Customer Reviews

Nikon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(27)
3 star:		(12)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

Wide open this lens has some noticeable flaws, but if you force it to using a more closed aperture (say F8), many of those become less apparent. Even if you're forced to shoot wide open or you don't know better, you can correct the aberrations and vignetting in software.

While some prefer the slightly better build of the 18-70mm, I'd take the extra 65mm (close to 100mm on the DSLRs that use these lenses) any day over a distance scale and a metal lens mount. For crying out loud it's an autofocus walk around lens, so distance scales are relics for few people to use and the mount is a moot point, since it will stay on 99% of the time. As for focus speed, it's great. There are faster focusing lenses, but not with a comparable zoom range for the price. Nikon is not a charity, they design sophisticated lenses, build them to high tolerances, and sell them to a loyal following at a fair price. Yes a $1000 lens will be better than a $330 one, and yes a $2500 lens collection will do better than a $330 lens. I should hope so!

Enough of the weaknesses, which plenty of other folks will write about, it is a very good lens. 135mm is about as long of a lens that I would want without VR stabilization, but it works well when there is ample light. Since it's only intended for DSLRs, bumping the ISO is always an option to assure shake free shutter speeds.

Why isn't this a 5* review, well, I can honestly tell you that there are many people with defective lenses in need of repair/replacement. I believe those issues have been fixed, but it's not a good circumstance. I recommend that you be sure to buy a genuine US copy with a full warranty--don't fall for any extended warranty though, as it's got a generous 5 years from Nikon. Being to 'po boy I am, I opted for one of those refurbished ones, hoping it was a unit that was returned by someone expecting a perfect lens at a bargain price, and a double check by Nikon assured that it is and likely will always be fully functional. No regrets thus far.

Quit your beefin'...this is a fine lens!
I use this lens exclusively and just cannot understand the naysayers to its quality, speed and pincushion problems.
Wierd that I have one of the few good ones?
It balances and handles great on my DSLR and takes sharp, richly colored, pics day in and day out.
The only reason I didn't give it 5 stars is that there is some 'purple fringing' at full tele. Not major but enough to ding a star.
This lens is a great value. For those who did get a bummer lens, it may worth another try or have it fixed.
I owned the reknowned Nikon 18-200 VR for a week and frankly found it heavy, clunky and the quality was no better. I returned it and kept this one.
OK, my two cents. I LIKE this lens a lot.

I'm a hobbiest/enthusiast not a professional, yet I've taken the time to learn terms like vignette, bokeh and about pincushion/barrel lens effect. The 18-135mm DX Nikkor lens suffers from all of them. If you're not a perfectionist or professional, then you will certainly not be disappointed by this utilitarian starter lens. If you expect to take your photography to "the next level" then this lens will quickly become a paperweight not worthy of space in your camera bag. ---

First, I've noticed vignetting (i.e., a slight darkening of the corners) at "extreme zoom" (135mm zoom). It's most noticible on skylines and photos of airborne objects. ---

Second, I've noticed slight pincushioning (the inverse of a fish-eye lens, everything is pulled towards the center of the photo, destroying square lines) at almost all zoom settings. ---

Third, the Bokeh (blur) is bad bokeh. Typically, photographers consider good bokeh to be that which is brightest in the center and gradually fades towards the edges until it merges with the blurred background. The 18-135mm lens suffers from bad bokeh, which is the blur highlight is on the edge of the blur. While this might be what you want for some artistic reason, it makes small light sources that blur in your background really stand out and detract from professional grade photographs. ---

Lastly, if you do any night shots, macro/close-up work or want to do any extended shutter photography, you will find that the lack of image stabilization (or vibration reduction as Nikon calls it) will drive you to purchase another lens quickly... unless you can work with tripod for all of your shots. ---

However, I've not suffered from any of the auto-focus issues that other customers have (although it doesn't focus well in darkness, this is not the lens's fault and there are solutions outside of the lens to solve this problem), nor have I had any defects in my lens. The photos are sharp (other than the above problems), but I have not had a chance to test (nor will I intentionally experiment with) durability. I've taken my 18-135mm on several "vacation" style outings and snapped well over 1000 shots in the first 3 weeks I owned my D80 w/ 18-135mm Nikkor Zoom lens. --- Already I'm upgrading to the 18-200mm Nikkor Zoom lens with VR. --- I wish I had not purchased this lens as part of my kit, but it has been good to me.

In summary, the 18-135mm Nikkor zoom-lens is an excellent beginner lens, but if you are a perfectionist (or professional) you would be better served to avoid purchasing the 18-135mm as part of your starter kit.

I compared this to the Nikon 18-200 VR:
1) The 18-135 is lighter and nicely balanced in handling, when mounted on the light bodies (like D-40). The 18-200 VR is much too heavy for the slight added zoom range.
2) The build quality is better than the 18-200. I got an 18-200 from the Japan factory, and it had dirt inside, inbetween lens elements! The 18-135 came perfectly clean.
3) The 18-135 has a smooth zoom barrel. While the 18-200VR has a horribly grinding zoom barrel, which sounds like it's got sand in it.
4) The zoom barrel stays put in any position, while the 18-200 does not stay in place (if you hold it vertical, it starts drifting - a LOT).
5) The focus speed is Much Faster than the 18-200. If you think this is slow, wait till you spend $ 700 for the 18-200 and have to wait while it hunts-n-pecks, focusing endlessly...
5) The VR did not give me any faster exposures. I composed the exact same shot with both lenses and got the exact same readings.
6) The only down side is the pincussioning. I agree with the other reviewers about this. But it's really only noticeable on architecture. Everything else about this lens overrides this blemish.
All-in-all, the 18-200 VR is nothing but Hype, for which they charge the consumer an extra $ 400. This is sales baloney.
I can't wait to get rid of my 18-200! I'm keeping this one.

The title says it all. I bought the lens because the glass is sharp, the focal length is handy, and it is lightweight and easy to use. But the light fall-off in the corners is significant unless you stop-down every shot. You'll see visible distortion at any focal length on the zoom - over 1% barrel distortion on the wide end and pincussion on the long end. The auto-focus is slow and tends to hunt, even in medium light. I wish the focus ring had distance markings, but at least I can override the AF-S with a turn of the focus knob. I plan on keeping the lens, but I am disappointed in the results. Let's just say this lens is a slight improvement over the mediocre 18-55mm kit lens.

I can't honestly give this a 1 or 2 star rating because i don't believe every one of these that Nikon makes will suffer the same fate as mine. It's far too easy to just blast a product because it didn't work for me, but at the same time, leave out the part that mine might just be a lemon and that doesn't necessarily mean all of these lenses are bad.

Got mine in a D80 kit for Christmas 2006. Everything worked great. This is my first digital SLR, I had been using Nikon 35mm products and many Nikon AF lenses before this. Focus was much faster than my previous setup. The images seemed extremely sharp at all focal lengths. I wasn't going to be printing 4ft prints so if there is minor problems in the corners I wasn't noticing it. Read what Ken Rockwell has to say about judging lenses before you take any of these reveiwers words for it.

My problem
I was out in the cold one night taking some shots and the motor just started making some grinding noise and then ceased to rotate the lens. The lens would no longer focus automatically. Manual focus worked fine, but not AF. This was within the first 1,000 shots of using this camera/lens. I sent it to Nikon for repair. They sent it back to me probably 6 weeks later. The thing seemed to be working fine, I didn't do any extensive testing with it other than a few dozen shots here and there. I go to an event where I wanted to take pictures and my camera's AF button wasn't responding properly and the lens wouldn't focus. This time it wasn't a grinding noise, the camera was simply acting as though it didn't recognize the lens as AF. The weird thing is the functionality would come and go randomly and quite frequently (every 10-30 seconds or so). Took the lens off and tried 3 other Nikon AF lenses and everything worked great so it isn't the body. Called Nikon, they said I'd need to send it in for repairs...again.

I'm going on a trip at the end of May and I'll probably be without this lense which means I'll either need to buy a new lens (most likely the Nikon 18-200mm with the VR) OR stick with my next longest zoom which only goes to 105mm.

I wish my wife had done what i'd asked and bought me the camera body only. But nooo, she had to be nice and get me the kit so that I wouldn't have to go out and buy a lens. The problem is I wanted the 18-200mm zoom instead of this lense because it is WAAAAAY better and much longer. If I go and buy it now my 18-135mm is a total paper weight and will never be used again.

Your choice:
If you are looking at this lens but can't afford the $900 for the 18-200mm, then realize you might have the same problems I had. However, if you don't have the problems i had you will have a great lens that will take nice sharp images at any focal length. The focus is great and the AF (when working) is fast and accurate. I wish this were a larger aperature lens as I do with all my lenses but if it were an f/2 lens then it wouldn't be $300 now would it? If you can afford it, or are serious about photography, just pony up the dough and buy the 18-200mm, you won't regret it.

This lens gets a 3 out of 5 because of the problems I had with it. If I had not had the problems I had, or if they managed to fix it permanently the first time I sent it in, I would have given it a 4. For a 5 it would need to be a longer focal length becaue 135 is not quite a zoom for me thus limiting its capabilities.

Here's what Nikon won't tell you (unless you push the customer service agents): This lens distorts the imagery at every focal length--not just the extreme telephoto range. Take a photo of something squarely framed, or, say, the siding on a house, and you will see that the image is pulled towards the center; the top, bottom, and sides bow inwards. This is true for the lens I bought and for ALL others opened in the store. Nikon says that Photoshop can fix these errors, but who wants to "fix" every portrait? For a lens that costs several hundred dollars--and one that's most frequently packaged with the D80--this is astonishing and, at best, disappointing.

I really hate how everyone whines and complains about distortion with this lens. From the comparison shots I've taken it's not that noticeable unless you get super nit picky about it.

This lens is a versatile zoom lens meant for everyday use. It's not meant for studio work as far as I can tell. For one thing it's slow in low light, F3.5 to me is way to slow for studio work. Not to mention all low cost wide angle lenses distort in one way or another. For studio, portrait, and portfolio shots you should be getting a straight 50mm lens with F1.4 or 1.8. It's only a $100 lens and cuts out any distortion and is closest to the human eye's focal range.

I would not use this for serious architecture work either. Any 35mm or DSLR camera will give you a huge angular distortion, this is where a 4x5 film camera comes in. *at least half of the people giving this lens a bad review just said "duh what?"* With a large format camera you can line up angles perfectly with the camera, not to mention you get the sharpest image you'll ever need. Photoshop does the same thing by enabling you to fudge the angles.

IMO the sub $500 Digital SLR equipment is meant for immediacy, it's meant for you to be able to bang out thousands of images without breaking the bank. It's not meant for making perfect architecture shots or professional grade studio shots, and thats not what I expect from it. The bane of being a photographer is to have multiple sets of equipment. A DSLR for the ability to bang out multiple shots with a wide focal range lens, a 35mm or DSLR with a nice 50mm lens for studio portraits and proof work, and a large format camera for those perfect crystal clear architecture shots.

Pros:
-This is a relatively cheap lens in the grand scheme of things
-It has a versatile focal range
-Quick focus in medium to high light level
-Quiet operation
-Build quality is nice.

Cons:
-Ok it distorts, but it's so subtle that I doubt a normal human will care.
-It does aggravate me that this does not have a focus range indicator, the 18-70DX and the 18-200VR has one why not this model?
-Also when in manual the focus ring slides past the min and max focusing points, I like a focus ring that clicks in and stops when I get to min and max focus.
-The lens wasn't free

These are minor cons compared to the gains you get, it allows an amateur or student to have a full range lens for a reasonable price. I'm a BFA Photo student fresh out of college BTW so this lens is perfect for me. If you are a "Professional Photographer" you shouldn't even be considering this lens. It's definitely not professional grade, it's for us who are at an intermediate level where we can't spend a fortune on 1 lens.

I have heard that this model has a tendency to fail in one way or another, I have had it for 2 weeks and it's still working for me. I'll check back if it does fail. However I bought mine brand spanking new with the 5 year extended nikon warranty. I know nikon service is a pain but it's worth it if you're still under warranty.

UPDATE: 2 years later and the lens is still going strong, haven't had any problems with it except dust... But you can't get around that.

I've had this lens for a few weeks now and can recommend it as a good multipurpose lens at a good price point for use on a Nikon DSLR camera. It appears to produce images that are better then the manual zooms I was used to from film cameras of a few years ago. If you are looking for a general Nikon lens for your new DSLR, you may find the 18-55 and 18-70 zooms a little short in the focal length range (as I did) and the 18-200 VR price tag a bit hard to swallow. This lens will give you a zoom range without being too hard on the wallet and I think it is as good as any of those other zooms over the same focal lengths for picture quality.

The title of my review basically says it all. I sold this lens soon after getting it as part of a D80 kit. While the contrast and colors are better than expected from a kit lens, the pincushion is just terrible. In any of the pictures I took that featured vertical lines (posts, poles, building edges, etc) the pincushion was so bad that it is uncorrectable even with Photoshop CS2. This was noticeable at any focal length. In the pictures that featured no vertical lines of any type, however, I did not notice any pincushion effect. The ones that did, however, were bad enough (for me) to decide to sell the lens. While I would not recommend this lens to anyone, I don't think it is a horrible lens by any means. Just not quite up to my standards. My review is 2.5 stars but they don't let you do that so I picked 3 stars.