Reading mode: Light Dark

Have A10 and 18-135mm, should I get 15-45mm or 18-55mm next?

Go to last post
A

AdrianTWQ

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
330
Reaction score
83
No other Lens.
15-45mm: Cheaper, lightest and smallest Zoom Lens in X System.
18-55mm: Seems to be the X System OIS Zoom Lens with the biggest Aperture. But for A10 is it an overkill? Would such a entry level camera be too low end for the 18-55mm to makes sense?

Main reason for considering another lens: 18-135mm is a bit big and heavy.

100% sure not going to get any primes.

What do you guys suggest?
 
Solution
F
The 15-45 is great for outdoors and it can perform decently with good light in-doors.

The 18-55 is slightly less wide than the 18-135, it comes with the weight and performance of metal and extra glass but it will be easier to focus in lower lighting.

I personally wouldn't be able to justify getting the 18-55 while owning a 18-135 but only you know what you will need for your profession.

If the 16-80 were released already, this would be easy!
Personally I'd definitely go with the 18-55. Better image quality, a bit larger apertures and it's made of metal.

The upsides to the 15-45mm is of course the wider angle, that it's very light and the price.
 
JayPhizzt said:
Personally I'd definitely go with the 18-55. Better image quality, a bit larger apertures and it's made of metal.

The upsides to the 15-45mm is of course the wider angle, that it's very light and the price.
Click to expand...
Thanks, one consideration is A10 being entry level beginner camera, would a higher end lens really makes any differences? What do you think?
 
AdrianTWQ said:
Thanks, one consideration is A10 being entry level beginner camera, would a higher end lens really makes any differences? What do you think?
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Most of the image quality lies in the lens anyway.

Also, what do you shoot? And why no primes? Convenience?
 
Oh, yes. The A10 is perfectly good IQ wise.

I'm not sure what to do about lenses. I'd have a serious think about the 27mm 2.8 which makes a tiny setup. The A10 needs the latest firmware to work with the 15-45. The 18-55 isn't a huge lot smaller than the 18-135. The 16-50 is a good lens you might find used and is a good deal smaller.
 
a_c_skinner said:
Oh, yes. The A10 is perfectly good IQ wise.

I'm not sure what to do about lenses. I'd have a serious think about the 27mm 2.8 which makes a tiny setup. The A10 needs the latest firmware to work with the 15-45. The 18-55 isn't a huge lot smaller than the 18-135. The 16-50 is a good lens you might find used and is a good deal smaller.
Click to expand...
I own 16-50 and 18-55. 16-50 is always on my camera, except when I shoot inside. Then I use 23 mm f2.

Only keep in mind 16-50 have problems in low light. I tried few times at home and it AF hunting lot, 18-55 does not have this problem. But again - for outdoor never find any problems.
 
JayPhizzt said:
JayPhizzt said:
Also, what do you shoot? And why no primes? Convenience?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Mostly indoor networking events, parties and seminars. I need to Zoom in and out fast because people are moving around. This is the main reason why I got the 18-135.

I plan to get a secondary lens more for outdoors gatherings. Where I don't need to Zoom so much. So I can use a smaller and lighter lens.

Primes don't have OIS, and I am not confident to shoot without it.
 
AdrianTWQ said:
JayPhizzt said:
AdrianTWQ said:
Also, what do you shoot? And why no primes? Convenience?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Mostly indoor networking events, parties and seminars. I need to Zoom in and out fast because people are moving around. This is the main reason why I got the 18-135.

I plan to get a secondary lens more for outdoors gatherings. Where I don't need to Zoom so much. So I can use a smaller and lighter lens.

Primes don't have OIS, and I am not confident to shoot without it.
Click to expand...
Then don’t get the 15-45. It’s a power zoom and slow to zoom plus fiddly plastic.

I like mine but I use it for hiking mostly and the wider angle comes in handy. It’s quite a bit smaller and lighter than the 18-55, esp on an XE body.
 
Unless you have a pathological tremor a shortish lens without OIS is perfectly managable. Don't worry about that and get the underpinning knowledge firmly under your belt.
 
AdrianTWQ said:
JayPhizzt said:
AdrianTWQ said:
Also, what do you shoot? And why no primes? Convenience?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Mostly indoor networking events, parties and seminars. I need to Zoom in and out fast because people are moving around. This is the main reason why I got the 18-135.

I plan to get a secondary lens more for outdoors gatherings. Where I don't need to Zoom so much. So I can use a smaller and lighter lens.

Primes don't have OIS, and I am not confident to shoot without it.
Click to expand...
Did you consider 16-55 f2.8 or 50-140 f2.8?

If the light is enough 18-55 can do the job, but if is not...
 
The OP said "Main reason for considering another lens: 18-135mm is a bit big and heavy" so I suspect not.
 
The A10 comes with the 16-50mm II, sold it away because it's neither superior in quality to 18-135mm nor small and light like the 15-45mm. So nope, not gettting another 16-50mm.

Would want to either go all the way light and small, or something with higher IQ then 18-135mm, hence either 15-45mm or 18-55mm.
 
The benefits to you of the XF over the XC is the wider aperture and to a lesser degree the aperture ring. I think those things make sense regardless of how entry level your camera is. If you upgrade to a better Fuji camera in the future those things will still benefit you.

If you are considering selling your XC zoom, bear in mind that a three mm difference is very noticeable on the wide end, far more noticeable than the 10mm difference in the long end. I would say keep your 15-45 for the times you want to shoot wide angle.

--
www.darngoodphotos.com
 
Last edited:
I recently sold the 18-135 because it is a heavy lens that is only ok. It lacks the wide angle for an all-purpose lens and it does not have enough telephoto reach.

I am keeping the 18-55 because I like the general optical performance of this lens and the extra faster aperture is a nice to have.

I am also keeping the 16-50 XC because I like the wider angle it has and it compares (optically speaking) quite well against the 18-55.

I dont have the 15-45 and am not planning to get it. I am waiting to see the 16-80/4.0 become available and how it performs. The 16-80 range is great for what I need, however this lens seems to be on the large and heavy side. I will have to see.

My recommendation for what you are looking for is to get the 16-50 XC as it is the best value among these Fuji zooms.
 
Not getting 16-50mm cos just sold it off. Most likely will get 15-45mm instead.
 
...unless you’re using a powerful external flash, the 18-55mm would make the most difference compared with your 18-135mm because it’s a whole stop faster, meaning you can use faster shutter speeds and/or lower ISO indoors, leading in general to better images. The 18-55mm is also significantly smaller and lighter. Of course what you lose compared with the 18-135mm is the reach, but indoors? Not sure that’s something you’d miss.

The 15-45mm gives you more wideangle but it is as slow as the 18-135mm. For indoor events, the extra stop of light of the 18-55mm should be much more valuable.
 
Plus of course it’s a really good lens, and can be had very cheap second hand.
 
I recommend the XC 16-50 3.5-5.6 over either of your two choices. I also have the XF 18-55, but the overall sharpness at 18mm is not as good as the XC 16-50 at 16mm. The 18-55 shines at the longer focal lengths, but is weak at the short end in my experience.
 
Neither. The 18-55 is great, but why would you buy it when you have the 18-135? If it’s about size, then I assu,e you’d sell the 18-135? If it’s not about size, why not buy a prime lens to go with your super zoom?
 
The 15-45 is great for outdoors and it can perform decently with good light in-doors.

The 18-55 is slightly less wide than the 18-135, it comes with the weight and performance of metal and extra glass but it will be easier to focus in lower lighting.

I personally wouldn't be able to justify getting the 18-55 while owning a 18-135 but only you know what you will need for your profession.

If the 16-80 were released already, this would be easy!
 
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top