a bit worry about 28-105mm's image quality

rlatjsrud · 02-29-2016, 10:41 PM

I saw the sample image at F/8 but not that sharp and quite blurry around the mid point. Well, 28-105 seem to have similar lens structure with 18-135 which is quite terrible lens but let's wait till April. Or am I expecting too much for $499 lens?

**sergysergy** · 02-29-2016, 10:46 PM

why is the 18-135 quite terrible?

Adam · 02-29-2016, 10:55 PM

Originally posted by rlatjsrud

I saw the sample image at F/8 but not that sharp and quite blurry around the mid point. Well, 28-105 seem to have similar lens structure with 18-135 which is quite terrible lens but let's wait till April. Or am I expecting too much for $499 lens?

Sounds like you're expecting a bit much. The 28-105mm is probably going to be the "worst" D FA zoom lens from an optical perspective just because it's designed to be affordable. That's not to say that it won't perform well alongside competing lenses.

I have a Nikon 24-120mm F4 and it has pretty terrible vignetting, but it's got a convenient zoom range, and that's its purpose in my bag

The same goes for the 18-135mm: you get a lot of versatility at the expense of a little bit of image quality.

**beachgardener** · 02-29-2016, 11:12 PM

Originally posted by rlatjsrud

I saw the sample image at F/8 but not that sharp and quite blurry around the mid point.

where is this sample?

rlatjsrud · 02-29-2016, 11:13 PM

Originally posted by sergysergy

why is the 18-135 quite terrible?

Pentax from German argued about the image quality from 18-135 cause it had a terrible optical quality few years ago.

**clackers** · 02-29-2016, 11:13 PM

Originally posted by rlatjsrud

I saw the sample image at F/8 but not that sharp and quite blurry around the mid point. Well, 28-105 seem to have similar lens structure with 18-135 which is quite terrible lens but let's wait till April. Or am I expecting too much for $499 lens?

I think most people are going to be using lenses they already own, Rlatjsrud.

Not just because of pricing reasons, either.

rlatjsrud · 02-29-2016, 11:15 PM

Originally posted by beachgardener

where is this sample?

http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/japan/products/lens/k/standard/hdpentax-dfa-2...g/ex-pic01.JPG

BROO · 02-29-2016, 11:46 PM

That's pretty much what I would expect from a budget kit lens.

---------- Post added 02-29-16 at 11:48 PM ----------

It's better than my 28-80 Takumar zoom :-)

Bengan · 03-01-2016, 12:06 AM

Looks good enough for a "super zoom" in this price range. Less edge distortion than the 18-135. I agree with Adam that this is the type of lens that I carry for the zoom range and weather seal. Not for the best preformance. I will probably buy this lens for the same reason I bought the 18-135, to be able to meet all temperatures and weather situations.

**kiwi_jono** · 03-01-2016, 12:38 AM

Looks pretty good to me. Especially considering its 36 MP image with the lens is resolving well in the centre. In any case better than images my 18-55 normally produces while having a bigger focal range.
Will be interesting to see what the reviews make of it.

rawr · 03-01-2016, 12:43 AM

No need to be anxious about the 28-105, I think.

As I mentioned in the thread below, if you look at the MTF charts for the 28-105 lens on the Ricoh site, it should be an OK performer.

Pentax 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6: HD D-FA any reviews yet?

kenspo · 03-01-2016, 02:34 AM

Originally posted by rlatjsrud

Or am I expecting too much for $499 lens?

Yes you are. This is a BUDGET lens..Not a pro lens.

**rod_grant** · 03-01-2016, 02:59 AM

Originally posted by sergysergy

why is the 18-135 quite terrible?

There is a thread here dedicated to the 18-135, and there are some very nice images on it! It is not all bad.

repaap · 03-01-2016, 03:06 AM

to me that picture looks pretty good for consumer lens...really. I suppose that there will be better ones down the road, and perhaps with * in it's name, or you can just buy 24-70 if quality is not meeting your standards. as far as 18-135 goes, it seems to be nice lens too for what it is. heck, even 18-55 wr is great in many situations with APS-C and this would be in same category with that lens, as 'kit'-lens.

**pepperberry farm** · 03-01-2016, 03:30 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by rlatjsrud

Pentax from German argued about the image quality from 18-135 cause it had a terrible optical quality few years ago.

but not based on your own experience with the lens?

02-29-2016, 10:41 PM	#1
rlatjsrud Guest	a bit worry about 28-105mm's image quality I saw the sample image at F/8 but not that sharp and quite blurry around the mid point. Well, 28-105 seem to have similar lens structure with 18-135 which is quite terrible lens but let's wait till April. Or am I expecting too much for $499 lens?

02-29-2016, 10:55 PM	#3
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,594	Originally posted by rlatjsrud I saw the sample image at F/8 but not that sharp and quite blurry around the mid point. Well, 28-105 seem to have similar lens structure with 18-135 which is quite terrible lens but let's wait till April. Or am I expecting too much for $499 lens? Sounds like you're expecting a bit much. The 28-105mm is probably going to be the "worst" D FA zoom lens from an optical perspective just because it's designed to be affordable. That's not to say that it won't perform well alongside competing lenses. I have a Nikon 24-120mm F4 and it has pretty terrible vignetting, but it's got a convenient zoom range, and that's its purpose in my bag The same goes for the 18-135mm: you get a lot of versatility at the expense of a little bit of image quality. 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:

03-01-2016, 12:06 AM	#9
Bengan Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,756	Looks good enough for a "super zoom" in this price range. Less edge distortion than the 18-135. I agree with Adam that this is the type of lens that I carry for the zoom range and weather seal. Not for the best preformance. I will probably buy this lens for the same reason I bought the 18-135, to be able to meet all temperatures and weather situations. Last edited by Bengan; 03-01-2016 at 12:11 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Considering the K-50: Questions about Image Quality	ComradeTao	Pentax K-30 & K-50	18	06-15-2015 08:36 AM
Nice article about assessing lens image quality	rrstuff	General Photography	15	01-17-2015 09:02 AM
need advice about image quality	karlito	Pentax K-r	67	02-13-2012 02:27 AM
Hi! - Here's a bit about me.	monochrome	Welcomes and Introductions	2	03-02-2008 02:27 PM
Some concern about image quality.	Bart	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	07-23-2007 05:54 PM

02-29-2016, 10:46 PM	#2
sergysergy Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,170	why is the 18-135 quite terrible?

02-29-2016, 11:12 PM	#4
beachgardener Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,842	Originally posted by rlatjsrud I saw the sample image at F/8 but not that sharp and quite blurry around the mid point. where is this sample?

02-29-2016, 11:13 PM	#5
rlatjsrud Guest	Originally posted by sergysergy why is the 18-135 quite terrible? Pentax from German argued about the image quality from 18-135 cause it had a terrible optical quality few years ago.

02-29-2016, 11:13 PM	#6
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by rlatjsrud I saw the sample image at F/8 but not that sharp and quite blurry around the mid point. Well, 28-105 seem to have similar lens structure with 18-135 which is quite terrible lens but let's wait till April. Or am I expecting too much for $499 lens? I think most people are going to be using lenses they already own, Rlatjsrud. Not just because of pricing reasons, either.

02-29-2016, 11:15 PM	#7
rlatjsrud Guest	Originally posted by beachgardener where is this sample? http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/japan/products/lens/k/standard/hdpentax-dfa-2...g/ex-pic01.JPG

02-29-2016, 11:46 PM	#8
BROO Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2016 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 655	That's pretty much what I would expect from a budget kit lens. ---------- Post added 02-29-16 at 11:48 PM ---------- It's better than my 28-80 Takumar zoom :-)

03-01-2016, 12:38 AM	#10
kiwi_jono Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Christchurch, New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,437	Looks pretty good to me. Especially considering its 36 MP image with the lens is resolving well in the centre. In any case better than images my 18-55 normally produces while having a bigger focal range. Will be interesting to see what the reviews make of it.

03-01-2016, 12:43 AM	#11
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	No need to be anxious about the 28-105, I think. As I mentioned in the thread below, if you look at the MTF charts for the 28-105 lens on the Ricoh site, it should be an OK performer. Pentax 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6: HD D-FA any reviews yet?

03-01-2016, 02:34 AM	#12
kenspo Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Oslo Posts: 2,207	Originally posted by rlatjsrud Or am I expecting too much for $499 lens? Yes you are. This is a BUDGET lens..Not a pro lens.

03-01-2016, 02:59 AM	#13
rod_grant Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wangaratta, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,951	Originally posted by sergysergy why is the 18-135 quite terrible? There is a thread here dedicated to the 18-135, and there are some very nice images on it! It is not all bad.

03-01-2016, 03:06 AM	#14
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	to me that picture looks pretty good for consumer lens...really. I suppose that there will be better ones down the road, and perhaps with * in it's name, or you can just buy 24-70 if quality is not meeting your standards. as far as 18-135 goes, it seems to be nice lens too for what it is. heck, even 18-55 wr is great in many situations with APS-C and this would be in same category with that lens, as 'kit'-lens.

03-01-2016, 03:30 AM - 1 Like	#15
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,660	Originally posted by rlatjsrud Pentax from German argued about the image quality from 18-135 cause it had a terrible optical quality few years ago. but not based on your own experience with the lens?