Fuji X-T2 first impressions.

[Hugh_3170]

Don't forget that Fuji delivered a number of firmware enhancements for the X-T1 over its life, which really transformed the camera (in a most positive way).  You need to ensure that the latest firmware is loaded into your X-T1 to get the best out of it.

[Anthony]

Lars, I agree with Hugh about the firmware updates.  They made a big difference.  They can still be downloaded from Fuji.

I am not in a position to compare image quality with the X-E1.  But here is a landscape photo which I made with the X-T1 in Tanzania recently, which I hope you like.

[Lars Hansen]

Don't forget that Fuji delivered a number of firmware enhancements for the X-T1 over its life, which really transformed the camera (in a most positive way).  You need to ensure that the latest firmware is loaded into your X-T1 to get the best out of it.

Lars, I agree with Hugh about the firmware updates.  They made a big difference.  They can still be downloaded from Fuji.

I am not in a position to compare image quality with the X-E1.  But here is a landscape photo which I made with the X-T1 in Tanzania recently, which I hope you like.

Thanks Hugh and Anthony,

About firmware updates - absolutely. My X-E1 has been updated regularly and some updates was significant - e.g. focus peaking which came a while later after I bought the camera .. that was a really nice update.

Anthony - I really like the sensation of late (or early..) sunlight in your landscape from Tanzania and the colors as well, thanks for posting this example. It could well be that X-T1 is an improvement for landscapes due to better overall color. I think the general view is that second generation X-Trans is an improvement over first generation. No rules without exceptions - I was once told that there are those who holds on to their first generation Fuji's due to better skin tones. Not a concern for me..   

[stenrasmussen]

Should I? 

[Anthony]

Yes, you know it makes sense.

[stenrasmussen]

I have to admit that the direction my need/desire/preference is heading is smaller, sexier, convenienterererer and still good quality. I haven't used my FX cameras in a long while. The D500 is a blast but still collects more dust than pictures now.

[Mike G]

I have to admit that the direction my need/desire/preference is heading is smaller, sexier, convenienterererer and still good quality. I haven't used my FX cameras in a long tile. The D500 is a blast but still collects more dust than pictures now.

Sten, I was first introduced to the X-T1 by our friend Anthony, but at the time I was wedded to my D810 and a small library of lenses. Yet I found that the combo of D810 and the 24-120 f4 lens was getting to feel very heavy, and I began not to take the Nikon gear out because of the weight. So after much soul searching and deciding that Nikon was not taking a path that I could agree with regarding weight and cost, I plumped for an X-T1 and a few lenses, and I loved it. Along comes the X-T2 and off went my order to WEX, and your post above was exactly how I felt, so far I have not been disappointed as the Fujinon optics are I find superior to my Nikon lenses certainly in the area of construction. The IQ I find I now prefer over my Nikon gear!, and of course it doesn't weigh as much!

I'm sure you won't be disappointed!

[stenrasmussen]

I am no stranger to the X-system. I currently have a X-A1, X-T10 and a 35/1.4 and before that I had a couple of X-T1s the 10-24, 18-55, 27 and 56. I know what those lenses are capable of and actually miss them. But as you say Mike the reduced bulk/weight is a big driver.
So I am now in the process of assembling my Nikon gear with the purpose of getting rid of it and also what lenses I want to get in my bag.

[RobOK]

Hello X-T2 tribe...

I am testing an X-T2 and leaning towards "yes!".

In addition to some primes, I am looking for a walk around zoom when I want a one-lens day.  What do people think of the 18-135? Also considering 18-55 and 16-55 but they are a little short.

Thanks for any Fuji lens thoughts!
Rob.

[Mike G]

Rob, although the 18-135 is a cracking lens it is quite heavy, but not outrageously so! I have no experience of the 16-55, but I'm led to believe lol though a brilliant sharp lens, heavy. That leaves their baby brother the 18-55, which is another cracker with a variable Aperture, but nonetheless it has a very well deserved reputation!

Starting from scratch I would be very tempted by the 16-55 because it has a constant F2.8 throughout its range, it weighs about 850 grams! Reputed to equal in image quality to prime lenses. But it doesn't have the very good Fuji OIS whereas the other two do.

Until I got GAS itch for some primes, the 18-135 + 10-24 was my walkabout kit.

My lens list is 16, 23, 56, 60M, 10-24, 18-55, 18-135, 50-140 both TCs and a Samyang 300mm mirror lens, I don't contemplate lugging them all around at the same time, Sten I hope that helps.

[Lars Hansen]

Rob,

I don't have experiences with the 18-135 and cannot comment.

I have two lenses I almost always carry. The 18-55 which I consider a great lens, compact and the OIS works really well - without the OIS I would have missed many shooting opportunities. You have probably noticed that the 18-55 is usually the (reasonable) cheap "kit lens". I have the 55-200 to complement the 18-55 and again the OIS have given me many shooting opportunities I would else have missed. Optically the 55-200 is also quite nice - especially at the shorter end.

[Anthony]

Hello X-T2 tribe...

I am testing an X-T2 and leaning towards "yes!".

In addition to some primes, I am looking for a walk around zoom when I want a one-lens day.  What do people think of the 18-135? Also considering 18-55 and 16-55 but they are a little short.

Thanks for any Fuji lens thoughts!
Rob.

Fuji lenses are of excellent quality.  Every Fuji lens I have is at least as good as its Nikon equivalent, and often better.

Whether the 18-135 or the 18-55 is the right choice for you depends on what you shoot.  I have heard that the 18-135 is not as good as some other Fuji lenses, but as I do not have it I cannot comment.  If you need that focal length range then it is the lens to go for. 

I can say that the 18-55 gives me better results than the Nikon 24-70 (original model), but of course it is not a constant f2.8.  As a walk around lens I find the 18-55 to be outstanding.  Having said that, the lens which is most often on my X-T2 is the 16 mm.

[stenrasmussen]

My main argument against the 18-135 is its bulk. Other than that it is a very useable lens. Despite being as good as the 18-55 is it was not among the ones on my list either. The reason is simply that I am a prime lens type. When testing lenses before I made my decision I fell in love with the 16/1.4. It has a beautiful rendering and I am really eager to start using it. My main triplet will be the 16, 23 or 35 and the 90. The 90 is quite bulky but that is easily forgottwn when it lets the light pass through it...what a fantastic piece of optics!

[simato73]

My main argument against the 18-135 is its bulk. Other than that it is a very useable lens. Despite being as good as the 18-55 is it was not among the ones on my list either. The reason is simply that I am a prime lens type. When testing lenses before I made my decision I fell in love with the 16/1.4. It has a beautiful rendering and I am really eager to start using it. My main triplet will be the 16, 23 or 35 and the 90. The 90 is quite bulky but that is easily forgottwn when it lets the light pass through it...what a fantastic piece of optics!

16, 23, 35 and 90, the magic triplet that works as four lenses!
Jokes aside, I do have the 18-135 and use it a lot.
As you can imagine it is for the convenience factor, this does really matter when I am hiking in the mountains in inclement weather. Basically it means that I have a weather sealed camera and lens that covers most of what I need and does not require switching, which in those conditions could be a problem; also faster, I can grab shots while on the move.
In other settings other lenses probably serve better.
In terms of image quality maybe the lens is slightly inferior to others, but nothing that jumps out in landscape work at smaller apertures. I have made very good 16"x24" uncropped prints with it.
Yes it is a bit bulky, but nothing the rather monstrous 16-55/2.8. Of all X lenses that is the one I would not buy.
I also have the 18-55, an excellent mid-range zoom, and my only small complaint about it is that I would like to go wider, say to 16mm.
That said, if something like a 16-80/4 WR ever comes out, it is unlikely that I buy it, given what I already own. More likely a 16mm prime (f/1.4 or f/2 if it comes out).

[Mike G]

This site is a good resource for reviews of Fuji X fit lenses!

http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/998-complete-overview-over-the-available-and-upcoming-fuji-x-mount-lenses/