16-85mm vs 18-135mm wr

Conqueror · 10-03-2014, 03:03 PM

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

**jatrax** · 10-03-2014, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by Conqueror

So I guess its down to speculation

Just about everything except: "16-85" is open to speculation................

Adam · 10-03-2014, 03:07 PM

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...

robjmitchell · 10-03-2014, 03:19 PM - **2 Likes**

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.

bobell69 · 10-03-2014, 04:26 PM

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.

normhead · 10-03-2014, 05:44 PM

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.

Funsize · 10-03-2014, 08:46 PM

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.

Conqueror · 10-04-2014, 02:24 AM

Quote:

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

Quote:

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.

dakight · 10-04-2014, 04:23 AM

"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.

normhead · 10-04-2014, 07:20 AM

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.

GeneV · 10-04-2014, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by Conqueror

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.

formercanuck · 10-05-2014, 02:32 PM

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)

normhead · 10-05-2014, 04:43 PM

Originally posted by formercanuck

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.

**filoxophy** · 10-05-2014, 04:43 PM

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.

formercanuck · 10-06-2014, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by normhead

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.

10-03-2014, 03:03 PM	#1
Conqueror 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, 03:07 PM	#3
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,608	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 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:

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 & K-5 II	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

10-03-2014, 03:06 PM	#2
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by Conqueror So I guess its down to speculation Just about everything except: "16-85" is open to speculation................

10-03-2014, 03:19 PM - 2 Likes	#4
robjmitchell Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne Aus Posts: 1,776	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
bobell69 Veteran Member 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
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	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
Funsize Junior Member 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
Conqueror Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: UK Posts: 440 Original Poster	Quote: 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 Quote: 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
dakight Veteran Member 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
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	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
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Conqueror 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
formercanuck Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: SoCal Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 518	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
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by formercanuck 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
filoxophy Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Albuquerque Posts: 1,133	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
formercanuck Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: SoCal Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 518	Originally posted by normhead 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.