Fuji 18-55 re buy

Location
Central Florida
Name
Tim Williams
Well I just re bought an 18-55. Just to let anyone know if their thinking about getting rid of there's, you will miss it. I re bought one a couple weeks ago but it had a little more wear than I like.
This is a no nonsense lens, maybe the best walk around I've ever had. I will probably unload my 35 f2 now. This will leave me with a 16, 18-55 and 90.
 
Two thoughts:

1. I hear you. I got my XT1 without it, thinking I wouldn't need it. I borrowed one, twice, and knew I made a mistake just on functionality alone. It's too damned good at too many focal lengths to ignore. It gets a LOT of work done without any fuss or compromise.

2. The 16, 18-55, and 90 might be the best 3 lens combo I could imagine. Dark indoors? Bring the 16. Need length and isolation? Grab the 90. Anything else, the kit zoom will probably do it.
 
Well I just re bought an 18-55. Just to let anyone know if their thinking about getting rid of there's, you will miss it. I re bought one a couple weeks ago but it had a little more wear than I like.
This is a no nonsense lens, maybe the best walk around I've ever had. I will probably unload my 35 f2 now. This will leave me with a 16, 18-55 and 90.

Congratulations! I am continually impressed by the IQ of the lens, but still use my X30 more whilst hiking and kayaking. The longer reach of its lens often makes a difference.
 
My new-ish 18-55 arrived this morning. I wasted no time in testing it on the X-T1. I slowed the SS all the way down to 1/8s for this one, and the OIS worked great.

DSCF1621.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Me too Bobby, but I'm going to hold onto mine for a few days just to make sure. My 35mm is really sharp and small . I only had the 16, 35, 90 up until now and the 35 stayed glued to my camera. Still want the 23 f2 though, the XT1 was built for these small lenses.
 
Last edited:
My kit was similar, being 16, 35, 50, &90. Then I swapped in the 23 f2 and sold the 16. Now I find myself shooting primarily the 23 and 50. The 90 when I have the space or need. If I get on a run doing portraits again, that is when I could get seller’s remorse.
 
I was trying to shoot through fog this morning across a flat that had a smattering of palms on the edge of a large lake. The 16 could not see the distant targets through the fog but the 35 locked right up. I figured this would be the case but glad I had it with me. Was shooting both at f11. The 18-55 locked on also at 35mm and up.
 
Last edited:
Thinking about it posted this over on mu43, but it might also apply here:

Why do we sometimes not like "better" lenses?

I've owned the PL15 f/1.7 twice now. It's "better" than the P14 f/2.5 or O17 f/1.8. I think I've owned the the PL 15 for a total of 7-9 months and took the first one I had on at least one vacation. But looking over my catalog I have about 35 shoots with the PL15, by far the fewest of any lens I didn't almost immediately return or resell. I did have the P14 and O17 for longer, 2.5 years for the P14 and 3 years for the O17 total (I've owned it twice). But during the time I had them (and for a while I had them at the same time), I have between 800-900 shots with each.

Trying to but my finger on why has not been easy, I still can't explain it. At first I thought maybe it was that I liked the 17mm focal length better, but that doesn't explain the number of shots with the P14 or that I can look at some of the images from the 17mm and wish they were a little wider.

Just makes me wonder what other better lenses people gotten only to regret and if they could articulate WHY the better lens wasn't for them.

In the case of the PanLeica 15mm f/1.7 I've "upgraded" to it twice, it's for sale again.
 
Back
Top