Jump to content

18mm f/2 - Your experience/opinion on this lens?


Hermelin

Recommended Posts

Thanks everyone for feedback.

 

I'm looking to use this lens for street photography but also some landscape shots, but my landscape shots I will shot at f/8 I guess that even the corners should be reasonable sharp by then.

 

My head says that the 18-55 is the more reasonable lens because it seems to be optically better than the the 18 f/2. But I enjoy shoting primes, and I enjoy lightweight and discret. And f/2 vs f/2.8 is not huge, but it is a difference.

 

So I'm pretty sure I will go with this lens after all :)

 

At f8 th corners will just barely be sharp enough for landscape, IMO. One thing I do with the lens is to apply straight sharpening at the edges and corners to help with the resolution falloff (I use the eclipse local adjustment tool in Lightroom). That does make them barely acceptable to me in 17x22 prints. I really wish Fuji would update the lens and improve th corners some.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using my 18mm a lot these days, and enjoying it. People say it's not sharp in the corners. I've not been bothered to check whether that's true or not. Besides, if people are looking at the sharpness of your corners rather than at your subject, you're doing something wrong as a photographer.

 

Some pictures from a trip to Ghana

2f29c66a6cb2831bdd07f83a4a2f634f.jpg

2ee757b3df4020931982956caa04033f.jpg

1a8c51f37937531da32f61ae54310c78.jpg

9c263741ece69f6b12b501ba6a02689b.jpg

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited by Warwick
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting discovery. While Fuji seems to overstretch the outer edges when correcting for distortion in this Fuji 18mm lens, Lightroom seems to get it right, MUCH nicer at the edges where Fuji kind of gets it wrong. While Lightroom is not the best X-trans RAW converter when it comes to detail and sharpness, for some reason or another, their lens correction algorithm appears to be better than Fuji's own. Generally I don't sweat this stuff because it's only at the far edges that this correction by Fuji overstretches a bit. Anyway, it was interesting to see this at work with LIghtroom 4.4. 

 

Now if only Fuji could adopt Lightroom's lens correction profile and let us update the firmware to handle it properly in-camera, that would be great. 

 

Brad

Link to post
Share on other sites

Throwing my 2c in.  I love this lens.  Compact, excellent IQ for what I need for photo journalism/street photography.  It's not a bad landscape lens either.  I think it gets too much of a bad rap, and mainly from the pixel peepers. As you can see from some of the photos people have posted, it's a fine lens.  I use it with the X-Pro2.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the sharpest lens.

Has some CA problems if you plan to shoot landscape.

Gets really close to subject.

Center sharpness is good, especially at macro distances.

Edge to edge is good at F5.6 and above.

Color IQ tends to be slightly "darker" than XF35F1.4 (Even when comparing to Rokinon's 12mmF2)

Focuses fast.

Lens flare may be a problem, got to be careful. 

Watch out for dust in lens. It's a dust magnet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using my 18mm a lot these days, and enjoying it. People say it's not sharp in the corners. I've not been bothered to check whether that's true or not. Besides, if people are looking at the sharpness of your corners rather than at your subject, you're doing something wrong as a photographer.

 

Some pictures from a trip to Ghana

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

nice shots, thank you!

Edited by arty
Link to post
Share on other sites

All said, I still love this lens and use it daily - in-camera JPEG's with slight adjustments in LR. It takes wonderful shots and I don't think much about this detail stuff. But its quirks are worthy of conversation. I see many Fuji X shooters that consider this their #1 go-to prime lens, me included. 

 

B

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read so many different reviews and comparisions about this lens.

 

Optically it seems to be inferior to the 18-55 but the wider aperture is fun

 

I myself prefer using primes and really want to plan to get this lens but the 18-55 seems to be sucha more reasonable choice so I'm lost.

 

Tell me your opinion please!

Optically inferior? I wouldn't say so, but then again I don't have the 18-55 to compare and using the X-Pro2, I prefer primes anyways and appreciate the extra stop at f/2.

 

On the newer bodies, especially on the X-Pro2, it's really fast to focus so you shouldn't have any problems there.

 

It's a great all around lens if you're into the 28mm (35mm equivalent) focal length.

 

I was going to sell mine in favor of going even wider like the 14mm f/2.8 or even the 16mm f/1.4, but I decided to keep it after ordering my X-Pro2 and haven't regretted keeping it.

 

I brought 3 primes on a recent trip to Hong Kong.. the widest being the 18mm, and I also brought the 35mm f/2 for mid-range & 56mm f/1.2 just to get that extra reach.  I thought I'd use the 35mm f/2 as my go to lens for the majority of the trip, but I was wrong and ended up using the 18mm for probably at least 80% of the trip. It's just so versatile and in a dense city like Hong Kong with tall buildings and people in close quarters, the 18mm made a lot of sense.  Besides being able to capture more in 1 shot and help provide more context to the image, I found even if I had space to try and shoot further away from my intended subject using the 56mm or even the 35mm, the city was so packed with people all the time, there was always going to be somebody running into my shot a good lot of the time.. so, the 18mm forced me get in closer to my subject and was able to capture more unobstructed image than my other 2 lenses. A great thing about getting closer to subject is you can offset the subject in the composition so it wouldn't even seem like you could be aiming the camera at them, or rather framing them into the image as your intended subject, and take the shot with surprisingly little disturbance to the scene.

 

Sure, you could do this by setting the 18-55mm zoom to 18mm, but I also appreciate the extra stop of light and just that bit of extra shallower depth of field to help isolate the subject and nicely blur out the background (and foreground if you have elements to do so)... plus, the 18mm f2 is just that more smaller and discreet.

 

I love the images I got with the 18mm f2 and it's smaller size and lighter weight was great on the X-Pro2.. and  you can see your aperture settings as opposed to the 18-55mm zoom which is variable so it doesn't have that feature. Some say the edges aren't as sharp wide open, but for street photography, and even some bit of portraiture, I don't think having absolute sharpness from center to the edge is essential.

 

Really depends on the type of photography you plan to do.. the 18-55 is probably a very sensible choice as it covers so much and it does so fairly well.. But, if you prefer primes, the 18mm f/2 is not a bad way to go if you like the 28mm (35mm equivalent) focal length.  Great general purpose lens and for me surprisingly more used and useful than the 35mm or even 23mm fuji lenses, especially if you want to capture more, are in crowded situations, and can or need to get closer to your subject in one of the smallest and lightest lenses.

 

The 14mm f/2.8 is nice, but maybe a bit too wide for most occasions. I may have loved it for landscapes (cityscapes) or when I wanted a more immersive image where people were secondary to the environment. I think the 16mm f1.4 is nice, but considerably more expensive and heavier and bulkier.. but, I do like the results I'm seeing people get from it.. my next choice if money and size/weight is not an option.

Edited by Wing0949
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I had the 18/2 for about 18 months. I just let it go yesterday (as a part of a trade-in for 10-24) and I already miss it.

Loved the size, weight and the hood - it iis perfect for walking around, as not much can really land on the lens. With the hood on I have never been in a need of cleaning a fingerprint off the lens.

This lens has been great to use on a camera when cycling or hiking. 10-24 might be better in some ways, but I know I'll get one of 18/2 before autumn for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got into the Fuji system because of this lens. To this day Nikon does not offer a fast, compact 28mm DX equivalent. (I have been waiting since 2004. The upcoming DL is camera, not a lens.) This is a wonderful little lens, especially for PJ, or street style shooting. That a long-winded way of saying it's quite sharp in the middle at any aperture. It focuses very quickly, if not super quietly. People who say the zoom is better are just plain wrong. (That's OK with me, it help keeps the price down.) I've seen the measurements to confirm it. In the RAW files the 18/2 is sharper than the 18-55 in the middle and at the edges at F2.8 (of course the 18/2 isn't stabilized so quick, hand-held comparison shots will not reveal this.) This not to say either one is a bad lens - but for low light - photographing humans @ F2 & 2.8 - the little 18 gets the nod. For more typical shooting, it's hard to beat the stabilized 18-55. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

With three wide angle primes one of them has to be last. But just because it is last compared to the others, doesn't mean it isn't great. I love mine. It's light, fast to focus and it renders colour beautifully. OK, so it isn't as sexy as 1.4 or as wide as 14 but it gets a bit of a bum wrap.

 

I believe it is one very underrated lens just like the 60 2.4. A lot of it is internet myth and people repeating what they have heard about it when it was originally released. I have 18 x 12 prints made with it and they're perfect. As stated a bit softer in the corners wide open. That is is the only negative I can say about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that lens a lot (I usually like lenses with that angle of view, but the 16mm is quite similar of course), but it is not the sharpest in the corners as others have stated. Size and weight are great compared to the 16mm.

 

Nevertheless I would appreciate an updated 18mm with WR and f/1.6 or 1.7 a lot, a slight increase in weight and size (and price) would be no problem for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With three wide angle primes one of them has to be last. But just because it is last compared to the others, doesn't mean it isn't great. I love mine. It's light, fast to focus and it renders colour beautifully. OK, so it isn't as sexy as 1.4 or as wide as 14 but it gets a bit of a bum wrap.

 

I believe it is one very underrated lens just like the 60 2.4. A lot of it is internet myth and people repeating what they have heard about it when it was originally released. I have 18 x 12 prints made with it and they're perfect. As stated a bit softer in the corners wide open. That is is the only negative I can say about it.

18/2 + 35/2 + 60/2.4 is my combo, I love all three

 

And who says 18/2 has soft in the corners I think they never try to develop RAW files made with 18/2. If they try RAW they would see that there's no soft in the corners, 18/2 is sharp at all plane. The corners soft is due to incamera distortion correction only

Edited by arty
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is a lot to be said about the three original Fuji lenses 18 f2, 35 1.4 and 60 2.4. I have collected all three and although I have other primes etc, these are the three for pleasure. If you have these three you can make yourself and whole career out of them!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I am considering a lens, one of the places I go is to Flickr and look for people who shoot the lens, then I spend quite a bit of time looking at their photos taken with that lens...https://www.flickr.com/photos/spyrospapaspyropoulos/

 

As far as I can tell, every time Spyros shoots his Fuji, he shoots it with the 18. His style may not be what you like, but look at his photos, the 18 is an impressive lens for it's price, and it's size only adds to it's appeal.

 

At any rate, this method is one of the best for researching purchases in my opinion...

https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=XF%2018%20f2.0

I totally agree. I use Flickr also to look at what pictures a given lens has taken. I'm not looking so much for quality as much as an idea of what a lens is typically used for by the community.

 

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

This lens is surprisingly nice to use indoors taking pics of my kid. Straight out of cam, no post processing. Couldn't get this kind of pic with any of my canon lenses because there is no 18 f/2. And I wouldn't get these wonderful colors even with post processing.

 

Pd3OTRk.jpg

Edited by Hermelin
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...