Sony 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Review | All in One Excellence

[@AngelusHD]

We bought this lens 2 years ago, we still love it, that range is great, it’s very lightweight and the sharpness is good, not near GM level of course but overall it’s our go to lens to get some great shots without bringing the bulk.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a fair assessment.

[@OutriderFIN]

Had this lens on my a6400 95% of the time. Great piece of kit! Then got the full frame fever and upgraded to A7III and 24-105 f/4. Gained some dr, sharpness and wide end, lost some range, compactness and the amazing af.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's definitely a better than average kit lens.

[@parmanduke]

This lens really takes sharp sharp photos. Highly underrated.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It was a pleasant surprise to me.

[@RG-rm9jt]

Hey Dustin, to answer your question about humidity, I shoot in Florida a lot. Yes, even the premium G and G Master lenses take a while to defog. The only thing you can do is just leave them exposed, and let them acclimate.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Exactly.

[@HAL9000_AU]

I’ve used this as my go-to everyday and travel lens for about a year, and have been very happy with it’s all-round capability whilst understanding its limitations. Your review is 100% spot on as usual.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm glad you are enjoying it.

[@erikpapp]

Thanks for the detailed and professional analysis. For the a6300 I use this Sony 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 lens with the Sigma 16mm lens. I am very satisfied with it.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a nice pairing.

[@tarng]

I was looking for good review on this lens, and i found this. really good review and explanation.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@Greenepyon]

Recently took this Lens to New York and it really delivered. Just had to pair ir with a 30 mm f1.4 from Sigma to get some low light performance and got a excellent combo. Excellent Review!!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's a great travel lens.

[@erikpapp]

Dear Mr. Abbott. Thank you for your appreciative response. Based on previous reviews, I plan to purchase the following lenses: Sony 70-350mm F4.5-6.3 G OSS, Sony Vario-Tessar T * E 16-70 mm f / 4 ZA OSS and Sigma 100-400mm f / 5-6.3 (C) DG DN OS.

[@martinweber3859]

16-70 is not very good

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would substitute the Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 for the 16-70mm

[@AndreiGrigorean]

Why do you need both the Sony 70-350 and the Sigma 100-400? I own the Sony, I highly recommend it.

[@CO8848_2]

That was my first lens. It was very sharp, but then I switched to 18-105 f4 because for video the power zoom and constant aperture worked better by keeping zooming smooth and exposure continuous. But the fellow who bought the 18-135 from me loved it. It was so good for stills that you really could just use that one lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There are definitely applications for both lenses. It's good to have choices.

[@JessicaNeidingHaverly]

Just bought this used! Only native glass I've had for the A6400 is the PZ 16-50 for 2.5 years. I recently got an adapted film 135 3.5 and I like the extra reach. Picked up this kit lens for the quick weekend trips I have coming up.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I think you'll enjoy it.

[@BICIeCOMPUTERconGabriele]

Great review, very useful, and I think this could be a great multi purpose lens. From Europe I was in awe when you mentioned the zoom front protrusion in centimeters and the weight in grams... and I was thinking: "finally an American youtuber that speaks to the world..." then I discovered you are Canadian! LOL

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm actually American by birth, though I do live in Canada now. I'm comfortable in both measurement systems at this point.

[@BICIeCOMPUTERconGabriele]

@@DustinAbbottTWI very good, thanks for using metric!

[@networm64]

The new chart setting is so welcome! Now the center is exactly center! If you could move the president face a little towards the right corner to put it in the golden rule of thirds spot it would be just perfect! Thank you for the review

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

LOL - it's never enough, is it? :)

[@networm64]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Hahaha its not our fault sir! You are such a glorious reviewer who's made us viewers greedy enough to not expect anything from you but the perfection!😇

[@robertcudlipp3426]

I have purchased a Sony a6400 in the last 6 months' . Prior to that, was happy enough with my a6000. When using the a6000, this lens was not available. As I believe is the case with many Sony a6.... series owners, I purchased a mint 2nd hand Sony 18-105 f4 lens. This does all I need, the 18-135 appears to be clearly a step up ,in various ways, however I can't justify purchasing one & basically selling the 18-105 for a song. It is a good, and as you might say, " by no means great lens". From what I have seen on some sites, quite a few older Sony apsc bodies owners also have the older lens and will probably retain them.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I always say if you are happy with what you have, there is no compelling reason to have to upgrade.

[@NLMusique]

Great video. A question for you. If you are traveling to Norway let's say, which would you bring to take outside scenic places like fjords, waterfalls, etc...? Would you take the Sony 18-135 or the Tamron 17-70?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'd probably still lean towards the Tamron. It's bigger, but is superior optically, goes a little wider, and gives you more flexibility in lower light.

[@NLMusique]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you so much for the recommendation.

[@gorbunovvv]

Once I've made an extensive sharpness comparison test between A7III+24-240 and A6300+18-135. Both lenses appeared to have more or less the same sharpness on photos. And ultimately I replaced the 24-240 to 18-135 in my kit. Mostly because of weight and dimensions) Not a huge fan of such kind of lenses, but still they are useful.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

They are useful for sure. I would agree that keeping the 18-135 is the better choice.

[@osamamohamed88]

I have a one and nowadays try to sell it and get instead sigma 16 f1.4 and sigma 54 f1.4 thanks for the review and thanks for every review you made, you deserve more thousands of subscribers.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Both of these prime lenses are nice, though that does leave you short of any real telephoto reach.

[@passioncrew5136]

Best youtuber ever

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks - that's pretty kind!

[@miles3798]

i'm stuck between this lens and tamron 18-300 for my sony a6700... right now i just have 16-50 kit lens. i mostly shoot pet action shots and pet portraits. some video too, all mostly outdoors in good lighting. any advice?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I personally think this lens is a naturally good fit for your a6700 in terms of size and capabilities.

[@jensenperalta7927]

​@@DustinAbbottTWIwas stuck on this too, I think i'm now going for this lens, I have primes but gets super tired changing lens when travelling😅

[@metphmet]

Barrel distorsion means anyway that the lens captures a wider angle.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a different take...

[@PopovskiDarko]

Between this one and Tamron 18-200 to get extra zoom range. Is it worth purchasing a Tamron? Or perhaps 18-300 Tamron ? Basically, I am deciding to buy Sony a 6400 with 10-18 and all in one zoom lens, I see lots of images from South Texas and San Antonio. I actually live in San Antonio., greetings

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I did this review while visiting Brownsville, South Padre, and San Antonio. The Sony is very good, but the Tamron 18-300 is also very good (though considerably larger).

[@CampervanTales]

Thinking of buying this lens. Would it be good for macro, portrait and street photography?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Not so much macro, as you get decent magnification but nothing approaching macro. You could try extension tubes, but I haven't tested that combination with the lens. It would be fine for the other applications, though not exceptional. Lenses like this are good for a variety of purposes but aren't as exceptional as dedicated macro or portrait lenses.

[@Mr.Altavoz]

Great video, thanks. I bought this lens with the Sony a6600. What lens would you recommend for low light?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

What kind of focal length and photography purpose? You may need to post as a fresh question so I see it.

[@Mr.Altavoz]

@@DustinAbbottTWI mainly night street/ candle light photography

[@diogoredes]

@@Mr.Altavoz I'm just getting started, but happy with the results using the Sigma 56mm 1.4. Obviously not great if you want to go wide, but for me it works great for street photography for mid distance subjects

[@devon4730]

What would say about the low light / night situation

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's not bad. The slower aperture doesn't help, but it's not extreme, either. Modern mirrorless cameras focus fairly well in low light.

[@jameiealehandro]

how does this compare to the 18-105 g f4 ?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't reviewed that lens, so I can't say for certain.

[@jhn011100]

Would be interesting to see how the upcoming Tamron 18-300 would compare.

[@networm64]

Same as me! But I wish it was a bit smaller, it looks huge compared to this lens. I hope it have the same price at least.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'll definitely do some side by side comparing.

[@thehappyclam3942]

I agree that it's a great all around lens but if you have room for a second lens the Sigma 16 pairs nicely.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Another good pairing is the Samyang AF 12mm F2 for that wide angle perspective.

[@Nico-bc4ir]

Very thorough and informative review. Watched it although I'm not an APS-C shooter. :)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for the support!

[@tek_soup]

they should of just put a G on it and bumped up, the materials/F4 to lower

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Perhaps, though a lens terminating in a maximum aperture of F4 would have been much bigger and more expensive.

[@SincerelyVIIProductions]

Im confused why you keep saying f8 when the lens only goes to f5.6

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It can be stopped down to F8 and smaller. F5.6 is the largest maximum aperture on the telephoto end, but the minimum aperture is F22, I believe.

[@stjepanjina]

Test Sigma-s 16/56mm f1.4 Pleaseeee

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I've already reviewed both of those lenses thoroughly. Search for them on my channel.

[@johndonaldson5126]

I've just about ceased using the 18-135. I like the focal range. The images aren't too bad, but they aren't that great either. I'll grab it, then I'll remember how disapointed I am each time I use it. I end up grabbing the excellent 18-50 2.8 Sigma and enjoy it so much, but it lacks that extra reach. I would be so pleased if Sigma came out with an 18-135 f2.8 APSC that produces high quality images. I would expect a lens with those spects to be over $750, large, and heavy. But it would be worth it.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a tough ask. Tamron did develop the 35-150mm F2-F2.8 for full frame, however, and that's pretty much the lens you are asking for. Someone just needs to do for APS-C.

[@sharkpyro93]

there always the tamron 17-70 f2.8, not as long as 135 but still...

[@tek_soup]

yeh $650 Kit Lens, it's a good one.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is that.

[@stefpix]

I have the Tamron 18-300 for when I need a long lens occasionally, but it is a bit bulky for every day walkaround lens. I have the Tamron 17-70, that i use for jobs/assignments, which is great, but also a little bulky. This would be something to put on a A6100 to carry in a fanny pack sling every day. A step up and a cheaper kit than a Sony RX100vii @DustinAbbottTWI how is the IQ of this Sony compared to the Tamron 18-300?