anerjee
Well-known
My standard film kit over the last several years has been the 28mm f/2 Ultron and the C-Sonnar 50mm f/1.5, so I am tickled by the idea of replicating a similar working set with my XE1.
Having said that -- I am very pleased with the 18-55mm kit lens. It is good enough for most of my use, and given the high ISO capabilities of the camera, I don't miss the f/2 or faster that I need for film.
So is there any other reason to move beyond the kit lens? Are the primes a lot better than the zoom? What about auto-focus speed?
thanks!
Having said that -- I am very pleased with the 18-55mm kit lens. It is good enough for most of my use, and given the high ISO capabilities of the camera, I don't miss the f/2 or faster that I need for film.
So is there any other reason to move beyond the kit lens? Are the primes a lot better than the zoom? What about auto-focus speed?
thanks!
stefan-s
Member
2/18 and 1.4/35
I like them
I like them
flysurfer
Member
14, 23 and 35 are much brighter and fully optically corrected. They are also more expensive options, they deliver maximum IQ. Lens brightness helps with object isolation and it enables better CDAF performance in low light. The 60 is a very sharp lens wirh nice bokeh and macro capabilities way beyond the kit zoom. That said, the kit zoom is quite capable, so moving to primes is just an option, it's far from mandatory.
back alley
IMAGES
primes offer a different experience from zooms...you have to move/plan/shoot differently.
with a prime, after a while, you can see what will be in a photograph before even looking through the finder...a zoom offers more possibilities/options and so unless you have a focal length in mind it's harder to envision the image.
not sure if that makes sense?
with a prime, after a while, you can see what will be in a photograph before even looking through the finder...a zoom offers more possibilities/options and so unless you have a focal length in mind it's harder to envision the image.
not sure if that makes sense?
cidereye
Film Freak
In reality the "kit lens" is not a "kit lens" in the way we normally view one as the quality, construction & performance are that of a lens way, way above the usual kit lens.
I've been very surprised with the performance of the 18-55mm and mostly would rather use that than primes unless I need the f/1.4 of the 35mm for effect.
Also, the AF speed of the 18-55mm is about the quickest of all the Fuji X lenses so you are not losing anything in that respect either.
I feel the 18mm on the zoom is better than the 18mm prime. The 35mm 1.4 is top notch. I also use the 27mm 2.8 and that works well too.
anerjee
Well-known
Can someone please explain to me what is the aperture on these mtf curves? I am assuming these are for wide open?
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/di..._lens_xf18_55mmf28_4_r_lm_ois/specifications/
These look very good to me, confirming my suspicion that this indeed is a very high performance lens.
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/di..._lens_xf18_55mmf28_4_r_lm_ois/specifications/
These look very good to me, confirming my suspicion that this indeed is a very high performance lens.
Jdi
Established
The 18 is quicker AF and pretty much always locks the first time, for me draws a nicer image, more film like, softer in the corners. The f2 is more than compensated for with the kit's ois, in low light. Keep it off at higher shutters. My most often used lens.
14 is a winner. Its my next lens.
35 is a winner. Probably the slowest at AF but draws a gorgeous image, sharp as a tack.
I use the 18-55 as a night lens and a tele. Since I tend to shoot at the wider end, its not used all that often.
14 is a winner. Its my next lens.
35 is a winner. Probably the slowest at AF but draws a gorgeous image, sharp as a tack.
I use the 18-55 as a night lens and a tele. Since I tend to shoot at the wider end, its not used all that often.