Fuji has been making lenses for many decades. I own many of their lenses, including the 18-55mm & have NOT been disappointed by any of them. Their build quality & the images they produce are outstanding. Many of their lenses rival some of my Canon “L” lenses that I used for many years.
Hi Jeffrey! I can only agree with this. They say that Fuji does not make bad lenses and this is true. I've been impressed with Fuji's consistency in producing great lenses. Kind regards!
I've been using my kit lens exclusively for years for amateur photography, resisting gear acquisition syndrome the whole time. I kind of felt guilty for using only that, but never had enough images I wanted to get with another lens. Then I started doing real estate photography and got a Samyang 12mm 2.8 for that, 18-55 just doesn't suit RE. Anyway, then I started doing food and automotive photography for pay, and the kit lens came into its own. It produces beautiful images of food and cars, so far I don't feel the need for another lens within the range of the zoom, though I did get a Fuji 10-24 which works for houses and automotive interiors. The only problem is, the 18-55 is about 10 years old now, and has a lot of microscratches on the outer glass, and if you shine a bright light into it you can see dust on the interior elements. So I need a new lens, and won't be able to get much for the old one. Did I mention I dropped it one time? Did not affect its operation at all, but there's a slight dent in the filter ring. That thing is built like a tank!
Hi Dale! Thanks so much for your overview of the lens. I feel the same. It's a very versatile lens and amazingly well built. Best of luck to you with your photography. Kind regards!
I agree that this lens is well built and has excellent performance. Thank you for the sweet spot graphs, they really were a revelation. I have been emphasizing f5.6-f8 and your tests indicated avoiding these. Going forward I will use f4 and go directly to f10 when possible. Thanks much!
Hi Tom. Yes I do have the 18-55 mm lens and, as you say, it certainly is a good lens. I'm glad you mention the sweet spot as F10. I recently heard that between F8 - F11 is good for optimum performance, so F10 sounds exactly right. I have been using F 5.6 or thereabouts but I'll try using F 10 and hope it improves my pics. I have an XT30 too and a couple of smaller primes.
I'm on my third copy of this lens....going back four years (this version is the best). I use this lens only with non-stabilized bodies and mainly for travel. My copies have all been sharpest at F8, which certainly limits its usability in low light. Having said that, it's built like a tank, has great dampening on the zoom and focus rings and the OIS works extremely well. I agree with many who say this lens should never have been called a "kit lens". On the second-hand market, this lens in almost mint condition can be had for $300....a bargain by any measure.
Hi Wayne! Yes, I agree with you. What a great lens (with a few minor limitations). "Kit lens" doesn't do enough justice to this lens, this is true. Thank you very much for watching and for your feedback!
Hi Tony! This combination is perfect for motorcycle trips - small and capable. I've also used this camera and lens on motorcycle trips. Best of luck to you!
Every time I start to think seriously about selling this lens, I make myself shoot with it and decide to keep it. The image rendering and attributes of the lens in general are great and I have more than a few shots I love that also keep up just fine with my primes and 50-140 in terms of pleasing sharpness. Its the AF that always makes me want to dump it - it is just not very good comparatively. My guess is that the #1 reason images look "soft" comes down to two things - quantity/quality of light and autofocus near-misses. Not BIG misses mind you, but "slight" misses that look great on a small screen but not when you put it on the big screen. If Fuji ever updates this lens to behave more like its newest lenses, which seem more reliably accurate, it would be a killer lens. I do like this lens a lot but would never risk it for any kind of paid work where speed is essential and there are no do-overs.
Hi Matt! Thanks a lot for your very thoughtful and interesting post. I think I agree with you. I rarely use this lens to photograph people where the focus needs to be on the nearest eye, and super accurate. Therefore I normally don't see those tiny misses in auto focus. For me this lens is a must have because of its versatility. I will say, however, that primes may be preferable for professional work - as you also pointed out. Kind regards!
Nice video. Thanks. My go-to setup for close-up and macro work is this 18-55mm lens and a set of macro rings, the JJC Autofocus AF Macro Extension Rings. I find the 35-55mm range most useful. The rings are small enough to always carry around for those just-in-case moments. And at around $35, you've just given this favorite lens a whole new purpose.
I got this with my XS 10 Fujifilm I took this lense to Asia, did some portray work and and street photography . The outcome this combo produced was overwhelming and exquisite . Also have the 35 f2,… but if I could use only one lense ,…it would be the 18-55mm.
I got my 18-55 as the kit lens when I bought my XE-2 9 years ago. It is now damaged and I am now looking at getting a new one or repairing the old one. I miss the lens. Good review
I've had this lens for a couple years now and it's great. Just the perfect balance. Sure it could have been better at X, but it would have been bigger and compactness is important to me. It's just a fantastic allrounder without big compromises anywhere.
I use this almost exclusively for video, along with some stills work. I think the sharpness works well for video because it renders people's faces a little softer. Though the stills I take, I'm more than satisfied with the quality. I like to track into people's faces and the focus racks flawlessly. The 2.8 aperture is great in the wide end. I don't mind how it adjusts to 4 because in video I stop down to that anyway because I like the background to have some definition in that 35 to 55mm range. I like this lens so much, I had a accident with my camera, the lens broke away from the mounting ring and I decided to send it to Fuji for $250 to get if fixed figuring they'll restore it to brand new quality.
Hi Garret! I'm with you on this one. I fully agree that this lens is so great. Lately I've been using this lens for video just as you mentioned. It is perfect for that. I take most of my stills with the Fuji XF 35 F/1.4 R ( ruclips.net/video/TsyVkPuo5mM/видео.html ) and Fuji XF 56 F/1.2 R ( ruclips.net/video/QBHeze-Ueqs/видео.html ) . These lenses are absolutely amazing - just like the XF 18-55. Kind regards!
This zoom lens is very good for what it can do for the price. Having OIS is also a bonus. Never had issues getting great photos from using it on my XT-1 or XT-20.
I have some 10 Fuji lenses, but the 18-55 is the go-to workhorse. I would love to see an upgraded version (WR and a fixed aperture, giving the ability to show the ‘f’ stop). That said, it largely lives on my X-Pro 3.
I got a used x-t30 as a small walk around lens for cities etc, (it made me switch to Fuji and trade my dslr for an x-t4!) which came with the xc-15-60. It’s a “cheap” lens but does a great job, the images are incredible from a lower priced lens. I do however want to get the 18-55 instead as I would prefer an aperture ring on the lens. I love the whole fuji system
Hi Tracey! The same thing happened to me. After I got my first Fuji I became mostly a Fuji shooter (I also use Nikon to a lesser degree). The X-T4 is an awesome camera and a great choice. The 16-50 is an affordable lens but very capable and fine. The 18-55 takes it up another step. Enjoy your photography!
I totally agree, it's my all-terrain lens for my X-T3 and X-E1! One more sub, keep up the good work talking about Fujifilm! Watch some of my works with Fuji ecosystem. Cheers from Portugal
Ahh, I was wondering why nature looks so familiar. And then I checked your profile to see where you are from. Greetings from Latvia! I'm considering getting X-T30 II with the 18-55 kit lens.
Hi Arthur! Thanks for watching and greetings to beautiful Latvia! Your plan to get the X-T30 II and the XF 18-55 mm lens is a great one. This pair is a winner. Kind regards!
Tom...this was a nicely thought out video on the Fujinon XF 18-55 which I have owned twice. My latest copy is surgically sharp that I don't refer to it as a "kit" lens. I have the 16-55 f2.8 great lens but an absolute anvil for everyday carry. It also is prone to purple fringing at times and barrel distortion on the long end of the zoom range.
Hi Edilson! Thank you so much! Did I understand you correctly that your second copy of the lens was sharper than the first one? I'm curious about this because generally Fuji lenses show very little variation between different copies. How did you determine the lens sharpness? Kind regards!
Tom...no I did not mean to suggest that the second copy was sharper than the first. Both copies render images the same to my eyes. I have heard of photographer making that claim but unless testing occurs under an objective and rigorous process, these claims are simply anecdotes and highly subjective.
Hi, Tom...very good video about this lens....wonderful photos ! .I ll buy a new FujiFilm X-T30II next week and I still haven't decided whether to take XF 18-55 or XC 15-45 lenc. i love photography-but I have no intention of becoming a professionall :-) Cheers from Zagreb!
Hi Darko. Greetings to Zagreb! Fuji X-T30 II is a wonderful choice. It's my favorite camera. As far as which lens to get, I'd say that the XF 18-55 is really great. On the other hand the XC 15-45 (ruclips.net/video/lkGXyrg5DiU/видео.html) is much smaller and much more convenient to carry around. I find that the XC 15-45 is better for gimbal work. Which ever lens you decide to get you cannot go wrong because both lenses are very capable. Good luck!
Hi J65 Tamashi! Thank you. This is an excellent question. I don't currently own the 16-80 mm lens but I'd like to review it. It will happen one day. Kind regards!
Just found your channel. Really great content and presentation. Valuable and to the point! Picking op the 15-45 tomorrow to complement my 14, 18-55, 50-140 and an adapted 50 (Nikon 1.8). When do you tend to use the 15-45 and when the 18-55? I was thinking of the 15-45 for very light travels, when I do not want to bring the 18-55 and 14 (with a second body to be quick).
Hi Nick! Great to hear from you. Indeed, I often prefer the 15-45 when I travel (ruclips.net/video/lkGXyrg5DiU/видео.html). It is perfect for that. It's got an unusually good center sharpness. Also, I like to use the 15-45 for filming from gimbal. This small lens is easier to balance. And the third situation is when the 15 mm very wide angle is needed: landscapes, real estate photography, artistic closeups. It's a very versatile lens. Kind regards!
I prefer this over the 16-55. OIS for me, took care of that extra stop of light (even if I'm photographing moving things, they aren't moving that fast). NOW I will say it comes best as part of a trio. The 14mm and the 55-200.
Hi Andy! Thank you very much for your feedback. I can only agree with what you are saying. Especially the 18-55 and 55-200 together is a nice set because where one ends the other one starts. Fuji is making a large number of great lenses but I find it most noteworthy that it can make the zoom lenses so perfect. Kind regards!
I'm looking forward to working with this lens. I've got a used one on the way. I'm curious if you have made a video on the lens stabilization. But I guess I'll test it out in a few days myself.
Hi Garret! Congratulations on getting this fine lens. I think you'll like it a lot. I have not specifically tested the image stabilization of this lens (how many stops it is) but this is a good idea and I'll add it to my list of future videos. Kind regards!
Thank you Tom, very good video about this lens .Diffraction point is about F 7.3 (26 mp camera),so shooting at F10 could be a problem.But the Fuji lensoptimzer takes care of this . Can you switch the optimzer off,is there a diffrence?It is a 14element lens, so you are loosing a little micro contrast ..i think!Nice video with nice shot's.Take care Tom.
Hi Jan. I'm glad you liked the video. I have not experimented with Lens Modulation Optimizer here but you are bringing out a good point. I have frequently used this lens at F=10 and so far I've been very happy with its performance. It's indeed true that some of the quality may come from the Fuji software. Thanks again.
Hi Tom, thank you for taking us through this. I want to know if you've focussed on a subject and then zoom in/zoom out, does the focus stay locked in throughout the zooming motion or does it lose focus (blur) and then reacquires it after the zoom action has stopped?
Hi Anindya! Thank you for asking. Could you specify some additional details. Are you asking about manual focusing, like so: a) switch to manual focusing b) choose a focal length A and focus on the subject (and take a photo), c) choose a new focal length B, but don't touch the focusing ring or change the camera position (and take a photo). You are asking if the same object is in focus in both photos? Or are you asking about the lens behavior when using some automatic focusing mode? Kind regards!
@TomPhoto Thanks for the question Tom, I'm actually talking about video. Suppose, I'm at 23mm and locking focus on a stationary subject and then zooming in (say to 50mm) on the subject, does the lens keep the focus or does it lose focus while going from 23mm to 50mm? In video, this is very important as if the camera loses focus on the subject when zooming in and out, it's not a good experience. In a nutshell, is it parfocal or not parfocal?
Hi, first of all, the video is really really helpful, i am going to buy my first camera and the sigma 18-50 with x20 is costlier than xs20 with xf18-55. So thanks😊. Also can you please please tell me, where this 03:03 picture has been taken? Or is their any special name to it? It seems beautiful i would love to see it someday.
Hi Shashank! Thank yo very much, indeed. I think you are making the right decision when considering Fuji. They are my favorite cameras. What's really unique about Fuji is that they have given their kit zoom lens (the XF 18-55) so much attention that it's a pro quality lens. Most other manufacturers don't do that. The picture at 03:03 was taken in Tartu, Estonia. It's the 2024 Culture Capital of Europe, so now is a very good time to visit :). Kind regards!
Hello! Do the images have editing? Or were they taken with fujifilm recipes? I currently have a sony a6600 but I can't contain the desire to buy a fujifilm xt30 ii. Do you think it is a good decision to sell my current camera? I love fuji colors. Thank you
Hi Julian! Thank you for asking. The sample photos in the video were taken with Fujifilm recipes, indeed. I fully understand your desire to get a Fuji X-T30 II. The X-T30 has been one of the most amazing cameras I've used. The colors are amazing and the entire photography experience is just so pleasant. You may want to check out my Fuji X-T30 sample photos ( ruclips.net/video/GDxsZgbP4iw/видео.html ). These photos were mostly shot as JPEG's, color was not altered and often the film simulation was Velvia. I have also produced a video on my Fuji X-T30 ( ruclips.net/video/OuV0ydLM20w/видео.html ). Kind regards!
Do not sell your gear for this "colour science" thing, it is mostly nonsense and on Fuji with their film simulations it is practically a gimmick. None of those look like a real film. I like Fuji, and I own a complete kit, but I would suggest changing the system because of some real reasons.
@@BojanBojovic Hi Bojan! Thanks for watching. I think a lot of people like Fuji for how their cameras feel and handle. I personally like the logic how they approach photography. Kind regards!
I think on the nikor 24-120 F4 or the newer nikon Z 24-200mm or the Nikon S 24-70 f4 as great kit lenses! Also the 27 mm f2. 8 that comes with the XE4 i think is a dream of kit.
Hi Mark! Thank you for asking. The pictures were very minimally edited. Mostly all of the photos were shot as JPEGs and they were cropped and very slightly sharpened with GIMP. Kind regards!
Hi Tom, good afternoon, first, thanks a lot for this video, secondly i would like your opinion on two lens that iam willing to by , XF 18-55 (from this video) or Sigma 30mm 1.4, my main style is street photos, the wide aperture from sigma its good, but the versatility of 18-55 got my attention, i would meant the world to me have your opinion on which one do you find suits more, once again thanks a lot and wish you all the best
Hi Rafsilva! Thank you for your kind words and thank you for your question. These are both great lenses and it depends on the particular situation which one of them is better. I do not have first hand experience with the Sigma 30 mm lens but I know a bit about this lens. I think it's wonderfully sharp but some people say it shows a bit of chromatic aberration. At the same time 30mm is generally very suitable for street photography. I'm a bit of a fan of the Fujinon 18-55 mm. For me this has been the first lens to get for Fujifilm system. The verstility and quality of this lens is superb. And it has an aperture ring, which is very nice. I find that for street photography I often like to go over 30mm. This improves the lines and gives street a different feel. For me only a 30mm lens would be a bit limiting. So I personally would buy an 18-55 mm lens before prime lenses but different people have different opinions. I hope I could help you a bit. Best wishes!
@@tom_photo , thanks a lot, it was the final push for my decision, i wish that Fuji could reward you for your amazing video and team player position, all happiness and success in this life for you and your family, from a new subscriber to your channel
I currently own 2 of these lenses. Both great at 18mm to about 40mm. Sadly they both lose sharpness after 40mm and at 55mm are only ok. I also own the 16-55 and its massively sharper at all focal lengths but its much more expensive and much heavier.
Hi Errol! Thanks for your feedback. Yes, I would imagine that the XF 16-55 mm is probably sharper. My experience with the XF 18-55 has been positive. Compared to the kit lenses of other manufacturers it it significantly better. Kind regards!
doubting between the 18-55, 16-55 and the tamron 17-70, lens stabilization is always better than ibis for some handhold work. Do I need a little more reach and a stop of light. Touch question, dont like the build from what seems otherwise a perfect lens. Dit not switch to fuji for mr plastic fantastic... How do you feel about the tamron 17-70 and what would be your first pick out of those 3?
Hi Steven! Thank you for asking this relevant question. I think all of these lenses are good options. You cannot go very wrong with any of them. I tend to believe in Fuji lenses when choosing a lens for Fuji. This is not to say that Tamron cannot do a good job. Different people have different needs and expectations, but I personally would choose the XF 18-55. This is so precisely made for Fuji cameras, it just fits so incredibly well and it is very versatile. It gets everything done so well. The XF 16-55 is a true top of the line lens. For me it it's a bit too heavy. It's a really perfect lens for video. If you are a videographer, this is a really good choice. I hope I could help you a little bit. Kind regards!
@@slglasius The Tamron is a great lens. More reach, F2.8 all along, great stabilization, sharp at the edges. But it is longer, chunkier, makes a larger kit. I also shoot Sony, I sold the 16-55 2.8, that has no stabilization, and happy with the Tamron. I just bought a Fuji XT30ii to try out and the 18-55mm. it is nice. I think the Tamron may be a superior lens, but I have not compared them directly. The plastic of the Tamron is very good. Of course the Fuji 18-55 is better looking, more balanced on a small camera and so on. the optical stabilization may be better in the Tamron, in my experience.
Very nice and informative video, you got an abo! :) One short question: I'm looking for a x t20 or t 30 right now and have two second hand offers for around the same price: A X t30 with the XC 15-45 and an X t20 with the XF 18-55. Which combination would you recommend (I would mostly use it for traveling)? It would be the only lens I would use for the time being except a samyang 12mm f2 (want to try out a little bit of astro). Thank you very much!
Hi Jens! Thanks you for this question. As far as size goes these cameras are identical. Also their photo quality is identical. As far as camera bodies go it boils down to two differences: touch screen and video. If you want to make high quality videos then the X-T30 is preferable. The touch screen makes auto-focusing much more convenient, especially during filming, giving X-T30 an advantage. The XF 18-55 is my go-to lens and super versatile. However I've never taken it on my hikes or travels because the XC 15-45 always wins for me here due to its size. The two pairs offered to you (X-T30 + XC 15-45 and X-T20 + XF 18-55) are worth about the same in terms of price. If you think yourself making a lot of high quality video, it may be a better idea to get the X-T30 combination and buy the XF-18-55 later if you end up needing it. If you value better built lenses and only make casual vacation videos then the X-T20 combination is attractive. My personal (and a very slight) preference is to go with the X-T30 pair because the XC 15-45 is a very sharp and small lens and you can always buy more lenses later. That said, a large factor is the condition. If one of the cameras or lenses is in much better condition or one of the cameras has taken much less pictures then this would almost certainly make me prefer the "fresher" option. I hope I could help you. I've also made a special video on XC 14-55 mm lens, X-T20 and X-T30. I'm copying the links here for you. Fujinon XC 15-45: ruclips.net/video/lkGXyrg5DiU/видео.html , Fuji X-T20: ruclips.net/video/cdqteCyNwdc/видео.html , Fuji X-T30: ruclips.net/video/OuV0ydLM20w/видео.html
@@tom_photo Thank you very much for the extensive answer! I already watched all the recommended Video and I now think that the X T30 + Xc15-45 combo will suit me better since I do a lot of backpacking. Thank you so much! :)
@@a6893_ Hi! Good thinking! However if you already have the X-T30 ii which is just about the nicest of cameras, there's no need to upgrade in any direction :). Cheers!
Thanks for a great video. Would the sweet spot at f10 be valid also for Video? I remember doing tests couple of years ago, I did video tests at f2.8, f8 and f16 and observed that it was the sharpest at f8. I may redo the tests at f8 x f10 just to be sure...
Hi Extended Play! Thanks for your question. Yes the sweet spot will also apply to video. Of the Fstops that you mention the F8 is, indeed, the sharpest. Often the sweet spot and sharpness don't matter in video. It tends to be the other way around almost because you'll often wanna go with the smallest Fstop to get the best bokeh and use an ND filter to be able to use large aperture. F8 is often not optimal for video because it will give you a sterile landscape documentary look. This will make it more difficult to catch the interest of the audience. The most common F-stop for cinematographic filming is 2.8. I really like to use 1.4 with my Fujinon 35 mm prime lens. You may want to check out my video on making short films:ruclips.net/video/igFFCGzGaAw/видео.html . Thanks again and best of luck to you!
@@tom_photo Thank you so much! I recently came back to making videos... and I only shoot landscapes with wide lenses, not interviews... so shooting always at the smallest fstop still applies for sharpest video? I do have a variable nd filter to compensate exposure so I may do some experiments at various fstops with and without the nd filter but it would be great to know what you think!
@@portcorner_noise That sounds good. I agree that for documentary style landscape videos it makes sense to be at the the sweet spot of the lens most of the time. It may still require an ND filter to make sure that the shutter speed remains correct. Kind regards!
Hi! Thank you for asking. I used Fujifilm X-T30. This lens is guaranteed to work very well with the X-T4 because it is often the kit lens for the X-T4. Fuji's autofocus is a bit slower in general than that of Sony, for example. Still it is fully adequate and Fuji is superior to many other manufacturers in several ways. Kind regards!
Maybe it’s just me but I found this lens very underwhelming. It was much softer than all primes in that range. And was significantly heavier, bigger and had much larger minimum focus distance than xc 1545. Basically didn’t have any redeeming qualities for me. Edit: typo
Hi. Thank you for your message. Indeed, the primes are sharper as you pointed out. The XF 18-55 mm seems to me to be sharper than any other zoom lens I've tested, though. I also like the feel of the lens. You are right when you say that it's kind of big. I also find that the XC 15-45 is better for traveling because it's much smaller. That said the 18-55 mm is still one of my favorites.
Could it be that your results are due to the lmo (lens modulation optimizer)that kicks in from f8 with strong sharpening to fight diffraction? Optically its best at 5.6 at all focal lenghts imo.
Hi! Thanks very much for your feedback. Yes, the lmo can have some effect. I have my camera set to lmo = on, so with native Fuji's lenses that I attach to my camera this function can correct certain aberrations. I think it is safe to assume that most users have this function automatically turned on. Therefore the combination of the optics and lmo can be viewed as a single set of properties for this lens when it comes to photography. But your point is valid and I should also repeat this experiment with lmo = off. I'll put this on my to-do list. Kind regards!
Hello Tom, Great video and nice images. I need to decide between 15-45 and 18-55. I look for better close focus abilities at wider end 15 and 18 respectively, may be a kind of macro at wide end on my T10. Kindly let me know your views. Also the images you shared please see if you can share Exif data. Thank You ! Rahul Deshpande
Hi Rahul! Thank you for your question. Both lenses are really nice. If you want wide angle and very small size then the 15-45 is a good choice.If you need more telephoto end and a sturdy build (and you don't care about the size) then the 18-55 is better. There is also a rather large price difference (the 18-55 is much more expensive). Both lenses are very sharp and accurate. The 15-45 has an incredible center sharpness but the 18-55 is more accurate across the frame. You cannot go wrong with either one of them. This is my review of Fujinon XC 15-45 mm lens: ruclips.net/video/lkGXyrg5DiU/видео.html . I hope I could help you a bit.
@@chinmayeed Hi! Minimal focus distance of the XC 15-45 is smaller than that of the XF 18-55 (I think 13 cm vs 30 cm). So the 15-45 is better for macro work. However at such a wide angle it's not a very good macro lens. There are workarounds to turn your normal lens into a macro lens. I'll soon make a video on that. Cheers!
I got the 15-45 used online for my T30, works great I love the wide 15 better than boring 18...this lens also has image stabilization. the 45 is equiv to 67.5 full frame. down side is 18-55 is a brighter lens.
Hi! That's another good question. You cannot spot a bad copy unless you run careful tests from a tripod at various settings. Checking this at the store is difficult. Luckily Fuji is one of the best lens makers and for most intents and purposes you don't need to worry about this. If you are buying from a reputable source and the lens turn out truly bad you can simply return it. Cheers!
Hi! Thanks for asking. Architectural photography is not a simple topic. A lot of times you need wide angle but to isolate parts of buildings for more interesting photos you may prefer narrower field of view. So, when it comes to focal length your proposed 16 mm is a great option but so is an 85 mm lens for example. I often prefer longer focal length because then you have less problems with straight lines. About the XF 18-55 - this is a very fine lens. For most people it will do most of the things. When people prefer prime lenses it's because they need them for a specific reason, such a s a large aperture for good bokeh. In architectural photography bokeh is often not a main concern. So, you can use your the 18-55 mm very well for architectural photography in most situations. Kind regards!
Got it & thanks for detailed reply. Thing is i have olympus camera & want to get in fuji for their stimulations, colours & tones & came across good deal for xe3 with 18-55. Your video gave good info at right time. Thanks again.
@@rahulsankalpana Hi! I think if both cameras are in the same condition and have the same shutter count then most people would probably go with X-T200. It's newer technology and a bit more capable. Cheers!
Hi! I have made a video where I talk about how to measure lens sweet spot (you can skip the first 1 min in the video): ruclips.net/video/OQyJQFDmWh0/видео.html
It’s a great little lens and has served me well, especially when I didn’t have a stabilised body. But that f4 aperture on the long end is a bummer. The 16-55 is too big and heavy. If I would get a new Fuji camera now, I’d likely go with the Sigma 18-50 that has constant f2.8. Love the ergonomics and the build quality of the kit lens, if it also had a constant aperture like the sigma, it’d be perfect.
@@tom_photo Sure. Sigma somehow made it possible while making it actually lighter, so I'm sure Fuji could shrink it down too if they put their minds to it.
Im debating between getting or not getting this zoom lens as a kit with a camera purchase (x-s10), and, in that case, I would do that only to go straight into a prime 35mm f1.4. The problem is that, in doing so, i lose the opotunity to get the discounted price, and i think i'll regret it. I hear people saying good things about this lens. For me, i think the biggest factor in a lens is the accurate colors in shadows, so, my reasoning for the prime better glass was to achieve that. But, i dont know how much better the colors would be between a more premium lens and the 18-55mm, because thats a dificult thing to know from side by side pictures taken from other people. Have you ever had any situations where this lens rendered colors/contrasts in a wierd way or too harshly? Thanks for the video
Hi Renato! Great question, thank you for asking. I own both of the lenses you're asking about and I've used them side by side. I'd say that the main difference is artfulness. The 18-55 renders everything very accurately. It's so precise and perfect that the result is very predictable. The shadows and highlights both look wonderful. Some may call it boring but I'd like to call is dependable. The 35 mm prime on the other hand introduces small "quirks" that you cannot put your finger on and that look lovely, fresh and novel. I think the two lenses complement each other very nicely. The 18-55 doesn't make mistakes as far as I'm concerned. The 35 mm prime does, but you'll love it. Other people may have different takes on this. For most people I'd recommend to get the 18-55 first and use it most situations. For more advanced photographers the 35 mm is a good addition. The 18-55 is special in its quality. It's above the other zoom lenses I've seen. If you get a good discount on your X-S10 only with the 18-55 and you end up not liking the lens, you can sell it. I hope I could help you. Happy photography!
@@tom_photo Thanks for your input Tom. I've read a forum last night, right after i commented on your video, and in there people were getting to the conclusion that the 18-55mm suffers from quality controls issues and there are some that are very good and some that are less good (don't know if its related of being built in japan or another country), but, oh man, this things make it even harder to choose. You are right, if i could get my hands on a good standard well made 18-55, i think I'll be very happy with the package overall. And it would be very complemented with the 35 f1.4 prime. The reason things are a bit dodgy for me is that i live in Brazil and i usually buy these products when i'm a in a short trip to the US, so no time to return if i got a bad lens. I'm debating now if there is another option to complement the 35 f1.4. Perhaps the 23 f2 (450 U$), but the focal length is not that different, so maybe not the best idea. The next one would be the 18 f2, which people seems to hate or love, depending to who you ask, but it is 600 U$, ouch. Then there is the 16mm f2.8 (400 U$) which, idk, seems like a worst idea then the zoom for me... All this thought experiment comes from the premise that I'm gonna get the 35mm f1.4. Another completely different idea would be to get a longer one in its place, like the 50mm f2, or 56mm f/1. In this case, the 23mm f2 would be a great complement. But then, that longer focal length of 50mm or 56mm is, for me, more limiting as far as I know, then the 35mm f1.4... so I'm tending to keep the 35mm f1.4 as a backbone premise and work my way from there to get to a nice complement. I think after my brain is about to explode, I'll end up getting the 18-55mm hahahahaha. Thanks again!
@@renatobfa Hi! Thanks for sharing. I have another idea for you. How about getting the XC 15-45 mm. I made a video on this lens (ruclips.net/video/lkGXyrg5DiU/видео.html). It's a very sharp and small lens. It's not the most convenient to use but it really delivers. It's my favorite travel lens.
@@tom_photo hummmm. I think that lens is not currently being sold new anymore, is it? But is a choice as well, its just hard for me to buy used since i dont live in the us
Hi! Thanks for asking. Indeed, I frequently use this lens for street photography and it works very well. I think it's a solid choice for streets. Kind regards!
Hi! Thank you for asking. Did you mean XF 55-200? If yes, I've covered it in another video (ruclips.net/video/WzSK9ke9uGw/видео.html) and I'm soon releasing a new and updated video. In short, this is a truly wonderful lens. I highly recommend it. If you have specific questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Kind regards!
WELL! I have definitely got the WORST copy of the Fuji 18-55. Unusable at 18mm from 2.8 to 3.5 and still bad at f/4 then about after a year I got "Turn camera off and on again" I updated the firmware on the camera (X-S 10) and the lens but that made no difference. Eventually the lens started making some weird noise and then died. My old Canon EFs 10-18 mm was WAY sharper using the Fringer adapter, especially in the corners. I now have the Sigma 18-50 on order. For the costs and performance of the third party lenses I will no longer be using Fuji's expensive and slow focusing lenses and if Canon ever open the doors to third party manufactures that's when I jump ship!
Hi! Thank you for sharing. I think these huge problems with the XF 18-55 are quite unusual. It's definitely possible to get a bad or faulty lens but this is rare. I do agree about the somewhat slow auto focus compared to some of the competition. I've been very happy with this lens so far. I currently own 2 copies of it but I've had more in the past and every one of them has been very very good for me. Kind regards!
I have four copies of the XF 18-55. They are only good at close focusing distances, for people and the like. Towards infinity, they are all faulty - with weird field curvatures in different areas of the frame. This lens cannot be recommended for landscapes.
Hi! Thank you for making these points. This lens has been working quite well for me for landscapes, too. I think there can be variability between different units. I'm addressing this question quite soon in another video. Kind regards!
@@tom_photo Thank you! Just discovered your sharpness diagrams in your other video. These seem to confirm that there‘s something weird going on because you need to stop down to f10 to get somehow reasonable results from the 18-55. At f10, you basically enter the realm of hyperfocal distance which effectively masks out any effects of field curvature, but is close to the diffraction limit already. That said, the 18-55 works magnificently for me at closer distances. It‘s just with landscapes that each of my copies exhibits different drops of sharpness within the image - or areas which are front-focused, also depending on focal length. But I tested only up to f8. Too bad, I really loved the idea of having a small but fun and powerful second system with my X-T3 and the 18-55. Btw. with the XF 50mm f2 my X-T3 delivers tack-sharp images even at wide apertures. So it‘s not the camera. Interestingly, the 18-55 seems to be significantly better on the X-T20, more than the difference of less than 3 MP would suggest. I must admit that I‘ve tested my 4th sample of the 18-55, which I received just recently, only with IS on so far - will do another comparison with IS off shortly.
@@GiovanniBausC Hi GiovanniBausC! Thank you for your interesting analysis. I will have to test the XF 18-55 with X-T20 vs the other X-mount cameras that I have. This is a good idea. I believe that the XF 50 is very sharp. This is a wonderful lens. Cheers!
@@GiovanniBausC I was also dissapointed up until I stepped it up to 10. When in auto priority mode unfortunately no matter where I put the focus point I only got the the value within 4-6 range.
@@StefanMrsevic Meanwhile I figured out that the results are much better when I switch the IS mode to "shooting only" or when on a tripod switch off the IS altogether. Not perfect yet but better than before. I've also added a Tamron 17-70 to my Fujifilm setup. In the image center, the 18-55 is very similar in IQ. Closer to the borders, the Tamron is more consistent but when the IS mode is set as described above the 18-55 is at least no longer as bad as it appeared at first. I only compared one of my 18-55 lenses to the Tamron, the one which was best in previous comparisons between samples.
Hi! Thank you for asking. This is generally true that at the widest aperture the lens is typically not as accurate when focusing. This is caused by shallower depth of field, certain lens aberrations, autofocus system uncertainty, and focus shift. However, I have not noticed that this is a big problem with the XF 18.55. Kind regards!
Hi Audiman. Thank you for your feedback. This is interesting. Maybe you had a bad copy of the lens? But I agree that the 16-55 and 16-80 are really great lenses. I'm going to post a video on Fuji XC 16-50 mm later this week.
@@tom_photo Sharpness at 18mm and f2.8 was the biggest problem. Maybe a bad copy but I have seen many reviews which claim the same. Stopped at f5.6 it was ok but nothing more than that. Center sharpness was better but the edges were still blurry and weird. Or maybe I am to demanding.
@@Audimann Thanks. Yes it helps to stop down the lens. I've been reasonably happy with F2.8. But I agree that prime lenses would function better. Still I think the XC 18-55 mm is the best kit zoom lens I've owned.
I think the 18-55mm is affected negatively if your camera has it default setting of Continuous OIS. People report better results (probably because of less vibration) when they change that to Shooting Only for the OIS. Mine seems a bit better, but it's subjective. However yes, I think I'm about to upgrade to 16-55 even though I'm just a hobbyist, as there's still something wrong with the 18-55 pictures that I can't quite place, and also I find the aperture ring a pain on a variable aperture lens.
Wow a f10 lens.... that’s why my copy was unusable at 55mm f6.4.... This is pretty unusual and the average user won’t know it how to get the best out of this lens. This make is a fail for me. For example the mentioned XF 35mm f1.4 lens is super sharp until f8. f8 makes it noticeably blurry compared to f6.4. So diffraction already kicks in with f8. So a f10 lens can not be ideally sharp in any way. 🤔
Hi hellomyphone! Yes, this lens has somewhat unique behavior. I should also add that sharpness can be modulated by camera's software. For example diffraction problems can be reduced a bit by software. I have seen lenses with apparent sweet spots at F16. This Saturday I will post a video on how to find lens sweet spot. Kind regards!
Hi! Thank you for asking. I'm assuming you are asking about image sharpness. Sure a typical prime is sharper. However I always invite people to ask why this tiny bit matters. If their clients ask for prime lens photos then obviously a prime lens is needed. For amateur photographers I don't very much recommend primes. They loose more than they gain by using only primes. Every zoom lens has a "sweet focal length" at which it is very close to its corresponding prime. The differences in sharpness are small but the differences in versatility are huge. I talk about 10 reasons to prefer zoom lenses in here: ruclips.net/video/zasLeb2CpuU/видео.html . Best of luck to you!
@@mannyquinn5841 Hi! Actually no. The photos were shot as JPEGs and no color was ever added. This is the power of Fuji's Velvia film simulation combined nordic winters during magic hours in the morning. It gets pretty spectacular here in the mornings.
I never liked it. When compared with the Nikon cheap and plastic 18-55 f3.5-5.6 the Fujinon was less sharp, more vignetting, more distortion, and more CA. So, optically the Nikon lens is cheaper at 100 Euro/Dollar, an optically better. But, it is plastic, it lets less light, and what is most important, it does not have so many angry fanboys to defend it with rage like the XF lens has. It is a nice lens overall, just not 700 Euro/Dollar nice, and especially not as nice as angry Fuji fanboys want you to believe.
Hi! Thank you very much for your feedback. Could it be that you had bad copy of the lens? But you are right that the Nikon lenses are also very nice. Kind regards!
Fuji has been making lenses for many decades. I own many of their lenses, including the 18-55mm & have NOT been disappointed by any of them. Their build quality & the images they produce are outstanding. Many of their lenses rival some of my Canon “L” lenses that I used for many years.
Hi Jeffrey! I can only agree with this. They say that Fuji does not make bad lenses and this is true. I've been impressed with Fuji's consistency in producing great lenses. Kind regards!
I've been using my kit lens exclusively for years for amateur photography, resisting gear acquisition syndrome the whole time. I kind of felt guilty for using only that, but never had enough images I wanted to get with another lens. Then I started doing real estate photography and got a Samyang 12mm 2.8 for that, 18-55 just doesn't suit RE.
Anyway, then I started doing food and automotive photography for pay, and the kit lens came into its own. It produces beautiful images of food and cars, so far I don't feel the need for another lens within the range of the zoom, though I did get a Fuji 10-24 which works for houses and automotive interiors.
The only problem is, the 18-55 is about 10 years old now, and has a lot of microscratches on the outer glass, and if you shine a bright light into it you can see dust on the interior elements. So I need a new lens, and won't be able to get much for the old one. Did I mention I dropped it one time? Did not affect its operation at all, but there's a slight dent in the filter ring. That thing is built like a tank!
Hi Dale! Thanks so much for your overview of the lens. I feel the same. It's a very versatile lens and amazingly well built. Best of luck to you with your photography. Kind regards!
I’ve just ordered this lens for my XH-1 and excited to see how it performs. Thanks so much for the samples in this video.
Hi Richard! Thanks for sharing. I'm quite certain you'll like the lens. Best of luck!
I agree that this lens is well built and has excellent performance. Thank you for the sweet spot graphs, they really were a revelation. I have been emphasizing f5.6-f8 and your tests indicated avoiding these. Going forward I will use f4 and go directly to f10 when possible. Thanks much!
Hi John! I'm glad you found my video useful. Thanks so much for watching. Kind regards!
Hi Tom. Yes I do have the 18-55 mm lens and, as you say, it certainly is a good lens. I'm glad you mention the sweet spot as F10. I recently heard that between F8 - F11 is good for optimum performance, so F10 sounds exactly right. I have been using F 5.6 or thereabouts but I'll try using F 10 and hope it improves my pics. I have an XT30 too and a couple of smaller primes.
Hi Ken! Thanks so much for watching. Best of luck to you!
It is a great lens, I also have a 16-80 and they have different camera bodies, Both lens are really fantasic. I love 'em both.
Hi Rodney! Absolutely, both of these lenses are amazing. It's generally difficult to say anything bad about any Fuji lens. Kind regards!
I'm on my third copy of this lens....going back four years (this version is the best). I use this lens only with non-stabilized bodies and mainly for travel. My copies have all been sharpest at F8, which certainly limits its usability in low light. Having said that, it's built like a tank, has great dampening on the zoom and focus rings and the OIS works extremely well. I agree with many who say this lens should never have been called a "kit lens". On the second-hand market, this lens in almost mint condition can be had for $300....a bargain by any measure.
Hi Wayne! Yes, I agree with you. What a great lens (with a few minor limitations). "Kit lens" doesn't do enough justice to this lens, this is true. Thank you very much for watching and for your feedback!
Hi, just got this used with an XT20, for a motorbike trip. Great to hear you are finding it so good, and I love your sample images. Thanks
Hi Tony! This combination is perfect for motorcycle trips - small and capable. I've also used this camera and lens on motorcycle trips. Best of luck to you!
Every time I start to think seriously about selling this lens, I make myself shoot with it and decide to keep it. The image rendering and attributes of the lens in general are great and I have more than a few shots I love that also keep up just fine with my primes and 50-140 in terms of pleasing sharpness. Its the AF that always makes me want to dump it - it is just not very good comparatively. My guess is that the #1 reason images look "soft" comes down to two things - quantity/quality of light and autofocus near-misses. Not BIG misses mind you, but "slight" misses that look great on a small screen but not when you put it on the big screen. If Fuji ever updates this lens to behave more like its newest lenses, which seem more reliably accurate, it would be a killer lens. I do like this lens a lot but would never risk it for any kind of paid work where speed is essential and there are no do-overs.
Hi Matt! Thanks a lot for your very thoughtful and interesting post. I think I agree with you. I rarely use this lens to photograph people where the focus needs to be on the nearest eye, and super accurate. Therefore I normally don't see those tiny misses in auto focus. For me this lens is a must have because of its versatility. I will say, however, that primes may be preferable for professional work - as you also pointed out. Kind regards!
Nice video. Thanks. My go-to setup for close-up and macro work is this 18-55mm lens and a set of macro rings, the JJC Autofocus AF Macro Extension Rings. I find the 35-55mm range most useful. The rings are small enough to always carry around for those just-in-case moments. And at around $35, you've just given this favorite lens a whole new purpose.
Hi Marq104! Thank you for your feedback. I think this is pretty smart. I have yet to give my 18-55mm lens a try as a macro lens. Cheers!
Thank you for another wonderful educational video . All yes, thank your daughters for the use of their models ( Barbie’s and dog)
Thank you so much for your kind comments!
Brilliant work!!! You made me want go for this kit lens, as I am knew to Fuji.
Hi Carlos! Thank you very much and welcome to the Fuji community! Indeed, this is a lens I'd recommend with confidence. Kind regards!
I got this with my XS 10 Fujifilm I took this lense to Asia, did some portray work and and street photography . The outcome this combo produced was overwhelming and exquisite . Also have the 35 f2,… but if I could use only one lense ,…it would be the 18-55mm.
Hi! I agree with you. This the best do-it-all lens. Kind regards!
Thank you for such an informative video, I recently got this lens with the Fujifilm X-T3 and have been loving the pictures and videos it takes
Hi Vachykaran! You have a great lens and a great camera. Best of luck to you with your photography!
I got my 18-55 as the kit lens when I bought my XE-2 9 years ago. It is now damaged and I am now looking at getting a new one or repairing the old one. I miss the lens.
Good review
Hi! Thank you for your feedback. I'd also miss this lens more than most of my other lenses. Kind regards!
I've had this lens for a couple years now and it's great. Just the perfect balance. Sure it could have been better at X, but it would have been bigger and compactness is important to me. It's just a fantastic allrounder without big compromises anywhere.
Hi! I feel very much the same as you about this lens. The portability matters to me very much, too. Kind regards!
I use this almost exclusively for video, along with some stills work. I think the sharpness works well for video because it renders people's faces a little softer. Though the stills I take, I'm more than satisfied with the quality. I like to track into people's faces and the focus racks flawlessly. The 2.8 aperture is great in the wide end. I don't mind how it adjusts to 4 because in video I stop down to that anyway because I like the background to have some definition in that 35 to 55mm range. I like this lens so much, I had a accident with my camera, the lens broke away from the mounting ring and I decided to send it to Fuji for $250 to get if fixed figuring they'll restore it to brand new quality.
Hi Garret! I'm with you on this one. I fully agree that this lens is so great. Lately I've been using this lens for video just as you mentioned. It is perfect for that. I take most of my stills with the Fuji XF 35 F/1.4 R ( ruclips.net/video/TsyVkPuo5mM/видео.html ) and Fuji XF 56 F/1.2 R ( ruclips.net/video/QBHeze-Ueqs/видео.html ) . These lenses are absolutely amazing - just like the XF 18-55. Kind regards!
This zoom lens is very good for what it can do for the price. Having OIS is also a bonus. Never had issues getting great photos from using it on my XT-1 or XT-20.
Hi samf! Thank you for your feedback. This lens is a rally solid performer. Kind regards!
You really brought out the strengths of this lens. Nice video. Could you please review fujinon 16-80 f4 lens?
Hi Sudhakar! Thank you so much. I'd be glad to review this lens once I obtain it. Kind regards!
So glad I found your channel.
Hi TasKarp! I'm honored to have you as a viewer. Kind regards!
Very nice review...only stuff no fluff...direct to the point :)
Hi Srinivas! Thank you so much, indeed. Kind regards!
I have some 10 Fuji lenses, but the 18-55 is the go-to workhorse. I would love to see an upgraded version (WR and a fixed aperture, giving the ability to show the ‘f’ stop). That said, it largely lives on my X-Pro 3.
Hi! Thank you for your feedback. I agree with you.
I got a used x-t30 as a small walk around lens for cities etc, (it made me switch to Fuji and trade my dslr for an x-t4!) which came with the xc-15-60. It’s a “cheap” lens but does a great job, the images are incredible from a lower priced lens. I do however want to get the 18-55 instead as I would prefer an aperture ring on the lens. I love the whole fuji system
Hi Tracey! The same thing happened to me. After I got my first Fuji I became mostly a Fuji shooter (I also use Nikon to a lesser degree). The X-T4 is an awesome camera and a great choice. The 16-50 is an affordable lens but very capable and fine. The 18-55 takes it up another step. Enjoy your photography!
@@tom_photo thank you
I totally agree, it's my all-terrain lens for my X-T3 and X-E1! One more sub, keep up the good work talking about Fujifilm! Watch some of my works with Fuji ecosystem. Cheers from Portugal
Hi. Thank you for your feedback. I checked out your channel and I love it! Also subscribed to your channel. Thanks.
Ahh, I was wondering why nature looks so familiar. And then I checked your profile to see where you are from. Greetings from Latvia! I'm considering getting X-T30 II with the 18-55 kit lens.
Hi Arthur! Thanks for watching and greetings to beautiful Latvia! Your plan to get the X-T30 II and the XF 18-55 mm lens is a great one. This pair is a winner. Kind regards!
@@tom_photo Ended up getting X-T4 with 18-55 lens. Got a pretty nice deal, bought just yesterday.
@@arca5200 Hi Arthur! That sounds wonderful. Great camera with a great lens. I'm sure you're going to love it. Best of luck with your photography!
Tom...this was a nicely thought out video on the Fujinon XF 18-55 which I have owned twice. My latest copy is surgically sharp that I don't refer to it as a "kit" lens. I have the 16-55 f2.8 great lens but an absolute anvil for everyday carry. It also is prone to purple fringing at times and barrel distortion on the long end of the zoom range.
Hi Edilson! Thank you so much! Did I understand you correctly that your second copy of the lens was sharper than the first one? I'm curious about this because generally Fuji lenses show very little variation between different copies. How did you determine the lens sharpness? Kind regards!
Tom...no I did not mean to suggest that the second copy was sharper than the first. Both copies render images the same to my eyes. I have heard of photographer making that claim but unless testing occurs under an objective and rigorous process, these claims are simply anecdotes and highly subjective.
@@117775EM Hi Edilson! Sure. Thank you for the clarification. Best of luck to you!
Hi, Tom...very good video about this lens....wonderful photos ! .I ll buy a new FujiFilm X-T30II next week and I still haven't decided whether to take XF 18-55 or XC 15-45 lenc. i love photography-but I have no intention of becoming a professionall :-) Cheers from Zagreb!
Hi Darko. Greetings to Zagreb! Fuji X-T30 II is a wonderful choice. It's my favorite camera. As far as which lens to get, I'd say that the XF 18-55 is really great. On the other hand the XC 15-45 (ruclips.net/video/lkGXyrg5DiU/видео.html) is much smaller and much more convenient to carry around. I find that the XC 15-45 is better for gimbal work. Which ever lens you decide to get you cannot go wrong because both lenses are very capable. Good luck!
posiadam ten obiektyw i zgadzam się , że jest to wyjątkowo dobre szkło , pozdrawiam.
Cześć Krzysztofie! Dziękujemy bardzo za Twoją opinię. Pozdrowienia dla pięknej Polski!
Good review. When might you be able to get your hands on the 16-80mm lens for comparison purposes? Cheers ....
Hi J65 Tamashi! Thank you. This is an excellent question. I don't currently own the 16-80 mm lens but I'd like to review it. It will happen one day. Kind regards!
Great review thank you I'm getting this lens 👍🏾
Hi Walter! Thank you very much, indeed. Best of luck to you with this great lens!
Just found your channel. Really great content and presentation. Valuable and to the point! Picking op the 15-45 tomorrow to complement my 14, 18-55, 50-140 and an adapted 50 (Nikon 1.8). When do you tend to use the 15-45 and when the 18-55? I was thinking of the 15-45 for very light travels, when I do not want to bring the 18-55 and 14 (with a second body to be quick).
Hi Nick! Great to hear from you. Indeed, I often prefer the 15-45 when I travel (ruclips.net/video/lkGXyrg5DiU/видео.html). It is perfect for that. It's got an unusually good center sharpness. Also, I like to use the 15-45 for filming from gimbal. This small lens is easier to balance. And the third situation is when the 15 mm very wide angle is needed: landscapes, real estate photography, artistic closeups. It's a very versatile lens. Kind regards!
I prefer this over the 16-55. OIS for me, took care of that extra stop of light (even if I'm photographing moving things, they aren't moving that fast). NOW I will say it comes best as part of a trio. The 14mm and the 55-200.
Hi Andy! Thank you very much for your feedback. I can only agree with what you are saying. Especially the 18-55 and 55-200 together is a nice set because where one ends the other one starts. Fuji is making a large number of great lenses but I find it most noteworthy that it can make the zoom lenses so perfect. Kind regards!
I'm looking forward to working with this lens. I've got a used one on the way. I'm curious if you have made a video on the lens stabilization. But I guess I'll test it out in a few days myself.
Hi Garret! Congratulations on getting this fine lens. I think you'll like it a lot. I have not specifically tested the image stabilization of this lens (how many stops it is) but this is a good idea and I'll add it to my list of future videos. Kind regards!
@@tom_photo Thanks! I just received it today. I’m shocked how good it is. The autofocus is great and it’s the focal lengths I can do a lot with.
@@GarretGrayCamera Hi Garret! Yes, this is all true :). Cheers!
I own this lens but use the 16-55 2.8 more although it is heavier. When traveling I may use the 18-55 more.
Hi Ed C! Indeed, the weight of the lens matters much. I use my XF 18-55 quite a bit but I love my XC 15-45 for traveling. Kind regards!
Thank you Tom, very good video about this lens .Diffraction point is about F 7.3 (26 mp camera),so shooting at F10 could be a problem.But the Fuji lensoptimzer takes care of this . Can you switch the optimzer off,is there a diffrence?It is a 14element lens, so you are loosing a little micro contrast ..i think!Nice video with nice shot's.Take care Tom.
Hi Jan. I'm glad you liked the video. I have not experimented with Lens Modulation Optimizer here but you are bringing out a good point. I have frequently used this lens at F=10 and so far I've been very happy with its performance. It's indeed true that some of the quality may come from the Fuji software. Thanks again.
Bought my first camera ever the fuji xt30ii with the xf 18 55mm cant wait for it to arrive. This made me very exited
Hi Pedro! You have every reason to be excited because you bought a wonderful camera and a wonderful lens. Best of luck to you with your photography!
Hi Tom, thank you for taking us through this. I want to know if you've focussed on a subject and then zoom in/zoom out, does the focus stay locked in throughout the zooming motion or does it lose focus (blur) and then reacquires it after the zoom action has stopped?
Hi Anindya! Thank you for asking. Could you specify some additional details. Are you asking about manual focusing, like so: a) switch to manual focusing b) choose a focal length A and focus on the subject (and take a photo), c) choose a new focal length B, but don't touch the focusing ring or change the camera position (and take a photo). You are asking if the same object is in focus in both photos? Or are you asking about the lens behavior when using some automatic focusing mode? Kind regards!
@TomPhoto Thanks for the question Tom, I'm actually talking about video. Suppose, I'm at 23mm and locking focus on a stationary subject and then zooming in (say to 50mm) on the subject, does the lens keep the focus or does it lose focus while going from 23mm to 50mm?
In video, this is very important as if the camera loses focus on the subject when zooming in and out, it's not a good experience.
In a nutshell, is it parfocal or not parfocal?
@@andrerusselch Hi Anindya! The lens maintains its focus when you zoom in/out without refocusing. Kind regards!
Tengo esa lente con mi Fujifilm xt3 y estoy muy contento, sobretodo en video
¡Hola! Muchas gracias. Esta es una muy buena lente, de hecho. ¡Atentamente!
Hi, first of all, the video is really really helpful, i am going to buy my first camera and the sigma 18-50 with x20 is costlier than xs20 with xf18-55. So thanks😊.
Also can you please please tell me, where this 03:03 picture has been taken? Or is their any special name to it? It seems beautiful i would love to see it someday.
Hi Shashank! Thank yo very much, indeed. I think you are making the right decision when considering Fuji. They are my favorite cameras. What's really unique about Fuji is that they have given their kit zoom lens (the XF 18-55) so much attention that it's a pro quality lens. Most other manufacturers don't do that. The picture at 03:03 was taken in Tartu, Estonia. It's the 2024 Culture Capital of Europe, so now is a very good time to visit :). Kind regards!
Hello! Do the images have editing? Or were they taken with fujifilm recipes? I currently have a sony a6600 but I can't contain the desire to buy a fujifilm xt30 ii. Do you think it is a good decision to sell my current camera? I love fuji colors. Thank you
Hi Julian! Thank you for asking. The sample photos in the video were taken with Fujifilm recipes, indeed. I fully understand your desire to get a Fuji X-T30 II. The X-T30 has been one of the most amazing cameras I've used. The colors are amazing and the entire photography experience is just so pleasant. You may want to check out my Fuji X-T30 sample photos ( ruclips.net/video/GDxsZgbP4iw/видео.html ). These photos were mostly shot as JPEG's, color was not altered and often the film simulation was Velvia. I have also produced a video on my Fuji X-T30 ( ruclips.net/video/OuV0ydLM20w/видео.html ). Kind regards!
@@tom_photo what recipes did you use? I am looking for some Velvia recipes that's why I'm asking thanks!
@@mindscapetvarchives Hi Sir Bob! Thanks for watching. For the sample photos I used primarily Velvia film simulation and also Standard. Kind regards!
Do not sell your gear for this "colour science" thing, it is mostly nonsense and on Fuji with their film simulations it is practically a gimmick. None of those look like a real film. I like Fuji, and I own a complete kit, but I would suggest changing the system because of some real reasons.
@@BojanBojovic Hi Bojan! Thanks for watching. I think a lot of people like Fuji for how their cameras feel and handle. I personally like the logic how they approach photography. Kind regards!
Don't forget the 16-50mm 3.5 had a version II. If you never used it, you're in for a surprise. And the price....
Hi. I've never used the 16-50 mm version II. I should learn more about it.
I think on the nikor 24-120 F4 or the newer nikon Z 24-200mm or the Nikon S 24-70 f4 as great kit lenses! Also the 27 mm f2. 8 that comes with the XE4 i think is a dream of kit.
Hi NGore-de! I think these are all very nice lenses, indeed. I don't have first hand experience with all of them, though. Kind regards!
Hi! Are the pictures you showed pre-edited? Or if it is edited, what program did you use?
Hi Mark! Thank you for asking. The pictures were very minimally edited. Mostly all of the photos were shot as JPEGs and they were cropped and very slightly sharpened with GIMP. Kind regards!
I might do exactly the same thing and buy another 18-55 kit.
Hi! That sounds like a good idea. Best of luck to you!
Hi Tom, good afternoon, first, thanks a lot for this video, secondly i would like your opinion on two lens that iam willing to by , XF 18-55 (from this video) or Sigma 30mm 1.4, my main style is street photos, the wide aperture from sigma its good, but the versatility of 18-55 got my attention, i would meant the world to me have your opinion on which one do you find suits more, once again thanks a lot and wish you all the best
Hi Rafsilva! Thank you for your kind words and thank you for your question. These are both great lenses and it depends on the particular situation which one of them is better. I do not have first hand experience with the Sigma 30 mm lens but I know a bit about this lens. I think it's wonderfully sharp but some people say it shows a bit of chromatic aberration. At the same time 30mm is generally very suitable for street photography. I'm a bit of a fan of the Fujinon 18-55 mm. For me this has been the first lens to get for Fujifilm system. The verstility and quality of this lens is superb. And it has an aperture ring, which is very nice. I find that for street photography I often like to go over 30mm. This improves the lines and gives street a different feel. For me only a 30mm lens would be a bit limiting. So I personally would buy an 18-55 mm lens before prime lenses but different people have different opinions. I hope I could help you a bit. Best wishes!
@@tom_photo , thanks a lot, it was the final push for my decision, i wish that Fuji could reward you for your amazing video and team player position, all happiness and success in this life for you and your family, from a new subscriber to your channel
@@rafsilva20 Thanks so much!!
I currently own 2 of these lenses.
Both great at 18mm to about 40mm.
Sadly they both lose sharpness after 40mm and at 55mm are only ok.
I also own the 16-55 and its massively sharper at all focal lengths but its much more expensive and much heavier.
Hi Errol! Thanks for your feedback. Yes, I would imagine that the XF 16-55 mm is probably sharper. My experience with the XF 18-55 has been positive. Compared to the kit lenses of other manufacturers it it significantly better. Kind regards!
@@tom_photo it's definitely a great kit lens for sure and would be fine for most people.
Build quality is superb.
@@flynnygo Absolutely. The build quality is really nice. Cheers!
doubting between the 18-55, 16-55 and the tamron 17-70, lens stabilization is always better than ibis for some handhold work. Do I need a little more reach and a stop of light. Touch question, dont like the build from what seems otherwise a perfect lens. Dit not switch to fuji for mr plastic fantastic...
How do you feel about the tamron 17-70 and what would be your first pick out of those 3?
Hi Steven! Thank you for asking this relevant question. I think all of these lenses are good options. You cannot go very wrong with any of them. I tend to believe in Fuji lenses when choosing a lens for Fuji. This is not to say that Tamron cannot do a good job. Different people have different needs and expectations, but I personally would choose the XF 18-55. This is so precisely made for Fuji cameras, it just fits so incredibly well and it is very versatile. It gets everything done so well. The XF 16-55 is a true top of the line lens. For me it it's a bit too heavy. It's a really perfect lens for video. If you are a videographer, this is a really good choice. I hope I could help you a little bit. Kind regards!
@@tom_photothanks!.
@@slglasius Steven, you're most welcome!
@@slglasius The Tamron is a great lens. More reach, F2.8 all along, great stabilization, sharp at the edges. But it is longer, chunkier, makes a larger kit. I also shoot Sony, I sold the 16-55 2.8, that has no stabilization, and happy with the Tamron. I just bought a Fuji XT30ii to try out and the 18-55mm. it is nice. I think the Tamron may be a superior lens, but I have not compared them directly. The plastic of the Tamron is very good. Of course the Fuji 18-55 is better looking, more balanced on a small camera and so on. the optical stabilization may be better in the Tamron, in my experience.
yes ur rigth mee too as you so wonder thei is amazing lenc eventhough this is a kit lens but wilder use
Hi! Thanks a lot for watching. I absolutely agree - this is an amazing lens. Cheers!
Very nice and informative video, you got an abo! :)
One short question: I'm looking for a x t20 or t 30 right now and have two second hand offers for around the same price: A X t30 with the XC 15-45 and an X t20 with the XF 18-55. Which combination would you recommend (I would mostly use it for traveling)?
It would be the only lens I would use for the time being except a samyang 12mm f2 (want to try out a little bit of astro). Thank you very much!
Hi Jens! Thanks you for this question. As far as size goes these cameras are identical. Also their photo quality is identical. As far as camera bodies go it boils down to two differences: touch screen and video. If you want to make high quality videos then the X-T30 is preferable. The touch screen makes auto-focusing much more convenient, especially during filming, giving X-T30 an advantage. The XF 18-55 is my go-to lens and super versatile. However I've never taken it on my hikes or travels because the XC 15-45 always wins for me here due to its size. The two pairs offered to you (X-T30 + XC 15-45 and X-T20 + XF 18-55) are worth about the same in terms of price. If you think yourself making a lot of high quality video, it may be a better idea to get the X-T30 combination and buy the XF-18-55 later if you end up needing it. If you value better built lenses and only make casual vacation videos then the X-T20 combination is attractive. My personal (and a very slight) preference is to go with the X-T30 pair because the XC 15-45 is a very sharp and small lens and you can always buy more lenses later. That said, a large factor is the condition. If one of the cameras or lenses is in much better condition or one of the cameras has taken much less pictures then this would almost certainly make me prefer the "fresher" option. I hope I could help you. I've also made a special video on XC 14-55 mm lens, X-T20 and X-T30. I'm copying the links here for you. Fujinon XC 15-45: ruclips.net/video/lkGXyrg5DiU/видео.html , Fuji X-T20: ruclips.net/video/cdqteCyNwdc/видео.html , Fuji X-T30: ruclips.net/video/OuV0ydLM20w/видео.html
@@tom_photo Thank you very much for the extensive answer! I already watched all the recommended Video and I now think that the X T30 + Xc15-45 combo will suit me better since I do a lot of backpacking. Thank you so much! :)
I bought the x-t30 ii with 18-55 keeping in mind that in future I will upgrade camera body to x-t# or x-pro# but lens will stay the same.
@@a6893_ Hi! Good thinking! However if you already have the X-T30 ii which is just about the nicest of cameras, there's no need to upgrade in any direction :). Cheers!
Thanks for a great video. Would the sweet spot at f10 be valid also for Video? I remember doing tests couple of years ago, I did video tests at f2.8, f8 and f16 and observed that it was the sharpest at f8. I may redo the tests at f8 x f10 just to be sure...
Hi Extended Play! Thanks for your question. Yes the sweet spot will also apply to video. Of the Fstops that you mention the F8 is, indeed, the sharpest. Often the sweet spot and sharpness don't matter in video. It tends to be the other way around almost because you'll often wanna go with the smallest Fstop to get the best bokeh and use an ND filter to be able to use large aperture. F8 is often not optimal for video because it will give you a sterile landscape documentary look. This will make it more difficult to catch the interest of the audience. The most common F-stop for cinematographic filming is 2.8. I really like to use 1.4 with my Fujinon 35 mm prime lens. You may want to check out my video on making short films:ruclips.net/video/igFFCGzGaAw/видео.html . Thanks again and best of luck to you!
@@tom_photo Thank you so much! I recently came back to making videos... and I only shoot landscapes with wide lenses, not interviews... so shooting always at the smallest fstop still applies for sharpest video? I do have a variable nd filter to compensate exposure so I may do some experiments at various fstops with and without the nd filter but it would be great to know what you think!
@@portcorner_noise That sounds good. I agree that for documentary style landscape videos it makes sense to be at the the sweet spot of the lens most of the time. It may still require an ND filter to make sure that the shutter speed remains correct. Kind regards!
@@tom_photo AWESOME, Thats what I thought, I will experiment as I always do with new lenses to me! All the best
Which camera did you use to determine the quality of this lense? Would this lense work well together with an X-T4 as its AF is reportedly not great?
Hi! Thank you for asking. I used Fujifilm X-T30. This lens is guaranteed to work very well with the X-T4 because it is often the kit lens for the X-T4. Fuji's autofocus is a bit slower in general than that of Sony, for example. Still it is fully adequate and Fuji is superior to many other manufacturers in several ways. Kind regards!
@@tom_photo Thank you for your fast response Tom. I will take your advice into very serious consideration!
@@TODM4XNL Hi! Thank you very much. I'm glad I could help you.
I think I'll wait when the Sigma 18-50 is released for Fuji
Hi philippe! That should be interesting, indeed.
Maybe it’s just me but I found this lens very underwhelming. It was much softer than all primes in that range. And was significantly heavier, bigger and had much larger minimum focus distance than xc 1545. Basically didn’t have any redeeming qualities for me.
Edit: typo
Hi. Thank you for your message. Indeed, the primes are sharper as you pointed out. The XF 18-55 mm seems to me to be sharper than any other zoom lens I've tested, though. I also like the feel of the lens. You are right when you say that it's kind of big. I also find that the XC 15-45 is better for traveling because it's much smaller. That said the 18-55 mm is still one of my favorites.
Could it be that your results are due to the lmo (lens modulation optimizer)that kicks in from f8 with strong sharpening to fight diffraction? Optically its best at 5.6 at all focal lenghts imo.
Hi! Thanks very much for your feedback. Yes, the lmo can have some effect. I have my camera set to lmo = on, so with native Fuji's lenses that I attach to my camera this function can correct certain aberrations. I think it is safe to assume that most users have this function automatically turned on. Therefore the combination of the optics and lmo can be viewed as a single set of properties for this lens when it comes to photography. But your point is valid and I should also repeat this experiment with lmo = off. I'll put this on my to-do list. Kind regards!
Hello Tom, Great video and nice images. I need to decide between 15-45 and 18-55. I look for better close focus abilities at wider end 15 and 18 respectively, may be a kind of macro at wide end on my T10. Kindly let me know your views. Also the images you shared please see if you can share Exif data. Thank You !
Rahul Deshpande
Hi Rahul! Thank you for your question. Both lenses are really nice. If you want wide angle and very small size then the 15-45 is a good choice.If you need more telephoto end and a sturdy build (and you don't care about the size) then the 18-55 is better. There is also a rather large price difference (the 18-55 is much more expensive). Both lenses are very sharp and accurate. The 15-45 has an incredible center sharpness but the 18-55 is more accurate across the frame. You cannot go wrong with either one of them. This is my review of Fujinon XC 15-45 mm lens: ruclips.net/video/lkGXyrg5DiU/видео.html . I hope I could help you a bit.
Hello Tom ! Thank you. Which lens is better in terms of close focus at wider end ?
@@chinmayeed Hi! Minimal focus distance of the XC 15-45 is smaller than that of the XF 18-55 (I think 13 cm vs 30 cm). So the 15-45 is better for macro work. However at such a wide angle it's not a very good macro lens. There are workarounds to turn your normal lens into a macro lens. I'll soon make a video on that. Cheers!
I got the 15-45 used online for my T30, works great I love the wide 15 better than boring 18...this lens also has image stabilization. the 45 is equiv to 67.5 full frame. down side is 18-55 is a brighter lens.
hello tom ,
i am buying this lens with fuji xe3 , how does one check if lens received is bad copy ? can we check it at shop itself ?
Hi! That's another good question. You cannot spot a bad copy unless you run careful tests from a tripod at various settings. Checking this at the store is difficult. Luckily Fuji is one of the best lens makers and for most intents and purposes you don't need to worry about this. If you are buying from a reputable source and the lens turn out truly bad you can simply return it. Cheers!
Thanks a lot👍
@@rahulsankalpana You are very welcome!
@@tom_photo i got xe3 & 18-55 combo & it is very impressive. Thanks for your advice 👍
@@rahulsankalpana Hi Rahul! Congratulations, this is a very impressive combo, indeed. Kind regards!
if i intend to use it for architectural photography should i prefer sigma -16 mm prime over this lens ?
Hi! Thanks for asking. Architectural photography is not a simple topic. A lot of times you need wide angle but to isolate parts of buildings for more interesting photos you may prefer narrower field of view. So, when it comes to focal length your proposed 16 mm is a great option but so is an 85 mm lens for example. I often prefer longer focal length because then you have less problems with straight lines. About the XF 18-55 - this is a very fine lens. For most people it will do most of the things. When people prefer prime lenses it's because they need them for a specific reason, such a s a large aperture for good bokeh. In architectural photography bokeh is often not a main concern. So, you can use your the 18-55 mm very well for architectural photography in most situations. Kind regards!
Got it & thanks for detailed reply. Thing is i have olympus camera & want to get in fuji for their stimulations, colours & tones & came across good deal for xe3 with 18-55. Your video gave good info at right time. Thanks again.
@@rahulsankalpana Hi! Thank you. Yes, Fuji is quite wonderful. I recommend giving it a try. My channel is mostly abut Fuji. Cheers!
Just another query from fuji xe3 with 18-55 & fuji xt200with xc15-45 which camera should i choose.both have same pricing
@@rahulsankalpana Hi! I think if both cameras are in the same condition and have the same shutter count then most people would probably go with X-T200. It's newer technology and a bit more capable. Cheers!
Hi, can you tell me about the method of measuring the best aperture for a sharper shot. I want to test my lens.
Hi! I have made a video where I talk about how to measure lens sweet spot (you can skip the first 1 min in the video): ruclips.net/video/OQyJQFDmWh0/видео.html
It’s a great little lens and has served me well, especially when I didn’t have a stabilised body. But that f4 aperture on the long end is a bummer. The 16-55 is too big and heavy. If I would get a new Fuji camera now, I’d likely go with the Sigma 18-50 that has constant f2.8. Love the ergonomics and the build quality of the kit lens, if it also had a constant aperture like the sigma, it’d be perfect.
Hi Salarycat! I agree that a constant aperture would be very nice. That would make the lens larger, though. Thanks you so much for your feedback!
@@tom_photo Sure. Sigma somehow made it possible while making it actually lighter, so I'm sure Fuji could shrink it down too if they put their minds to it.
@@salarycat Hi! Yes, I think it can be possible. Cheers!
no image stabilization on the sigma though. corners are soft also sometimes
@@Ed-lz4jv Hi Ed! Sure, the Fuji lens definitely has its advantages. Kind regards!
Im debating between getting or not getting this zoom lens as a kit with a camera purchase (x-s10), and, in that case, I would do that only to go straight into a prime 35mm f1.4. The problem is that, in doing so, i lose the opotunity to get the discounted price, and i think i'll regret it. I hear people saying good things about this lens. For me, i think the biggest factor in a lens is the accurate colors in shadows, so, my reasoning for the prime better glass was to achieve that. But, i dont know how much better the colors would be between a more premium lens and the 18-55mm, because thats a dificult thing to know from side by side pictures taken from other people. Have you ever had any situations where this lens rendered colors/contrasts in a wierd way or too harshly? Thanks for the video
Hi Renato! Great question, thank you for asking. I own both of the lenses you're asking about and I've used them side by side. I'd say that the main difference is artfulness. The 18-55 renders everything very accurately. It's so precise and perfect that the result is very predictable. The shadows and highlights both look wonderful. Some may call it boring but I'd like to call is dependable. The 35 mm prime on the other hand introduces small "quirks" that you cannot put your finger on and that look lovely, fresh and novel. I think the two lenses complement each other very nicely. The 18-55 doesn't make mistakes as far as I'm concerned. The 35 mm prime does, but you'll love it. Other people may have different takes on this. For most people I'd recommend to get the 18-55 first and use it most situations. For more advanced photographers the 35 mm is a good addition. The 18-55 is special in its quality. It's above the other zoom lenses I've seen. If you get a good discount on your X-S10 only with the 18-55 and you end up not liking the lens, you can sell it. I hope I could help you. Happy photography!
@@tom_photo Thanks for your input Tom. I've read a forum last night, right after i commented on your video, and in there people were getting to the conclusion that the 18-55mm suffers from quality controls issues and there are some that are very good and some that are less good (don't know if its related of being built in japan or another country), but, oh man, this things make it even harder to choose. You are right, if i could get my hands on a good standard well made 18-55, i think I'll be very happy with the package overall. And it would be very complemented with the 35 f1.4 prime. The reason things are a bit dodgy for me is that i live in Brazil and i usually buy these products when i'm a in a short trip to the US, so no time to return if i got a bad lens. I'm debating now if there is another option to complement the 35 f1.4. Perhaps the 23 f2 (450 U$), but the focal length is not that different, so maybe not the best idea. The next one would be the 18 f2, which people seems to hate or love, depending to who you ask, but it is 600 U$, ouch. Then there is the 16mm f2.8 (400 U$) which, idk, seems like a worst idea then the zoom for me... All this thought experiment comes from the premise that I'm gonna get the 35mm f1.4. Another completely different idea would be to get a longer one in its place, like the 50mm f2, or 56mm f/1. In this case, the 23mm f2 would be a great complement. But then, that longer focal length of 50mm or 56mm is, for me, more limiting as far as I know, then the 35mm f1.4... so I'm tending to keep the 35mm f1.4 as a backbone premise and work my way from there to get to a nice complement. I think after my brain is about to explode, I'll end up getting the 18-55mm hahahahaha. Thanks again!
@@renatobfa Hi! Thanks for sharing. I have another idea for you. How about getting the XC 15-45 mm. I made a video on this lens (ruclips.net/video/lkGXyrg5DiU/видео.html). It's a very sharp and small lens. It's not the most convenient to use but it really delivers. It's my favorite travel lens.
@@tom_photo hummmm. I think that lens is not currently being sold new anymore, is it? But is a choice as well, its just hard for me to buy used since i dont live in the us
@@renatobfa Hi! Yes, I think you can only get it used. A good place to try would be Ebay or Amazon.
Its this lens good for street photography?
Hi! Thanks for asking. Indeed, I frequently use this lens for street photography and it works very well. I think it's a solid choice for streets. Kind regards!
@@tom_photo thank you very much. Im going to buy a XT2 with this lens.
@@Zen.Experience Hi! The X-T2 is an excellent choice. Best of luck to you!
How about 50- 200 xf Fuji zoom lens.
Hi! Thank you for asking. Did you mean XF 55-200? If yes, I've covered it in another video (ruclips.net/video/WzSK9ke9uGw/видео.html) and I'm soon releasing a new and updated video. In short, this is a truly wonderful lens. I highly recommend it. If you have specific questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Kind regards!
WELL! I have definitely got the WORST copy of the Fuji 18-55. Unusable at 18mm from 2.8 to 3.5 and still bad at f/4 then about after a year I got "Turn camera off and on again" I updated the firmware on the camera (X-S 10) and the lens but that made no difference. Eventually the lens started making some weird noise and then died. My old Canon EFs 10-18 mm was WAY sharper using the Fringer adapter, especially in the corners. I now have the Sigma 18-50 on order. For the costs and performance of the third party lenses I will no longer be using Fuji's expensive and slow focusing lenses and if Canon ever open the doors to third party manufactures that's when I jump ship!
Hi! Thank you for sharing. I think these huge problems with the XF 18-55 are quite unusual. It's definitely possible to get a bad or faulty lens but this is rare. I do agree about the somewhat slow auto focus compared to some of the competition. I've been very happy with this lens so far. I currently own 2 copies of it but I've had more in the past and every one of them has been very very good for me. Kind regards!
I have four copies of the XF 18-55. They are only good at close focusing distances, for people and the like. Towards infinity, they are all faulty - with weird field curvatures in different areas of the frame. This lens cannot be recommended for landscapes.
Hi! Thank you for making these points. This lens has been working quite well for me for landscapes, too. I think there can be variability between different units. I'm addressing this question quite soon in another video. Kind regards!
@@tom_photo Thank you! Just discovered your sharpness diagrams in your other video. These seem to confirm that there‘s something weird going on because you need to stop down to f10 to get somehow reasonable results from the 18-55. At f10, you basically enter the realm of hyperfocal distance which effectively masks out any effects of field curvature, but is close to the diffraction limit already. That said, the 18-55 works magnificently for me at closer distances. It‘s just with landscapes that each of my copies exhibits different drops of sharpness within the image - or areas which are front-focused, also depending on focal length. But I tested only up to f8. Too bad, I really loved the idea of having a small but fun and powerful second system with my X-T3 and the 18-55. Btw. with the XF 50mm f2 my X-T3 delivers tack-sharp images even at wide apertures. So it‘s not the camera. Interestingly, the 18-55 seems to be significantly better on the X-T20, more than the difference of less than 3 MP would suggest.
I must admit that I‘ve tested my 4th sample of the 18-55, which I received just recently, only with IS on so far - will do another comparison with IS off shortly.
@@GiovanniBausC Hi GiovanniBausC! Thank you for your interesting analysis. I will have to test the XF 18-55 with X-T20 vs the other X-mount cameras that I have. This is a good idea. I believe that the XF 50 is very sharp. This is a wonderful lens. Cheers!
@@GiovanniBausC I was also dissapointed up until I stepped it up to 10. When in auto priority mode unfortunately no matter where I put the focus point I only got the the value within 4-6 range.
@@StefanMrsevic Meanwhile I figured out that the results are much better when I switch the IS mode to "shooting only" or when on a tripod switch off the IS altogether. Not perfect yet but better than before. I've also added a Tamron 17-70 to my Fujifilm setup. In the image center, the 18-55 is very similar in IQ. Closer to the borders, the Tamron is more consistent but when the IS mode is set as described above the 18-55 is at least no longer as bad as it appeared at first. I only compared one of my 18-55 lenses to the Tamron, the one which was best in previous comparisons between samples.
🥇
Thank you!
18-55mm the focus is not accurate in f2.8 why
Hi! Thank you for asking. This is generally true that at the widest aperture the lens is typically not as accurate when focusing. This is caused by shallower depth of field, certain lens aberrations, autofocus system uncertainty, and focus shift. However, I have not noticed that this is a big problem with the XF 18.55. Kind regards!
I owned this lens but whas not impressed at all. 16-55 or 16-80 are on another level.
Hi Audiman. Thank you for your feedback. This is interesting. Maybe you had a bad copy of the lens? But I agree that the 16-55 and 16-80 are really great lenses. I'm going to post a video on Fuji XC 16-50 mm later this week.
@@tom_photo Sharpness at 18mm and f2.8 was the biggest problem. Maybe a bad copy but I have seen many reviews which claim the same. Stopped at f5.6 it was ok but nothing more than that. Center sharpness was better but the edges were still blurry and weird. Or maybe I am to demanding.
@@Audimann Thanks. Yes it helps to stop down the lens. I've been reasonably happy with F2.8. But I agree that prime lenses would function better. Still I think the XC 18-55 mm is the best kit zoom lens I've owned.
I think the 18-55mm is affected negatively if your camera has it default setting of Continuous OIS. People report better results (probably because of less vibration) when they change that to Shooting Only for the OIS. Mine seems a bit better, but it's subjective. However yes, I think I'm about to upgrade to 16-55 even though I'm just a hobbyist, as there's still something wrong with the 18-55 pictures that I can't quite place, and also I find the aperture ring a pain on a variable aperture lens.
@@mikefoster6018 Hi Mike! Thanks for sharing. Using the Shooting Only for the OIS is a good idea to try.
Wow a f10 lens.... that’s why my copy was unusable at 55mm f6.4....
This is pretty unusual and the average user won’t know it how to get the best out of this lens. This make is a fail for me.
For example the mentioned XF 35mm f1.4 lens is super sharp until f8. f8 makes it noticeably blurry compared to f6.4.
So diffraction already kicks in with f8.
So a f10 lens can not be ideally sharp in any way. 🤔
Hi hellomyphone! Yes, this lens has somewhat unique behavior. I should also add that sharpness can be modulated by camera's software. For example diffraction problems can be reduced a bit by software. I have seen lenses with apparent sweet spots at F16. This Saturday I will post a video on how to find lens sweet spot. Kind regards!
how does this compare to a prime lens
Hi! Thank you for asking. I'm assuming you are asking about image sharpness. Sure a typical prime is sharper. However I always invite people to ask why this tiny bit matters. If their clients ask for prime lens photos then obviously a prime lens is needed. For amateur photographers I don't very much recommend primes. They loose more than they gain by using only primes. Every zoom lens has a "sweet focal length" at which it is very close to its corresponding prime. The differences in sharpness are small but the differences in versatility are huge. I talk about 10 reasons to prefer zoom lenses in here: ruclips.net/video/zasLeb2CpuU/видео.html . Best of luck to you!
@@tom_photo im starting out doing real-estate videos, and i was wanting a lens for the detail shots. in my case is the zoom lens better?
@@edi18912 Hi! I agree that a zoom lens will work better for you. Regards!
Close up distances?
Hi sclogse1! I'm guessing I said that somewhere in the video and now you're asking about it; do I understand you correctly? Cheers!
@@tom_photo Nah, he is just a troglodyte that is unable to use the language properly. You should be grateful for the question mark :)
@@kynio3433 Hi! Thanks :)
Nice images, but they don't come looking like this from the camera, uh?
Hi! Thank you. The images shown in the video were all taken with the Fujinon XF 18-55 mm. I had the lens mostly in front of Fujifilm X-T30 or X-T20.
@@tom_photo I meant if you post edited them in order to yield that color richness, Tom.
@@mannyquinn5841 Hi! Actually no. The photos were shot as JPEGs and no color was ever added. This is the power of Fuji's Velvia film simulation combined nordic winters during magic hours in the morning. It gets pretty spectacular here in the mornings.
@@tom_photo Then, dear Tom: kudos2U!!!
Keep on sharing!!
@@mannyquinn5841 Thanks!
I would love to sell this lens, i like lenses that are sharp at low F-stop! This one is not
Hi Anze! I find it quite sharp at small F-stops as well. Maybe you have a bad copy? Regards!
@@tom_photo hmm could be, i think i might try to sell it and go for 35 mm 1.4 or 2.0, and than Viltrox 13mm
@@kaiting1981 Hi! These are all nice lenses. The 18-55 and the 35 mm would be my top picks. Regards!
@@tom_photo great pick. I love to shot portret, 18-55 is not the best choice for bokhea and shallow dept of field
I never liked it. When compared with the Nikon cheap and plastic 18-55 f3.5-5.6 the Fujinon was less sharp, more vignetting, more distortion, and more CA. So, optically the Nikon lens is cheaper at 100 Euro/Dollar, an optically better.
But, it is plastic, it lets less light, and what is most important, it does not have so many angry fanboys to defend it with rage like the XF lens has.
It is a nice lens overall, just not 700 Euro/Dollar nice, and especially not as nice as angry Fuji fanboys want you to believe.
Hi! Thank you very much for your feedback. Could it be that you had bad copy of the lens? But you are right that the Nikon lenses are also very nice. Kind regards!
I've had 2 of these lenses, yes it enables taking photographs when attached to a Fuji X mount body but there is absolutely NOTHING special about it.
Hi John! Thank you for watching and for providing feedback. Kind regards!