UKC

So I'm almost decided on an xt10.

With cash back I can get one with the 16-50 for £470 or with the 18-55 for £625. I can go used for £35 less in both instances but for that small a difference it doesn't seem worth it.

Is the latter (18-55)worth £155 more??

I do like wide angles and the 18-55 is lacking in that department a bit but should I scratch that itch by getting the 16mm or the 10-24 at a later date?

What other lenses do you have and rate? What kind of things do you take photos of and how has that influanced your choice of lens/es.

Thanks for the input.

In reply to George Fisher:

The 18-55 2.8-4 is a cracking lens. Super sharp. Without pixel peeping, I'd say that the Xt10 and 18-55 combo isn't far at all off my canon 5d3 and a 24-105.

I mostly shoot portraits, landscapes and snow sports and found that the 55-200 is great for a bit more reach and the 56 1.2 is a lovely portrait lens. I've not got anything wider than the 18-55.

In reply to George Fisher:

Hi, was about to reply to your email, but I'll do it here in case anyone wants to comment. I would concur that the XF 18-55 is superb. The budget XC 16-50 is significantly lighter, but I'm not sure how the quality compares (best look at some reviews or maybe someone can comment). It has no aperture ring (you adjust on the back of the camera and this might be a consideration). I do have the budget XC 50-230 which I find really excellent and am very pleased with the image quality for wildlife - it is so light that there is little excuse not to carry it. On a trip to the States I really began to wish I had something wider than the 18-55 for the big landscapes and on my return splashed out on the XF 10-24. It was expensive and relatively heavy but has been worth every penny and, if I choose to carry just one lens in the mountains, it is this one. The quality is fantastic, I would say at least matching the 18-55. I think I would have really missed the versatility if I'd gone for a fixed focal length wide lens instead. It seems pretty well balanced on the camera to me - certainly not a problem.

In reply to George Fisher:
I just have the 18-135mm XF IOS on my X-T10, just cant be arsed anymore with multiple lenses for general use. Both body and lens were 2nd hand.

Find the 18 plenty wide enough and I do panos if I want wider (Merge in LR6 makes this so quick and easy), and having the reach past 55mm is just great for everyday use. Not found the lens being bigger any hassle or found the f3.5 -5.6 limiting either.

Not uploaded any summer hols shots yet, but these from the a trip to the south-west in April give a feel of the 18-135mm versatility. https://www.flickr.com/photos/105343926@N08/albums/72157664879199733

In reply to George Fisher:

I've got the XT10 plus the 16-50, 10-25,35 f1.4, 56 f1.2, and the 50-230, plus a Samyang 8mm. Will probably get the 100-400.
Been very impressed with the 16-50 seing its such a cheap lens, tried the 18-55 on an XT-2 and not sure I'd swap for it.
Have a look at the below link for MTF data on the lenses, opinions are great but alot of people will rave about things just because they own it, which is great but the reports will give a bit more insight
At the price of the camera its a steal

In reply to london_huddy:


Almost the same here, albeit XE1 with 18-55 vs 5D3 with 24-70 2.8 mk2, and I agree. I find myself doing a bit more desaturating with the Fuji images, and I reckon I can recover more highlights (but not shadows) on the Canon, but otherwise it needs geeky pixel peeping (which I can't be bothered with as I think it misses the point of photography) to discern any real superiority in the bigger Canon file. The Fuji 18-55 is outstanding, especially considering that it is Fuji's 'kit' lens. I'm considering a XT2 as a travel/mountaineering camera.

In reply to alex anderson:

Good reference for lens reviews.
http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x

In reply to George Fisher:
The XF 18-55 is an excellent lens, in terms of image quality, but after a year of use I ended up selling it and getting a small set of primes instead. I've never really liked zoom lenses and I found the unmarked, free-rotating aperture ring on the 18-55 difficult to use (although it's still better than controlling aperture from the camera body, which I believe you have to do with the 16-50).

That's all personal preference really, though. As a general-purpose zoom lens it's very highly regarded and I think you'd struggle to do better.

Here's my lens setup:

1. XF 35mm f/2. Just about the perfect general-use lens for me. Excellent IQ, great autofocus and weather-resistant. I use this most of the time.
2. XF 18mm f/2. My general wide-angle prime. It's a better lens than a lot of the reviews would have you believe, and available for peanuts on the second-hand market.
3. Samyang 12mm f/2. My astrophotography lens. Superb for starscapes and aurora-hunting.
4. A random 200mm Pentax f/3.5 prime with a PK-X adapter. Too heavy for mountain trips but I occasionally use this for wildlife photography.

Edit: forgot to mention the camera bodies I use. I used an X-E1 exclusively for about two years but now have an X-T1 as well, which is gradually taking over for my backpacking and mountaineering trips. It's better in most respects (and, crucially, weather sealed) but the X-E1 is still highly capable, and the image quality is the same from both cameras.

In reply to Only a hill:

I'm seriously pissed off with this thread. I'd manage to convince myself I didn't need an X-T10 and my Sony RX100 was enough for me but reading this got me googling. Now I'm considering an X-T1!

(Is the XT-1 worth the extra?)

In reply to galpinos:


I had a wander along the Cuillin ridge on my own last weekend. Carrying bivi stuff and a rope, I decided to save weight and just took my RX100 rather than my X-T10........... The light was incredible and, good as the RX100 is, it's just not the same and I know I would have got better shots with the Fuji, especially with the wide and long zooms.

In reply to Robert Durran:

You're not helping Robert.......... but thanks for the feed back!

In reply to galpinos:

For me, the X-T1 was definitely worth the extra for the weather sealing alone, but the physical ISO dial is also a major benefit. On the X-E1, changing between different ISOs manually (something I usually only do for astrophotography) has to be done through a menu, which is a pain if you're trying to shoot starscapes on a mountain while wearing gloves. I anticipate this will be a lot easier with the X-T1. I also like the amazing viewfinder. Of course, the X-T10 will have exactly the same image quality so the differences are all in the control features really, and the handling.

In reply to Only a hill:


One of the big improvements of the X-T10 over the X-E1 (I upgraded) is that there are about 8 buttons and dials that can be customized. I have a dial on the front of the camera customised to ISO which I can easily adjust with one finger without taking my eye from the vierwfinder.


I think I'm right in saying that the X-T10 has the same viewfinder as the X-T1. It is certainly amazing with zero noticeable lag and a significant improvement on the X-E1

In reply to Robert Durran:

Yes, extra customisable buttons are definitely a good thing! For me the X-T1's physical dedicated ISO dial is perfect, because it can be adjusted by touch without even looking through the viewfinder. I don't like having ISO in a menu at all for astrophotography (although it's certainly no big deal for the vast majority of the time, when I just use auto-ISO).


Actually I believe the X-T1's viewfinder is somewhat larger, although they both have the same resolution. Both better than the X-E1's viewfinder in any case.

Complete list of differences here: http://www.wexphotographic.com/blog/fuji-x-t10-vs-x-t1-27-key-differences

In reply to all:

Well thanks guys!!

Reading through here all I need is a x-t1 with its larger finder and weathersealing. A 10-24 as my mountain landscape lens, the 18-55 as its sooo great. A 50-230 as it's brilliant and light. A couple of primes, 35 f2 and the 56 for portraits. Oh and a cat to take pictures of to load up to instagram.

That's about 4 times over budget, anything else I've missed.

Seriously, some interesting reading, I'll keep pondering all this.

In reply to George Fisher:

Interesting comparison here of three Fuji standard zooms:

http://www.fujivsfuji.com/16-55mm-f2pt8-vs-18-55mm-f2pt8-4-vs-18-135mm-f3pt...

In reply to George

...That's about 4 times over budget, anything else I've missed...

Purchasing through Cotswold Cameras (other grey importers are available) was certainly no problem and may help with the budget. I had to pay some duty but Cotswold refunded that on emailing them a scanned receipt. For warrenty they use the same people as the insurance companies use to get their repairs done - though I've not had to test the warrenty. I bought an xt1 with 18-55 and 50-200 from Cotswold cameras a while ago and I recently bought the 100-400 from wex as there was Fuji cash back deal. Now pondering on a 1.4x converter but it only works with a couple of lenses...

In reply to ChrisJD:
I have the 18-135 as well. It covers everything and I love the results.

I also have a 28, trying to make it a more portable package, but still found it got in the way on multi pitch rock. Next on the wish list is a low light lens like the 56.

I have the X-T1. No brainer for weather-sealing. I fancy something like an X-E1/ X-M1 as well, when I need something smaller.

In reply to fairweatherclimber:


Yep, as a one lens solution, it's a winner.

In reply to fairweatherclimber:

I wouldn't recommend the X-M1. I had one briefly. It is very small, but you lose the viewfinder and most of the physical controls, and the handling is significantly worse IMO. It does have a good tilting screen however. In my view the older X-E1 is a significantly better camera than the X-M1.

In reply to George Fisher:

I have the 55-200mm as well as the 18-55mm for my XT-1 and have got some great shots with both lenses - they're excellent.

I would love to get the 10-24mm and the 56mm f1.2 as well but that is another £1,500!

The issue for me is cost - for the equivalent 4 Fuji lenses that I have for my Canon, I'm looking at a total of about £2,300. The same coverage of focal lengths on my Canon has cost me about £900, although to be fair the Canon 40mm f2.8 probably doesn't compare to the 56mm Fuji and the Fuji lenses are all no doubt that bit better.

For me the Fuji is an expensive luxury that I take on hols because it's all smaller and lighter! For everything else I use the Canon. Mind you, can't go wrong in investing in good lenses that hold their value so I'm hoping I can get some used Fuji lenses at a good price at some point.

In reply to Only a hill:

Ok cheers for that

In reply to George Fisher:

I've had my XT-1 since they pretty much came on the market and have been through most of the lenses! They're all very good.

Permanently in my case though are the 55-200, the 16mm f1.4 and the 35mm f2. I also own a Samyang fish eye for some milky way/aurora stuff and, although I don't use it very often, the 56mm f1.2 because it's almost too good to part with, it's just a bit heavy and 'specific' for lugging around day to day.

In reply to George Fisher:

Here's another question. (I'm getting further from a decision)

I was set on an x-t10. Now there is just £100 difference between that and an x-t1 on the used market. Which way do you go?

In reply to George Fisher:


I was out at the weekend up a friend's last Munro is damp weather, planning to get good photos of everyone but definitely felt held back worrying about getting my X-T10 wet. The weather sealing comments here have been making me think.........

In reply to George Fisher:

As an X-T10 owner, then I'd say the X-T1. If nothing else, just for the ISO dial!

In reply to George Fisher:

what are you like? weren't you set on ricoh a few weeks ago
why not olympus em-5 ii (~450 for new body with cashback) or sony a6000 (~350 used body)

In reply to malk:

I'm the guy who can't decide what camera he wants!!

I bought the Ricoh but realised it wasn't flexible enough for taking family photos. I also realised that a compact wasn't sufficiently different from my phone for grabbing snaps and having on me all the time. So it went back.

so... I've arrived here looking for something that's not massive but is part of a system and has the ability to use various lenses for different situations. I've had various film and digital cameras and quite a few lenses. The Fuji(s) seem to have a good fit of size and capability.

In reply to George Fisher:




Im in the same boat...had a play with my nieces 'tiny' Nikon 24Mb D3400 Dslr...im very tempted. Its not 'weather sealed' but neither is any other camera I have. Im very tempted, fairly cheap too, compared to the Fuji stuff.

In reply to George Fisher:

youtube.com/watch?v=rHp0PyBu2CQ&

In reply to malk:

On my mirrorless journey I had an A6000 for a while. It was fine, but in the end I decided I just didn't like the look/colour/depth of the images the Sony produced and the camera handling. The RAWs (for me anyway) weren't that robust if pushed in post (highlight/shadow recovery).

In reply to ChrisJD:


I'd echo that sentiment, although my experience of the X-T10 is limited to playing around with it in a store. The ISO dial is genuinely useful and I like the fact that you can control _all_ of the exposure variables with physical dials that can be adjusted without looking through the viewfinder or at the screen. Also, the build quality on the X-T1 is extremely robust.

In reply to Only a hill:

no IBIS and touchscreen on the fujis is a dealbreaker for me (unless you can persuade me otherwise

In reply to George Fisher:

Will you please all stop talking before I make an expensive mistake?

In reply to malk:


I've no idea what an IBIS is, but by this do you mean you like the lack of a touchscreen or not. I doubt I would have gone for Fuji if it was controlled through a touchscreen!

In reply to Robert Durran:

selecting focus area is much easier with a touch screen and in-body image stabilisaton means you can get sharp handheld images with 1/8s or longer..

In reply to Robert Durran:


In Body Image Stabilsation

Fuji opted to put it in their lenses

In reply to malk:

To be fair, I haven't missed either feature for the kind of photography I do. Your mileage may vary, of course!

In reply to malk:


I can see that that would be good, but otherwise I want things at my fingertips with my eye at the viewfinder and that wouldn't happen with a touch screen, whereas all the comtomizable buttons on my X-T10 do it really well.