[audiobomber]

It appears that my 18-135mm is sharper than my 18-250 pretty much everywhere.

https://picasaweb.google.com/bonhommed/18135Vs18250#

All photos on a tripod, 2s lock-up, auto exposure, MF and AF, wide open apertures. Light was changing due to cloud cover.

[dasuhu]

Are these corner crops?

Yeah the 18-135 is definitely sharper than the 18-250 in these examples.

Strange how the manual focus shots are more out of focus than autofocus.

Nice name btw

[audiobomber]

Are these corner crops?

Yeah the 18-135 is definitely sharper than the 18-250 in these examples.

Strange how the manual focus shots are more out of focus than autofocus.

Nice name btw

There are no crops, just full size photos.

I suck at MF. The only reason I do them is to show that AF is up to scratch.

Were you able to figure out how to see full resolution?

Thanks for looking.

[Rondec]

Thanks for these shots! 18-135 actually looks quite nice in these. A little softness in the corners at f5.6 135mm, but nothing like what was shown in Klaus' photos on photozone. This is a lens I am seriously considering, but didn't want to sink money in it if it turns out that I won't use it if image quality suffers too much.

[dgaies]

Thanks for these shots! 18-135 actually looks quite nice in these. A little softness in the corners at f5.6 135mm, but nothing like what was shown in Klaus' photos on photozone. This is a lens I am seriously considering, but didn't want to sink money in it if it turns out that I won't use it if image quality suffers too much.

Those shots seem on par with my copy of the 18-135. I went out last night and did something similar, although with a wooden fence not a brick wall. Didn't have a tripod with me so I figured I would retake the shots in the next few days before I posted anything. FWIW, the corners and edges aren't nearly as nice (resolution-wise) as the center at long focal lengths, but I have no hesitation in recommending this lens overall. I really like mine and find it to be a very useful lens. The way I look at it, it's like an upgraded/extended 18-55WR; faster/quieter AF, equal or wider aperture over the common range and has the extra range from 55-135mm (even if the IQ suffers a bit)... all in a package that's not much bigger than the 18-55WR itself (except for the price, which is a lot bigger ).

[Rondec]

Right. If the DA 17-70 f4 had weather sealing, it would be a competitor, but having spent enough money for a weather sealed body, I would like the whole combo to be sealed.

[dgaies]

Right. If the DA 17-70 f4 had weather sealing, it would be a competitor, but having spent enough money for a weather sealed body, I would like the whole combo to be sealed.

The DA17-70/4 is another lens I really liked despite being it being criticized for weak performance on the long end (although not to the same extent as the 18-135). If the 17-70/4 was weather-sealed, I would likely have one of those instead to use as a WR-kit lens. That said, I believe the 18-135 is still f/4.5 at 70mm, so it's not that much slower over the common range than the 17-70/4.

[deadwolfbones]

This seems to match my own experience better than PZ's as well.

I'm pretty sure PZ just got a bad copy, and Pentax Europe did a bad job of dealing with it.

[audiobomber]

I added some real life test shots. No tripod this time. https://picasaweb.google.com/bonhommed/18135Vs18250#

[GeneV]

This seems to match my own experience better than PZ's as well.

I'm pretty sure PZ just got a bad copy, and Pentax Europe did a bad job of dealing with it.

That last part is what I have suspected. I don't have the personal experience to offer an opinion on the lens' performance. I do notice that the shots you and others have posted show corners which look nothing like those in PZ.

[GeneV]

Right. If the DA 17-70 f4 had weather sealing, it would be a competitor, but having spent enough money for a weather sealed body, I would like the whole combo to be sealed.

The kit lens and its sibling, the DA 50-200 are ideal travel-sized lenses. I'm a big fan of the DA17-70, and the results from mine are hard to distinguish from my primes, but it is a bit larger and heavier than I prefer for travel. I was still interested in the 18-135 because of its compact size (just .5 cm longer than the kit lens). It is 2 cm shorter and 85gr lighter than the 17-70. That makes a big difference as a travel lens. The WR is just icing on the cake.