Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-03-2014, 03:03 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 440
16-85mm vs 18-135mm wr

I'm in need of a WR zoom.

Just wondering if I should hold out for the 16-85mm.

Is the expectation that its IQ should be superior to the 18-135mm? I don't remember seeing a rough guide price for the 16-85mm. So I guess its down to speculation

10-03-2014, 03:06 PM   #2
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Washington Cascades
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,320
QuoteOriginally posted by Conqueror Quote
So I guess its down to speculation
Just about everything except: "16-85" is open to speculation................
10-03-2014, 03:07 PM   #3
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 49,612
I would expect the 16-85 to be better in the corners since it isn't quite a superzoom, but we really have to wait until it comes out...

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, 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:

10-03-2014, 03:19 PM - 2 Likes   #4
Veteran Member
robjmitchell's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne Aus
Posts: 1,457
If your into landscapes the 16mm vs the 18mm makes a huge difference. On the tele end you can always crop if you have the resolution.

10-03-2014, 04:26 PM   #5
Veteran Member
bobell69's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Courtenay BC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 498
If you have patience., wait for the new lens to come out and look at the reviews. I'm hopeful that it will be a good lens for both landscapes as well as portraits.
10-03-2014, 05:44 PM   #6
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 35,938
Do you have 85-135 covered with another lens? If not, I'd go for the 18-135. If so, I'd wait for the 16-85 to come out. The thing is, if you buy the 16-85 right after it comes out you'll probably pay more than the 18-135, which has fallen from over $600 to less than $500. We don't know when the 16-85 will be discounted, the 18-135 is discounted now. So many things to think about.
10-03-2014, 08:46 PM   #7
Junior Member
Funsize's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 34
I'd wait to see what the 16-85 has to offer. Pentax must think it has some significant advantage over the 18-135 or there'd be no point in releasing it.
10-04-2014, 02:24 AM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 440
Original Poster
QuoteQuote:
Do you have 85-135 covered with another lens?
100mm DFA WR and 55-300mm DA metal mount ... so only 100mm in WR

I'm after something for foul weather but travel too

I haven't completely ruled out the DA 20-40mm ... as this would result in a nice kit:

DA 15mm (own)
DA 20-40mm
DA* 55mm (own)
DFA WR 100mm (own)

The FA 35mm f2 and 55-300mm which I also own would be applying for new jobs perhaps in that setup above



QuoteQuote:
Pentax must think it has some significant advantage over the 18-135 or there'd be no point in releasing it.
Yes other lenses are getting the HD treatment, but not the 18-135mm so perhaps it is an approximate replacement.

10-04-2014, 04:23 AM   #9
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
dakight's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,216
"A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Actually it's worth much more than that. There is *always* something newer, "better" and more desirable in the pipeline. If the 18-135 does what you want and it fits within your budget then buy it. If you wait for the next best thing you will spend all your time waiting and not shooting.
10-04-2014, 07:20 AM   #10
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 35,938
I'd go with the 18-135. Used in combo with the 100 macro, a DA 15 and 55-300 it covers pretty much every conceivable use and limits your lens changes in the field.
The IQ of the 18-135 is excellent centre sharp everywhere in it's focal length, and I hate lens changes, so going to 135 is important, and I use 135 on the 18-135 extensively, even as a pseudo macro because it focuses very close. For me, I'm just not giving that up.

A few recent K-3 images... from a bushwhack through some wilderness, trying to find a lake....
K-3 and DA 18-135

Pseudo macro at 135mm





Wide angle 18mm


This last one taken at 48mm


You have a wide angle shot taken at 18 and a couple close ups taken at 135... people will say you don't need the range. When I see some images taken with their shorter FL lenses I like as much as the ones I take at 135mm with this lens, I might listen.

For me I wouldn't wait for the 16-85, because it's not the lens I want. But, everyone is different.
10-04-2014, 07:17 PM   #11
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,829
QuoteOriginally posted by Conqueror Quote

The FA 35mm f2 and 55-300mm which I also own would be applying for new jobs perhaps in that setup above
I have done some pretty nice traveling with those two plus a DA21 or 15. I fell and broke the plastic front on my trusty FA35 traveling this summer, and it has now been replaced by the FA31-- not nearly as light and compact, but a beautiful lens which never wants to leave my K3.
10-05-2014, 02:32 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SoCal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 517
Norm, you have me convinced. I have tried out (LensRentals.com) the Pentax 18-135mm WR - and its a nice lens - especially for outdoors/walking/hiking.
Its not an optically 'perfect' lens, but for what I shoot ~90% of the time, this is a good lens.
Only reason I wouldn't get it - would be if I was wanting something faster or longer - I don't shoot enough of those to make it worthwhile (yet).
My only wish on this lens would have been a macro function. It can focus decently though at fairly short distances (compared to say... Rokinion 85mm which needs 1m)
10-05-2014, 04:43 PM   #13
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 35,938
QuoteOriginally posted by formercanuck Quote
Norm, you have me convinced. I have tried out (LensRentals.com) the Pentax 18-135mm WR - and its a nice lens - especially for outdoors/walking/hiking.
Its not an optically 'perfect' lens, but for what I shoot ~90% of the time, this is a good lens.
Only reason I wouldn't get it - would be if I was wanting something faster or longer - I don't shoot enough of those to make it worthwhile (yet).
My only wish on this lens would have been a macro function. It can focus decently though at fairly short distances (compared to say... Rokinion 85mm which needs 1m)


The Tamron 90 or DFA 100 WR are also great macro companions for the 18-135.
10-05-2014, 04:43 PM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 1,121
Very nice demonstration, Norm. A WR zoom is on my wishlist...just not at the top right now. I know how useful they can be, but I just don't lust after them, lol. For now I have a DA-L 18-55 non-WR to cover my zoom needs. I do think a 16-85 or 18-135 would see more camera time though. Being that the 18-135 is a bit smaller and undoubtedly will be cheaper, I may end up going that direction...in two years when I get out of grad school, haha.
10-06-2014, 10:53 AM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SoCal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 517
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The Tamron 90 or DFA 100 WR are also great macro companions for the 18-135.
For now, I'll stick with my 'freebie' Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 and Sigma 28mm f/2.8 mini-wide II. Only real downside with the Rokinon - min focusing is 1m.
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!
16-85mm vs 18-135mm, 18-135mm, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K30 w/ 18-135mm or K5 w/ 18-55mm AL WR & SMCP-DA 50-200mm WR biscohuffer Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 06-25-2013 08:30 PM
K-30 WR body + spare battery + 18-135mm WR lens + 18-55mm WR lens = 738 jido Pentax Price Watch 4 01-16-2013 04:36 AM
pentax 18-135mm wr lens vs sigma 18-125mm dc os hsm lens atg Pentax K-5 5 12-14-2012 08:24 AM
pentax 18-135mm wr vs sigma 18-125mm DC os hsm lens atg Welcomes and Introductions 2 12-13-2012 07:55 PM
18-135mm vs 18-55mm WR kit lens incidentflux Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 01-04-2012 10:12 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:34 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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