Comments on: A Practical Review of the Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS

By: tena lena

tena lena — Mon, 24 Jun 2024 13:41:28 +0000

Hi there, Brian I do not have an 18-135 with which to make this analogy. I think that focal length would be perfect for traveling because size and weight are important factors. Despite what I've heard, large range zooms usually come with trade-offs in terms of design. here

By: Lamyrus

Lamyrus — Mon, 24 Jul 2017 15:07:00 +0000

When buying a Pentax dslr kit you get a 18-55mm. And secondhand they are doing around €35.

By: Sean McCormack

Sean McCormack — Thu, 08 Jun 2017 19:32:00 +0000

In reply to Shani Leead. You generally wouldn't use OIS when on a tripod.

By: Shani Leead

Shani Leead — Thu, 08 Jun 2017 18:35:00 +0000

Is there any reason not to leave the lens on OIS all the time?

By: probably

probably — Fri, 28 Apr 2017 11:25:00 +0000

The XF 18-55 is NO ordinary kit lens. When bought separately, the XF 18-55 has quite a steep price tag as any high quality APS-C standard zoom – which is exactly what the XF 18-55 represents.
A real ordinary kit lens is hardly available separately, usually features pretty modest IQ, and is made as cheap as possible in order to bait people buying cameras that they could not afford otherwise (i.e., when investing in good glass). Nothing of which applies to the XF 18-55.
Luckily, for some reason the Fujifilm marketing dept. decided to offer the XF 18-55 at a remarkable discount if you buy it together with a camera.
It’s been my 1st X-lens years ago and despite having primes in its range now it still gets frequently used and will never leave my Fuji-X lens pool.

By: Ralph Parker

Ralph Parker — Wed, 25 Jan 2017 17:46:00 +0000

In reply to Sean McCormack.

This is one way you possibly can make am impressively decent wealth per 30 days… You can Try it personally! After been without work for six months time, I began freelancing over this website and at the moment i couldn’t be more happy. After six months time on my latest job opportunity my month-to-month income is around 12k per month…>> http://www.facebook.com/For-US-UK-Canada-Australia-and-New-Zealand-1081278581977571/app/208195102528120/

By: chavez.stephanie

chavez.stephanie — Fri, 13 Jan 2017 11:14:00 +0000

In reply to Sean McCormack. Go through following report to learn how a single mom was able to acquire $89,844/year in her spare time on her PC without selling anything>>> -> START WORKING IMMEDIATELY!!!! <-

By: monica-morrison

monica-morrison — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 09:12:00 +0000

In reply to Sean McCormack.

I’ve earned $84 ,000 up to now this season working via internet and also I’m a full time college student . I’m benefiting from an online business opportunity I heard about and after that I’ve made this kind of great money . It is actually undoubtedly simple to use not to mention I am just too thankful that I found out about that . The capability using this is limitless . Here’s exactly what I do>>>
http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsecure81.weebly.com%3AT9IvmaribMKLUl1VZidxKHh2n0s&cuid=319043

By: Sean McCormack

Sean McCormack — Tue, 20 Dec 2016 09:35:00 +0000

In reply to Jeff Sinon. Agreed, thought the 50-140 sits between the 70-200 f4 and 70-200 f2.8 in weight. Overall the whole system weight is far less.

By: Sean McCormack

Sean McCormack — Tue, 20 Dec 2016 09:34:00 +0000

In reply to Jeff Dyer. I think the X-T10 was the only one that had both as an option. And, unfortunately it's already discontinued. Great camera. Roll on the X-T20. £150 in the difference would be a no brainer for me all day long with this. I did struggle with the choice of getting a tele lens though and would happily have got the XC 55-230 based on reviews, but in the end went for the shorter 50-140 f2.8. I shot shows and need the speed more than the reach. I have the 18-135 on loan so will have a look at that. Again another kit lens, just not quite the normal kit lens.