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!

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 Richard! Thanks for sharing. I'm quite certain you'll like the lens. Best of luck!

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!

Hi John! I'm glad you found my video useful. Thanks so much for watching. Kind regards!

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!

Hi Carlos! Thank you very much and welcome to the Fuji community! Indeed, this is a lens I'd recommend with confidence. Kind regards!

Hi Ken! Thanks so much for watching. Best of luck to you!

Thank you so much for your kind comments!

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!

Hi Rodney! Absolutely, both of these lenses are amazing. It's generally difficult to say anything bad about any Fuji lens. Kind regards!

Hi! I feel very much the same as you about this lens. The portability matters to me very much, too. Kind regards!

Hi Sudhakar! Thank you so much. I'd be glad to review this lens once I obtain it. Kind regards!

Hi Vachykaran! You have a great lens and a great camera. Best of luck to you with your photography!

Hi samf! Thank you for your feedback. This lens is a rally solid performer. Kind regards!

Hi! I agree with you. This the best do-it-all lens. Kind regards!

Hi! Thank you for your feedback. I'd also miss this lens more than most of my other lenses. Kind regards!

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 ( kzfaq.info/get/bejne/itmpic6B2tWZnYE.html ) and Fuji XF 56 F/1.2 R ( kzfaq.info/get/bejne/h6h4mN2WkrvJoac.html ) . These lenses are absolutely amazing - just like the XF 18-55. Kind regards!

Hi TasKarp! I'm honored to have you as a viewer. Kind regards!

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!

Hi Srinivas! Thank you so much, indeed. Kind regards!

Hi! Thank you for your feedback. I agree with you.

Hi. Thank you for your feedback. I checked out your channel and I love it! Also subscribed to your channel. Thanks.

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

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!

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 Walter! Thank you very much, indeed. Best of luck to you with this great lens!

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 (kzfaq.info/get/bejne/otF3i9yjzJuomYk.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 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!

Cześć Krzysztofie! Dziękujemy bardzo za Twoją opinię. Pozdrowienia dla pięknej Polski!

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!

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!

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!

¡Hola! Muchas gracias. Esta es una muy buena lente, de hecho. ¡Atentamente!

Hi Nick! Great to hear from you. Indeed, I often prefer the 15-45 when I travel (kzfaq.info/get/bejne/otF3i9yjzJuomYk.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!

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! That sounds like a good idea. Best of luck to you!

Hi. I've never used the 16-50 mm version II. I should learn more about it.

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!

Hi philippe! That should be interesting, indeed.

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 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!

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!

Hi! Thanks a lot for watching. I absolutely agree - this is an amazing lens. Cheers!

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!

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. 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.

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 ( kzfaq.info/get/bejne/faqopr2Yx7aYmas.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 ( kzfaq.info/get/bejne/hduGY9yVsbOWYKs.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!

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!!

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: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/otF3i9yjzJuomYk.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.

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: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/otF3i9yjzJuomYk.html , Fuji X-T20: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mcqhp8h03rTblJc.html , Fuji X-T30: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/hduGY9yVsbOWYKs.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!

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!

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 (kzfaq.info/get/bejne/otF3i9yjzJuomYk.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.

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.

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!

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:kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n812eaZ4363Fcas.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

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.

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! Thank you for asking. Did you mean XF 55-200? If yes, I've covered it in another video (kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jeCDfpycyp_Zd6s.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!

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): kzfaq.info/get/bejne/hbepfbR3qdO7mGQ.html

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!

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! 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!

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!

Thank you!

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: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/sMejf8iTl6nUpYk.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!

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 :)

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!

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 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.

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

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!

Hi John! Thank you for watching and for providing feedback. Kind regards!