| Author: | | New Member Registered: February, 2012 Posts: 3 | | | | | | | Senior Member Registered: June, 2009 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 242 | | Review Date: February 11, 2012 | Recommended
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | WR! Size/Weight/Cost to performance ratio is great. Lovely colors. Pentax exterior styling vs. off-brang lenses. | | Cons: | Obviously not optically perfect. Aperture slow compared to F2.8 zooms of similar range. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K7
| |
I had to give this lens a "9" even though it might not deserve that rating optically. I feel that it's value/rating needs to account for the fact that you have the 18-55mm kit lens II optics wrapped up in a gorgeous WR lens all for the super cheap kit lens price. It will never be a F/2.8 contant aperture zoom. It will never be the absolute best in optical quality / IQ. With that said, this lens gives you amazing pictures (especially when stopped down to it's sweet spot), with great Pentax colors, all the while being a WR lens. Just an absolute amazing value lens that I would hearily recommend to anyone if they can live without F/2.8.
PS. For some reason, the ratings for this lens are quite a bit less than the non-WR version II lens, depite being the same optically.
| | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2011 Location: jakarta Posts: 9 | | Review Date: February 9, 2012 | Not Recommended | Price: $240.00
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | light, 18-55, WR, compact | | Cons: | soft focus, PF, vignetting @ 18 f 8++, a bit slow for af | | Sharpness: 3
Aberrations: 3
Bokeh: 5
Autofocus: 6
Handling: 9
Value: 4
New or Used: New
Camera Used: k5
| |
i got it as kit for my K5, perhaps i was overly expecting on this lens. the image i was taken wasn't as good as with smc-m 50mm 1,7 or with Pentax-DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL II. the focussing a bit slower, when non wr just snap the focus it takes about 200ms more to catch it . and it has a sof focus. sadly this is coming wth my K5 perhaps just a bad copy  | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: September, 2010 Location: Lyon area, France Posts: 718 | | Review Date: January 19, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | WR | | Cons: | distortions at wide-angle | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 5
Bokeh: 6
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 9
New or Used: New
| |
This is a nice kit lens. It doesn't do anything spectacular, but it isn't bad at anything either. Of course it is slow but as part of a kit with K-5, gives you a very cheap way to enjoy shooting in the rain with WR!
Construction and feeling is clearly more enjoyable than the DA-L equivalent that came with the K-x, though the optical qualities are the same.
| | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: August, 2011 Location: Melbourne Posts: 4,842 | | Review Date: November 28, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | useful range; WR; small and light | | Cons: | slow; moderate IQ | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: New
| |
A superior kit lens, but a kit lens nonetheless. The IQ is perfectly adequate for many situations, but not stunning. I bought this as part of a K-5 kit, and it is now my least used lens. The DA 15 and 40 Limiteds have supplanted it for most uses. However, there are at least two situations where I still find it useful: wet weather, where the WR is most welcome, and quick shots in crowds where the zoom is a boon. Or if I REALLY need those in-between focal lengths. You could also regard it as a good lens for a hike, given its size and weight, but the DA 15 and 40 together hardly exceed it in weight and are smaller in volume. The 18-55's maximum magnification, 0.34x, is rather nice though for flowers etc.
Small, light, cheap, decent IQ ... a worthy tool in your bag.
UPDATE: Such a useful focal length range, nicely built, very light, decent sharpness when stopped down a bit ... I just wish I liked its images more. They're not bad, they just look ho-hum compared to those from a good prime. To be expected of course, especially in light of the price differential. Still, I do SOMETIMES get a stunning shot from it, often for some reason when there's a lake or still water. I also get good results in post-processing to high contrast B&W.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: October, 2010 Posts: 6,242 | | Review Date: October 25, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | WR, handling, improved Image and build quality. | | Cons: | Slow, distortion. | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 10
Value: 10
New or Used: New
| |
I have to add one review here too.
I have had the first version of this lens, so I did not have so much expectations from this either(it came with camera and having WR body it makes sense to have WR lens too  ). But now after some more intensive use, I must say that I'm impressed. As a all around lens this one is quite good. But because of it's lack of speed you need usually some aid like tripod, monopod ect. And also an external flash could be good idea too .
So back to this lens. I do find that it needs some work to be done, for getting most of it. Color rendering is just great and rich. I have had some nice results, sharpness is above medium level clearly. With this lens it is possible to take a good shot - unlike vers. I. - in darker conditions too. And flare resistance is quite good too. I use this lens mostly in 24-40 range, where it is at it's best, but it is quite good even at 18 mm and 55. Distortion is still correctable without too much hussle.
Close focus is really quite surprisingly good. It is not a macro, but you can take nice flower shots, and details too. That WR thing is just icing on this cake. So that is why I gave it 8. (Don't spoil this lens by doing too much pixel peeping) I do recommend this lens for anyone who like to hike and shoot outdoors no matter what weather. For it's price it is really good lens.
    | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2011 Location: Chester Posts: 719 | | Review Date: October 24, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Aesthetics, Weather Sealing, Sharpness, Weight, Quick-Shift | | Cons: | IQ, Build Quality | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 6
Value: 10
New or Used: New
| |
A real example of how image quality is so much more than sharpness. I can get sharp images with this lens at any setting easily, and the range is incredibly useful with the weather sealing as the icing on the cake.
But I don't use it all that much, I generally prefer my 35 F/2.4 or 50 f/1.4. Why? Well, obviously they're faster and smaller, and their small size offsets their plastic construction. They still feel solid (less so the 35, but it's dirt cheap so I don't complain). But their images have qualities that the images from this lens just don't have.
Bokeh is actually very good wide open at 55, but gets a bit odd as you stop down, the aperture shape becomes VERY apparent very quickly. I think it lacks in overall contrast. It's still contrasty, but only to the point of acceptability. And local contrast is pretty poor, there isn't a great deal of definition in the details.
Overall a great lens, and you can get incredible images out of it with utmost ease and convenience. But to get really lovable images you'll likely need to spend a bit of time in PP. Well, I do anyway. Or I just use a different lens if it's not raining.
And as said, the macro capabilities are actually very impressive!
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2010 Location: Manchester, UK Posts: 2,653
4 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 26, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | WR, light, small, metal mount, cheap, excellent value | | Cons: | could be faster, sharper ,,, | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 9
New or Used: New
Camera Used: K-7
| |
Unbeatable price to performance ratio. An ideal consumer zoom. It could do with being faster, sharper, less CA, less distortion, better build, etc., but probably not at the price.
Autofocus works perfectly, quick shift focus is handy, lens hardly extends in length over its zoom range and the front element does not rotate. Bokeh is great, WR resistance is useful, the lens is very light and sturdy. Any misbehaviour (CA, barrel distortion, vignetting etc.) is predictable and easily corrected either in-camera or in post-processing. But do not put a UV filter on this lens - even a good one degrades IQ noticeably, use the hood instead to protect the front element.
My copy is acceptably sharp even wide open - if yours isn't then you either have a bad one or you are doing something wrong.
A great lens to get you started with.
I have little else to add except some pictures, all have EXIF data and full size originals accessible on Flickr, if you want to pixel-peep. All shot as RAW and post-processed with SilkyPix Pro 5.
  
  
  
 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: April, 2007 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Posts: 576 | | Review Date: August 20, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Weather Resistant, Quite Sharp, Colour | | Cons: | Slow, Build Quality, Only Quite Sharp, Vignetting | | Sharpness: 5
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 8
| |
This is not a half bad lens. It isn't very good but there are plenty worse out there.
I don't use it much as just about every other lens I own is superior for my needs. But I have used it in situations when I was reluctant to use any of the other lenses due to the weather. Sometimes making the difference between taking the shot and not bothering, thus making it a very useful lens to have at hand.
The Good:
SMC coating ensures good colour and flare resistance so no complains there. As mentioned above the weather resistance can come in handy. The bokeh is quite pleasing.
The Bad:
Build is quite poor, plastic for most part. Image quality isn't really any good either, acceptable though. Slower than my grandma using a computer... Also it shows vignetting at the wide end even when stopped down quite a bit (not that it is necessarily a bad thing).
All in all a quite mediocre lens.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: January, 2010 Location: Toulouse Posts: 1 | | Review Date: August 12, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | weather sealed, light, shift Focus, | | Cons: | soft when open, noisy AF | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
Good pack Zoom.
Must be replaced by a 16-50 Da* if you want a sharper and larger Zoom
| | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2011 Posts: 10 | | Review Date: August 11, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $94.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | small, light, cheap | | Cons: | a bit slow, zoom range a bit small | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Autofocus: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
I got this lens bundled with my K-5. It was very cheap, but still it is a very good lens.
The built quality is good. There are no useless buttons. The Autofocus is fast and silent. There is this "quick shift" thing to adjust the focus which is very handy at times. The image quality if satisfying. I haven't tested the WR yet.
The only problems are 1) the small zoom range (18-55, that's just over 3x), so you don't get any wide angle or telephoto and 2) the aperture (3.5-5.6), but those were obvious from the spec, so no surprise, and it was to be expected anyway from such a light and small lens
| | | | | New Member Registered: July, 2008 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 5 | | Review Date: July 1, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Color, weight and Price, Macro | | Cons: | Soft @ 50-55mm f/5.6-7.1, distortion | |
This has been a good walk around lens for general photography.
The macro focusing capability is a huge plus, but be aware that at 50-55mm f/5.6-7.1 has greatly reduced image clarity. Some people may like this soft focus look and I do agree it looks better than what you can achieve in Lightroom, but this is not for everyone. Pentax should be wary of doing things like this as it could leave a bad taste in a new photographers mouth.
The good news is there is a way around it. By stopping down to f/8 or greater the image becomes as sharp as one should expect from this lens.
Although you may find yourself having to use an off camera flash a lot and that's not good for walking around.:ugh:
| | | | | Moderator
Site Supporter Registered: June, 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Posts: 17,377 | | Review Date: June 9, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Small, weather sealed | | Cons: | 5.6 max aperture at 55mm | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 7
Autofocus: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
New or Used: New
| |
This lens is as good as the AL II version with the added advantage that it is WR which is why I got my copy. I sold my AL II long ago even though it was a good lens. The feature gave it an added aspect for drizzle days and 90+% hot humid days in a canoe etc. I give my copy the II an 8.5 and this one an 8.0 but that is sample variation because they should be the same performance wise.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: October, 2010 Location: Portugal Posts: 30 | | Review Date: April 22, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | wr, peso, quick-shift... | | Cons: | por 70€ no tengo nada en contra. | |
Considero esta lente imprescindible para cualquier cuerpo a prueba de mal tiempo. En la K5 compenso la poca luminosidad subiendo la sensibilidad iso. A f8 y f11 da buenos resultados bastante nitidos aunque tampoco se le puede pedir milagros por sólo 70€  | | | | | Forum Member Registered: October, 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 78 | | Review Date: April 16, 2011 | Recommended
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Cheap, WR, weight, build | | Cons: | Slow, distortion, build | |
Came as a kit with my K7 which was my first DSLR. I made the mistake of buying a DA40 Ltd at the same time which is a much nicer lens. The 18-55 WR is built quite well for a kit lens but against limited primes it just doesn't compare.
For what it is though it is good and can create great images, it just doesn't have the specialness of some of my other lenses. Pretty much the only time I use it now is when I need the weathersealing.
If I was getting a kit lens with a K5 now, I would probably go for the 18-135 which seems a step up in terms of build, range and optical quality.
| | |
;)
;)
;)
;)
