[kotofei]

K10D, K100D
Buying full frame body is not planned in next 2-3 year
There is rumors that short crop kit (18-55) is better for contrast, microcontrast, corner details etc.
Sadly, there is not much sample photos from 18-35 for direct comparison. I notice, that 18-35 have bigger DOF than 18-55 - it may helps with architectural photo shooting
18-35 is twice expensive than 18-55
18-35 have very little to NO chromatic abberation
18-55 is cheap plastik piece with 10-20k shoots lifespan
18-55 have better geometry @18 mm

any thoughts ?

[pinholecam]

No comparison imo.

FAJ 18-35 is also poor wrt flare tolerance and not much to shout about on FF.
DFA 18-55 is sharper (on aps-c), flare tolerant, better contrast and imo, works rather well on FF even with some crop.


On FF



On apsc

[pathdoc]

It might be worth holding off. If you're not going full-frame for 2-3 years, you never know what Pentax might have released by that time. If you're scared of missing out on an FA-J-18-35 and you want an inexpensive option for the K-1 when you buy one, then by all means get it, but it will offer you no particular advantage on the K10D or K100D and as pinholecam has suggested, the current kit lens is better on crop.

[kotofei]

So, there we have 18-55 rev.1, rev.2 and rev "weather proof". The last one going with RED ring. What difference with rev.1 and rev.2? Metal bayonet ? All three optical are the same ?

[normhead]

I have an FAJ 18-35. My copy is terrible. I've used it in two lens comparisons and it was voted the worst lens by forum participants in both cases. Maybe there are good copies out there, but, bad copies of many lenses are still fairly functional. My copy of the 18-35 isn't worth putting on the camera. I'd be better to use my DA 35 or DA 40 XS and crop.

[pres589]

"18-55 is cheap plastik piece with 10-20k shoots lifespan"

Where did you get this idea from?

The only advantage to the FAJ 18-35 that I can tell is that it works on full frame. That's it.

[normhead]

I'm going to be doing a test, Sigma 8-16 of APS-c or 18-35 on FF, which is better, my hunch is it will be the 8-16 on APS_c.

[bdery]

18-55 is cheap plastik piece with 10-20k shoots lifespan

Simply not true.

So, there we have 18-55 rev.1, rev.2 and rev "weather proof". The last one going with RED ring. What difference with rev.1 and rev.2? Metal bayonet ? All three optical are the same ?

Read this

HD vs. SMC Pentax-DA 18-50mm F4-5.6 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

There is no optical advantage to the older 18-35mm lens.

I notice, that 18-35 have bigger DOF than 18-55 - it may helps with architectural photo shooting

Again, not true. DOF depends on the focal length and aperture.

[grahame]

Comparing FAJ 18-35 vs DA 18-55 on APS camera is not fair for FAJ. Same is true if I mount fa20, 31 or 43 on a Q camera, I should not compare them directly to Q 06 lens -- you will find 06 is much bette corrected with much less CA and maybe better resolution.

18-35 was designed as a VERY wide lens, and it still is. It can take nice photos that otherwise you will have to spend $$$ more to get a lens for a same frame. What is the next cheapest lens allows you go what wide? MF or AF?

If you are not going to buy K1 soon, I will suggest stay with DA18-55, unless you want to collect one for your future FF camera . DA 16-45 is a great lens and is much cheaper now.

---------- Post added 11-03-16 at 11:54 AM ----------

I'm going to be doing a test, Sigma 8-16 of APS-c or 18-35 on FF, which is better, my hunch is it will be the 8-16 on APS_c.

Agree. 8-16 on APS is sharper than sigma 12-24 on FF, particularly in corners.

however, K3ii+ Sigma 8-16 is not that much cheaper, or lighter than K1+ 18-35.

[kotofei]

Read this HD vs. SMC Pentax-DA 18-50mm F4-5.6 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

thanks, that was helpful

>> I notice, that 18-35 have bigger DOF than 18-55 - it may helps with architectural photo shooting Again, not true. DOF depends on the focal length and aperture.

Not exactly. Yes, DOF depends on focal lenght and aperture. BUT! DOF differs with optical scheme.

[clackers]

. Yes, DOF depends on focal lenght and aperture. BUT! DOF differs with optical scheme.

No, it doesn't.

Anyway, +1 to the suggestion of the DA 16-45.

[normhead]

thanks, that was helpful


Not exactly. Yes, DOF depends on focal lenght and aperture. BUT! DOF differs with optical scheme.

This was point of contention of mine for a long time. And my own research proved me wrong, there may be very minor differences in different lenses, I was able to detect very little difference in actual DoF, what I did find was images with different focal points that made it appear there was. If you actually put down a ruler and measure the DoF, there is very little difference between different optical formulas.

[grahame]

If you actually put down a ruler and measure the DoF, there is very little difference between different optical formulas.

I believe you.

I guess aperture size on lenses are not 100% accurate. The levers are just fixed on the ring by screws, and workers adjusted them during assembly. that is why we see a little difference in exposure among lenses. That little difference might count.

Also, optical formulas contribute to the bokeh and the transition from in focus to blurry area. That might contribute to the slight difference in DOF at same aperture setting on the aperture ring.

Just my guess.

[old4570]

FAJ 18-35 ... Own it .. Currently sits on a istD ...
Compared to the 18-55 there is no contest , the 18-55 wins hands down . ( It's not even a contest = My lenses )
For a cropped sensor camera the 18-55 is one of the best budget lenses you can own .

[kotofei]

So... retractable 18-50 F4-5.6 is awful. The worst short kit lens in pentax lineup.
How about sigma 17-70 F2.8-4.5 compared to DA-L WR 18-55 F3.5-5.6 (with quick shift- afaik better kit lens in "18-55" family) ?