| Author: | |
7 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 23, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $500.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Size, sealing, range, DC/focus, quick-shift, colour, contrast | | Cons: | long-end at a distance | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 9
New or Used: Used
Camera Used: K5
| |
I've now taken enough shots that I have a decent sense of what this lens does and doesn't do well. I'll get to the point: I highly recommend this lens if you want a wide-range zoom, optimized to be compact, sturdy, quick-focussing and weather-sealed. It is also a nice 'close-up' lens. If you want a telephoto lens, this is not it, but we all know that.
Let me also explain this isn't a go-to indoor lens for me. It's my take it anywhere on a trip or hike or ski day kind of lens. I wouldn't use it to replace a f/2.8 wide/mid range zoom nor would I depend on it for professional events, though I will say this is my only zoom that goes below 55mm. I just look to primes when things are wider. So understand where I'm coming from with my assessment. I actually think I'm using it for the purposes Pentax intended. That said, if you are on a budget, this certainly would suffice as your only lens.
The build and form factor is really great, and that was obviously a priority for Pentax. It's small and light for how it's made and what it does. I think this is why the price is higher. It's quality. It follows the Pentax ethos of small sized gear (ie. limited/pancakes, K5, Kx etc). No question marks here. 
Performance is obviously geared (literally) towards quick focussing, thus it has a short throw. If you need to quick-shift, it's got that. If you want manual focus, look elsewhere (which makes a lot of sense); it's just not a manually oriented lens. It's for general, all-round ease of use. No strikes here either in my opinion. 
Colours are really nice and right in there with the best of Pentax. Contrast is good.
Bokeh is really quite decent for such a zoom under a number of settings (remember what kind of lens this is with its range and size). I think Pentax had as a priority to make this a good close-up lens for the 'traveller' so that they could get nice flower or other more intimate shots with well-rendered out of focus backgrounds. It does this well. When you get into mid-range and wider, it begins to get a bit more edgy. Physically speaking, the engineers probably had to choose one thing over another. I like their choice.
Distortion is what it is. They could've improved this but likely the lens would be twice the size and weight. I'll take the form factor over an architecturally acceptable wide end. Get a 12-24 if that's your bag. 
And sharpness, that all pervasive talking-point in reviews and forums, like nothing else matters. I think Photozone is off the mark on this lens. At the very wide end it suffers a bit in edges and a fair bit in the corners. At about 21mm it starts to get really pretty good. I'll still happily take an 18mm shot of a scene with balanced light (harsh contrasts seem to make softness more noticeable). Through the mid range up to about 115mm I find it very usable and pleasant for a general purpose lens. I give it a thumbs up. It's at the long end that it's very mixed. Don't even bother trying to take a shot at 135mm with the subject far away. Mush. But point this thing at a daisy six feet away and you can get a really nice close up shot with a good centre and please bokeh surrounding. Maybe they could've paid more attention to long-end sharpness, or maybe again the lens would have been twice the size to make it so. I just avoid its use as a distance telephoto and hold things to around 120mm and I've got some really nicely rendered landscapes, for example. I call it a really nice 20-115mm lens.
Another point about sharpness. Someone on this forum noted it's sweet spot between 24-70mm and f/5.8-8. I would agree. In this range, it competes very well against some of the best zooms going. That really puts things into perspective.
Aberrations are there in high contrast. You're going to have to deal with this in-camera or in post-processing. I don't know much about this. Would coatings fix it? Or is it physical limitations or cost considerations. Regardless, computer software/firmware does the job on most everything, so it's no deal breaker, nor is it unique to this lens. 
There are a few situations/settings to avoid, and I'm learning what those are, so the vast majority of situations I can get really great service from this lens. It's not the smoothest kid on the block, but it certainly is one of the most multi-talented.
I'm rating it a solid 8 out of 10. Which means I think it's a really nice lens (I only rate the very best lenses at 9 or 10). It's got a great purpose in life, and if I needed to be ready for anything with just one lens, this is it. The other way I look at it is, given the choice between this lens + K5 and a point-and-shoot, I have my light hiking photography choice easily made with the 18-135. An alternative is a Nikon D800 with a 28-300... and a Sherpa. Go ahead and rain or snow. You can take pictures without a strained shoulder.
 | | | | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2010 Posts: 91
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 11, 2012 | Not Recommended | Price: $490.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | build quality, WR, versatile zoom range | | Cons: | image quality | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 5
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 7
New or Used: New
Camera Used: Pentax K-7
| |
On the positive side of things, first I should mention is its build quality. I own DA* 16-50 and the build quality of this lens is comparable. It also looks at its place on the K-7 and balances it good. It is small, lightweight yet sturdy lens.
Now the bad side. I had only two lenses (DA*16-50 and Fa 77 ltd) before I got that one. I was disappointed by DA* 16-50 performance at large apertures towards its short end. The distortions was very large and soft corners were noticeable even at 10cmx15cm prints. So I thought that I would rather get that versatile weather-sealed all-purpose zoom lens and for the difference (plus some extra) would get DA 12-24 or DA 15 ltd for wide-angle shots. The first day I got the lens I mounted it and went out. The weather was bright and sunny, I took many shots of my dog running, some birds, whatever... Looking at the pictures in Aperture later I noticed lack of something... I guess I should call it "microcontrast". The shots were quite sharp but I couldn't stop feel that they miss some small details. Zooming the image, I could definitely count hairs on my dog's ear but that "lack of details" feeling was still there. Then was event shooting (children) - ambient light, AF 540 flash, DA 18-135 and K-7 to pair them. I'm happy that Fa 77ltd was there too, otherwise the whole session would be completely spoiled. While 77ltd pictures where "alive", clearly 3d and very pleasant, the output from 18-135 seemed like if I took pictures of some magazine article with printed children photos on it. I mean they were completely flat, no 3d, nearly like pictures taken with cheap P&S camera. The white balance was off in very odd way, I couldn't fix it properly in Aperture, no matter how much efforts I put on it.
A few words on autofocus: it is fast enough when you are out in sunny day but in low, ambient light it often couldn't focus at all (Fa 77 and DA* were focusing properly under the same conditions). I believe it would be better with K-5, though I don't have one to confirm.
As a conclusion: I would recommend 18-135 to a person who absolutely needs an all-in-one zoom, otherwise avoid it whenever possible. I reviewed images taken with DA* 16-50 and found that they were way better, not to mention FA 77ltd. Now I'm selling 18-135, keep 16-50 for harsh conditions and ordering FA 31ltd since at the end of the day not number but the quality of images what matters. As for wide-angle.. I would probably buy DA 15 ltd one day or wait until full-frame camera is out.
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: November, 2011 Location: Homer, Alaska Posts: 101
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 16, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $500.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharpness, Build Quality, AF Speed, WR | | Cons: | A little soft wide open at 135mm | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 9
New or Used: New
| |
I recently shed my Nikon gear for Pentax equipment, and wanted a lens that could replace my Nikon 18-200mm VR, a lens built on compromise, but very good overall.
I purchased the Pentax 18-135mm with a little trepidation after reading so many less than kind reviews, knowing I could return it if I didn't like it.
I can't speak to the other reviews as my lens focuses precisely and quick, and provides very sharp images throughout the zoom range.
Yes it gets a little soft at the long end, but not as bad as the Nikon at the equivalent range, and that was okay for paid work.
Rare among modern lenses, but it actually feels well made too, quite solid.
The distortion and aberration issues are mostly non issues on the K5 or for users of Lightroom 3 which have full support for correcting these errors.
I really like the color and overall IQ of these Pentax lenses, and am very happy with this particular lens. Why haven't the other guys adopted the lens shade cut out for polarizers.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Posts: 1,678
3 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 29, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $650.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Focal Range, WR, Build Quality | | Cons: | Sharpness, Vignetting, CA's, Distortion, Price/Value | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 4
New or Used: New
| |
Bought this new in late Feb. 2011, After using it frequently this summer (my better half prefers the versatility and AF), I found myself giving up on this one, it's a nicely built lens and balances out well on the K-5, but the soft corners, and heavy barrel distortion, and vignetting, AND CA's... and and and. Eventually I found myself just taking this lens off when I go shooting and throwing on any of my other lenses.. even my broken Takumar-A 28-80 Macro is better IMHO.
This lens does server a purpose and I will be ok keeping this paperweight.. because on days it's pouring rain outside, it's my only WR option that makes me say "I think I'll go out and shoot today" then have a smirk on my face seeing the Canikoners hiding under tree's with their camer's in their jackets.
If I had the money back to do it over again.. I would get the 18-55 WR and maybe look at the 55-300 to go with it.
| | | | | | | Administrator
Site Webmaster Registered: September, 2006 Location: Arizona Posts: 51,608
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: August 11, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $500.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Compact, handy zoom range, weather sealed, fast AF | | Cons: | Image quality is only slightly better than that of the kit lens | | Sharpness: 6
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 10
Value: 9
| |
This lens quickly became one of my favorites because of its versatility. Not only can it be used outdoors in bad weather, but it also covers a very nice zoom range and has the fastest AF of any Pentax SDM lens currently out there. As such, when I don't want to carry around my other large and heavy lenses, or when image quality isn't a priority when I'm traveling, I pick this lens.
Its image quality isn't bad, but it isn't perfect, either. It's what you would expect from any lens with such a long zoom range. I would rate the overall IQ slightly better than that of the 18-55mm WR kit lens and the 18-250mm superzoom. This lens is certainly capable of producing good results, but if you're used to shooting with primes, you'll see a difference right away. Considering what I use this lens for, however, its image quality doesn't bother me at all.
Overall, I can highly recommend this lens for anyone that needs a all-in-one walkaround lens.
| | | | | New Member Registered: August, 2009 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 4 | | Review Date: August 11, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $550.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp across the frame from f5.6 at wide angle, compact, near instant and silent focussing, good range for walk-about lens | | Cons: | somewhat soft and lacking in contrast at 135mm | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 9
| |
Had this lens for 7 months now and it stays on my K-5 nearly the whole time.
Stopped down, it is very sharp across the frame, the DC motor produces near instantaneous (and quiet) focussing. Good colour and contrast out to 80 - 100mm, but loses some after that. Any CA present is easily corrected in-camera if you accept some slow-down in write times, but any CA is also very easily corrected in Lightroom 3.4 or in PCDU4.
In summary, an excellent general purpose lens and strongly recommended, especially as the prices are coming down at last!
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2011 Location: Kunming Posts: 86 | | Review Date: May 5, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $560.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp enough in my poor eyes, and much sharper than DA L18-55, versatile, fast and silent focus. | | Cons: | Would like it better if it had a longer reach, say 18-200mm and has a macro capability; well, I know I'm asking too much. | | New or Used: New
| |
I don't know how much sharper I must expect from this lens, but what I've got from the processed files from RAW are good enough for me.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/38069/1_Carnival.jpg
All the best!
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2011 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 95 | | | | | Senior Member Registered: December, 2010 Location: El Dorado Hills, CA Posts: 191 | | Review Date: April 26, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $500.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | Light, compact, build quality | | Cons: | Distortion, CA, corner softness | | Sharpness: 5
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 9
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 5
New or Used: New
| |
Based on the other user's description, I think my copy is not a bad one. It is just what it is.
CA is even visible at 25% of the actual image size.
The center image quality is good, but the corners are really really soft, especially at wide end.
I really love the range, but cannot live with the poor IQ.
I gave it 4 because I don't think it is even "good".
| | | | | New Member Registered: April, 2011 Location: Calgary, AB Posts: 1 | | Review Date: April 25, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $530.00
| Rating: 5 |
| Pros: | Weather sealing, Focal range, Size, Wieght, Color rendering | | Cons: | Soft edges, CA, Cost | |
I don't think a rating of '9' is very realistic for this lens so I'm adding my perspective so that potential buyers are more aware of the issues with it than I was when I researched it.
First of all the positives since I'm a postive person by nature! - Great build and feels really good on the K-5, very well balanced.
- Weather sealing is awesome and combined with the small form factor makes this a very attractive hiking / walkaround lens, which is exactly what I bought it for. It was the only zoom lens in my Pentax kit - everything else is primes.
- Great color rendition.
- Smooth zoom and manual focus.
I've used a lot of lenses and camera systems over the years. I was hoping that this lens would be something like the Canon 24-105 f/4 IS or the Nikon 16-85 VR lens. Based on the reviews here and the specs I was very disappointed with my first set of images taken while on a ski trip in the Canadian Rockies. After a few more trips I knew I could no longer use this lens. I only shoot RAW (DNG format) so that's what I base this on.
Negatives:- CA is really bad. Honestly, even with Lightroom adjustments I just couldn't clean it up very easily.
- I could probably live with the CA (the FA31mm isn't that great with CA either) but the softness on the edges (especially the right side on my copy) was horrible. The center was reasonable but I want to be able to use the 18mm for a reason! My copy was almost unusable on the edges - especially for larger prints.
Based on the quality of the images my copy of the 18-135mm produced I cannot recommend this lens. For the same money you could get much better performance in the Pentax world, just not quite the same useful zoom range or features - unfortunately.
Pentax could fix the problem by tightening up QC and spending just a bit more time on the edge performance.
This lens will produce decent images - just not what I was expecting for the specs / price.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: October, 2009 Location: North Posts: 4,710
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 15, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | WR, Small, Light, good focal lengths, very close focus | | Cons: | slow as expected of a zoom with such a reach | |
Linking up to a rather comprehensive review of this lens I made in the Lens Discussion section.
It covers actual usage as well as center sharpness tests.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/140258-review-...ml#post1467071
Fantastic lens. Focal length is right on for a walk about lens. The close focus ability esp. at 135mm is certainly the understated 'trick up its sleeve'. So close with such good subject isolation even at f5.6, that its very 'macro like'
| | | | | Senior Member Registered: January, 2008 Location: Zug Posts: 132
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 6, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very small, great range, zoom ring very smooth in operation. | | Cons: | | |
Also see this series of 4 images at various lengths, No work done on them except for Aperture export to jpg from PEF.
 | | | | | New Member Registered: December, 2006 Location: Toronto Posts: 10
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 21, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $500.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | WR, Fast and Silent AF, Fantastic zoom range, Sharp, Excellent build quality | | Cons: | No focus indicator | |
At first, I thought this lens was marketed towards the entry-level shooters just by looking at the large zoom range. But upon closer inspection, I think this lens is more geared towards the mid to high end enthusiast shooters.
Besides the slow aperture range (f3.5-5.6), everything else about this lens speaks high-end: solid build quality, fast and silent in-lens AF, great image quality and weather resistance! Plus you get features you won't find in high-end zooms: light weight and compactness!
Mind you that I am using this lens on a K-5 and its high iso performance and SR totally makes up for the slower aperture on this lens. I did make some test shots with my 4 year old K10D and although AF was very good, the poor high-ISO performance on the K10D doesn't go well with this lens' slow aperture especially at the telephoto end.
I was contemplating about splurging on the DA* 16-50mm and 50-135mm, but the performance per dollar on this is lens is too great. You get most of the DA* features like SDM (or DC in this case), WR and solid build quality in a light weight and compact package - plus I get most of the zoom range in one lens instead of two.
In summary, this is the perfect walk around travel lens IMO. Mounted on the K-5, I get a weather sealed kit and where I just think about taking pictures rather than deciding which lens to use (and swapping them).
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: May, 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Posts: 3,897
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 12, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | WR, extra range, compact | | Cons: | edge definition (sharpness, fringing) | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 7
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-7
| |
Let's face it, the WR feature goes to waste when you open your camera to change lenses - so this lens is a safer choice in poor conditions compared to the 18-55. I reduced my kit by three to afford this one, but early tests show its value. Note the focus is close to the mount, which one must learn; it's not a big deal to me, and focus is smooth and easy as expected. I was pleasantly surprised to note that, unlike so many motorized lenses, this one has no AF/MF switch; the kaf3 mount knows what to do with the lens whether AFs or AFc. Focus has been crisp, correct and very quiet. As fast or faster than any lens on my K-7. It's very similar in length to the 55-200 but substantially thicker and heavier, so these two lenses make a great combo!
Image quality looks good but it does have the usual 'superzoom' issues. Some color fringing and softness, most noticeable at the wide end. Near center everything is excellent, great color rendition, contrasty and sharp. It's the usual sacrifice of some IQ for versatility, and I am happy I made this choice, especially for a compact WR lens!
My copy is f/4 from 20-28mm, f/4.5 from 28 to 70mm then f/5.6.
Edit - like a few others I let this go later.  I found it wasn't worth using much past 100mm without all corrections turned on, which slowed the K-7 too much for my taste. I wish it weren't so, but it feels like it tries to do too much and the compromises caught up to me after several months of trying to work around them. My copy of the Sigma 18-200 had far fewer of the 'superzoom' issues noted above.
Second Edit: I have purchased a second copy of this lens. It performs far better than the original, but images would still improve with in-camera corrections enabled due to some softness and less but still visible fringing. I would not raise my score to a 9 however, but it's an 8¼ more than a 7½ and I will keep this one. If you buy one, test it and be sure you like it! | | | | | Inactive Account Registered: May, 2010 Location: Viet Nam Posts: 27
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 11, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $600.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | saturation, sharpen, build,....AF speed (DC) | | Cons: | CA,expensive | |
i'm from Vietnam.used kits, 16 45 and now 18 135..and it's my favourite len
some pictuers by 18 135
_SML6991 by smilingman82, on Flickr
_SML6990 by smilingman82, on Flickr
_SML7042 by smilingman82, on Flickr
_SML6951 by smilingman82, on Flickr
_SML6903 by smilingman82, on Flickr
_SML6886 by smilingman82, on Flickr
| | |
![SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR Review RSS Feed](https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/images/rss/rss_feeds14x14.gif)
![SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR](https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/43/Pentax_18-135mm.jpg)
![SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR](javascript:update('https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/43/Pentax_18-135mm.jpg');)
![SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR](javascript:update('https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/43/4K-5_cross_with_DA_18-135_WR_x800.jpg');)
![SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR](javascript:update('https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/data/43/smc_Pentax-DA_18-135_3_5-5_6_x600_optics.jpg');)
![Buy the SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR](https://www.pentaxforums.com/content/camerapics/pentax-button.gif)
![Read our SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR in-depth review!](https://www.pentaxforums.com/content/homepage/pflensseal.gif)
![Add Review of SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR](https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/images/digitalvb/pentax_red/buttons/addreview.gif)
![Buy the SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] DC WR](https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/images/digitalvb/pentax_red/buttons/buylens.png)
