[JensE]

On APS-C, the 18-135mm is definitely my most used travel lens and I would pick it as the single one. If APS-C was my only format, I'd potentially replace it with the 16-85mm, because the wide angle is often more useful to me than the long end. But as the KP is my 'compact' travel option (over my K-1), I prefer the less bulky 18-135mm (esp. the hood) and rather complement it with the 15mm Ltd for an overall easier to pack and more versatile combo.


On a recent trip covering Spanish cities and nature with four lenses, out of 1159 pictures, 656 were taken with the 18-135mm and most of the 258mm using with the 40mm Ltd and about 50 of the 152 using the 55-300mm PLM could have adequately been captured with it as well. I only packed the Sigma 8-16mm on a few days (93 exposures), whenever I anticipated interesting wide-angle shots.

The low price (bundled or used) is another advantage of the 18-135mm: I'm on my 3rd at the moment, the first is still going strong as a permanent loan to my daughter despite a lot of (ab-)use, a worn bayonet for the hood and drying mark on the front lens after I took an involuntary swim in a lake. The 2nd was dropped by my son and needs to be repaired for consistent focus but I needed a quick replacement for a trip, so I just bought another used one for a similar amount as the repair, which was available locally.

---

Last edited by JensE; 12-29-2021 at 09:22 AM.

[photogem]

It's not advice. Please re-read the OP.

Not only did I read the OP but his other posts as well were he wrote that he has difficulties with his DA18-270!


His way of communicating is with very few words, so the unseen has to be made visible.

He doesn't seem to be the person for chit-chat!

[texandrews]

Not only did I read the OP but his other posts as well were he wrote that he has difficulties with his DA18-270!


His way of communicating is with very few words, so the unseen has to be made visible.

He doesn't seem to be the person for chit-chat!

Or clarity with an OP....

[normhead]

I often walked around Niagara Falls probably 10 times with the DA 18-135 on the camera and often never made a lens change.

[c.a.m]

In my opinion, I don't think it's essential to be prepared to capture images of all the possible subjects when traveling. I think I would prefer image quality over quantity, and I would look for interesting, relevant subjects that suit whichever lens I had with me.

I shoot with a K-3 Mark III. If I were to take only one lens, it would probably be my DA 20-40mm Limited. I think I could manage very well with it. There's a lot of love for the DA 18-135, which I also have. Some might suggest that it works well in the 20-40mm range -- which it does -- and the longer focal lengths would be a bonus. I'd agree, but I prefer the rendering of the 20-40 at those focal lengths.

Two lenses: DA 20-40mm Limited + DA* 50-135.

Three lenses: add the FA 43mm Limited.

Of course, there's always a chance that at the last minute when packing, I'd take the 18-135! There's no best answer!


- Craig

[TER-OR]

Hello:

If you had only one lens to take on a road trip, what would it be?

Tks!

When I travel, it's the 18-135. It covers the bases, is a pleasure to use with the motorized focus and has proven its weatherproofing credentials. Since I have cameras without flashes, I also tote along the AF-201 Flash, also weather resistant.

I'll also cheat and bring my DA21mm and maybe the DA40mm pancakes.

[UncleVanya]

In my opinion, I don't think it's essential to be prepared to capture images of all the possible subjects when traveling. I think I would prefer image quality over quantity, and I would look for interesting, relevant subjects that suit whichever lens I had with me.

I shoot with a K-3 Mark III. If I were to take only one lens, it would probably be my DA 20-40mm Limited. I think I could manage very well with it. There's a lot of love for the DA 18-135, which I also have. Some might suggest that it works well in the 20-40mm range -- which it does -- and the longer focal lengths would be a bonus. I'd agree, but I prefer the rendering of the 20-40 at those focal lengths.

Two lenses: DA 20-40mm Limited + DA* 50-135.

Three lenses: add the FA 43mm Limited.

Of course, there's always a chance that at the last minute when packing, I'd take the 18-135! There's no best answer!


- Craig

The DA 20-40 Ltd and DA* 50-135 is one of my frequent carry combinations as well with my KP.
I didn't like the FA 43 ltd and would pair with the DA* 55 or the DFA 100 Macro as my interests include macro shots often enough.

[ChristianRock]

Seeing the results Dave (pepperberry farm) is getting from his DA 18-250mm, I think I'd be seriously inclined to get one (rather than the 18-135mm) if I ever end up getting a superzoom (which, as we all know, once one gets older, one ends up with this kind of lens...)

[normhead]

Seeing the results Dave (pepperberry farm) is getting from his DA 18-250mm, I think I'd be seriously inclined to get one (rather than the 18-135mm) if I ever end up getting a superzoom (which, as we all know, once one gets older, one ends up with this kind of lens...)

I'd offer you mine but we way already gave it away. Mine a Sigma 18-250 is so badly de- centred as to be unusable. It's been sent to Sigma, but they did squat. But we do have some nice pictures taken with it.

[ChristianRock]

I'd offer you mine but we way already gave it away. Mine a Sigma 18-250 is so badly de- centred as to be unusable. It's been sent to Sigma, but they did squat. But we do have some nice pictures taken with it.

Thanks for the thought. I think though, I'll wait a few years before I'm the old guy with the superzoom. In the meantime I'll keep changing primes back and forth and watch my wife get annoyed at that

[silcam]

Seeing the results Dave (pepperberry farm) is getting from his DA 18-250mm, I think I'd be seriously inclined to get one (rather than the 18-135mm) if I ever end up getting a superzoom (which, as we all know, once one gets older, one ends up with this kind of lens...)

Bravo. Smart choice Plus it fouses so close it can almost be considered a macro if need be.

[Profligatographer]

In 2007, I bought a Pentax K-10d and a 21mm f/3.2 Limited lens. Took it with me to Paris (see Original Refrigerator Art).

Went back in 2009 and 2011, with this same lens on Pentax K-20d, then K-5. (see Here Now, Gone Before Long)

The Trump pandemic halted my travels abroad, but I still use that 21mm lens on K-3, K-1, and K-70, although I have added most of the other Pentax limited primes.

Were I to travel tomorrow, I would probably take the K-70 (love that articulated LCD and built-in flash) and the trusty 21mm lens.

T.

[ChristianRock]

Bravo. Smart choice Plus it fouses so close it can almost be considered a macro if need be.

It's still a lens I'd consider but I've decided that for now I'm not going to get it.

I love the results from my HD DA 18-50mm which has good range for 99% of the shots I take on travel and vacation (it goes along some primes for low light and better quality if I can swing it). And the HD DA 18-50 is super sharp with superb colors and contrast - it really is a fantastic zoom (and I have the DA*16-50mm to compare, which is also a great zoom, yet quite a bit heavier). If I need something in the 50mm+ range I think my FA 80-320mm performs better in the 50-250mm range than the DA 18-250mm. My copy of the FA 80-320mm is very sharp at 200mm and goes downhill from there, though I'd say even at 320mm it's still useable...

[xabolcs]

Logically, it would be DA 18-135; but out of laziness only the DA f:2.4 / 70mm travels with me

[lotech]

I will take the 18-135 no doubt, it was my first such lens with Pentax, an average traveller need not super far reach but close distance wide shot more.