Originally posted by parinya-ekparinya
I agree with others that you might get a bad copy. It is true to me that 18-135mm gives the soft results for above 100mm, but it is not that bad. Anyway, I sold it because I got a 16-50mm and a 50-135mm.
I don't know if I had a bad copy or not, in fact my copy had the same performances than in the review of photozone.de and they tested two copies.
At that time I did a compare at 70mm with all my lenses, 70ltd, sigma 17-70, sigma 70-300, pentax 18-135 and the last one is far behind the others in term of IQ. Center was excellent but all corners was just a shit of pixels. I love to stitch panoramas, and with this lens it was just impossible, as there is a canyon gap between center and mid-corners sharpness... If this was a bad copy, it was a really really bad one... This is silly because Iiked its range, silent DC motor and WR.
---------- Post added 08-31-2018 at 08:09 AM ----------
I would like to add that I love to take landscapes panorama with primes: 70mm ltd (smc version for starburst with cityscapes) or the cheap 50mm1.8. Both are very very sharp corner to corner. I also have cheap 35mm 2.4, sharpness is very good too, but I don't like its starburst effect as it only have 6 aperture blades.
Thoses 3 lenses with the 12-24 is my current setup for landscape. I miss longer focal lenght such as 50-135 or 100 macro and sometime a zoom in the 17-50 range would be convenient too. I am waiting photokina to see if revamped 16-50 and 50-135 are in the pipe, but 11-18 will be my next priority.