Pentax DA 18-135

In case anyone was thinking about this lens, I just purchased it ...initially thinking it would be a great travel lens when I hit NYC in October....but am so impressed by it's smallish size, amazing range, and more than adequate IQ....that it hasn't left my K-r. Loving it.

Yes, it's a nice lens and I would be happy to use one.

Please post some sample photos in full size so we can all take a look at the IQ. Thx

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/smc-pentax-da-18-135mm-f-3-5-5-6-ed-al--if--dc...

In term of IQ I don't think it is good enough. But for a compact traveling lens is more than enough.

exactly. Yet...I still find it "permanently" attached to my dslr because not sure my other lenses (18-55 and 55-300) are any better.

Buy a 35mm 2.4 and start to shoot fix. You will find yourself in a different world. Well of course get the FA limited would be even better, but 35mm 2.4 is a very good start, once you shoot fix you will next return to super zooms.

I agree to a point... My FA50 pretty much lives on my camera at the moment but I often find it too narrow... At this point the Tamron 17-50 comes out...
I love the IQ (and size) of the primes but the flexibility of a good zoom lens can often (imo) outstrip the the IQ... I'd rather 'get the shot' a lil' soft than miss it cos its out of range... Or too close (in the case of the 50...)

I have the 18-135 and am very happy with it. I also have, and won't get rid off the 17-70. The big plus of the 18-135 over the 17-70 for me (apart from the extra range) is that it doesn't hunt - it just gets on and focuses quietly and quickly.
The IQ may not be up to the * or ltds but it is still pretty good imho.
It is the only lens I took on my hols last week.

I'd agree on 50mm being a little too long for a DSLR. Then again I'm finding I prefer 40mm or 35mm as a standard lens on film too!

The DA 35mm or the 21mm Ltd would be much handier as a walkabout lens than the 50mm.

Yet my 18-135mm has a permanent place in my bag whereas the 35mm 2.4 has one at home on the shelf.

Lucky we aren't all the same isn't it

Yes after I got myself the 31mm ltd I find my sigma 18-50 2.8 very rubbish, at 18mm the IQ is so bad that I wouldn;t use, when shoot at 18mm focal length I normally put on my 10-20mm sigma, then 31mm as a normal walk around lens, 50-135 when I need the reach and the 77mm ltd just to show off to canon and nikon friends that 77mm can be this small. ha ha.

Slightly off-topic but I recently tried the Tamron 18-250 "all in one" but just wasn't happy with the IQ compared to my DA17-70 which I'm pretty impressed with.

I've read the not so positive 18-135 review and it's put me off it really, mainly due to the mentioned weak borders. Bearing in mind though that I usually shoot around F11 I'd be interested to hear comparisons of the 18-135 vs the 17-70 (Gwyn please:wink - certainly the sharpness difference between a prime and decent zoom is much less significant at these apertures.

Simon

Simon, for a serious holiday, or serious landscapes I would still use the 17-70, which is better at the edges and not so distorted. As a general all purpose lens though the 18-135 suits just fine.
I'll try and post some samples soon, but with two sprained ankles it is not easy at the moment.

The 18-135mm is a good lens and in bad weather certainly comes into its own.