17-70 vs. 18-135 - ADVICE

Started Nov 13, 2011 | Discussions thread
Babka08 Regular Member • Posts: 246
Re: 17-70 vs. 18-135 - ADVICE

So I declined to buy a 17-70 and have kept the 18-135. I've found it to be quite a good performer the more I use it, and I'd extend my range of goodness to 19-120mm. Some of my shots depend on the distance to the subject, with certain distances appearing softer than others at the same telephoto focal length. Subjects further away at 135mm are a real wash. But a flower at 5 feet away at 135mm is really nicely rendered. Someone smarter may know why this is the case. Refraction or something like that?

Anyhow, I've found the colour to be excellent, the sharpness way better than Photozone would suggest, the contrast good (not amazing but good), and the bokeh quite pleasing indeed at f5.6 at the long end of its range. Like for flowers, for example.

I'm thinking more and more that Pentax got this one right, especially in making it so darn small and weather sealed. It's a great travelling, hiking, one-lens solution with the weather sealed K5. I've got a DA55-300 on order for the longer end (it impressed me next to the 60-250, which is about 40x heavier), and I have limited primes at the shorter end for my 'special' shooting. But when I need just one lens in a compact package, the 18-135 is proving itself quite capable.

 Babka08's gear list:Babka08's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM Voigtlander 20mm F3.5 Color Skopar SL II +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow