kit lens vs 18-135? Anyone have insight if the 18-135 really is worth the price difference?
1575542
It's not so much the IS as the "STM" or stepping motor used inside this lens vs. the USM motor used in their other high quality lenses. The USM is built to bring subjects into focus with bullet speed. That's great for still image (sports, auto racing, etc) photography but not so good for video where you want a slightly smoother transition when focusing between subjects. The STM motor is designed to work with the new Hybrid CMOS sensor in the camera that utilizes both contrast and phase detect focusing technologies, with the phase detect being the new addition. The STM motor is also stated to be quieter which should translate into less in camera noise being picked up in your videos. Basically once the camera is set into video mode the camera uses the phase detect AF system to get the camera very close to 100% focus lock and then switches over to contrast detect for 100% lock. This of course all happens in nanoseconds. At least this is what I've been able to gleam from the numerous preview articles I've read today. Hope this helps somewhat. FWIW, I'd be looking to get the 18-135 STM kit when/if I do decide to upgrade from my Rebel XT (yes, same camera for 7 years, can you believe it). The flexibility of the 18-135 focal range for all-around still shooting plus the video enhancements make it very appealing. At least as long as the IQ testing backs it up. Plus this lens was stated to sell for around $550 all by itself if I'm not mistaken so in the kit represents a great savings imo.
2085593
I use Canon and I didn't find marvelous this lens, just convenient because of the range. Even if it works on that Pentax, I guess your criterion could be sharpness instead of range, and I think the 18-135 WR is a bit sharper than this one, in case you are chasing for a zoom lens.
1594347
It is a personal preference. The 18-105 is much more versital than the 55-300 which is a zoom lens. The 18-105 covers about 75% of what you'll need if not 90% if your just a casual shooter. I'd recommend the 18-105 but if you have a 18-55 just get and 18-105 to replace it or get the 55-300 for a zoom. I have both of these lens and I can definately say the 18-105 is a better bet but if you really need a zoom lens get the 55-300.
423082
The 18-105 is definitely the sharper lens. In my opinion, even at F4 throughout the entire range, you get amazing results. The 18-200, like most zooms, you have to really stop it down some to get the best results and the telephoto ends tends to get soft focus. It's a good all-in-one but definitely can notice the difference in performance and image quality especially in lower light situations.
13734
You did not mention if you use a FF camera or a crop sensor. That will have an impact on focal length. Without knowing much about your shooting style or long term plan, I would recommend getting the 135 if you have a FF body and the 100 if you are on a crop sensor.
1385131
Off hand I'm not sure. Go to the Pextax website and check. I love the 18-135 mm lens that came with mine. I just made a trip to Yellowstone and of course it was raining. No Problem. Most of the pictures came out great and the one that didn't were operator error. If you can upgrade to the 18-135 I think you will be happy. It's a do all len.
1664836
This is generally seen as a direct upgrade from the 18-55 Kit lens. It covers almost the same focal lengths, but with wider aperture (more possible light), better autofocus, and better overall image quality. If you like the zoom range on the kit lens but are unsatisfied with the images that come from it, this is a lens you should consider.
681555
No. Not really. But it is wider than your 18-55 and BETTER quality, so...if you are looking for an upgrade to the 18-55, this is a great one. It is also better than the 28-135 by a mile. Sell both the 18-55 and the 28-135 and replace them both with the 15-85. I have been through a ton of lenses and I ended up with: 15-85, 70-300 IS USM, 50mm. Look at the Canon 10-22 or the Tokina 11-16 if you want a superwide lens.
2227374
Since this is your first DSLR I will recomend the Canon 18-135 as a good all around lens. Overtime you may find the need or desire for other lenses like primes and L but to get you started the 18-135 will do a good job.
967393
The 24-105 is more versatile. The 135 is limiting but has gorgeous shallow depth of field.
501123
Congrats on the nice lens! I have the 17-85. It's better than my 18-55, but I would love to get the 17-55 someday. Heck, I'd like to get a lot of different lenses someday! But being completely new to dslr, I think what I have now will suffice until I get going.
1270622
The 18-140mm lens is a very good lens. I did trade mine for a 16-85mm lens that fit my work better. Also I have used the18-200mm lens which is also a very good lens. I don't think you could go wrong with any of these lens. The choice remains on what you want from your lens.
119684
I have a complete review up of the 18-135 STM comparing it to the old 18-135 with video and photos, this might be helpful to someone determining if it is worth the money http://digital.photorecommendations.com/recs/2012/08/18-135-stm-detailed-review/ In my opinion the 18-135 package is the best value if you want the convenience of one lens.
364835
Basically just more distance. In my opinion, i never ever use the kit lens, so get the cheaper one and get a couple primes with much much better quality. Thats just my opinion. Honestly, just watch some reviews and based off what kind of photography you're doing its your call!
135635
If you want versatility, I'd definitely go with the 18-270 lens. I absolutely love mine. I'd also look at the 16-300 Tamron as well. It's a couple hundred dollars more, but I feel well worth the investment.
1192320
If you have a 16MP sensor camera or better then go with the 18-140mm. Its sharper than 18-200. Both of them focus quickly. If you have an old camera with less Megapixels then 18-200 will be better because the focal range, unless weight is an issue for you.
464454
To be honest, unless you need 1.4 or the DOF scale, or minimum distortion at 23mm, the 18-55 is going to be better simply because of the IOS. I own this lens and I love it, but it really doesn't provide much over the 18-55, and I actually keep the 18-55 on most of the time unless I am going to do street photography in daylight.