[mir]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Hi all,

I am about to by a used lens but have difficulties in deciding which one to choose. I have these lenses to choose from which all are more or less in same condition:

SIGMA 18-250 mm 3.5-6.3 DC macro SLD HSM: Price €199 ($227)


SMC Pentax-DA 18-270mm F3.5-6.3 ED SDM: Price €148 ($169)


Pentax SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED AL DC WR: Price €161 ($184)

Which one should I choose?

Regards Michael.

[ramseybuckeye]

Pentax SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED AL DC WR, best of the lot, IMO. I can't say I've ever used the other two, but any other lenses I've used in that range were not very good, they seem to have a lot of compromises. Although I've read a few good things about the Pentax 18-270.

[pschlute]

Your problem with going for a single zoom lens that covers the widest range in terms of FL is that they tend to be the poorest optically.

[i_trax]

All 3 lenses are newish design , No screw drive AF , so only good with newish Pentax cameras.
The only 18 - 135 will give you WR ( weather resistance ) and Quick Shift ( Full time manual focus).
The only Pentax 18 - 135 + 18 - 270 will give you in camera body lens correction option.
Please Note (!) : the best Sigma version is , SIGMA DC MACRO HSM with filter size 62mm ( no OS ).
I have this version , it is the latest , smallest and lightest.

[allanmh]

I am the proud owner of no less than two copies of the Pentax 18-250mm, and they have traveled with me across much of the globe, but the one I would recommend for you is the 18-135mm. It has WR, it has better bokeh, and AF fine tuning and in-camera lens correction (as of course does the 18-270mm). It loses very little in reach, and it is actually easy to crop to get the same angle of view as the lenses with greater reach. I would take that, and save up for a 15mm Ltd to complement it, but that is just me. YMMV. Whatever your choice, happy shooting!

[Sandy Hancock]

Another vote for the 18-135 here.

WR, QS, silent focus. Very highly regarded.

Find a used 55-300 (ideally one of the later, WR versions) for the long end and you're set.

[Des]

Check the reviews of the three here:
SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
SMC Pentax-DA 18-270mm F3.5-6.3 ED SDM Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC Macro HSM Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

If you don't need coverage longer than 135mm, get the DA 18-135, because it will be noticeably better than the other two in that range. It's actually quite a good lens and a very good buy at that price. (I set out the pros and cons in my detailed review: SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database.) As others have pointed out, it also has the advantage of being weather resistant (when used with a weather-sealed camera like your K-5ii), having QuickShift (manual focus override) and being a little more compact than the other two.

If you do need longer reach (e.g. for wildlife or sport), the question is whether to get one of the superzooms running to 250mm or 270mm or get the 18-135 and another longer lens.

I used to have a Tamron 18-250, which is one of the forebears of the Pentax 18-270 (the 18-270 was adapted from a Tamron design). I later got a cheap Pentax DA L 55-300mm f4-5.8 and the difference was huge - the 55-300 was better than the superzoom across their common range, but particularly at the long end. A two-lens solution with the 18-135 and a 55-300 will give much better results.

The use case for the 18-250 or 18-270 is if you only occasionally shoot longer than 135mm and the convenience of not having to carry another lens, or change lenses, when you want more reach matters most. A superzoom can be a convenient carry on a hike, a flight or a boat trip. But be aware that it comes with real compromises.

Whichever you go for, be aware that to get the best results from these types of lens requires shooting in RAW and processing your images.

[AfterPentax Mark II]

The question is: why do you want to buy a 2nd hand lens? If you need help choosing, than you better buy not one of them and keep the money in your pocket for a rainy day. But the 18-135 is a gem. I bought this one for the Samsung GX-10 and now it sits on a KP. And with progressing the line from there to the KP I learned that the 18-135 is so good that it keeps up with the new installments of APS-C camera's. On the KP it still shines as one of the better lenses I have. It beats the Sigma (and probably the 18-270?) as well.

[robiles]

As somebody who has been toying (for a loong time) with the idea of buying a 18-135, it is the lens I would recomment. But i also have the 50-300, so i would cover 90% of my needs with just two lenses, and both pretty compact. Would fit in a medium sized bag, with some accessories.

But i would not use either sadly, because in the end a limited would end up on the camera. They are such a joy tu use, they are small, but most importantly they are well thought out lenses in any way possible. Small size with nice metal build, quirky lens caps and hoods. The one on the 15 ist for me the worst. I really like the sliding ones, but i understand that for a wide angle lens this would be difficult to implenent.

The 15 and 21 can be nicely used for landscaped, cityscapes (esp. at night with a tripod). The 35 gets a lot less used as it is a macro, and has a long throw. If it misses focus, it has a lot to travel - a bit annoying. The 70 gets used most for taking photos of people, mostly family, and beer (here i like to experiment). 40mm is not something that suits me.

tl;dr: get the 18-135. but i would not buy either.

[hcc]

Back to the OP, I was in a similar situation 10 years ago: the Sigma 18-250mm (new) or the DA 18-250mm (2d hand). The best thing that I did was to go a brick-and-mortar store and try the Sigma 18-250mm. Gosh, it was heavy and big: I did not not feel comfortable. I very often carry my camera system (camera body + lens) with me when I go bush walking: size and weight are key criteria for me. I bought the DA18-250mm and I do not regret it. It is still working hard and this is a testimony of the lens robustness.
10 years later, I have now the DA18-250mm, the DA18-135mm and the DA18-270mm. The DA18-250mm is still working well and and I tend to use it as an expandable lens, in very tough situations. The DA18-135mm is great and WR. I use it in very wet weather because it is WR but I miss the reach. I bought the DA18-270mm for the extra reach and I love the quiet and fast AF. So, as all-around lenses, my three musketeers (DA18-250mm, the DA18-135mm and the DA18-270mm) have their respective advantage. I tend to use one at a time, in complement and to supplement my prime lenses. (I am a prime lens shooter, but I love the flexibility of an all-around lens as a backup.)
If you need WR, go for the DA18-135mm
If you have a limited budget, go for a 2nd hand DA18-250mm. You can also go for the Tamron 18-250mm K-mount: the same lens and typically slighty cheper.
Otherwise, go for the DA18-270mm. You will love the qiet AF and the extra reach.

Hope that the experience may help.

[C_Jones]

The 18-135 seems like a nice choice. For my wide end needs and some reach I have the Pentax 16-85.

[i_trax]

Back to the OP, I was in a similar situation 10 years ago: the Sigma 18-250mm (new) or the DA 18-250mm (2d hand). The best thing that I did was to go a brick-and-mortar store and try the Sigma 18-250mm. Gosh, it was heavy and big: I did not not feel comfortable. I very often carry my camera system (camera body + lens) with me when I go bush walking: size and weight are key criteria for me.

Yes , there was a BIG Sigma old days but the latest one is more less the same as DA 18 - 250 ,
have both and still use both.

[kypfer]

Hi all,
I am about to by a used lens but have difficulties in deciding which one to choose. I have these lenses to choose from which all are more or less in same condition:
SIGMA 18-250 mm 3.5-6.3 DC macro SLD HSM: Price €199 ($227)
SMC Pentax-DA 18-270mm F3.5-6.3 ED SDM: Price €148 ($169)
Pentax SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED AL DC WR: Price €161 ($184)
Which one should I choose?
Regards Michael.

My personal choice from that list, assuming no other lenses available, would be the DA 18-270mm, simply because of having the widest range, but the price looks good as well
After that, I'd go for the 18-135mm … lots of good reports, somewhat lighter and s/h xx-300mm or thereabouts aren't difficult to come by at an economical price if you decide later you need the extra reach.
Nothing against the Sigma, I use several Sigma lenses, but in this line up it's a bit betwixt and between, unless the "macro" capability is particularly good AND you want that ability.

[UncleVanya]

Tough choice. I am not a huge fan of superzooms because they tend to suck. But I’ve seen @pepperberry farm use a DA 18-250 with fantastic results and the Sigma as well as the DA 18-270 are at least that good optically. So while there may be compromises sometimes the best lens for the job isn’t the best optically.

But let’s break this down more:

In body image correction is available in both Pentax lenses.

Weather Resistance is only available on the 18-135 of those three choices.

Longer ranges On two of the “I’ll lenses (136-250 or 136-270) are really useful when you need a shot beyond 135 and when cropping isn’t likely to succeed.

For me weight and size push me toward the 18-135 as what I would recommend.

[filmmaster]

Take it from someone who has been there, you are going about it the wrong way.

Selecting a lens is NOT about "oh i need this range in focal length, now what should i look for".

The means to selecting a lens is "I want to do somethign specific with this lens, such as bird photography and other animals like deer or even sitting on the beach taking photos of beach bunnies"

Then you go about the critical needs of the lens. LIke optical quality.

Here is a tale of a lens i have, sitting on my desk with no camera for it. it is a sigma 70-300 1:4 - 5.6 DL Macro SUPER...

similar to this one,
Sigma Zoom DL Macro 70-300mm f/4-5.6 For Pentax | eBay

but in an EF mount instead of that lenses pentax mount.. how strange....

that lens was designed for photo journalism with a 35 mm camera.... yeah its late 1990s... when it was originally released to the market it was an 800$ lens designed to create an image that would have no optical images if used as nothing larger then a full page photo in an issue of popular mechanics or Time magazine.