain if I'm missing something here? Is there some feature I'm not aware of that makes the Pentax worth so much more?
(Other than the Pentax logo)

**miltona580** · 05-27-2014, 02:16 PM

Also, a premium zoom is not as good as a premium prime. I have both the FA Limited set and DA* 16-50. The DA* 16-50 is a great lens. The FA Limiteds are considerably better. Would I consider the DA* 16-50 good enough to use everyday? Yes, most of the time I would. I wouldn't use it for a shot the sun was in unless I intentionally wanted flare (that is one of its weaknesses - prone to flare). Also, the primes are all faster, enabling me to get a shot at a lower fstop that is impossible with the zoom.

But all of these lenses are WAY better than a super zoom. However, you do have to ask yourself, what is it you want. Will you be happy with good but not great results? If so, that super zoom is WR and covers a very large range. If you want something better, I think people pointing you to the DA* zooms are not incorrect - just the cost is way higher. If you start thinking about primes, again the price will be even higher than the premium zooms. You won't have to cover everything, but you will probably need/want an ultra wide, a wide, a normal, a short telephoto, and a long telephoto.

05-27-2014, 01:04 PM	#1
theraven871 Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 86	18-135mm disappointment - Alternatives? I recently had an opportunity to play with a Pentax 18-135mm. Its a good lens for its price range; But I'm looking for something with a bit better IQ. Is there an alternative to this focal range for Pentax cameras? The focal range doesn't have to be exact. I'm just trying to evaluate options.

05-27-2014, 01:44 PM - 1 Like	#11
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595	If you want premium image quality, go for one of the 16-50 or 17-50 lenses from pentax/sigma/tamron, they're all quite good. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

05-27-2014, 01:55 PM - 1 Like	#12
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by theraven871 Your approach may be the best way to tackle this focal range. As much as I would prefer 1 lens instead of 2, I just don't think I would be happy with the 18-135mm. I went through the exact same process, and I realized I wasn't going to be happy with the IQ unless I split the range up. It's the same way with any manufacturer (the closest thing to an exception being the Canon and Nikon 24-105/120 lenses I mentioned). I you look at the images from the DA50-135 you'll quickly realize the trade-off is worth it. It's the best such lens on the market, and one of the best lenses Pentax has ever made, IMO. Don't struggle too much with the DA16-50 decision. You simply won't find the same level of IQ as the DA50-135 (not even in other DSLR brands). So simply compare the DA16-50 with the Tamron and Sigma 17-50/2.8, and make a decision. Some objective measurements say the Tamron is better, but subjectively I didn't like it enough. So just decide which is better for you, and realize this zoom range will be a compromise in IQ no matter what. For me the DA16-50 was the only lens of the three that (just barely) exceeded my own personal minimum standard for IQ, so I bought it and am happy with it (even though it cost about twice as much as the Tamron, which I don't think I would have been happy with). Two more points: 1) Don't let the SDM issues some owners have had scare you off, because these lenses deliver on the IQ, and you'd be missing out on many great photos 2) Neither of these lenses focuses quickly enough for most fast-moving sports. They'll work sometimes, but if you get close in with wide apertures like me, you'll be pulling your hair out in frustration some of the time. You'll need other lenses for this situation, and the ones that can really deliver the same IQ for sports are mostly screw-drive primes. So even though I consider this DA zoom combo the best value on the market IQ-wise, they can't do everything. Last edited by DSims; 05-27-2014 at 02:15 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Trying to swap my 18-55 WR kit lens for its 18-135mm equivalent	Styx1284	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	13	01-21-2014 06:53 PM
pentax 18-135mm wr vs sigma 18-125mm DC os hsm lens	atg	Welcomes and Introductions	2	12-13-2012 07:55 PM
lens hood alternatives for DA* 50-135mm	laissezfaire	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	05-20-2010 12:26 AM
Alternatives to Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8	hinman	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	46	10-01-2009 03:10 AM
Alternatives to Sigma 18-125	ngkmh	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	08-08-2007 01:16 AM

05-27-2014, 01:13 PM - 1 Like	#2
cbope Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Helsinki Posts: 664	There are not any good all-in-one alternatives with the same focal length range. I ended up getting the Pentax DA* 16-50 f2.8 and DA* 50-135 f2.8 two lens combo to cover that range. But, it's a lot bigger and heavier kit than a single DA 18-135. I've used a friend's DA 18-135 and I thought it was OK, perhaps a bit better than the kit DA 18-55 lens, but not significantly so. It would be a decent travel lens, but I use my DA* 16-50 for that and it's not significantly bigger or heavier than the DA 18-135. I rarely miss the extra reach since I mostly shoot landscapes/cityscapes.

05-27-2014, 01:24 PM	#3
hcc Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,002	The DA18-135mm is an all-around zoom lens. Like ALL all-around zoom lens, the lens design is a compromise over the range of focal lengths. And the all-around zoom lenses cannot yield the IQ standards of the best primes. If you want the best IQ, you need to go primes. If you want IQ at the best price, go for primes. If you want IQ and have a budget, consider the DA* zoom lenses or alternatives. A few in-depth reviews include: DA* 16-50mm vs. Sigma and Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 Comparison - Introduction - Pentax Camera Forums Fast Sports Zoom Lenses for Pentax - 70-200mm Sigma & Tamron - Pentax Camera Forums HD Pentax-DA 20-40mm Limited - Introduction - Pentax Camera Forums https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-da-60-250mm/introduction.html https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-da-star-50-135mm-f28-lens/introduction.html My 5 cents....

05-27-2014, 01:30 PM	#4
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Correct - the DA16-50 and DA50-135 is the alternative. Does anyone really make a great ~18-135 lens for any DSLR? I'm struggling to think of who that would be. Perhaps some are slightly better than Pentax' version, but none are outstanding. The best similar lenses that come to mind are Canon's 24-105/4 and Nikon's 24-120/4. Both are quite good, but they're Full Frame lenses, and 24mm is not at all the same as 18mm. For that matter, 105mm or 120mm isn't as long as 135mm. Perhaps the closest lens in a Pentax is the FA24-90/3.5-4.5. The DA50-135 is outstanding, and the DA16-50 is very good to excellent. They cost much less used, if you're considering buying them.

05-27-2014, 01:31 PM	#5
theraven871 Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 86 Original Poster	Originally posted by cbope There are not any good all-in-one alternatives with the same focal length range. I ended up getting the Pentax DA* 16-50 f2.8 and DA* 50-135 f2.8 two lens combo to cover that range. But, it's a lot bigger and heavier kit than a single DA 18-135. I've used a friend's DA 18-135 and I thought it was OK, perhaps a bit better than the kit DA 18-55 lens, but not significantly so. It would be a decent travel lens, but I use my DA* 16-50 for that and it's not significantly bigger or heavier than the DA 18-135. I rarely miss the extra reach since I mostly shoot landscapes/cityscapes. Your approach may be the best way to tackle this focal range. As much as I would prefer 1 lens instead of 2, I just don't think I would be happy with the 18-135mm.

05-27-2014, 01:33 PM	#6
Biro Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 1,200	If the DA* 16-50 and 50-135 f/2.8 are too much money for you or you simply don't want glass that big and heavy, the next stop would be the DA 17-70mm f/4 or perhaps the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro HSM . Adam did a comparison review between the Pentax and two versions of the Sigma 17-70: https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-sigma-17-70mm-comparison/introduction.html?src=lrdb

05-27-2014, 01:37 PM	#7
cbope Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Helsinki Posts: 664	Originally posted by hcc If you want IQ at the best price, go for primes. Hmm... not sure this will hold up. How many primes are needed to fully cover the 18-135 range and how much would this set cost? If we are talking new lenses, not used, I'm pretty sure this is going to go way over the cost of two DA* zooms covering the same range. I'm open to be proven wrong, but I just can't get my head around the numbers working out in favor of the primes. And then there is the weight and space issue... I don't hate primes, but they have their place. I regularly carry 3-4 in my bag, but I find myself using them less and less as I get better zooms. Now they mainly come out only for special occasions... like macros, the lovely bokeh of my Super Tak 50/1.4, etc.

05-27-2014, 01:38 PM	#8
savoche Master of the obvious Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Lowlands of Norway Posts: 18,311	What hcc said. You don't get super IQ in a 5x zoom, and a fairly small one at that. The 18-135 is good at a lot of things, excellent at none. I find it to be a brilliant travel lens, but if I want to play artist I'll use primes.

05-27-2014, 01:40 PM	#9
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	I used an 18-135 in combination with a DA300 on a birding trip earlier this year. The WR came in handy as it was rainy, but I was disappointed as well with the IQ of the zoom for this nature focused excursion. I usually use it for family snapshots as a one lens solution and it fits the bill well, but for more critical work it is lacking especially when compared to higher end glass. I have since purchased a DA50-135 as a companion for my DA*300 on these types of trips.

05-27-2014, 01:41 PM	#10
cbope Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Helsinki Posts: 664	Originally posted by Biro If the DA* 16-50 and 50-135 f/2.8 are too much money for you or you simply don't want glass that big and heavy, the next stop would be the DA 17-70mm f/4 or perhaps the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro HSM . Adam did a comparison review between the Pentax and two versions of the Sigma 17-70: Pentax 17-70mm Lens Comparison - Introduction - Pentax Camera Forums I was very close to buying the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 DC Macro HSM, but in the end went with the DA* due to WR, fixed aperture and quick-shift manual focus. In the end, it was worth the extra cost to go Pentax.

05-27-2014, 02:08 PM	#13
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	For me, I don't need to cover every mm of every FL. I keep the18-135 around for traveling with the family. In the center, from 20-70, the IQ is really very good. When traveling, that meets my needs. A truly great solution is the DA15 limited, a Sigma 30/1.4 and the Tamron 70-200. If you are feeling more inclusive, add the 21 limited and your favorite 50 to the mix. Maybe a dedicated macro as well.

05-27-2014, 02:08 PM	#14
theraven871 Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 86 Original Poster	Originally posted by DSims I went through the exact same process, and I realized I wasn't going to be happy with the IQ unless I split the range up. For me the DA16-50 was the only lens of the three that (just barely) exceeded my own personal minimum standard for IQ, so I bought it and am happy with it now (even though it cost about twice what the Tamron would have cost me). I don't have any issue splitting the range up. As much as I would love to support pentax, I just don't see a large enough of a difference in the 16/17-50mm range over the Sigma and Tamron alternatives. Is the DA from Pentax? That would make more sense if it was. Otherwise, the Pentax version seems wildly overpriced compared to the Tamron and Sigma. That said, I'm not afraid to spend money on good glass. But not when the competition is offering identical quality for 1/3 the price. I can get the Sigma/Tamron variants for $450-$550; whereas the Pentax is almost $1300. Can anyone explain if I'm missing something here? Is there some feature I'm not aware of that makes the Pentax worth so much more? (Other than the Pentax logo)

05-27-2014, 02:16 PM	#15
miltona580 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 309	Also, a premium zoom is not as good as a premium prime. I have both the FA Limited set and DA* 16-50. The DA* 16-50 is a great lens. The FA Limiteds are considerably better. Would I consider the DA* 16-50 good enough to use everyday? Yes, most of the time I would. I wouldn't use it for a shot the sun was in unless I intentionally wanted flare (that is one of its weaknesses - prone to flare). Also, the primes are all faster, enabling me to get a shot at a lower fstop that is impossible with the zoom. But all of these lenses are WAY better than a super zoom. However, you do have to ask yourself, what is it you want. Will you be happy with good but not great results? If so, that super zoom is WR and covers a very large range. If you want something better, I think people pointing you to the DA* zooms are not incorrect - just the cost is way higher. If you start thinking about primes, again the price will be even higher than the premium zooms. You won't have to cover everything, but you will probably need/want an ultra wide, a wide, a normal, a short telephoto, and a long telephoto.