I think the "shallow DOF" issue is way overblown. Not many people consistently need the shallowest DOF possible, except for "artsy" purposes. I was sorting (mostly down into the Recycled Bin) an old wedding shoot that I did - only one of two in my life, and hopefully the last. I used a 16-35/2.8 stopped down to f/4 mostly (as the light was rubbish) and where I was shooting a couple, only one of the two was in proper focus a lot of the time. It took extra care to align them in a parallel to the sensor plane to remedy that. I should have shot at f/5.6 at least, probably f/8 for good measure - but I didn't have a high ISO body at the time.
The new 18-135/3.5-5.6 I got for my wife gives less DOF than anyone would want at the long end if focused up close. That's f/5.6 at 135mm on APS-C. You can stop down however much you want, of course, but then you'll end up raising the ISO into the realms where the larger sensor benefit wrt noise is going to evaporate.
The new 18-135/3.5-5.6 I got for my wife gives less DOF than anyone would want at the long end if focused up close. That's f/5.6 at 135mm on APS-C. You can stop down however much you want, of course, but then you'll end up raising the ISO into the realms where the larger sensor benefit wrt noise is going to evaporate.