Jump to content




The above adverts really do help Fotozones. Please click on them if they are relevant to you. Not seeing them? Just exclude Fotozones from your ad blocker. Thanks!


Photo
- - - - -

Nikon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G DX AF-S


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

Poll: Rate this lens (13 member(s) have cast votes)

Rate this lens

  1. 1 Star (appalling) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 2 Stars (below par) (1 votes [7.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.69%

  3. 3 Stars (average) (7 votes [53.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 53.85%

  4. 4 Stars (above average) (5 votes [38.46%])

    Percentage of vote: 38.46%

  5. 5 Stars (outstanding) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Dallas

Dallas

    Fotozones Owner

  • Administrators
  • 18,167 posts
  • LocationDurban, South Africa
  • Edit my pics?:Yes

Posted 23 October 2007 - 11:32

Please post your opinions of this lens here. This topic will be indexed on our LENSES page. Please keep comments related to the lens in question.

Clicking on an ad just once a day will help me tremendously with financing this site. 

You can also support the site by buying your gear from the affiliate advertisers below (use these links):

Amazon.com | Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.de | Adorama | B&HThinkTankPhoto | Digital REV | OWC 

Alternatively you can DONATE via PayPal (donor list)

 

Follow Me On: social-facebook-box-blue-icon.png social-twitter-box-blue-icon.png YouTube-icon.png google-icon.png 


#2 junarto

junarto
  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 10 May 2008 - 17:51

It's my main lens for almost 1,5 years until i could manage to buy 17-55 2.8. The lens deliver a very sharp picture, IMHO it could match the sharpness of my 50 1.8.
Many user complaining about the vignette and distortion, but there's not a problem from me, but my main complain is the CA and fringing when using this lens for landscape. It's still there even i stop down to f/16.
Many people too considering about the plastic mount, but since I have several prime lens and zoom, I change lenses quiet often, i could change 2-3 lenses just for a single scenery and have no problem with the mount, but finally the AF-S motor died on me in my last visit to Japan (last February) the temp is below 0 degree Celsius, and the focus is start squeaking and stop focusing. It cost me around $50 to replace the AFS motor :(. So, lesson taken, is not a great working horse, But 18-135 is truly really nice light travel lens with a reasonable price.

#3 Russ

Russ

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • LocationIndiana

Posted 28 May 2008 - 13:51

This lens is quite sharp and covers a wide zoom range.  It is slow, lacks VR, and breaks easily. It has more distortion and CA than I like. 

It is too expensive for an entry level lens and two crappy for a higher level lens.  It makes an adequate lightweight back up lens, there if you need it but hopefully you never will.

It will only make you happy twice...the day you buy it and the day you sell it.

#4 c_junarto

c_junarto
  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • LocationJakarta

Posted 05 May 2010 - 13:16

Got this lens as kit with my D80, very sharp lens, IMHO sharper than my Tamron 28-75 and 70-300VR wide open, but the vignetting and CA is bit annoying. Broke in 2nd years when i visit japan in winter (accidentally expose to rain and snow), repaired and sold it afterward. Good beginner lens but 135 in DX little bit to long for shoot by handheld

#5 ozone

ozone

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • LocationNorway
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 14 February 2014 - 18:31

This lens is definately sharp enough for 12-16MP cameras (best in the lower focal-lenghts), but it is to slow, lacks VR and desperately needs it!

So for photography without a tripod, the upper focal-lenght range is unusable in anything but direct sunlight.

Thus the 18-55mm VR is the logical and better choice.

In addition, I think this lens is way too big to have a plastic mount.



#6 DaveO

DaveO

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 557 posts
  • LocationCrossville, Tn

Posted 10 March 2014 - 14:46

   I bought a used Nikon 16-85 VR lens instead because it had VR and a metal lens mount.  Even though it doesn't reach as far.



#7 aajiiholma

aajiiholma

    Advanced Member

  • Life Member
  • 352 posts
  • LocationEspoo, Finland
  • Edit my pics?:Ask Me

Posted 26 March 2014 - 11:52

I bought a 18 - 140 lens, a newer version of this. It is with VR and a metal lens mount.

 

It seems to be quite good even with my D7100. Best sharpness is on longer side of the lens.

Let's hope you make a new thread for this very lens.

 

Antti


Antti

D7100, D300, Nokia Pureview 808
some lenses





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



Receive a FREE CAMERA BAG from Think Tank Photo


An appeal to all Fotozones visitors: please help me to keep this site going by starting your gear purchases using any one of the affiliate links shown below:

Amazon.com | Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.de | Adorama.com | thinkTank Photo | DigitalRev.com | OWC | B&H or Donate via PayPal

Starting your shopping here doesn't cost you anything more, but by using the links above (or any others found on the site) you are advising the affiliate that you support this website. This results in a small commission that helps with the running costs. If your preferred outlet isn't among those listed above you can also support the site by making a donation of any amount via PayPal (no PayPal account required). Any donation will be most appreciated.