18-55 or 18-135 for the X-T10

[micene]

Hello everybody,

 

Currently I have an X-t10 with the 16-50 kit lens but, I'm looking for a better quality zoom, so I've to decide between the 18-55 (used) or a 18-135 (brand new).

 

In your opinion, which is the best choice ? (I have a propensity for the 18-135 but I'm not sure that it fits well on the small body of the camera).

[Dis]

Totally depends on your preferences for lenses sizes and focal lengths. Nobody can decide that for you. Both lenses are great.

[micene]

Ok, but do you think the 18-135 is too big as "always" lens for th x-t10 body ?

[Dis]

Ok, but do you think the 18-135 is too big as "always" lens for th x-t10 body ?

The size is great for X-T1. You don't need third party opinion for this. Just go to the local store and try it yourself. 

[Lumens]

As stated this is largely personal preference so a question that cannot be answered accurately.  I own the 18-55 and find it is a great lens - I couple it with the 55-200 for more reach and the system is fantastic. But with that said I constantly have second thoughts about the 18-135.  

 

I recently realized that would give me the exact focal range of a Bridge Camera I once owned and absolutely loved.  It was what got me into photography.  I have not been able to find a replacement for it until I realized the 18-135 is it. I will likely succumb to G.A.S (Gear Acquisition Syndrome)  and end up purchasing the 18 - 135 at some time in the future.

 

I believe both are quite close in image quality from what I have read so most of your answer lies in size, weight, what you shoot and what you prefer.  So realistically if there is a shop you can get to and compare what you like/dislike about each - that would be the best advice.

[jlmphotos]

I purchased the 18-55 way back in 2013 when I got the X-E1 camera.  Now, using the X-T1 the 18-55 is my "go-to" lens even though I own the Zeiss 12, Fui 16, 23, 35 and the 55-200.  I've looked at and touched the 18-135 but to me it's a tad too large.  I also find that MY COPY of the 18-55 to be OUTSTANDING in sharpness wide-open, to stopped down.  But that has been my experience;  there are many others who find the 18-55 de-centered, or soft.  If you are buying it used I suggest that if at all possible, that you try it on your X-T10 first.  Again:  If possible.

Feel free to check my Flickr page -- not because I'm looking for any traffic, I could care less, but because you'll see many 18-55 sample images there.

I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.  The link to my various sites are in my signature below.

[darknj]

The 18-135 almost as big as that XF 16-55 F2.8. Then again, I consider it as the swiss knife of the Fujinon XF series.

 

The pro for it in my book are:

 

- Super wide zoom range, you can point at pretty much anything and get something out of it from wide angle to almost quite far away.

- 5 stops OIS, super handy when light goes away or you need to nail that thing at 135mm handheld with slow speed. I frequently able to get 1/15 sec shots at 135mm without too many issues.

- WR, moot point for you but it is relatively important for me with my X-T1.

 

Cons:

 

- Yeah it's slow with F3.5-5.6.

- Big chunky piece of metal.

- Makes you super lazy because you can just zoom into things instead of finding a better angle for the picture. (personal point)

- Get super spoiled by the OIS and pester that you can no longer do a 1/15 sec shots handheld with the XF 35mm F1.4 (also personal point)

 

To compare both lenses, the 18-55 will be sharper, at 18 the lens is even sharper than the 18mm prime, and is of course faster but you would need to carry another lens with you for short tele and further away subjects.

 

Now, from personal experience, unless I know beforehand what I am going to shoot, I will always pack the 18-135 with me, the versatility it brings is uncanny. It is a good lens that will bring you good picture with good sharpness. Will it be excellent ? Nope, but then again it doesn't have to be and also it is not the purpose of that lens to be.

Also, it is the lens that stays always on my X-T1 for family sortie. I can hand the camera to my wife and she will be able to take picture too without fuss nor complain about "Where is the zoom" like on my primes.

 

So in the end, are you looking for an excellent short zoom or a good super versatile lens ?

 

Oh and if you do plan on getting the 18-135, you might want to consider some extra grip for the camera, I know it helped me a lot with my X-T1 which is both bigger and larger already than your X-T10.

[Dis]

To compare both lenses, the 18-55 will be sharper, at 18 the lens is even sharper than the 18mm prime, and is of course faster

18-135 is only 2/3 stop slower than 18-55 in 18-55mm focal range. It's not a number one really needs to consider with this kind of lenses.

[darknj]

18-135 is only 2/3 stop slower than 18-55 in 18-55mm focal range. It's not a number one really needs to consider with this kind of lenses.

 

Agreed but facts are still there. The F2 is faster than F3.5. For some the 2/3 stop is not relevant enough, for other, even 1/2 stop value means a lot of different things.

[Dis]

Agreed but facts are still there. The F2 is faster than F3.5. For some the 2/3 stop is not relevant enough, for other, even 1/2 stop value means a lot of different things.

You've meant F2.8.

I'm one of those who rarely notice real world difference in less than 1 stop. Factors like broader zoom range, weight, price, WR are much more significant.

[darknj]

You've meant F2.8.

I'm one of those who rarely notice real world difference in less than 1 stop. Factors like broader zoom range, weight, price, WR are much more significant.

 

Thank you for the correction, yes I meant the F2.8.

 

Also fully agreeing with you on that point. In full bright light or even half decent conditions, those differences hardly matter.

 

But I have learned from a colleague that cover concerts even musical events that even half a stop of light could mean getting a shot or not getting anything at all. Hence adding the precision for the OP because we have no idea what the subject will be.

[Dis]

But I have learned from a colleague that cover concerts even musical events that even half a stop of light could mean getting a shot or not getting anything at all. 

I do quite a lot of low light shooting. I used to shoot concerts too. 2/3 stop of digital amplification can't turn low noise level into unacceptable. You rather need no noise at all and shoot at base ISO or noise is acceptable and 2/3 stop added noise is not a game changer. 

[darknj]

I do quite a lot of low light shooting. I used to shoot concerts too. 2/3 stop of digital amplification can't turn low noise level into unacceptable. You rather need no noise at all and shoot at base ISO or noise is acceptable and 2/3 stop added noise is not a game changer. 

 

He specialize in Metal genra which needs around 1/200 for the drum guy, he shoots with a D800 with either the 14-24 F2.8 or the 24-70 F2.8 depending on how far he is.

 

I have to say it's not something I am very knowledgeable at since I take most of picture in decent to good natural light conditions.

[Dis]

He specialize in Metal genra which needs around 1/200 for the drum guy, he shoots with a D800 with either the 14-24 F2.8 or the 24-70 F2.8 depending on how far he is.

The gear doesn't really matter. We are talking about the difference which is always the same. Nevertheless 2/3 stop means a lot as soon as you are professional competing with other pros. Even a marginal advantage can make you a job winner. Thus I agree that in some situations even a 2/3 stop advantage means a lot. Nevertheless I am sure that the topic starter doesn't meet these circumstances. Thus I'd consider focal range and WR against price and size.

[Max_Elmar]

The OP would be much better served by thinking more about what kind of photography they want to do rather than what bit of gear "upgrade" they should buy next. 

[andrewv8]

I had the 18-55 when I had an X-E1.  It was a great lens.  Super sharp, fast, quiet and really built well.  I think the aperture range is more useful than the 18-135 but tbh you drop from 2.8 almost immediately when you start zooming in.  If it were me, I'd choose the 18-55.

[TedGamble]

If I could have but one lens, it would be the 18-135. Superb OIS, superb zoom range, and unless you microscopically pixel peep, you won't see the difference. Besides, it's weather resistant. The only downsides are (1) it's larger and heavier and (2) it's slightly slower (the superior OIS makes that a non-issue).

[gordonrussell76]

HI

 

My vote would be the 18-135mm its a great lens.

 

I have owned the 18-55mm I sold it and the 55-200 and bought the 18-135mm Caveat I did this because I have primes that cover most of the 18-55mm range and prefer primes. I replaced the two zooms with the 18-135mm so I could have a walkaround do it all lens for when I am shooting with my family on holiday and don't want to be constantly changing lenses.

 

However what I have found is that in certain situations the image stabilization has worked more in my favour than a low aperture. If you are after bokeh then yup you are better off with a F2.8 or lower, but the reality is the 18-55mm did not really give bokeh in fact its easier to get pop with the 18-135mm by standing further away and using a longer focal length to get some compression. Anyhoo for shootting low light with a high depth of field the OIS serves you better as you can run it at F5.6 and a low SS and get the shot. Obviously moving targets will blur but the inside of a church for example is going to be easier to get a shot with teh 18-135mm

 

I believe that the stabilization on the 18-135mm is the second best in the FUji range only beaten out by the 50-140mm whcih is not a practical lens nor will it give you the standard focal lengths between 18-50

 

The 18-135mm is not quite as tack sharp at 18mm as the 18-55 but its very good and I like the way it renders and I found the colours to be richer.

 

I think its a no brainer and the money you save buying the 55-200 you can put towards the 23mm or 35mm prime which will give you another flavor of low light option and better bokeh options than any of the zooms discussed.

 

Be careful though primes are like crack

 

G