16-105 mm or 18-135 mm?

Started Jun 7, 2013 | Questions thread
buratino Regular Member • Posts: 187
Re: 16-105 mm or 18-135 mm?


responding to 'Quality wise, which is the best?': 18-135 is undoubtedly better lens, at least if you need wide angle. I tested them on A200 10Mp body side by side at cityscape distances and 18-135 at 18mm was much better than 16-105 at 16 or 18mm. Probably at 24mm also, I have to recheck. The 16-105, which is often favorably compared to Zeiss 16-80, is not good at all at sides and corner at 16mm.  The 18-135mm is much better at corners, but have strong barrel distortion, which is correctable. As for the barrel distortion, it is negative with architecture, and actually plus, when you picture people faces close to the sides/corners: they are much less distorted 'diagonally", when the barrel distortion is present. Taking into account that Sony does not make very good wide angle lenses for a crop sensor (Zeiss 16-80 may be exception, but not as good as a prime could be), I would recommend 18-135mm, even though it' is not as wide as 16mm. Also, the quality of 18-135 is good, focusing is fast and much more silent than any old lens. I hope it was helpful enough for the my very first post here at DR.

 buratino's gear list:buratino's gear list
Sony Alpha a99 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Rokinon 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye CS +6 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow