decisiontime on the 18-135/3.5

Iksobarg · 07-19-2013, 09:33 AM

Hi my name is John and I'm an amateur Pentax guy with a decision to make and I could use some help from my beloved community.
Can anyone advise me for or against getting a Pentax DA 18-135WR/3.5 to replace some of this:

FA 50/1.4, Tamron 17-50/2.8, DA*50-135, DA 10-17/3.5, FA 80-320/4.5

The 18-135 is not going to replace everything, I know. It's just that I'm having probs. with deciding what lenses to take for vacation at the beach and a family wedding...
soo I'm taking all of them!! but would prefer just my DA10-17, FA50/1.4, a DA18-135 (only three lenses vs. five!!) but then maybe also the FA80-320 (not likely, ohh!! I don't know!!

)
Now tried to do a little homework and read a little about the 18-135 but I do love my DA*50-135/2.8WR and the FA80-320/4.5.
Anyway I don't think I would replace/get rid of any of my current lenses ("YOu just don't do THAT!! I know!!).

So back to it: Should I get the 18-135WR and expect it to be a decent replacement (on such a travel where I want to be light), for my tamron 17-50 and the DA*50-135?

I spose I should just get rid of the camera bag that can carry all my kit and leave just the little one.. heheh (NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!)

corrected my tamron specs!! goodeye Tomwil

Last edited by Iksobarg; 08-02-2013 at 01:58 PM.

JinDesu · 07-19-2013, 09:44 AM

The 18-135 will be a good replacement for the 17-50 and 50-135 in cases where you want to travel light and are not concerned with the telephoto end of the lens. The 18-135 performs great in the 20-35 range, and is only one stop slower than the Tamron, but it will not be as good as the 50-135.

Kozlok · 07-19-2013, 10:07 AM

The 18-135 is serviceable for when your family doesn't want to wait for you to change lenses. My vacation setup is the 18-135, 10-17 and a Sigma 30/1.4 for low light. At portrait distances, it is more than adequate, decent at the wide end, so-so at the long end for far away objects.

All that said, Adams recent review suggests the Sigma 17-70 is better.

seventysixersfan · 07-19-2013, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by Kozlok

All that said, Adams recent review suggests the Sigma 17-70 is better.

But the DA 18-135 WR would be handy with your K-30 WR body, when you're at the beach with the family...

**coolgobi** · 07-19-2013, 10:19 AM

John,

Keep things simple. Travel light. Enjoy your vacation and family wedding. Tamron zoom lens and the FA 50mm will do.

**tomwil** · 07-19-2013, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by Iksobarg

Tamron 16-55/2.8

I'm puzzled. Did this lens ever exist?

**jatrax** · 07-19-2013, 11:06 AM

The 18-135 will cover the 17-50 and 50-135 range thus eliminating one lens. It certainly won't replace the 10-17 or the 80-320 or the FA 50mm. If you are looking for a good all around take on vacation lens the 18-135 is excellent. My wife's kit is the 18-135 and 55-300. The 18-135 gets 90% of the use. I would think the IQ will not be quite as good as your current 17-50/50-135 but for family pictures I'm not sure you would notice and it is certainly a much handier lens.

So for a light simple kit get the 18-135 and pair it with the 80-320 and you have a good 2 lens kit. Take the FA 50mm along for low light if you want or just make do.

Old Man · 07-19-2013, 11:23 AM

Life is too short to fret about stuff. Just get one of each and a great big bag, and take'em all.

I know, I'm not much help because I always take too much.

**JimJohnson** · 07-19-2013, 11:28 AM

+1 on the 18-135 plus 80-320.

If all I can take is my body and one lens, it is the 18-135. If two lenses, the 18-135 plus 55-300. Just like I can fake a longer lens via cropping, I can within limits fake macro via cropping too.

More gear? Now I have to start thinking between a better flash and one of my specialty lenses. It's always a tough decision to not take gear, but my shoulder and back always thank me at the end of the trip for doing it.

**TER-OR** · 07-19-2013, 12:10 PM

Well, if the FA50 were the macro, I'd certainly take it to the beach, if there are any interesting critters.
Otherwise, I'd take the 18-135 and your long zoom. I'd probably pack the 10-17 as well, if nothing else for some sunset time-lapses.

Iksobarg · 07-19-2013, 01:34 PM

Hi, John here again and I just want to say it's been just over three months since I bought my last lens (the DA10-17).
I wasn't actively thinking about it but "it" just happened. LBA. It's as if that 18-135 said to me,"Hey if you get me you won't need all those other heavy and expensive lenses!"

Back to topic, since my goal for next time is to achieve portability and range coverage (is that what's called?), I side with getting the 18-135. Gee, that was easy.

As for this trip we leave in just six hours. I'm taking all the pictured kit even though I agree with simplicity, as someone stated. I have plenty of space and we'll be close to home base.

I now realize that I wanted to take all those lenses since I'll certainly have some time to get to know them better.

Iksobarg · 08-02-2013, 02:16 PM

Thanks to all for the feedback. I ended up taking all pictured kit :S
Onto a second family gathering in Berlin late August, a few weeks away:
After much research I'm about to pickup a Tammy 18-250 and take the FA50/1.4 and call it a day.
Option b would be my Tam17-50/2.8, the fa50/1.4 and the da*50-135.

Some of you said go 55-300 and I'm like, nooo, that would mean I'd have a major overlap with my FA80-320, which love.
I don't mind changing lenses too much. At the wedding we attended I had to go with the FA50/1.4 as there was no time to swap. If I had known to use my ext. flash I would've use the *50-135 but I was a guest and didn't want to shadow too much the pro Canon photographer already on site. I haven't researched, but prolly will now. Does the 55-300 kick my 80-320 ass that bad?
Again, thanks my Pentax bros. and sisters.

**jatrax** · 08-02-2013, 09:14 PM

Originally posted by Iksobarg

Some of you said go 55-300 and I'm like, nooo, that would mean I'd have a major overlap with my FA80-320, which love.

I don't think anyone actually said to get the 55-300, only that a good kit is the 18-135 pared with the 55-300. In your case the 18-135 pared with the 80-320 is just fine. I suspect the 55-300 is better but not enough to change when you already have the 80-320. And I've never used a 80-320 so who knows it might be just as good.

07-19-2013, 09:33 AM	#1
Iksobarg Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 208	decisiontime on the 18-135/3.5 Hi my name is John and I'm an amateur Pentax guy with a decision to make and I could use some help from my beloved community. Can anyone advise me for or against getting a Pentax DA 18-135WR/3.5 to replace some of this: FA 50/1.4, Tamron 17-50/2.8, DA50-135, DA 10-17/3.5, FA 80-320/4.5 The 18-135 is not going to replace everything, I know. It's just that I'm having probs. with deciding what lenses to take for vacation at the beach and a family wedding... soo I'm taking all of them!! but would prefer just my DA10-17, FA50/1.4, a DA18-135* (only three lenses vs. five!!) but then maybe also the FA80-320 (not likely, ohh!! I don't know!! ) Now tried to do a little homework and read a little about the 18-135 but I do love my DA50-135/2.8WR and the FA80-320/4.5. Anyway I don't think I would replace/get rid of any of my current lenses ("YOu just don't do THAT!! I know!!). So back to it: Should I get the 18-135WR and expect it to be a decent replacement (on such a travel where I want to be light), for my tamron 17-50 and the DA50-135? I spose I should just get rid of the camera bag that can carry all my kit and leave just the little one.. heheh (NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!) corrected my tamron specs!! goodeye Tomwil Last edited by Iksobarg; 08-02-2013 at 01:58 PM.

07-19-2013, 01:34 PM	#11
Iksobarg Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 208 Original Poster	Thanks for the feedback \o/ Hi, John here again and I just want to say it's been just over three months since I bought my last lens (the DA10-17). I wasn't actively thinking about it but "it" just happened. LBA. It's as if that 18-135 said to me,"Hey if you get me you won't need all those other heavy and expensive lenses!" Back to topic, since my goal for next time is to achieve portability and range coverage (is that what's called?), I side with getting the 18-135. Gee, that was easy. As for this trip we leave in just six hours. I'm taking all the pictured kit even though I agree with simplicity, as someone stated. I have plenty of space and we'll be close to home base. I now realize that I wanted to take all those lenses since I'll certainly have some time to get to know them better.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: M42 lesnes, Tak 50/1.4, 35/3.5, 135/3.5, Sears 200/3.5, Helios, New price	grahame	Sold Items	5	06-30-2013 07:48 AM
Pentax 18-135 3.5-5.6 repairable?	Dachiko	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	6	06-05-2013 12:49 PM
SMC-DA 18-135/3,5-5,6 AL should I buy it?	peos99	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	17	01-11-2013 11:36 PM
Pentax DA18-135 3.5/5.6 WR or Sigma 18-125 3.8/5.6	NRV Shooter	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	12-15-2012 10:05 AM
For Sale - Sold: For Sale in Australia Tamron 18-250, Takumar 135 / 3.5 and 2.5,Pentax SMC K 200	Westoz	Sold Items	15	06-07-2012 04:24 AM

07-19-2013, 09:44 AM	#2
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	The 18-135 will be a good replacement for the 17-50 and 50-135 in cases where you want to travel light and are not concerned with the telephoto end of the lens. The 18-135 performs great in the 20-35 range, and is only one stop slower than the Tamron, but it will not be as good as the 50-135.

07-19-2013, 10:07 AM	#3
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	The 18-135 is serviceable for when your family doesn't want to wait for you to change lenses. My vacation setup is the 18-135, 10-17 and a Sigma 30/1.4 for low light. At portrait distances, it is more than adequate, decent at the wide end, so-so at the long end for far away objects. All that said, Adams recent review suggests the Sigma 17-70 is better.

07-19-2013, 10:14 AM	#4
seventysixersfan Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Alexandria, VA Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by Kozlok All that said, Adams recent review suggests the Sigma 17-70 is better. But the DA 18-135 WR would be handy with your K-30 WR body, when you're at the beach with the family...

07-19-2013, 10:19 AM	#5
coolgobi Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 155	John, Keep things simple. Travel light. Enjoy your vacation and family wedding. Tamron zoom lens and the FA 50mm will do.

07-19-2013, 10:28 AM	#6
tomwil Site Supporter Join Date: May 2009 Location: Maryland USA Posts: 778	Originally posted by Iksobarg Tamron 16-55/2.8 I'm puzzled. Did this lens ever exist?

07-19-2013, 11:06 AM	#7
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	The 18-135 will cover the 17-50 and 50-135 range thus eliminating one lens. It certainly won't replace the 10-17 or the 80-320 or the FA 50mm. If you are looking for a good all around take on vacation lens the 18-135 is excellent. My wife's kit is the 18-135 and 55-300. The 18-135 gets 90% of the use. I would think the IQ will not be quite as good as your current 17-50/50-135 but for family pictures I'm not sure you would notice and it is certainly a much handier lens. So for a light simple kit get the 18-135 and pair it with the 80-320 and you have a good 2 lens kit. Take the FA 50mm along for low light if you want or just make do.

07-19-2013, 11:23 AM	#8
Old Man Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Indiana Posts: 171	Life is too short to fret about stuff. Just get one of each and a great big bag, and take'em all. I know, I'm not much help because I always take too much.

07-19-2013, 11:28 AM	#9
JimJohnson Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Summer:Lake Superior - Michigan Winter:Texas Hill Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,774	+1 on the 18-135 plus 80-320. If all I can take is my body and one lens, it is the 18-135. If two lenses, the 18-135 plus 55-300. Just like I can fake a longer lens via cropping, I can within limits fake macro via cropping too. More gear? Now I have to start thinking between a better flash and one of my specialty lenses. It's always a tough decision to not take gear, but my shoulder and back always thank me at the end of the trip for doing it.

07-19-2013, 12:10 PM	#10
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	Well, if the FA50 were the macro, I'd certainly take it to the beach, if there are any interesting critters. Otherwise, I'd take the 18-135 and your long zoom. I'd probably pack the 10-17 as well, if nothing else for some sunset time-lapses.

08-02-2013, 02:16 PM	#12
Iksobarg Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 208 Original Poster	Thanks to all for the feedback. I ended up taking all pictured kit :S Onto a second family gathering in Berlin late August, a few weeks away: After much research I'm about to pickup a Tammy 18-250 and take the FA50/1.4 and call it a day. Option b would be my Tam17-50/2.8, the fa50/1.4 and the da50-135. Some of you said go 55-300 and I'm like, nooo, that would mean I'd have a major overlap with my FA80-320, which love. I don't mind changing lenses too much. At the wedding we attended I had to go with the FA50/1.4 as there was no time to swap. If I had known to use my ext. flash I would've use the 50-135 but I was a guest and didn't want to shadow too much the pro Canon photographer already on site. I haven't researched, but prolly will now. Does the 55-300 kick my 80-320 ass that bad? Again, thanks my Pentax bros. and sisters.

08-02-2013, 09:14 PM	#13
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by Iksobarg Some of you said go 55-300 and I'm like, nooo, that would mean I'd have a major overlap with my FA80-320, which love. I don't think anyone actually said to get the 55-300, only that a good kit is the 18-135 pared with the 55-300. In your case the 18-135 pared with the 80-320 is just fine. I suspect the 55-300 is better but not enough to change when you already have the 80-320. And I've never used a 80-320 so who knows it might be just as good.