xf18-55mm 2.8-4 vs xc16-50mm 3.5-5.6

[EBC811]

Hello,

I'm going to purchase either XT1 or new XT10 but can't decide if i should get the 18-55 or 16-50mm

I like the 2mm wider advantage of 16-50mm, but in terms of image quality is their a big difference?

I don't mind 16-50mm being a stop slower than the 18-55mm

Does anyone have both of these lenses and provide some information?

thank you

 

[x-tc]

 I don't think Fuji makes a "bad" lens. For $100 net for 16-55 vs $300 for the XF 18-55 with the X-T10 kit. Its a good value if you want to get started and is "above average" compared to other kit lens from Nikon and Canon IMHO.  In contrast, the 18-55 is probably the best kit lens you can buy from any camera manufacturer.  Fuji, Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, Samsung, Olympus.  The XF 18-55 is the king of kit standard zooms. 

 

Fuji has set the bar with the 18-55, its really up to you what is good enough for you and what kind of quality you are expecting for $100 vs $300.  At $100, its not a great loss if you decide its not good enough later on.  Also with the plastic mount, I would not expect it to last forever.  All of my plastic mount lens have either broke at the mount or have misaligned elements.  Anyhow, at $100, its no big loss. So if it breaks in a few years, you can decide to upgrade if you want. I guess it depends how much you intend to use it and how often.  If you intend to shot a lot, are picky about performance at the extreme ends, and do not intend to buy any more lens for a long while and just want a "do it all lens" that you will be thrilled with, stay on the camera 100% of the time, and not have any doubts shooting wide open in the corners, then I personally would invest the extra $200 for 18-55 up front.  If budget is tight and you are not critical about the corners and do not expect heavy usage the XC 16-55 will be good lens. Better than what is offered from Nikon and Canon in cropped format certainly IMHO.

 

  That said, I left Nikon DX lineup because I got fed up with poor quality DX "kit" lens (handling, durability, and soft shots wide open, especially or at the long end) and was thrilled to have the option to buy the amazing XF18-55. Some people say the XF18-55 is one of the reason to buy into the Fuji X series interchange cameras in the first place. That is how good it is.

 

This might help you familiarize yourself with the 16-55 relative to the 18-55.  Again at $100, its a no brainer if you are just getting into the brand and want to get going. If you want to look ahead more long term, you can't get much better than the 18-55.

http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-fujifilm-fujinon-xc-16-50mm-f3-5-5-6-ois/2/

 

Although I don't find a review comparing 16-55 to 18-55 directly, here is a review of the XF18-55 vs the XF35mm prime lens to give you a sense of how good a zoom can be when it is compared to a prime. Maybe this may help explain why some people buy into Fuji X camera just for the XF18-55. 

http://www.fujivsfuji.com/18-55mm-vs-35mm-f1pt4/

[heliosfan]

I'll chime in, since I have the XF18-55 that came with my X-T1 kit and I am pleased with it, although I am more of a prime guy. The OIS is good to have and the f2.8 at the wide end is also decent.

Definitely better than my 18-55 II from my Canon days!! But it doesn't excite me that much. It's sharp, got that Fuji look, excellent build quality, but I guess the range just isn't that interesting to me. 

It now serves as my poor man's wide angle. In a dream world, I would rather go for a 16/1.4, 35/1.4 and a 90/2 and a lot less money in my pocket. 

Anyway, I found out I needed something a bit closer to a 70-200, so I bought an XC50-230 on a whim, got it for next to nothing and...well...my excuse was that I needed something with autofocus for my son's soccer matches.

Trying to capture anything moving with an old 135 mm Takumar was just too much work.

I wasn't expecting too much, just happy that I wouldn't have to worry about the constant focus hunting.

But honestly it BLEW ME AWAY. Not only does it have (to my eyes) the same IQ as the rather expensive XF equivalent (55-200), but I kind of like the lightness and the plastic doesn't bother me. The compression makes it a very good portrait lens to boot. In good daylight it even manages to catch decent action shots (the new firmware update will probably make it even better).

 

In fact, I have never had any plastic mounts break on me (Canon has a whole range of lenses with plastic mounts), but then again I never dropped my camera onto concrete.

Roger Cicala at LensRentals, an authority on the issue says there is no indication that lenses with plastic mounts break more frequently than metal ones, so I think that point is less important.

 

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/12/assumptions-expectations-and-plastic-mounts

 

 

Turns out, Fuji CAN'T make a bad lens!! From my experience, the XC zooms are seriously underrated and you can pick them up for next to nothing.

If you can live without an aperture ring (and rather use the rear dial, which is not so bad if you are used to DSLRs) and the extra stop I say go for the XC16-50, IQ-wise you won't find much of a difference.

Not only are you getting those 2 extra mm at the wide end (which actually makes a difference), but you save money that you can put towards other, stellar glass (I know I would).

I think it would be a great combo with the X-T10!

But don't take my word for it, here are a few comparisons of the XC and the XF zooms:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHoI2U4v2mc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAvIaiIbv2Q

[citral]

Those XC lenses can be a great choice for people who hike light and want to take landscapes with a great DOF and the occasional animal shot works too. If an accident happens, it's not the end of the world as they are dirt cheap.

 

Otherwise (non-hiking stuff), and if you think you'll use it a lot, I'd say get the 18-55 and/or 55-200. It's going to last and has good resale value as well (here in EU at least, I'd have no issue selling my 18-55 for 300€), the aperture rings are great and those extra stops are never a bad thing.

 

Neither are a bad choice optically really.

[EBC811]

thank you guys for advice. I really do appreciate it very much.  thanks for the links to review and videos.  Honestly it makes me more confused about which one to pick.

Both lens look adequate for my needs.  I think it depends on how much extra 2mm is important to me.  I think i will preorder xt10 instead of getting xt1.

 

 

[x-tc]

good luck ellie2011,

 

Here is a focal length simulator from Nikon to allow you to compare 16 vs 18.   Pick the DX button for Fuji equivalent crop factor. 

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/simulator/

[Walsh_uk]

I just bought the X-T10 with kit lens 16-50 MKII and I have to say its extraordinarily good little performer..