I have the neewer lens in this video and I enjoy your videos very much I have a Sony a 6000 I have learned from you to take better pix with it from you can you do a video on the Mieke 35 mm 1.4 thank you
I own the 18-135 and i love it. I also tested the 18-105 for a week but compared to the 18-135 i was disappointed. The sharpness in total seems better to me on the 18-135. And it is more compact and not as heavy but giving you 30mm more focal length. The only thing i liked better with the 18-105 are the colours, i think they are more natural while the 18-135 has a slightly(VERY slight!) greenish tint. But thats nothing you could not handle by adjusting white balance or in post editing. I might add i just do photos, no videos.
I had both, kept the 18-135. IMO it's much better : -you get better battery life -smaller -much better to "hold" (attached it is a lot more comfortable) -a lot faster to zoom -faster boot -slightly better OSS (imo) -it also had slightly better image quality at the 90-135 range and the low end range (18-25mm) -you get +30mm zoom ( 105 vs 135mm) -better bookeh at long shot portraits (135mm f5.6 is better than 105mm f4) What I really liked for the 18-105 is the build quality but it wasn't enough to keep it. My biggest issue with the 18-105 was basically the size and the weigh of it.
Owned both, sold the 135. From a video perspective, the 18-105 is superior. Reasons: -No noticeable difference in sharpness for video (the difference is only noticeable when cropping into photos) -18-135 has an annoying extending barrel which looks cheap and unprofessional imo and it unbalances gimbals, also more dust is bound to get in over time -The power zoom, it's brilliant and very easy to control to get slow, smooth zooms (brilliant for video) -Build quality is superior - seems more like a high-end lens as opposed to a kit lens. I hate that extending barrel soooo much, it just looks so cheap -Constant aperture -I tended to only use either lens up to 100mm anyway so not fussed about the extra 30mm -Price. The 18-105 is $120 cheaper -Nicer to hold. I like bigger lenses, gives more stability when shooting video handheld and it's easier to work with I miss the AF/MF switch though.
I would like to add that since the 105 has internal zooming, it doesn't suck in dust. Like for taking pictures on the beach that is a big advantage. The thing I don't like as much is when you turn off the camera, it doesn't remember at wich focal length it was. It starts at 18mm again when turning on the camera. For zooming you can use the rockerswitch or just turn the lens like a non power zoom.
Definitely the 18-105mm. The fact that the aperture can stay constant at f/4 on any focal length definitely had won me. Heck, to this day I didn't see any similar product with fixed or constant aperture with wide focal length range as the 18-105mm lens.
If I didn't already have the 18-105, I might consider the 18-135 for the extra reach. However, I will not switch simply because the PZ rocker for video is useful for a steady zoom in video. If you don't do a lot of video then the 18-135 is better. Optically, I think it's a close tie. The 18-135 seems contrastier. OTOH, if you do video, you really want a flat image and tune to taste in post. I'd rather have that too. Plus, if you do video seriously, a variable aperture can wreck havoc on exposure. Knowing you have f4 steady makes it easier to get consistent exposure, especially if you have your aperture, shutter speed set in manual. So with the ISO. Overall, it's a tie. But if I were to recommend one to a beginner, or just a good all around, it's the 18-135. In our country, the price of both is about the same, so it' snot a question of price. I don't think you can g wrong either way. But if you are into serious video, the 18-105 is a better choice. If I were doing weddings/events and the like, the 18-105 is it. Plus, getting to 135mm with that lens is ok using the clearimage zoom, most especially for 4k video where the image is really an 8mp stills continuously. For that, the 18-105 is a better deal for me, hence, I am not switching or selling mine.
I own the 18-105 Lens. I like the fixed aperture as well as the powered zoom. Also, the no change in length is great for gimbals. I shoot more video than photos.
I also schroot more video but i want to buy the 18-135 because i film more at 18mm then i have better low light and i don't need the Power zoom and the 18-135 is in the kit in my country 300$ and the 18-105 cost 560$
Had both for a few months, the 135 was significantly sharper throughout all of the range, is wonderfully compact with great zoom range, it also handles much better. The 105 had a nice metal build quality, nicer bokeh, was better for video and low light obviously. I did however sell the 18-105 due to its large size on aps-c, unpleasant handling characteristics when zooming/focusing and from various examples I've seen very susceptible to dents and scratches. If i want low light capability and nice bokeh I put on a prime and easily surpasses the 105. Both are nice lenses in their own right.
Owned both and returned the 18-105.its a little sharper but the 18-135 is great when you work with lower apertures.works great for photography and excellent for video
If the T is for telephoto what's the W for besides wide?!!! Tight and wide seems more logical!! Telephoto would be the type of lens as opposed to a prime lens!!
I purchased the 18 to 135 over 6 months ago. I pretty much just do still photography so it works out well for me. I also like the fact that it’s a little more compact which makes it nice for traveling. If I were doing a lot of videography I would have went with the 18 to 105 for the power zoom and constant aperture.
I am going on a weekend trip to Washington DC soon (it's a Honor Flight for Vietnam Veterans). Photography is not the main intent of this trip but, I do want to document my experiences. I want to bring only my A6600 and a single lens as an easy to carry combination. I purchased this 18-135mm lens because of its size and weight and fairly decent image quality. I am bringing a small flash for low light conditions. I purchased the lens used at a good price with the rationale that I can buy it, use it for the trip and then resell it, without losing too much money. You never know, I may decide to keep it!
@@kyletaggart Just do what you do and keep up the great work, and remember we will all be watching you.............that's not creepy is it,well its youtube so "views''.
If doing mostly vid work, not stationary vlogging, the vid exposure will remain the same with f4, and not get lighter/darker as you zoom, along with a PZ / controlled zoom. Besides that, don't see much different with exception of the reach. Good stuff as always, and Congrats on sponsors and Sony recognition.....Kudos to them, for appreciating quality vloggers.
I own both lenses! I just purchased a used 18-105 because of budding interest in video and like the power zoom, constant aperture, and fixed physical length while zooming. However I am disappointed in it's center sharpness when compared to the 18-135; I believe 18-135 a better general purpose lens, the 18-105 better for video.
Glad that Sony sent you these for reviews because your videos are easy to understand! I’ve been debating for awhile and think I’ll go for the 18-135 because it has more versatility which is great for travel. However I will wait for the price to drop as well because $500 is still steep for me!
It is a little steep! It’s a shame cause they ask it for $400 when bundled with the 6400. Kinda think it’s worth it honestly. And thanks, Sony even seeing my videos at all made my day!
Its defiantly the 18-135. The 105 has a significant bit of distortion vs the 135 and as well what I've noticed with this lens is its surprising very good around the edges of photos right up to that 135mm, from 18-70mm sharpness again 135 for the win, the 105 starts to pick up sharpness just a bit better than the 135 from the 70mm margin. Overall the G 105 lens just doesn't quite cut the same all round and close up image quality. Still if I had to pick a lens that's covering that range between 16mm-85mm hands down its the 18-135mm, personally I wouldn't touch the 105 but that its self out performs the Zeiss 16-70mm by long shot. This is at f/8-f/11
Hi. I’m interested in buying an A6000 and wanted your opinion on the kit that includes a 16-50mm lens and 55-210mm. Would you recommend purchasing the kit or just purchase the body only and pick up one of these lens? FYI... I’m quite the novice and just getting into photography. Thanks.
I say the combo kit, that comes with the 16-50 and 55-210. If you get into it, and start taking your camera with you everywhere and then start thinking about achieving a different look or feel like you’re ready for a next step I’d recommend the Sony 50mm, or a lens that suits your needs for what you’re shooting (landscape, portrait, street, ect). The two kit lens combo is a great starter package and it saves you money. ✌🏻
with the 135 you don’t see the focal length on the screen because it’s written on the zoom ring, with the 105 you can see it on the screen because it’s electronic zoom
So far i got Sigma 16mm 1.4 for nighttime photo, Landscape or for portraits. sony 70-350mm for taking pictures of animals, sports, or concerts And my starter pancake lens ... Which in the current moments has been my all around lens that i will soon replace with Sony 18-105mm.
I want to buy a sony A6400. Which lens should i prefer as kit lens? For youtube videos for better quality video. I will shoot in my room. Which is best for me 18-55 or 18-135. Please reply.Thanks
Have owned the 18-105 for a couple of years and love the lens, but I do a lot of travel photography and have found it to be a little heavy when traveling. I recently upgraded to the a6700, and got an amazing deal that came with the 18-135. Struggling to decide which one to keep? I don't need both. The 18-135 of course is brand new, and could re-sell, but if it is the better lens, I don't want to get rid of it. Any feedback would be great. Travel/landscape photography is the majority of my work.
I think they’re close in imagine quality. It’s been a long time since I’ve had the 18-135 in hand, but what stuck out to me was it was lighter and having the extra reach was nice. For traveling the 18-135 might be a better fit, but it depends what you want. If you were enticed to buy a different lens to replace the 18-105 and are happy with the 18-135, maybe part ways with the 18-105 is the weight is an issue.
Thanks for the feedback. I am leaning in the direction you recommended. Do you know if Sony came out with that firmware update regarding the focal length? I did not see it, but did notice the focal length missing when shooting.@@kyletaggart
which one will you suggest me if i want a something like all in one lens? is 18-135 sharper? or it's not noticable? or should I go for 18-105mm? Help me i am in confusion
If you’re not gonna get another lens and only have one lens, get the 18-105. The 18-135 is lighter, but the 18-105 is a better build and has OSS and a constant aperture of f4.
Damn bro, now you got me thinking I don't need to buy the 18-105. I got the 18-135 with my a6400. I had planned on getting the 18-105 as well but seeing your comparison pics there wasn't a big enough difference to me to justify the price. Great review.
Yes, people are still watching this years later. Surprised nobody has point out that the captions at 3:44 are wrong. Framing is similar, but one is claimed to be @105mm and the other @18mm! Or maybe you were much farther away with the 105? ;)
Quick question do you think the 18 to 105 would handle light trails of course light would be coming from cars etc how well do you think it would handle
A zoom may be best if you want a lot of flexibility. A great lens for that could be the Sony 18-105 f4. Also a fun fact, I’m a roller coaster enthusiast myself! Haha
Haha yup. “Home” park is Six Flags Great Adventure. Think my count is 130ish total. I visit my home park probably anywhere between 5-10 times a year. There was a sting in my 20’s where I really got to hit a lot of parks in the US that were in my list like Cedar Point, Six Flags Great America, Kings Island, Kings Dominion. Even weird ones like Mt. Olympus. I’m definitely at the level of some ppl, but it’s something I love!
@@kyletaggart that's soo cool!! Tbh I'm not really a fan of Kingda Ka. I find it rough and extremely uncomfortable I find Top thrill dragster to be better. My home park is Hersheypark. I don't keep track of my coaster counts🤣🤷🏾♂️
i have the 18-105 very pleased with it but i think of buying the 18-135 as a kit lens for the the a6400 and enjoy it's lither wight and sell the 18-105 what do you think guys
You’d then be able to compare and see for yourself what you really need. Plus you’d be making a $100 regardless of which one you sell since the 18-135 comes $100 cheaper as a kit lens. 🤷🏻♂️
Just bought a seconhand a6000 from my roommate, have both the kit lenses (16-50 and 55-210) and after seeing this video I think ill try to get my hands on the 18-135 since its compacter and I can probably slap it on my camera during rock climbing. Thanks for the comparison!
Hi, I cannot find comparision for shutter speed. I usually photo a walking persons in a little bit low light with using a zoom with camera in my hends. Is 18-105 better solution for me because constant F4 in zoom? If yes then ho much? What I see around is 18-135 has better picture quality but I am not sure if it is still true for low conditions with camera in my hands.. As second parameter low weight and more zoom is interesting for me and I don´t make video at all. Thank you for advice! (and sorry for my english :))
The 6600 has the biggest battery, so if battery life is on the top of your list, then the 6600 is the best choice hands down. As for video - the 6300, 6400, 6500, and 6600 are your options as they all have the most fleshed out video options - log profiles. However, lenses are the most important thing really. If you want a complete setup, for cheaper, I’d go with 6400 and the Sony 18-105 lens. Here’s a link to the 6400. It’s basically a 6600 without the bigger battery. geni.us/Sonya6400
If money isn't an object - Sony 16-55mm f2.8 G would be a great pick. Another good (and newer) zoom is the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 - I haven't reviewed that yet though. Also - both lenses in this video would be perfectlygood for puppy pictures and video - the 18-105mm f4 more so for video.
Gonna day good ol’ SD card slot. Transferring 4K wirelessly, or via usb is either a nightmare or a hassle. Also bonus tip, transfer footage to an external SSD, or a hard drive that isn’t your main drive running your computer’s OS. Having a dedicated drive will speed up editing immensely.
I like your videos on Sony. My first question is should I upgrade my nex6 to a 6400 or 6600? Or should I get a 18-105 or 18-135 lens? I like my nex6 but newer cameras are 24 mb vs 16. But 6600 doesn’t have a built in flash. At a cross roads. Thanks.
If you like built in flash but want more megapixels, you could go for the a6400. The a6600 feels much bigger than the other a6k models bc the bigger battery. Also for a starter zoom, if you don’t mind a lens getting larger on zooming in, the 18-135 feels lighter. The 18-105 has internal zoom and doesn’t get larger. 18-105 is better for video.hope this helps! 🙌🏻
Pls help me choose the zoom. i used sigma 16mm and 30 mm 1.4. I’m so tired of changing them. I want one lens. I choose 16-55 2.8 g, tamron 17-28, Sony g18-105 g. i want a sharp lens. Help me pls
If you have the budget I’d go with the 16-55 f2.8 from Sony. It’s a fantastic lens and yeah, no more switching! If you want something cheaper then I’d suggest the Sony 18-105.
i have the 18-135 kit lense but i want the 18-105. i dont even know if i really need it. i want to buy it but i dont wanna spend more money if i dont have to. I film cars and i want to do some pretty epic night time shots and stuff for video. but i dont know if i can acheive the same results with the kit lense, help lol.
thanks for comparing at low light. most cameras/lens good in light. a comparison in low light/night is really good review point. camera used to compare is a6000 as in the video, 18-105 is little background creamier as its f4. is expected
hey man. great vid. do you think the 18-105 would work for sports or any kind of action photography? if not, what lens would you prefer for that on the a6000. thanks in advance!
Hey Kyle- it’s great that your being recognized by Sony!!! I bought the 18-135. Really love it for the compact light size. Great walk around lenses. I don’t do much video so constant f4 is not as much an issue. Viewed many comparisons before my purchase and am very happy with it.
i have a question 🙋🏻♀️ so basically the two lenses have great image quality you can’t tell the difference from the samples when both set at the same aperture. so the question is, in the long term(lets say 5yrs of usage) as a beginner photographer (landscape/street/architecture/ some portraits) which one would you recommend the most? should i give up the constant f4 or give up the extra focal length and the small size ? also which one is more durable? I would appreciate your answer 😄 and thank you 🙏🏻
I haven’t had my camera or lenses for 5 years yet. Can’t comment on that! Haha. But, it completely depends on your preference for focal length. If you ever plan to do video worn I’d say get the f4.
I'm new in this (photography) world, I just ordered my first camera, the a6000 with the 16-50mm and 55-210mm kit lens. I'm sure they will be great to learn the basics on. But later I would like to compare those kit lenses to both the 18-105mm and 18-135mm. Thanks for your videos, I really like them and find them useful! :-)
Hi, I have 2 x A6000 cameras and I am just about to upgrade to the A6700. You really want to upgrade both of those lenses as and when you can particularly the kit 16-50 which I have found to be very disappointing. I get way better results with my iPhone. Sony G lenses are much better and worth saving for a GM as that is a different class again.
Hi can you suggest as per low price point which one is better sony 16mm f 2.8 pancake lens or sigma, 19mm f2. 8. I want to use it for astro and night sky shoot. Nothing professional so i am considering not to spend a lot of money.
If you’re doing Astro/night sky stuff I’d suggest a different lens all together. Like the Rokinon 12mm f2 or a Rokinon 12mm f2. I’ve heard that the Sony 16mm isn’t the best, but I don’t know from personal experience.
@@kyletaggart thank you for the reply. Its just that the cost of these is too much. I checked samyang manual lens too. From price point these are the once i can actually afford. 😅
Being a variable aperture lens (18-135), you can clearly see on those samples the bokeh is nowhere near the 18-105. This is important when investing in a lens - a variable vs constant aperture. It is not all about sharpness (both look sharp anyway for a 'non' 2.8 lens). I wouldn't want a variable aperture lens that cost almost as much as constant aperture lens. Plus, the 18-135 is not an "internal focusing" lens - it extends when you zooming and this will affect stability when hand hold or using a gimbal. If I were force to choose, the 18-105 is an easy choice. Perfect for video, great enough for still.
I agree on the video part, but from my experience, the photos seemed better from the 135mm. Technically speaking, I'm not sure why that was, but it just seemed it to me.
I own the 18-135mm. I keep it on my a6000 all the time. Its size makes it great for traveling. It has the wide angle shoots at 18mm and can zoom close at 135mm (but take into account the 1.5 crop factor of a6000). Would I buy the 18-105? I would have to rent or borrow the lens to test it out first. Sony send them to me as well. Hahaha
Depends what you’re shooting! If you’re shooting video, and want a constant aperture at any zoom length, the 18-105mm is better that that. If you want a light lens and more range, get the 18-135mm. 👍🏻
hikyletaggart I may buy the 18-135mm however I do have the Sony 55-210mm so I know whether I really need it to be honest, I have about 4 different lens so they’ll be coming with me to Italy in 3 weeks we’re I’ll get some really good shots know doubt .
There are already quite a few comparisons out there but I'm glad you are being recognized by Sony. So when the successor to the A6500 will be announced on some remote island, Sony should invite you instead of some of the overrated influencers that went to see the launch of the A6400 😉. As to lens, I'm currently not looking for one but would probably go for the 18-105 despite its bulkiness, I would be using it for video. btw both lenses were quite smudged so I hope they were clean when you took the shots.
It’s is a perfect all around lens, definitely a replacement for the kit. People love it for video. Since you guys do night stuff I’m not sure if she’d want that, or maybe she does AND a lens like the Sigma 30mm f1.4 for night stuff.
Not as good in lowlight (f1.8 be f4). You have much more flexibility with the 18-105 because of its soon range. Sharpness, I’d say the 35mm is sharper. For video, I’d suggest the 18-104 hands down.
I just purchased the 18-105 exactly three days ago... It's been on my a6000 for three days now lol... Yes the constant F4 is great!! The image quality is to close to call!! The one thing I do like about the 135 is the AF MF switch!!
Trying out the 18-105 right now, and your video is perfect timing for my decision making. Lol I think I’m still more inclined with 18-105 bec of the power zoom and the constant aperture 🙌🏻
The constant aperture was the selling point for me! 😊 but I agree with you. I’m impressed with how the 135. Exceeded expectations! Good kit replacement definitely!
Hi I am planning to buy a 18-105 oss but and i am also looking at 55-210 oss because of the zoom range can you make a video on both of these lenses. Thank you :-)
I actually don’t own the 55-210. I’d get the 55-210 used if you can. The 18-105 is the much better lens overall, but if you need the range go with the 55-210.
@@kyletaggart thanks for the clarification I am glad to hear that. Thank you
4 ปีที่แล้ว +1
Great video men helps me really a lot. I have a question though If you were to go to Mongolia for filmmaking locals living in tents, hunting with eagles, riding horses. What would be your lens choice for APS-C camera? Sigma 30mm f/1.4 + sony e 18-105mm f/4 or something else? maybe only sigma 24-70mm f/2.8?
If it’s a filmmaking trip, I’d imagine you’d be filming a ton, and you’d have hours of time to film. So switching lenses may not be an issue. I’d go for the 18-105 f4 and then the Sony 35mm f1.8 as both have OSS. I’d probably use the 18-105 for 80% of the shots and then planned detailed shots with the 35mm (or 30, whichever you go for). Hope this helps! Thanks
4 ปีที่แล้ว +1
hikyletaggart this really helps! Thank you man for your reply. I appreciated 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Next time when you zoom, try to shoot them at the same distance for every picture. When you zoom in on the 135 and compare it to the 105, the 135 has less objects in it (since its zoomed more) so there's less objects in the frame and its more focused on one thing, When the 105 is focused on more things cause its zoomed at a different length, like the dog picture I was seeing different details cause some had more objects or was focused closer. I can tell u stepped back though! I know its sounds silly but it was hard to get a conclusion when the shots were different. Im no way saying this was a bad video or anything, it was very informative! just giving my 2 cents cause I'm actually conflicted on which to buy! I know its not easy to zoom in to the exact length on both!
No worries at all, and yeah I know exactly what you mean. The issue a the 18-135 only shows distance on the lens itself, and not the screen. I took other shots at more exact lengths but I couldn’t find em when I went to edit the vid haha. Thanks for checking the video out at all! 😊
I assume you watched the video, but if you didn’t... 18-105 - higher quality lens, better for video, constant aperture. geni.us/18to105Gf4 18-135 - smaller, lighter, bigger zoom range geni.us/18to135
Hey Brother!! 18-135 or 18-105 Which is good for Photography, Videography, portraits, street photography, and Have Better Image quality and sharpness ?
Thanks Kyle!! I tend to go for the 18-105..........mainly because they are so similar in quality and I like the build of that lens better and the constant F4 is appealing. I don't think I need the extra 30 mm on a regular basis. When doing some sports photography I will put on my kit lens 55-210.......but that is occasionally. I hope that after buying this lens I will mostly use this one and my Sony 35mm f1.8 most of the time.......they will have to be my travel combo. And one day.........I will buy the sigma 56mm 1.4 too............one day :) Keep n making vids! Happy for you thet you are being recognized by Sony!
In 2020. the general view seems to be that the 18-135 is the superior lens. However, as it was not available when I had only recently purchased my a 6000, now several years ago, purchased the 18-105 G and will keep it
My plan is the 18-105. From what I've seen in other demos, it's generally sharper. As you said, constant f4 is great. The 18-135 may be sharper at the 105mm range, but I often see that zoom lenses begin to fall off as they reach their limit. So unless you're shooting at 105mm all the time, I think the 18-105 will usually provide better results. Higher imagine quality at constant f4. Also, not that I plan to use a gimbal, but the 18-105 would work better with one since it doesn't get longer when zoomed. BTW, I think a greater depth of field would be better for these sorts of videos. Maybe f5.6? Your bokeh is excellent, but when you're holding up lenses, they're super out of focus and I personally think it'd be better to be able to see your face and what you're holding in your hand at the same time. On the power zoom switch, is "tight" the official word for the "T" side? I heard someone else call it "telephoto". Both make sense but I don't know what Sony intended it to be. Congratulations on the continued sponsorship and also the recognition from Sony! That's really b/a and must feel super validating 😁😁
Thanks so much! And actually, I was guessing about the “tight”, but you may be right on the telephoto. Also yeah, I wasn’t looking at the monitor to see what was in focus when holding them up, filming at f1.4 will do that! Haha.
Which lens you guys choosing? or which one do you own?!
I have the neewer lens in this video and I enjoy your videos very much I have a Sony a 6000 I have learned from you to take better pix with it from you can you do a video on the Mieke 35 mm 1.4 thank you
1.4? Interesting!!
I got a 18 105 recently, and I gonna keep it cuz I shot videos mostly
I own the 18-135 and i love it. I also tested the 18-105 for a week but compared to the 18-135 i was disappointed. The sharpness in total seems better to me on the 18-135. And it is more compact and not as heavy but giving you 30mm more focal length. The only thing i liked better with the 18-105 are the colours, i think they are more natural while the 18-135 has a slightly(VERY slight!) greenish tint. But thats nothing you could not handle by adjusting white balance or in post editing. I might add i just do photos, no videos.
@@schnubbel76 thanks
I had both, kept the 18-135. IMO it's much better :
-you get better battery life
-smaller
-much better to "hold" (attached it is a lot more comfortable)
-a lot faster to zoom
-faster boot
-slightly better OSS (imo)
-it also had slightly better image quality at the 90-135 range and the low end range (18-25mm)
-you get +30mm zoom ( 105 vs 135mm)
-better bookeh at long shot portraits (135mm f5.6 is better than 105mm f4)
What I really liked for the 18-105 is the build quality but it wasn't enough to keep it.
My biggest issue with the 18-105 was basically the size and the weigh of it.
All very good reasons! Is didn’t notice a battery life change, but good point.
Owned both, sold the 135. From a video perspective, the 18-105 is superior.
Reasons:
-No noticeable difference in sharpness for video (the difference is only noticeable when cropping into photos)
-18-135 has an annoying extending barrel which looks cheap and unprofessional imo and it unbalances gimbals, also more dust is bound to get in over time
-The power zoom, it's brilliant and very easy to control to get slow, smooth zooms (brilliant for video)
-Build quality is superior - seems more like a high-end lens as opposed to a kit lens. I hate that extending barrel soooo much, it just looks so cheap
-Constant aperture
-I tended to only use either lens up to 100mm anyway so not fussed about the extra 30mm
-Price. The 18-105 is $120 cheaper
-Nicer to hold. I like bigger lenses, gives more stability when shooting video handheld and it's easier to work with
I miss the AF/MF switch though.
@@thecameraguys5381 18-105 is more expensive see B&H
@@Motoremocao I was going by eBay as that's where I tend to buy most of my camera gear. The price difference swings the other way there.
I agree with you. I originally have the 18-105, but I sold it and got the 18-135.
I would like to add that since the 105 has internal zooming, it doesn't suck in dust. Like for taking pictures on the beach that is a big advantage. The thing I don't like as much is when you turn off the camera, it doesn't remember at wich focal length it was. It starts at 18mm again when turning on the camera. For zooming you can use the rockerswitch or just turn the lens like a non power zoom.
I have a 18-105G len, it's good enough for me. There is no reason to switch to 16-135. Cheers!
Definitely the 18-105mm. The fact that the aperture can stay constant at f/4 on any focal length definitely had won me. Heck, to this day I didn't see any similar product with fixed or constant aperture with wide focal length range as the 18-105mm lens.
Constant F4 is the only thing 105 won in this competition. Size and weight alone makes me throw away 105 and never return after I bought 135.
If I didn't already have the 18-105, I might consider the 18-135 for the extra reach. However, I will not switch simply because the PZ rocker for video is useful for a steady zoom in video. If you don't do a lot of video then the 18-135 is better.
Optically, I think it's a close tie. The 18-135 seems contrastier. OTOH, if you do video, you really want a flat image and tune to taste in post. I'd rather have that too. Plus, if you do video seriously, a variable aperture can wreck havoc on exposure. Knowing you have f4 steady makes it easier to get consistent exposure, especially if you have your aperture, shutter speed set in manual. So with the ISO.
Overall, it's a tie. But if I were to recommend one to a beginner, or just a good all around, it's the 18-135. In our country, the price of both is about the same, so it' snot a question of price. I don't think you can g wrong either way. But if you are into serious video, the 18-105 is a better choice. If I were doing weddings/events and the like, the 18-105 is it. Plus, getting to 135mm with that lens is ok using the clearimage zoom, most especially for 4k video where the image is really an 8mp stills continuously. For that, the 18-105 is a better deal for me, hence, I am not switching or selling mine.
Very good points. Yeah the 135 surprised me with it’s IQ!
I'm leaning towards the 18-105 for gimbal work. And the constant f4. Great review
I own the 18-105 Lens. I like the fixed aperture as well as the powered zoom. Also, the no change in length is great for gimbals. I shoot more video than photos.
I also schroot more video but i want to buy the 18-135 because i film more at 18mm then i have better low light and i don't need the Power zoom and the 18-135 is in the kit in my country 300$ and the 18-105 cost 560$
Had both for a few months, the 135 was significantly sharper throughout all of the range, is wonderfully compact with great zoom range, it also handles much better. The 105 had a nice metal build quality, nicer bokeh, was better for video and low light obviously. I did however sell the 18-105 due to its large size on aps-c, unpleasant handling characteristics when zooming/focusing and from various examples I've seen very susceptible to dents and scratches. If i want low light capability and nice bokeh I put on a prime and easily surpasses the 105.
Both are nice lenses in their own right.
Great comment!
16oz in a pound, dude.
Owned both and returned the 18-105.its a little sharper but the 18-135 is great when you work with lower apertures.works great for photography and excellent for video
Agreed. The 18-135 is my favorite everyday lens on my A6400
Just to clarify, 11.5 ounces isn’t 1.08 pounds. It is actually .719 pounds if it is 11.5 ounces. Otherwise I liked the video.
Got my 18-135 for the equivalent of $300. Very happy with it for travel, combined with the Sigma 16mm and Sigma 30mm f1.4: great combo.
"T" for tight? Are you sure? I thought it was "T" for Telephoto. 🤔
You’re probably right haha
@@kyletaggart Hey, I'm going to start saying tight from now on. Sounds better! 👍
Scott Morris me too!
Haha it’s official!
If the T is for telephoto what's the W for besides wide?!!! Tight and wide seems more logical!! Telephoto would be the type of lens as opposed to a prime lens!!
Sony sent you items?! That’s amazing! Just goes to show how great your doing! Proud of you lol. Another great video!!
Aw thanks Jenn! 😊 I know, crazy!
I’ve also got both. I’d say the 18-105 is far more superior because you get the a Constant F4 and for videos it’s zooming is too smooth!
I purchased the 18 to 135 over 6 months ago. I pretty much just do still photography so it works out well for me. I also like the fact that it’s a little more compact which makes it nice for traveling. If I were doing a lot of videography I would have went with the 18 to 105 for the power zoom and constant aperture.
Just went to a July 4th parade yesterday. This lens was a lot of fun to use
I am going on a weekend trip to Washington DC soon (it's a Honor Flight for Vietnam Veterans). Photography is not the main intent of this trip but, I do want to document my experiences. I want to bring only my A6600 and a single lens as an easy to carry combination. I purchased this 18-135mm lens because of its size and weight and fairly decent image quality. I am bringing a small flash for low light conditions. I purchased the lens used at a good price with the rationale that I can buy it, use it for the trip and then resell it, without losing too much money. You never know, I may decide to keep it!
Nice vid it's good to see you going up in the world of youtube and now you have sponsors, great job.
Thank you so much!!! Really trying my best so it’s nice to have someone notice lol
@@kyletaggart Just do what you do and keep up the great work, and remember we will all be watching you.............that's not creepy is it,well its youtube so "views''.
Hahaha understood. And thanks, always love it when you comment! (I recognize icons and names)
@@kyletaggart ya recognition :) see potato jet someone answer's my comment's.
If doing mostly vid work, not stationary vlogging, the vid exposure will remain the same with f4, and not get lighter/darker as you zoom, along with a PZ / controlled zoom. Besides that, don't see much different with exception of the reach. Good stuff as always, and Congrats on sponsors and Sony recognition.....Kudos to them, for appreciating quality vloggers.
I agree, but it was quite interesting to see how good the 135 was. And thank you!
I just bought the 18-135, and it's coming in the mail tomorrow! So excited to get my hands on a new lens!
let us know how you like it - I have the 18-105... I shoot a lot at night so 5.6 was a deal-breaker for me.
It’s an awesome lens, not the best at night, but you’ll love it. I was amazed at the bokeh at 135 f5.6. Looks great!
I own both lenses! I just purchased a used 18-105 because of budding interest in video and like the power zoom, constant aperture, and fixed physical length while zooming. However I am disappointed in it's center sharpness when compared to the 18-135; I believe 18-135 a better general purpose lens, the 18-105 better for video.
couldn't agree more! I haven't examined the center sharpness on both, but I came away liking the 18-135 more. Both great lenses.
Glad that Sony sent you these for reviews because your videos are easy to understand! I’ve been debating for awhile and think I’ll go for the 18-135 because it has more versatility which is great for travel. However I will wait for the price to drop as well because $500 is still steep for me!
It is a little steep! It’s a shame cause they ask it for $400 when bundled with the 6400. Kinda think it’s worth it honestly. And thanks, Sony even seeing my videos at all made my day!
Its defiantly the 18-135. The 105 has a significant bit of distortion vs the 135 and as well what I've noticed with this lens is its surprising very good around the edges of photos right up to that 135mm, from 18-70mm sharpness again 135 for the win, the 105 starts to pick up sharpness just a bit better than the 135 from the 70mm margin. Overall the G 105 lens just doesn't quite cut the same all round and close up image quality. Still if I had to pick a lens that's covering that range between 16mm-85mm hands down its the 18-135mm, personally I wouldn't touch the 105 but that its self out performs the Zeiss 16-70mm by long shot. This is at f/8-f/11
Does the 18-135 lens compatible with EV 10 ?
yep!
Hi. I’m interested in buying an A6000 and wanted your opinion on the kit that includes a 16-50mm lens and 55-210mm. Would you recommend purchasing the kit or just purchase the body only and pick up one of these lens? FYI... I’m quite the novice and just getting into photography. Thanks.
I say the combo kit, that comes with the 16-50 and 55-210. If you get into it, and start taking your camera with you everywhere and then start thinking about achieving a different look or feel like you’re ready for a next step I’d recommend the Sony 50mm, or a lens that suits your needs for what you’re shooting (landscape, portrait, street, ect). The two kit lens combo is a great starter package and it saves you money. ✌🏻
I like the build of the 18-105 more, but damn the 18-135 is a better performer.
Another great review, Kyle. If I’m to choose, I’ll go with the 18-105 G f4. But they’re both great lenses no doubt.
Both are really fun!
with the 135 you don’t see the focal length on the screen because it’s written on the zoom ring, with the 105 you can see it on the screen because it’s electronic zoom
I just bought this lens and it is superb for an ALL IN 1 LENS to go for my travel vlog! Nice video man!
Thanks! And congrats on the lens.
So far i got Sigma 16mm 1.4 for nighttime photo, Landscape or for portraits.
sony 70-350mm for taking pictures of animals, sports, or concerts
And my starter pancake lens ... Which in the current moments has been my all around lens that i will soon replace with Sony 18-105mm.
I want to buy a sony A6400. Which lens should i prefer as kit lens? For youtube videos for better quality video. I will shoot in my room. Which is best for me 18-55 or 18-135. Please reply.Thanks
Great review! Any idea if it the firmware has been updated to show the focal length in the camera? 11:50
Thanks. I don’t think so, but you can check Sony’s site! Check for camera and lens. Don’t think the camera had it updated for this.
Have owned the 18-105 for a couple of years and love the lens, but I do a lot of travel photography and have found it to be a little heavy when traveling. I recently upgraded to the a6700, and got an amazing deal that came with the 18-135. Struggling to decide which one to keep? I don't need both. The 18-135 of course is brand new, and could re-sell, but if it is the better lens, I don't want to get rid of it. Any feedback would be great. Travel/landscape photography is the majority of my work.
I think they’re close in imagine quality. It’s been a long time since I’ve had the 18-135 in hand, but what stuck out to me was it was lighter and having the extra reach was nice. For traveling the 18-135 might be a better fit, but it depends what you want. If you were enticed to buy a different lens to replace the 18-105 and are happy with the 18-135, maybe part ways with the 18-105 is the weight is an issue.
Thanks for the feedback. I am leaning in the direction you recommended. Do you know if Sony came out with that firmware update regarding the focal length? I did not see it, but did notice the focal length missing when shooting.@@kyletaggart
which one will you suggest me if i want a something like all in one lens? is 18-135 sharper? or it's not noticable? or should I go for 18-105mm? Help me i am in confusion
If you’re not gonna get another lens and only have one lens, get the 18-105. The 18-135 is lighter, but the 18-105 is a better build and has OSS and a constant aperture of f4.
@@kyletaggart thanks
@@kyletaggart i am buying it for wildlife and sports photography. would you suggest me this one or the 18-135mm?
Hi ... good video... i wonder how sharp is 18-105 g at 18mm for landscape?
It’s great imo. Love zooming in for landscape perspectives as well.
Damn bro, now you got me thinking I don't need to buy the 18-105. I got the 18-135 with my a6400. I had planned on getting the 18-105 as well but seeing your comparison pics there wasn't a big enough difference to me to justify the price. Great review.
If you do video, the 18-105 is better, but photo, not so much. Constant f4 is nice, but the compression at 135 is good too.
Yes, people are still watching this years later. Surprised nobody has point out that the captions at 3:44 are wrong. Framing is similar, but one is claimed to be @105mm and the other @18mm! Or maybe you were much farther away with the 105? ;)
No worries. Mistakes happen. Still replying years later too!
'W' is for wide angle; 'T' is for telephoto 6:17.
Quick question do you think the 18 to 105 would handle light trails of course light would be coming from cars etc how well do you think it would handle
Yes it would. Light trails take practice. It’s also important to remember you can really make light trails pop after you edit the photos later. 👍🏻
What software do you use for editing videos? I am trying to learn travel video, but can’t decide which software to pick up. Any suggestions?
I use Lightroom premium and edit on my iPad Pro and iPhone. Suits all my needs and it’s cheap (in my opinion.) $5 a month
hikyletaggart I thought lightroom can only edit photos. It can also edit videos?
Good question. Does Lightroom edit video? I have Lightroom CC which I think only does photo. But Lightroom premium??
18-105mm for video on gimbal work since it doesn't change length and balances well.
Great point!
I'll be shooting footage and taking pictures of roller coasters and theme parks, which lens would you recommend?🤔
A zoom may be best if you want a lot of flexibility. A great lens for that could be the Sony 18-105 f4. Also a fun fact, I’m a roller coaster enthusiast myself! Haha
@@kyletaggart really? Wow!! Who woulda thought I'd find a person doing lens comparison as coaster enthusiast?!😳
Haha yup. “Home” park is Six Flags Great Adventure. Think my count is 130ish total. I visit my home park probably anywhere between 5-10 times a year. There was a sting in my 20’s where I really got to hit a lot of parks in the US that were in my list like Cedar Point, Six Flags Great America, Kings Island, Kings Dominion. Even weird ones like Mt. Olympus. I’m definitely at the level of some ppl, but it’s something I love!
@@kyletaggart that's soo cool!! Tbh I'm not really a fan of Kingda Ka. I find it rough and extremely uncomfortable I find Top thrill dragster to be better. My home park is Hersheypark. I don't keep track of my coaster counts🤣🤷🏾♂️
@@rushingthrills6021 Agreed on the KK for TT! also Hershey is amazing. Can't wait to ride Candymonium!
Okay so if I’m shooting cars with a6400
I have the 50mm . I’m indecisive about getting the 16-50 / 18-105 / or the 18-135 . Please help :/
Video or photo? Video 18-105. Photo, probably 18-105 anyway, but it is heavier than the 18-135.
On the 135 lens what is the aperture at 105mm?
Couldn’t tell you now, don’t have the lens anymore. I think as soon as you zoom in it starts declining.
i have the 18-105 very pleased with it but i think of buying the 18-135 as a kit lens for the the a6400 and enjoy it's lither wight and sell the 18-105 what do you think guys
You’d then be able to compare and see for yourself what you really need. Plus you’d be making a $100 regardless of which one you sell since the 18-135 comes $100 cheaper as a kit lens. 🤷🏻♂️
Just bought a seconhand a6000 from my roommate, have both the kit lenses (16-50 and 55-210) and after seeing this video I think ill try to get my hands on the 18-135 since its compacter and I can probably slap it on my camera during rock climbing. Thanks for the comparison!
No problem! It’s a great kit replacement.
Hi, I cannot find comparision for shutter speed. I usually photo a walking persons in a little bit low light with using a zoom with camera in my hends. Is 18-105 better solution for me because constant F4 in zoom? If yes then ho much? What I see around is 18-135 has better picture quality but I am not sure if it is still true for low conditions with camera in my hands..
As second parameter low weight and more zoom is interesting for me and I don´t make video at all.
Thank you for advice! (and sorry for my english :))
The 18-105 would be better because constant f4 and it has OSS. So it would stabilize better handheld in lower light.
@@kyletaggart Thank you!
Wich is better for Videos because a TH-camr Has sayd Me the edges are not so sharp is it so on a 6400?
18-105 is better for video!
I was planing To Buy a6600 should I buy a6600 kit with 18-135 or a6600 body with another 18-105, My Priority is Video.
The 6600 has the biggest battery, so if battery life is on the top of your list, then the 6600 is the best choice hands down. As for video - the 6300, 6400, 6500, and 6600 are your options as they all have the most fleshed out video options - log profiles. However, lenses are the most important thing really. If you want a complete setup, for cheaper, I’d go with 6400 and the Sony 18-105 lens. Here’s a link to the 6400. It’s basically a 6600 without the bigger battery. geni.us/Sonya6400
@@kyletaggart dude thanks for the reply really considering that 👍
No problem!
What's the best for a6100 puppy pics and videos champ? Thanks
If money isn't an object - Sony 16-55mm f2.8 G would be a great pick. Another good (and newer) zoom is the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 - I haven't reviewed that yet though. Also - both lenses in this video would be perfectlygood for puppy pictures and video - the 18-105mm f4 more so for video.
What is the best way to transfer 4k videos and photos, from the camera to your computer?
Gonna day good ol’ SD card slot. Transferring 4K wirelessly, or via usb is either a nightmare or a hassle. Also bonus tip, transfer footage to an external SSD, or a hard drive that isn’t your main drive running your computer’s OS. Having a dedicated drive will speed up editing immensely.
@@kyletaggart thanks man. I bought a card reader! Works awesome
hey Kyle! been hooked on ur videos n m going to pull the trigger on a6000.. i want to use the f4 18 to 105 with it.. can i?
Yes, that’s an a6000 lens, it’s made for the 6000, 6300, 6400, and 6500. You’re all set!
I like your videos on Sony. My first question is should I upgrade my nex6 to a 6400 or 6600? Or should I get a 18-105 or 18-135 lens? I like my nex6 but newer cameras are 24 mb vs 16. But 6600 doesn’t have a built in flash. At a cross roads. Thanks.
If you like built in flash but want more megapixels, you could go for the a6400. The a6600 feels much bigger than the other a6k models bc the bigger battery. Also for a starter zoom, if you don’t mind a lens getting larger on zooming in, the 18-135 feels lighter. The 18-105 has internal zoom and doesn’t get larger. 18-105 is better for video.hope this helps! 🙌🏻
hikyletaggart i hold 18-135 as a kit lens on my sony 6500 . do i need to update for 18-105 ? ore no sense ?
Not much of a diff in my opinion for photo. It’s a smidge heavier, but it is more versatile for video, but photo, stick with the 18-135.
sale the kit, and get a f1.8 wide dont forget macro 90mm
Never knew what the "G" stood for. Thanks. Review was great too!
Thanks for checking it out Stuart!
Pls help me choose the zoom. i used sigma 16mm and 30 mm 1.4. I’m so tired of changing them. I want one lens. I choose 16-55 2.8 g, tamron 17-28, Sony g18-105 g. i want a sharp lens. Help me pls
If you have the budget I’d go with the 16-55 f2.8 from Sony. It’s a fantastic lens and yeah, no more switching! If you want something cheaper then I’d suggest the Sony 18-105.
hikyletaggart maybe Zeiss 16-70?
I messed with that lens for only a short bit in the store. I wasn’t a big fan of it. It is a small lens though.
hikyletaggart buy 16-70 or 18-105? I want to buy right now. I don’t have lens now))
I’d go 18-105. geni.us/18to105Gf4
Can i know which lens are wide for vlogging ?
Sony kit lens 16-55 mm
Sony 16mm f2.8
Sony 20mm f2.8
Those are the smaller lenses, but keep in mind the kit lens has Image Stabilization.
Great video.... which sony lens would you buy for low light pictures ?
16-55 2.8
Thanks for your advice. This week I'm going to pick up the 6400 with the 18-135 at Best Buy.
Sick with it! Enjoy, that’s a nice combo. I want the 6400 😂
i have the 18-135 kit lense but i want the 18-105. i dont even know if i really need it. i want to buy it but i dont wanna spend more money if i dont have to. I film cars and i want to do some pretty epic night time shots and stuff for video. but i dont know if i can acheive the same results with the kit lense, help lol.
The 18-105 is better for video, but not for low light. You’d have to look at a prime lens with a faster aperture for that.
hikyletaggart awesome man thanks, that helps a lot.
I have both lenses and have been using the 18-135 the most. More compact.
Sometimes it really just comes down to convenience!
Wich lens is for video better
18-105mm f4.
@@kyletaggart ok thx👍
Why? Im about to swap a 135 for a 105 (im filmaker and poor and southamerican) would you?
thanks for comparing at low light. most cameras/lens good in light. a comparison in low light/night is really good review point.
camera used to compare is a6000 as in the video,
18-105 is little background creamier as its f4. is expected
hi, i’ll be shooting a wedding in a couple of months. which one do you recommend getting?
18-105 f4. ✌🏻if you’re gonna do any video that’s a great lens for video as well.
hey man. great vid. do you think the 18-105 would work for sports or any kind of action photography? if not, what lens would you prefer for that on the a6000. thanks in advance!
Outdoor sports. I’d probably go with a wider range lens depending on where you’ll be able to access the field/court. Like the Sony 18-135mm or 55-210.
@@kyletaggart thanks man! what about indoor sports?
Depends on the lighting. Lenses with OSS, but ideally a camera that can do higher ISO’s.
@@kyletaggart appreciate the responses. think i’m going to give the 18-105 a try. i like the versatility of it!
Hey Kyle- it’s great that your being recognized by Sony!!! I bought the 18-135. Really love it for the compact light size. Great walk around lenses. I don’t do much video so constant f4 is not as much an issue. Viewed many comparisons before my purchase and am very happy with it.
That’s good to hear! And thanks. Hopefully more cool stuff to come!
15oz is 1.5lbs?
I go for 18-105, with its power zoom and constant aperture..I find it more useful....
Great video man. So would you say the 18-135mm and 18-105mm are the top 2 zoom lenses for the Sony E mount?
Haven’t messed with the 70-350! It’s $1,000 but it just came out in 2019.
i have a question 🙋🏻♀️
so basically the two lenses have great image quality you can’t tell the difference from the samples when both set at the same aperture.
so the question is, in the long term(lets say 5yrs of usage) as a beginner photographer (landscape/street/architecture/ some portraits)
which one would you recommend the most?
should i give up the constant f4 or give up the extra focal length and the small size ?
also which one is more durable?
I would appreciate your answer 😄
and thank you 🙏🏻
I haven’t had my camera or lenses for 5 years yet. Can’t comment on that! Haha. But, it completely depends on your preference for focal length. If you ever plan to do video worn I’d say get the f4.
Hi kyle, what’s the best zoom lens you recommend on the a6000 for street/city photography? Either one of these or even outside of these 2 lens?
either of these can work for street. a lot of manual lenses I've reviewed on the channel as well. Or something like the sigma 30mm f1.4.
Can these be used on a A7 II?
Yea, but in crop mode.
Wich Has a better stabilization in video? Is it the stabilization identical?
Very usefull video! Thanks Kyle👍.
Thanks for watching 😊
I'm new in this (photography) world, I just ordered my first camera, the a6000 with the 16-50mm and 55-210mm kit lens. I'm sure they will be great to learn the basics on. But later I would like to compare those kit lenses to both the 18-105mm and 18-135mm.
Thanks for your videos, I really like them and find them useful! :-)
Hi, I have 2 x A6000 cameras and I am just about to upgrade to the A6700. You really want to upgrade both of those lenses as and when you can particularly the kit 16-50 which I have found to be very disappointing. I get way better results with my iPhone. Sony G lenses are much better and worth saving for a GM as that is a different class again.
Hi can you suggest as per low price point which one is better sony 16mm f 2.8 pancake lens or sigma, 19mm f2. 8. I want to use it for astro and night sky shoot. Nothing professional so i am considering not to spend a lot of money.
If you’re doing Astro/night sky stuff I’d suggest a different lens all together. Like the Rokinon 12mm f2 or a Rokinon 12mm f2. I’ve heard that the Sony 16mm isn’t the best, but I don’t know from personal experience.
@@kyletaggart thank you for the reply. Its just that the cost of these is too much. I checked samyang manual lens too. From price point these are the once i can actually afford. 😅
Give the lenses you mentioned a shot. I’d probably go with the Sigma, it’s not as wide but I’ve heard good things about it.
Being a variable aperture lens (18-135), you can clearly see on those samples the bokeh is nowhere near the 18-105. This is important when investing in a lens - a variable vs constant aperture. It is not all about sharpness (both look sharp anyway for a 'non' 2.8 lens). I wouldn't want a variable aperture lens that cost almost as much as constant aperture lens. Plus, the 18-135 is not an "internal focusing" lens - it extends when you zooming and this will affect stability when hand hold or using a gimbal.
If I were force to choose, the 18-105 is an easy choice. Perfect for video, great enough for still.
I agree on the video part, but from my experience, the photos seemed better from the 135mm. Technically speaking, I'm not sure why that was, but it just seemed it to me.
I own the 18-135mm. I keep it on my a6000 all the time. Its size makes it great for traveling. It has the wide angle shoots at 18mm and can zoom close at 135mm (but take into account the 1.5 crop factor of a6000). Would I buy the 18-105? I would have to rent or borrow the lens to test it out first. Sony send them to me as well. Hahaha
Good to see you Henry! Haha. I want the 18-135, I like the look at 135, BUT, we have the 18-105 so we don’t NEED it. Sad to send this one back!
Out of these two, which would you suggest to pair with the sony zve10?
Depends what you’re shooting! If you’re shooting video, and want a constant aperture at any zoom length, the 18-105mm is better that that. If you want a light lens and more range, get the 18-135mm. 👍🏻
Just got the EPZ 18-105mm F4 it’s a brilliant lens, Mark from England
Awesome to hear Mark! It really is an awesome piece of glass!
hikyletaggart I may buy the 18-135mm however I do have the Sony 55-210mm so I know whether I really need it to be honest, I have about 4 different lens so they’ll be coming with me to Italy in 3 weeks we’re I’ll get some really good shots know doubt .
best lens for video/filmmaking. 18-105 or 18-135 ?
18-105
I got the 18-135 but im seriously considering the 105 for video because of the constant f4.
There are already quite a few comparisons out there but I'm glad you are being recognized by Sony. So when the successor to the A6500 will be announced on some remote island, Sony should invite you instead of some of the overrated influencers that went to see the launch of the A6400 😉.
As to lens, I'm currently not looking for one but would probably go for the 18-105 despite its bulkiness, I would be using it for video. btw both lenses were quite smudged so I hope they were clean when you took the shots.
Thanks so much! Haha yeah maybe they’ll send me to the next Catalina Wine Mixer. Who knows!
HI, IS CLEARIMAGEZOOM POSSIBLE WITH THIS LENSE? 18 105
Yep!
I'd have to go with the G lens for just 50 more bones to have that constant f4. May get that one for my wife to pair with the a6000. Great video dude!
It’s is a perfect all around lens, definitely a replacement for the kit. People love it for video. Since you guys do night stuff I’m not sure if she’d want that, or maybe she does AND a lens like the Sigma 30mm f1.4 for night stuff.
@@kyletaggart Well I do the night photography and she assists. But on her own she would do mainly daytime stuff. More towards your style.
I wonder how does sony 18-105mm compare with sony 35mm?
Not as good in lowlight (f1.8 be f4). You have much more flexibility with the 18-105 because of its soon range. Sharpness, I’d say the 35mm is sharper. For video, I’d suggest the 18-104 hands down.
I just purchased the 18-105 exactly three days ago... It's been on my a6000 for three days now lol... Yes the constant F4 is great!! The image quality is to close to call!! The one thing I do like about the 135 is the AF MF switch!!
Nice! Can’t go wrong with either, have fun with your new lens! And yeah the switch would be nice if it were on the 18-105
Trying out the 18-105 right now, and your video is perfect timing for my decision making. Lol I think I’m still more inclined with 18-105 bec of the power zoom and the constant aperture 🙌🏻
Hard things to give up! Hope you’re enjoying the lens!
The constant aperture was the selling point for me! 😊 but I agree with you. I’m impressed with how the 135. Exceeded expectations! Good kit replacement definitely!
Hi I am planning to buy a 18-105 oss but and i am also looking at 55-210 oss because of the zoom range can you make a video on both of these lenses.
Thank you :-)
I actually don’t own the 55-210. I’d get the 55-210 used if you can. The 18-105 is the much better lens overall, but if you need the range go with the 55-210.
@@kyletaggart thanks for the clarification I am glad to hear that.
Thank you
Great video men helps me really a lot. I have a question though If you were to go to Mongolia for filmmaking locals living in tents, hunting with eagles, riding horses. What would be your lens choice for APS-C camera? Sigma 30mm f/1.4 + sony e 18-105mm f/4 or something else? maybe only sigma 24-70mm f/2.8?
If it’s a filmmaking trip, I’d imagine you’d be filming a ton, and you’d have hours of time to film. So switching lenses may not be an issue. I’d go for the 18-105 f4 and then the Sony 35mm f1.8 as both have OSS. I’d probably use the 18-105 for 80% of the shots and then planned detailed shots with the 35mm (or 30, whichever you go for). Hope this helps! Thanks
hikyletaggart this really helps! Thank you man for your reply. I appreciated 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
damn... what happened to the price of the 18-105? just got it from b&h for 540 used :/
It looks like you were using a ring light for this video. It is reflected in your eyes and looks strange.
I like the look.
Next time when you zoom, try to shoot them at the same distance for every picture. When you zoom in on the 135 and compare it to the 105, the 135 has less objects in it (since its zoomed more) so there's less objects in the frame and its more focused on one thing, When the 105 is focused on more things cause its zoomed at a different length, like the dog picture I was seeing different details cause some had more objects or was focused closer. I can tell u stepped back though! I know its sounds silly but it was hard to get a conclusion when the shots were different. Im no way saying this was a bad video or anything, it was very informative! just giving my 2 cents cause I'm actually conflicted on which to buy! I know its not easy to zoom in to the exact length on both!
No worries at all, and yeah I know exactly what you mean. The issue a the 18-135 only shows distance on the lens itself, and not the screen. I took other shots at more exact lengths but I couldn’t find em when I went to edit the vid haha. Thanks for checking the video out at all! 😊
Confusion confusion i just bought sony a6400 and which zoom lens will be better for me?
I assume you watched the video, but if you didn’t...
18-105 - higher quality lens, better for video, constant aperture.
geni.us/18to105Gf4
18-135 - smaller, lighter, bigger zoom range
geni.us/18to135
Hey Brother!! 18-135 or 18-105 Which is good for Photography, Videography, portraits, street photography, and Have Better Image quality and sharpness ?
For what you just listed - 18-105 f4. geni.us/18to105Gf4
@@kyletaggart Thanks man!! 😊🙏 Love from India !
Thanks Kyle!! I tend to go for the 18-105..........mainly because they are so similar in quality and I like the build of that lens better and the constant F4 is appealing. I don't think I need the extra 30 mm on a regular basis. When doing some sports photography I will put on my kit lens 55-210.......but that is occasionally. I hope that after buying this lens I will mostly use this one and my Sony 35mm f1.8 most of the time.......they will have to be my travel combo. And one day.........I will buy the sigma 56mm 1.4 too............one day :)
Keep n making vids! Happy for you thet you are being recognized by Sony!
Thanks so much! And hope you enjoy the new lens! It’s a great all around lens and I think you’ll love it.
In 2020. the general view seems to be that the 18-135 is the superior lens. However, as it was not available when I had only recently purchased my a 6000, now several years ago, purchased the 18-105 G and will keep it
how about 18-200?
Wich Has a better stabilization?
Keep up the great work Kyle
Thanks, I will!
My plan is the 18-105. From what I've seen in other demos, it's generally sharper. As you said, constant f4 is great. The 18-135 may be sharper at the 105mm range, but I often see that zoom lenses begin to fall off as they reach their limit. So unless you're shooting at 105mm all the time, I think the 18-105 will usually provide better results. Higher imagine quality at constant f4. Also, not that I plan to use a gimbal, but the 18-105 would work better with one since it doesn't get longer when zoomed.
BTW, I think a greater depth of field would be better for these sorts of videos. Maybe f5.6? Your bokeh is excellent, but when you're holding up lenses, they're super out of focus and I personally think it'd be better to be able to see your face and what you're holding in your hand at the same time.
On the power zoom switch, is "tight" the official word for the "T" side? I heard someone else call it "telephoto". Both make sense but I don't know what Sony intended it to be.
Congratulations on the continued sponsorship and also the recognition from Sony! That's really b/a and must feel super validating 😁😁
Thanks so much! And actually, I was guessing about the “tight”, but you may be right on the telephoto. Also yeah, I wasn’t looking at the monitor to see what was in focus when holding them up, filming at f1.4 will do that! Haha.
For taking video which one better