[bmw_328ci]

I want to get K3 and I am torn apart. Its either the kit with 18-135 and 50 as my prime lens or the 20-40 limited (which will be 576 if bought with the K3) and that make it in my price range($1250 for two lens or $1370 with the limited) Any one own the both lenses (18-135 and 20-40) ? Which choice is better?

[c.a.m]

Sorry, I own the 18-135 but not the 20-40. However, when I was looking for a lens to fill a gap in my focal-length range and also get a weather-resistant (WR) lens, I seriously considered the 20-40. At the time (August 2014), I felt it was too expensive for me (CAD $1,000) compared to the somewhat limited reviews and polarized views of users (some good, some not so good). I also saw many more consistently-positive comments on the 18-135 than for the 20-40, and almost all of the images that were posted for the 18-135 were 'nice'. The recent detailed lens review on PF gave it a solid rating. Don't get me wrong - there are also a number of examples of great images taken with the 20-40, so it seems to be a capable lens, image-quality wise and some users are very happy with it.

As a side benefit, I am finding that the 18-135 also provides a versatile focal-length range that is handy when I go hiking with my wife (who is not a photographer) - I don't need to change lenses, which makes for a more pleasant experience and allows me to still take snaps as we walk. It would also be a good travel lens.

Now, I probably would have chosen differently if the 20-40 was at your price point of $576, although I wasn't in the market for a new camera and also have other lenses. Here in Canada, the current best price is still at around $850 I think.

If this is your first DSLR, or if you don't have other good lenses, then I'd recommend getting the 18-135 + 50mm. That would provide you with a very decent kit.

Hope this helps a bit. Wait and see what other PF members say, as my comments reflect only my own opinion.

- Craig

[nicoprod]

Choose flexibility 18-135 and 50. Take pictures.

[UncleVanya]

What do you plan to shoot?

[AquaDome]

Both are weather resistant.
The HD DA 20-40 Limited is a better lens for image quality.
However, if you are only going to have one lens, the DA18-135 is the better choice for sheer versatility. Plus it comes with a DA50/1.8.

[climit]

the 18-135 is supossed to be a very bad lens, so better forget about it. your lens choosing depends on the kind of photography you make. the two DA primes 35 and 50 are cheap and make a good start.

[c.a.m]

the 18-135 is supossed to be a very bad lens, so better forget about it.

On what evidence are you basing your claim? After extensive research, I arrived at the opposite conclusion, as have many other users.

- Craig

[bmw_328ci]

What do you plan to shoot?

I mostly shoot portrait and landscapes.

[MPrince]

the 18-135 is supossed to be a very bad lens, so better forget about it. your lens choosing depends on the kind of photography you make. the two DA primes 35 and 50 are cheap and make a good start.

I invite you to view some of the photos I have taken with the 18-135 then come back here and tell me it's a bad lens.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dkmurphypr/tags/da18135/

[normhead]

My issue with the DA*20-40 is it's position in the lens line up. I always think, cover everything with zooms fill in with primes in your most popular shooting FL. If you buy the 20-40, what other zooms could go with it.

For Example in DA*s you have the 16-50 and 50-135, so you have 16-135 covered without duplication. If you start with the 20-40, what is your second zoom?

Start with the 18-135 and you can have a pretty complete kit adding either the DA* 60-250, Tamron 70-200, or DA 55-300 to it. At that point you're pretty much done with zooms and can go on to primes.

The one place the 20-40 is going to excel over the 18-135 is indoors. It's little bit faster. But if that's what you're looking for, the Tamron 17-50 or Pentax 16-50 are both ƒ2.8 constant. Why wouldn't you go that way?

That being said... if you shoot wide angle the lens does have it's advantages.
HD Pentax-DA 20-40mm F2.8-4 Limited DC WR Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

I usually read what everyone else says and ask myself the question "Are these guys the same type of shooter I am?" The fact that this lens wouldn't suit me doesn't mean it doesn't suit anybody. If my logic is foreign to you, you might like it.

[Hogdriver]

Consider D FA f2.8 50mm macro...it will give you the option to expand when you are ready and future flexibility of APC or FF camera body. Enjoy!

[lesmore49]

the 18-135 is supossed to be a very bad lens, so better forget about it. your lens choosing depends on the kind of photography you make. the two DA primes 35 and 50 are cheap and make a good start.

Do you have an 18-135 ?

I have one and I find it's an excellent lens. Very good focal range and I'm more than happy with the end product...the photograph.

[aleonx3]

the 18-135 is supossed to be a very bad lens, so better forget about it. your lens choosing depends on the kind of photography you make. the two DA primes 35 and 50 are cheap and make a good start.

Are you referring to the Pentax version or the Canikon version of this lens?

[normhead]

Do you have an 18-135 ?

I have one and I find it's an excellent lens. Very good focal range and I'm more than happy with the end product...the photograph.

How many times do we have to correct that friggin Photozone review?
You feel like saying to these newbs, 'When you get some images with your primes as good as the one's I get with my 18-135, we'll talk."

[aleonx3]

I want to get K3 and I am torn apart. Its either the kit with 18-135 and 50 as my prime lens or the 20-40 limited (which will be 576 if bought with the K3) and that make it in my price range($1250 for two lens or $1370 with the limited) Any one own the both lenses (18-135 and 20-40) ? Which choice is better?

I would have both (one for outdoor and one for indoor shots).