How do you like this lens vs. using the 18-55mm zoomed to 23mm?
464447
I absolutely love this lens. It's by far the best glass fuji did so far.That zoom is now in the drawer for ever.Using that lens in full aperture is a delight.I strongly recommend to get a good BW ND filter 1.8 so you could use it at full aperture in daylight.Go for it, you won't regret!
464448
Although the 18-55 lens is a very good lens for a zoom, the 23 prime lens is far superior in my opinion in many ways especially with the 1.4 speed but the optics are extremely good in the 23 and the lens is built beautifully.
464449
For me its the lens I hd to have and I'm very happy with it. 35mm equivalent is one of my two favorite focal lengths 85mm (new XF 56) is the other. I also like the clutch based manual focus. The 23 is the lens I use the most. Only take out the 18-55 when I need to travel lighter.
464450
The quality of a prime lens is always much better than the quality of a kit zoom lens. And since the kit zoom lens has a variable aperture you cant throw the background out of focus since the max aperture is 5.6 or 6.3 or a very wide depth of field. With a f1.4 lens (like this one) you can shoot in shade, or nighttime or darker areas that would be impossible to shoot in with the zoom unless you increase the ISO way up which will result in less noise. Dont rely on a zoom. Use your feet to get the shot and use a prime lens and it will make you a much better photographer. The pros all use prime lenses like this 35mm equivalent lens on their cameras for street shots. The quality of a prime lens is always much better than the quality of a kit zoom lens. And since the kit zoom lens has a variable aperture you cant throw the background out of focus since the max aperture is 5.6 or 6.3 or a very wide depth of field. With a f1.4 lens (like this one) you can shoot in shade, or nighttime or darker areas that would be impossible to shoot in with the zoom unless you increase the ISO way up which will result in less noise. Dont rely on a zoom. Use your feet to get the shot and use a prime lens and it will make you a much better photographer. The pros all use... » Read More The quality of a prime lens is always much better than the quality of a kit zoom lens. And since the kit zoom lens has a variable aperture you cant throw the background out of focus since the max aperture is 5.6 or 6.3 or a very wide depth of field. With a f1.4 lens (like this one) you can shoot in shade, or nighttime or darker areas that would be impossible to shoot in with the zoom unless you increase the ISO way up which will result in less noise. Dont rely on a zoom. Use your feet to get the shot and use a prime lens and it will make you a much better photographer. The pros all use prime lenses like this 35mm equivalent lens on their cameras for street shots. « Show Less
464451
In terms of handling color, sensitivity to low light conditions, and precision of focusing, the 18-55mm lens is no match to the excellent XF 23 lens.
464452
I have both lenses and use them differently. The 23mm I mainly use when street shooting. But since I got the 23mm, I've don't use my 18-55 as much.
464453
My wife uses this lens more than I do, so I can't speak specifically to its performance at 23mm, but my general impression is that it's a great lens. Really solid build, nice feel to it, and excellent optics. A way better lens than I had expected.
464454
To be honest, unless you need 1.4 or the DOF scale, or minimum distortion at 23mm, the 18-55 is going to be better simply because of the IOS. I own this lens and I love it, but it really doesn't provide much over the 18-55, and I actually keep the 18-55 on most of the time unless I am going to do street photography in daylight.
464455
The 18-55 is a great lens, but the 23mm prime is a magic lens. Since I've acquired the 23mm I hardly use my 18-55. Maybe it's still the honeymoon phase, but I just love the 23. It renders images in a different way than the 18-55, and the speed/DOF of 1.4 really does make a difference.
464456
No comparison. Ability to go to F1.4 makes the depth of field control so much better. These two lens are in completely different class.
464457
I absolutely love this lens. It's by far the best glass fuji did so far. That zoom is now in the drawer for ever. Using that lens in full aperture is a delight. I strongly recommend to get a good BW ND filter 1.8 so you could use it at full aperture in daylight. Go for it, you won't regret!
357723
I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it. I got it in "brand new white box" for about half the price and that's even a greater deal. I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it.... » Read More I spent many months comparing 28-300 and this 24-120 before I settle with this. I was looking for a walk around lenses for travel and family picture because I don't want my f2.8 lenses to take all the fun out of the trip as they are heavy and big. To my surprise, this 24-120 replaced my 24-70 f2.8 except for shooting sports as the AF is not as snappy as the 24-70 f2.8 and I need to shoot more frames to cherry pick the ones that are in focus. Other than sports, my copy of 24-120 f4 has taken over the job of 24-70 f2.8. I used it at weddings and senior pictures...... I am very happy with it. I got it in "brand new white box" for about half the price and that's even a greater deal. « Show Less
1939648
I got this because I take my camera everywhere, but don't always know what shooting conditions I'm going to encounter. I wanted the wide zoom range. It's not as sharp or fast as my 2.8L lenses, but to be fair they're also primes. But it is a fine lens to own if you need a zoom with good range. I've gotten great images from both ends of the spectrum with this one. I also own a Tamron 2.8 70-200 but I haven't even gotten it out since I got this one, since I'm mainly shooting outdoors during the day I just haven't needed anything faster.
523657
I have been using the 24-70 2.8 for a while now on my 7D and I find that the range is not optimal for outdoors. I can get some great shots at 70 mm, but at 24 mm the shots just are not wide enough - close but not there. Upgrading (or downgrading) to the 17-55 2.8 IS USM this week. I think it will be a way better lens for a cropped sensor camera. It will allow me to get some landscape shots that I was just not able to achieve with the 24-70.Side note: tried the 24-70 2.8 on my friend's 5D MII and it was awesome - It would be my lens of choice if I had a full frame camera.
813924
Hope I didn't confuse you Michelle. I have this lens and use it with an 18mm to 55mm lens and have made some really interesting shots with it.
809688
The 56 mm is a sharper lens, especially stopped slightly down from its maximum f/1.2) but you are really buying the 56 mm for the gorgeous results when it is shot wide open - something that the 18-55 (while still an excellent lens) just cannot do.
1703577
Thanks Michael for sharing your experience. I myself ended up buying a 60d with 18-135 lens kit about a week ago from amazon and I am very happy both with the body as well as the Lens. I had a T2i with 18-55mm before this purchase, and I am not a pro but so far i haven't seen any degradation on the image quality between the two lenses. I like the 18-135 for its decent quality and a very practical zoom range. Not to mention that 60D is a far better body than T2i.
763550
Hi, actaually I have this lens and had the 16-50. I got the nex 6 last year and sold the 16-50 lens because I felt the pics came out better in the 18-55. The focus was better and pics seems crisp to me in 18-55. Yes it's much heavier and the smaller to travel with. 16-50 made it really nice to go our the city with.... But I just couldn't take a good pic with the 16-50. I got the 18-55 for about $100 used. So I'm happy.
582401
I used to have those 2 lenses and moving to a single 18-200mm gave me a whole new experience in photography. No more spending times switching lenses on-the-go, which saves me from missing shots and protects the camera a little further (in case you would need to switch lenses outside, like in a beach or something -- my case).
1118682
you will see some distortion at the 18mm range but will disappear in at the 25 to 28mm area- sometimes it is rather a nice special effect, depends on the shot. Make sure it is a Canon IS lens for the stabilization. The zoom has a very nice range but you will loose some speed as compared to a simple wide angle lens. It is a great walk around lens to suit needs of a wide range of situations.
2004639
I've tried both and I like the 24-70 far better. It is a sharper, faster lens.
356777
It depends on what $200 is worth to you. Assuming you just have the 18-55mm for a season, will the loss of pictures zoomed between and including 1x to 2x in addition to the ability to get that without changing lens with the higher quality of extra low dispersion (ED), be less than $200 to you?
423083
I have the sel18105G. I didn't compare it with other lens and I am an amateur photographer. All I can say is that I think it is great withnice crisp photos.
919086
18-300 mm photos are pretty good. With this you do not have to be changing lenses (55 - 300mm). The stabiliser work fine, light is good. Wide angle do not work fine.
784054
I personally would go with the 18-105mm. It is more "flexible." Hope this helps.
608535
Hey,the focus is very fast and absolutely noticeable compared to the 18-55mm. Hope that helps.Kind regards
956489
I would go with the 18/135 lense . Have had both , 18 is newer , better technology , wider and lighter . Pictures are outstanding