18-135 WR vs Tamron 17-50

Started Mar 19, 2012 | Discussions thread
Steve1307 Regular Member • Posts: 307
Re: 18-135 WR vs Tamron 17-50

I agree the DA 18-135 is a great all weather no messing about travel lens, for when you dont what your family complaining about waiting for you changing primes.

In the limited use of a thousand or so shots in the couple of month I've owned it. I tend to us it like a 23 - 110 f5.6 just to keep of the vignetting and distortion which is expected in any similiar lens and I will admit that it is a bit softer at the sides than a 55-300 in the range 100-135mm, which again you would expect.
I think it is better than I remember my 18-55 kit which now sees little action.

For what it is i think it is brilliant - especially when paired with a K-5 - who needs f2.8 for general travel. Bring a prime instead.

I would expect that the Tamron 17-50 would give better IQ and low light performance of course and this is why I earlier had considered it, also because it was 1mm wider, but 50mm would be to short for me. For best IQ and/or low light I would grab a prime lens instead.

Before the 18-135 release, what I was hoping for was a K-mount version of the Tokina 16-135 . It didnt eventuate but thats no great pity because it turns out that lens is rubbish anyway.

When shooting locally, I usually carry up to 5 or 6 primes around up to 300mm but when travelling my more sensible kit to cover most things is 15ltd, 18-135 WR and 43ltd.
If I really needed a lens over 100mm then add the 55-300.

So i guess my answer would be DA18-135 WR supported by a fast prime if you have one.
Tamron 17-50 f2.8, a longer zoom and keep them both out of the rain.

 Steve1307's gear list:Steve1307's gear list
Pentax K-7 Pentax Q Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED +13 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow