18-70 vs 18-135

Sorry to start a thread on this probably well argued point but the search engine is dowm at the moment.

I am looking to buy a D40 with either the 18-70 or 18-135 lens instead of the 18-55 kit.

The price difference is minimal and I am leaning heavily towards the 18-135mm for its exta reach. I understand that both are very sharp but the 18-135 has more distortion/vinigaretting etc.

With the 18-70 I will need another lens (eg the new 55-200vr) down the track wereas I see the 18-135mm as a more stay-on type lens for my purposes.

Is the 18-70 really that much better in the REAL world or is everyone more than happy with the 18-135?

Thanks for your time.

Cheers Darin

This has been hashed over a lot - here and I think in Nikonians as well (you might want to check there). I've had both and definitely like the 18-135 better. At least on copies, the 18-135 is significantly sharper below 30mm. Distortion was similar at the wide end with both lenses (pretty bad). The 18-70 is slightly faster, more solidly built (metal lens mount) and has a distance scale (which I never used), but in my opinion, these are pretty minor tradeoffs for an extra 70-135 range.

Since it is D40, so 24-85mm AFS will be good. But if you don't mind manual focus, you can try 24-85mm F2.8 version.

If you have cash, you should get 28-70mm F2.8 AFS untimately.

--
James Kei
http://www.webshots.com/user/cwkei

Hank Wolfe said:

This has been hashed over a lot - here and I think in Nikonians as
well (you might want to check there). I've had both and definitely
like the 18-135 better. At least on copies, the 18-135 is
significantly sharper below 30mm. Distortion was similar at the
wide end with both lenses (pretty bad). The 18-70 is slightly
faster, more solidly built (metal lens mount) and has a distance
scale (which I never used), but in my opinion, these are pretty
minor tradeoffs for an extra 70-135 range.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply.

I think sharpness is more important than the distortion. Distortion can be corrected, lack of sharpness can't. The speed difference is minor as you say. I think the extra reach and not haveing to carry two lenses will be the key thing in my decision.

Cheers Darin

Tianium said:

The price difference is minimal and I am leaning heavily towards
the 18-135mm for its exta reach. I understand that both are very
sharp but the 18-135 has more distortion/vinigaretting etc.
With the 18-70 I will need another lens (eg the new 55-200vr) down
the track wereas I see the 18-135mm as a more stay-on type lens for
my purposes.

Click to expand...

I prefer the 18~70 for the reasons you mention here. I find the range covers the bulk of my basic needs. When I want longer I want MUCH longer, so even the 18~135 would not be a one-lens solution.

Tianium said:

Is the 18-70 really that much better in the REAL world or is
everyone more than happy with the 18-135?

Click to expand...

I bought the 18~70 as a lightweight travel and party lens. It was never intended to replace my more serious gear, but I used it last week for a college project and I was very impressed. I was shooting at night in central London and didn't want to carry much gear (or stop to change lenses). I can see it creeping into my bag more oftenthan originally planned.

I have both the 18-70 and the 18-135. The 18-135 is a bit sharper at all focal lengths and apertures; has similar amounts of CA and distortion; focuses much closer (but a little more slowly, I think); is -surprisingly- somewhat wider at 18mm; has -obviously- a lot more reach (but e.g. a 70-300 would still be an invaluable addition to your kit); has slightly worse build quality (no distance scale either); and vignettes a lot at 135mm. I'd pick the 18-135 over the 18-70 any day, but your luck with manufacturing tolerances and QA may differ...

Hope this helps.

--
Martin
Adelaide, Australia

It really depends on your shooting. I bought D80 with 18-70 when it first came out, instead of 18-135. There were no reviews of 18-135 at the time, only some sample shots. It is a good lens indeed, but it is only 2x longer reach, and has all the other built, distortion and vignet problems. I reviewed all my pics taken over the last few years, and noticed that I did not miss much over 70mm. I just came back from 2 weeks vacation in LA and Bahamas, and used the 18-70 and 35/2. I noticed that there may be 2 or 3 pics (out of about 1000 pics) that I would love to have longer reach, but much longer than 135mm. I think I'll buy 55-200vr to augment the 18-70. If you buy the 18-135, then you next addition will have to be 70-300vr which is a nice lens, but too heavy and bulky for travel.

I have just bought the 18-135mm and I think it's a great lens, very sharp! There are some distorsion and vignetting, but it is very easy to correct with PTLens.
Get the program. It is easy to use, and very very cheap.

PeterM

for your replys.

Darin