Poll about the DA 18-135 WR
This topic has a poll - login to enter
Posted 13/08/2011 - 17:53
Link
I voted a firm yes, despite its technical limitations it's a very pleasing lens.
Posted 13/08/2011 - 18:08
Link
I voted a firm no. I'm all for the convenience of a wide range of focal lengths but there's a limit in what current designs can achieve. My 17-70 and 50-135 covers that range with decent quality
Posted 13/08/2011 - 18:14
Link
Mind you never is a long time
Posted 13/08/2011 - 18:16
Link
Mike-P wrote:
Where is the option for already have?
+1Where is the option for already have?
I have one and, though it does have limitations, I use it a lot, far more than I ever did my 50-135*. I still use my 17-70 the most. It is very convenient to take travelling when you have to travel light - the extra range is useful. It also doesn't hunt for focus like the 17-70 can.
Posted 13/08/2011 - 18:20
Link
If you already have it, then vote on whether you'll buy it again if you lost/broke it
Discovering the joys of photography with Pentax
Posted 13/08/2011 - 21:11
Link
NikonToPentax wrote:
If you already have it, then vote on whether you'll buy it again if you lost/broke it
I voted a definite yes, I have it and I would buy it again. It is interesting that many of my best shots are now taken with that lens. Maybe that is because of its versatility, but in any case it is working very well for me.If you already have it, then vote on whether you'll buy it again if you lost/broke it
Maybe you should separate the poll for those who have used the lens and those who are just not interested.....
Posted 13/08/2011 - 21:50
Link
Smeggypants wrote:
I voted a firm no. I'm all for the convenience of a wide range of focal lengths but there's a limit in what current designs can achieve. My 17-70 and 50-135 covers that range with decent quality
Ah! but there are some amongst us, me included who aren't in the position to own both these lenses, as much as i would love to.
I voted a firm no. I'm all for the convenience of a wide range of focal lengths but there's a limit in what current designs can achieve. My 17-70 and 50-135 covers that range with decent quality
Thanks
Sean
Sean
Posted 13/08/2011 - 21:54
Link
melness wrote:
I had them both, but I sold the 50-135. Superb lens but it sat collecting dust most of the time. Yes I liked the extra reach but hated changing lenses continuously in the field. Sad I know.
Smeggypants wrote:
I voted a firm no. I'm all for the convenience of a wide range of focal lengths but there's a limit in what current designs can achieve. My 17-70 and 50-135 covers that range with decent quality
Ah! but there are some amongst us, me included who aren't in the position to own both these lenses, as much as i would love to.I voted a firm no. I'm all for the convenience of a wide range of focal lengths but there's a limit in what current designs can achieve. My 17-70 and 50-135 covers that range with decent quality
Posted 13/08/2011 - 22:04
Link
I voted maybe. I have lenses in the focal range which are probably considered "superior" in optical quality, and certainly faster.
However If there is a need to travel light and not have the need for changing lenses nor need fast F-stops, then it might be a consideration.
However If there is a need to travel light and not have the need for changing lenses nor need fast F-stops, then it might be a consideration.
Posted 13/08/2011 - 23:21
Link
Just to add, I am cameraless at the moment ( two lens kit was refunded by Amazon). So I am considering whether to get the standard kit lens or the one with the 18-135, but I am having trouble with the price of £450 plus for that lens.
Discovering the joys of photography with Pentax
Posted 14/08/2011 - 10:29
Link
I voted maybe too.
If I was going on a trip where changing lenses and weather/atmospheric conditions could be hazardous to my camera/lenses if I had to change them often and they were not WR lenses, then I'd consider it a good option.
The negatives are of course the lower quality IQ than a DA* lens and the much higher price than a lens designed for the average user. Naturally you are paying for the convenience of the range and the WR.
If I was going on a trip where changing lenses and weather/atmospheric conditions could be hazardous to my camera/lenses if I had to change them often and they were not WR lenses, then I'd consider it a good option.
The negatives are of course the lower quality IQ than a DA* lens and the much higher price than a lens designed for the average user. Naturally you are paying for the convenience of the range and the WR.
Posted 14/08/2011 - 11:38
Link
I voted no. At that price I think I'd instead go for a Kr as a second body.
Posted 14/08/2011 - 14:55
Link
I've the DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 so that range is covered but the DA18-135 looks like a fun traveling lens but the price is too high i think and the cheaper DA17-70 gives you better IQ and still have a very useful range.
Isn't that an option?
Isn't that an option?
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
237 posts
15 years
In the sky