Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Not counting the price difference, for those who own either or both of these lenses, which one wins as an all-around lens. I'd like to eventually replace the two kit lenses that came with the camera. Opinions on both? Thanks.

nhastings Loc: Telluride, CO

I don't have Sony equipment but Fuji. My opinion is that if IQ is the same, go with the 18-135. Gives you a little more to work with.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

I have the 18-105 and I will never part with it! The 18-105 is a power zoom lens. So if you take any video at all, you will have a very professional smooth zoom, and it stays in focus while zooming! The fact that it is a "G" lens and the 18-135 is not, should say everything.

Soul Dr. Loc: Beautiful Shenandoah Valley

I have the 18-105 lens. I'm real pleased with it.
It's my usual walk around lens when I don't need a lot of reach.
I don't have the 18-135, so can't tell you anything about it.

Will

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

I know there are lots who like the 18-105 f/4 OSS, but I have to weigh the cost, as it's $300.00 more than the 18-135. There's a 30mm zoom difference between the two, so that's not a lot, and with the Sony Clear Image Zoom, shooting in JPEG, that brings me out to 210mm, which I'm finding adequate for my needs. I'm operating on a rather limited budget here.

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

The 18-105 is almost a cult lens. Friends use the power zoom for PR style video with the a6500 or 6300.

I used my friends and wished I had the lens. It is one of the those camera's the far exceeds the price in quality.

Bipod

I can count one hand the number of times I shot at over 200 mm. Unless you're a
wildlife photographer or doing surveillance, I can't imagine why someone on a budget
would need 210 mm focal length.

I was never a fan of ultra-wide either. But suppose I was: any zoom lens is bound got have some
vignetting at an 18 mm setting. If you're really going to shoot that wide, you'd be much better off
with a (relatively cheap) 18 mm FFL.

A narrower zoom range generally means a sharper lens (all else being equal).
Shorter maximum zoom also generally means a faster (larger maximum aperture) lens.

If you're on a budget, why are you buying a zoom lens? FFL lenses are in all respects
superior (especially reliability!) except one: convenience. Every thrift store in America
has a couple of broken motorized zoom lenses that are out of warranty: Nikons, Canons,
Sonys...you name it.

When did conveninece become more important than reliaiblity, robustness, brightness and
image quality?. Sure, "everybody's doin' it"--so what? On that basis, we'd all eat three
meals a day at McDonald's. And if conveniece really is what matters most, then nothing
beats a smart phone camera.

I know this will fall on deaf ears, but complexity always comes at a price: and not just
in money terms. Drop an FFL and it might still work; drop a motorized zoom...

Anyway, you probably saw these reviews, but in case not:
https://kenrockwell.com/sony/lenses/18-105mm.htm
https://www.thephoblographer.com/2018/04/09/review-sony-18-135mm-f3-5-5-6-oss-sony-e-mount/

Ob1 Loc: Utah

I own the lens and like was mentioned it is a G master lens. It does make a big difference. It is expensive however I have found with lenses you really get what you pay for. The only thing I disagree with the Ken Rockwell review is the comment on size. It is not very big. You will be very happy with this lens. Good luck deciding.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

I appreciate your comments here. And no deaf ears on my part. I guess you'd have to know that photography is not the only thing I do, and I am not a pro or even an advanced amateur, and I'm certainly not an artist like my grandson is. So convenience is appropriate for my needs. I'd rather have the convenience of just one lens so I don't have to change lenses and maybe miss a shot. I don't demand the highest quality, just good quality. That is, I like my images to come out sharp and clean, but I don't need a $1500.00 lens to get that.

I am also aware of the shortcomings of long zoom lenses, in that they tend to be soft at the extreme ends. However, up here, there is frequently the need to reach out a ways to get a subject. Even if you go to extremes to get to where the wildlife is, a long lens is nearly a requirement, however, I can't afford to charter an airplane or a boat to get somewhere to photograph critters. When I say "budget," I don't mean to imply I'm broke, but being retired I can't just put in a few hours of overtime each month to boost the bank account. I just need to be careful where I spend my money.

Anyway, over time it's become apparent that I rarely shoot at more than 100mm, so a "big" lens would just be a heavy piece of expensive equipment that I'd have to lug around. I'm 72 and just don't need the weight.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

I assume you're referring to the 18-105?

Ob1 Loc: Utah

Yes, sorry. I also own the Sony 70-200 2.8 and Sony 100-400 both G master lens. I’ll be honest the 18-105 is not in that league however it is a very good lens that I use for my grandchildren and all of their activities. If it passes that test it must be pretty darn good.

unclebe1 Loc: NYC & Wellington, FL

Don't know what you are looking at Wingpilot, but I just checked B&H and the 18-105 f/4 was $548 while the 18-135 f/3/5-5.6 was $498, only $50 difference. For that small difference I'd get the 18-105 f/4 G Master lens. It is a better lens. It is my everyday lens on my a6000 and I find it quite comfortable and definitely not too large for the camera. Unless you really need the additional 30mm of reach (which it sounds like you don't) I'd go for the G Master.

Just my 2 cents. Enjoy!!

repleo Loc: Boston

Wingpilot.
There is only $50 difference between the 18-105 G and the e-mount 18-135. I think you must have been looking at the Sony DT Zoom 18‑135mm f/3.5‑5.6 SAM which is an A-Mount lens and will require an adapter on an A6XXX camera.

I have the 18-105 G and love it. I was considering changing it for the 18-135 due to the fact that the 18-135 is approx 25% lighter and more compact. I posted a similar question to yours a little while ago. https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-549533-1.html Most of the responses I got were that the E 18-135 was a fine lens but not in the same category as the 18-105 with its constant F4.0.

For my money, if I could only have one lens for my A6000 it would be the 18-105 G. However, in your case, you should note that the 18-105G is a power zoom and will not work with Clear Image Zoom.

I think you would find the 18-135 will give at least as good if not better IQ than either of your two kit lenses.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

Another vote for the 18-105mm f/4. I also bought a 10-18mm f/4 and a 50mm f/1.8. The 18-105mm is always on the camera except when I need the special talents of one of the other 2. The 18-55 and 55-210 than came with my a6000 are probably forever back in their box.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

You're right. I think I got that price from another lens. Sorry about that. I went back and took a second look and got the two prices you mentioned.