DA 18-135 mm lens

**sibyrnes** · 11-14-2017, 02:10 PM

I had to google lens band. Thanks for the tip! Do you use the regular or small lens band for your 18-135?

**mattb123** · 11-14-2017, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by sibyrnes

I had to google lens band. Thanks for the tip! Do you use the regular or small lens band for your 18-135?

I think I just got the regular but they may not be that brand. It's a "regular" sized lens, I think.

**mikesbike** · 11-14-2017, 03:04 PM

I usually bicycle or walk with my camera/lens in a belt/shoulder camera holster of a size to fit the lens or lenses I am taking. I have therefor never experienced the lens creep and the holster offers protection.

**mattb123** · 11-14-2017, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by mikesbike

I usually bicycle or walk with my camera/lens in a belt/shoulder camera holster of a size to fit the lens or lenses I am taking. I have therefor never experienced the lens creep and the holster offers protection.

That's how I get around town most of the time too. I use a Crumpler Four Million Dollar Home shoulder bag (my "purse"

).
But when I hike I like to have the camera ready so I use a sling strap. That's when the lens band is needed with the 18-135.

**psoo** · 11-14-2017, 06:56 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by mattb123

I really like the compromise of IQ vs. versatility vs. size/weight of the 18-135. Corner softness hasn't been a problem or even noticeable for me. I've sold a fair number of images made with this lens too. I use it for adventure photos and even lost one in the snow once. I considered the 16-85 as a replacement but decided to get the 18-135 again since it is less expensive, smaller and lighter, and has a more versatile FL range.

I recently spent a week on Kilimanjaro with a K-3 and 18-135 lens on it probably 95% of the time. I also brought the DA 15 and 50/1.8 for specific uses but rarely used them.

I've been amazed at the tremendous number of responses I received concerning lenses that may be superior to my DA 18-135. It was an education to receive so many valuable and thought-provoking leads. It seems that most of you think that the DA 18-135 is an excellent lens although some lack of edge sharpness is present. A little cropping should handle this for my type of general photography. Coupled with my DA 12-24 I think I should be content with this combo and not waste money looking for new glass. I look forward to even more responses from you, so keep the thread going with any additional advice. Thanks.

Angel Perez · 11-15-2017, 09:26 AM

I have both the 18-135 and the Sigma 17-50. When shooting events its the 17-50. I also use it for shoots where i need to shoot head to toe. I really use my 18-135 as a walk around lens or for the WR. I used it last year during a blizzard and the lens was perfect. I dont use it much as i shoot headshots, portraits and the performing arts. In the performing arts i need the 2.8 but until i did get faster lenses i still made some great shots with this lens. I had a Tamron 28-75 and when compared to the Pentax there was something about the Pentax IQ that just stood out. So I say keep your lens and when you are ready go for it and feed your GAS. Nothing too wrong with that. I have a few vintage lenses that i used because that was all i could afford and you know what, they worked very well and gave me some real great images. All lenses have characteristics that if we use them correctly will give us some wonderful images.

**psoo** · 11-15-2017, 01:49 PM - **1 Like**

Hi Angel:

Your comments and others show that many Pentax users enjoy using lenses that fall within the 18-135 mm focal length because they often give sharper images than the 18-135. I picked up an old Vivitar (Cosina) 35-70 mm, f/3.5-4.5, for next to nothing, that to me is super sharp. One reviewer in the Pentax Forum gave it a 4 for sharpness, and the other one gave it a 10. The attachments below (If I attached them correctly) show that this lens is excellent on my K50. However, I probably won't use it much since my 18-135 has a larger focal length range and is easier to use. I'll stick to the 180135.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

**psoo** · 01-05-2018, 08:03 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

Wait. You were perfectly happy with the lens until you read in a magazine that it had soft corners? Seriously? Who cares what some wannabe article writer in a magazine says? I certainly do not. How do you know the 'reviewer' is a capable photographer? How do you know his particular lens wasn't decentered? How do you know they even tested the lens instead of writing up some boiler plate?

I use the DA 16-85 on my K-3II and my wife uses the DA 18-135 on hers. Sometimes my pictures are better, sometimes hers are. Standing side by side and shooting the same thing in the same light.

If YOU are happy with the DA 18-135 do yourself a favor and ignore magazine articles. If YOU are not satisfied with the DA 18-135, well that is another story and there are alternatives. I believe the DA 16-85 is slightly sharper but you give up a lot of focal range for that. And it is not a lot sharper when stopped down. Just my 2 cents....................

---------- Post added 11-07-17 at 06:03 PM ----------

I met my girlfriend 38 years ago. Haven't found 'better' yet.

That's great Jatrax, hold onto her. Can you tell me if all your lenses are more than 38 years old?

**jatrax** · 01-05-2018, 08:28 PM - **3 Likes**

Originally posted by psoo

Can you tell me if all your lenses are more than 38 years old?

No, but quite a few of them are:

**luftfluss** · 01-05-2018, 09:38 PM - **1 Like**

**psoo** · 01-06-2018, 05:24 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

No, but quite a few of them are:

My oh my, they're all Takumars

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
macro lens filter for my 18 - 50 mm lens or 50 - 200 mm lens?	inzova	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	4	09-28-2016 12:07 AM
For Sale - Sold: 3 ZK Lenses: Zeiss 35 mm F2, Zeiss 50 mm F2 Makro, and Zeiss 85 mm F1.4 Planar	Vantage-Point	Sold Items	10	08-31-2016 08:11 PM
For Sale - Sold: HD Pentax DA 20-40 mm F2.8-4, Pentax DA 16-45 mm f4, Pentax-F 135 mm F2.8 lenses	Vantage-Point	Sold Items	4	07-16-2016 08:20 AM
For Sale - Sold: Brand New FA 31 mm, FA 77 mm, DA* 60-250 mm, DA* 300 mm	ppkkcao	Sold Items	14	11-02-2014 08:42 PM
is my copy ok or??? 16-45's 45 mm vs 50-135 mm' s 50 mm	hll	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	06-20-2008 09:03 AM

11-14-2017, 02:10 PM	#61
sibyrnes Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: Pittsburgh, Pa. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 447	I had to google lens band. Thanks for the tip! Do you use the regular or small lens band for your 18-135?

11-14-2017, 02:21 PM	#62
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,872	Originally posted by sibyrnes I had to google lens band. Thanks for the tip! Do you use the regular or small lens band for your 18-135? I think I just got the regular but they may not be that brand. It's a "regular" sized lens, I think.

11-14-2017, 03:04 PM	#63
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	I usually bicycle or walk with my camera/lens in a belt/shoulder camera holster of a size to fit the lens or lenses I am taking. I have therefor never experienced the lens creep and the holster offers protection.

11-14-2017, 03:09 PM	#64
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,872	Originally posted by mikesbike I usually bicycle or walk with my camera/lens in a belt/shoulder camera holster of a size to fit the lens or lenses I am taking. I have therefor never experienced the lens creep and the holster offers protection. That's how I get around town most of the time too. I use a Crumpler Four Million Dollar Home shoulder bag (my "purse" ). But when I hike I like to have the camera ready so I use a sling strap. That's when the lens band is needed with the 18-135.

11-14-2017, 06:56 PM - 1 Like	#65
psoo Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 485 Original Poster	Originally posted by mattb123 I really like the compromise of IQ vs. versatility vs. size/weight of the 18-135. Corner softness hasn't been a problem or even noticeable for me. I've sold a fair number of images made with this lens too. I use it for adventure photos and even lost one in the snow once. I considered the 16-85 as a replacement but decided to get the 18-135 again since it is less expensive, smaller and lighter, and has a more versatile FL range. I recently spent a week on Kilimanjaro with a K-3 and 18-135 lens on it probably 95% of the time. I also brought the DA 15 and 50/1.8 for specific uses but rarely used them. I've been amazed at the tremendous number of responses I received concerning lenses that may be superior to my DA 18-135. It was an education to receive so many valuable and thought-provoking leads. It seems that most of you think that the DA 18-135 is an excellent lens although some lack of edge sharpness is present. A little cropping should handle this for my type of general photography. Coupled with my DA 12-24 I think I should be content with this combo and not waste money looking for new glass. I look forward to even more responses from you, so keep the thread going with any additional advice. Thanks.

11-15-2017, 09:26 AM	#66
Angel Perez Senior Member Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 158	I have both the 18-135 and the Sigma 17-50. When shooting events its the 17-50. I also use it for shoots where i need to shoot head to toe. I really use my 18-135 as a walk around lens or for the WR. I used it last year during a blizzard and the lens was perfect. I dont use it much as i shoot headshots, portraits and the performing arts. In the performing arts i need the 2.8 but until i did get faster lenses i still made some great shots with this lens. I had a Tamron 28-75 and when compared to the Pentax there was something about the Pentax IQ that just stood out. So I say keep your lens and when you are ready go for it and feed your GAS. Nothing too wrong with that. I have a few vintage lenses that i used because that was all i could afford and you know what, they worked very well and gave me some real great images. All lenses have characteristics that if we use them correctly will give us some wonderful images.

01-05-2018, 08:03 PM	#68
psoo Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 485 Original Poster	Originally posted by jatrax Wait. You were perfectly happy with the lens until you read in a magazine that it had soft corners? Seriously? Who cares what some wannabe article writer in a magazine says? I certainly do not. How do you know the 'reviewer' is a capable photographer? How do you know his particular lens wasn't decentered? How do you know they even tested the lens instead of writing up some boiler plate? I use the DA 16-85 on my K-3II and my wife uses the DA 18-135 on hers. Sometimes my pictures are better, sometimes hers are. Standing side by side and shooting the same thing in the same light. If YOU are happy with the DA 18-135 do yourself a favor and ignore magazine articles. If YOU are not satisfied with the DA 18-135, well that is another story and there are alternatives. I believe the DA 16-85 is slightly sharper but you give up a lot of focal range for that. And it is not a lot sharper when stopped down. Just my 2 cents.................... ---------- Post added 11-07-17 at 06:03 PM ---------- I met my girlfriend 38 years ago. Haven't found 'better' yet. That's great Jatrax, hold onto her. Can you tell me if all your lenses are more than 38 years old?

01-05-2018, 08:28 PM - 3 Likes	#69
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by psoo Can you tell me if all your lenses are more than 38 years old? No, but quite a few of them are:

01-05-2018, 09:38 PM - 1 Like	#70
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619

01-06-2018, 05:24 AM	#71
psoo Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 485 Original Poster	Originally posted by jatrax No, but quite a few of them are: My oh my, they're all Takumars