Buying the X-T4 - but which kit lens

Started May 5, 2020 | Discussions
R_U_Q_R_U
R_U_Q_R_U Senior Member • Posts: 1,325
Re: Buying the X-T4 - but which kit lens

Maxxum Fan wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

Yep, Ken Rockwell likes it.

He likes everything as it helps his affiliate links. Also gets free trips and doesn't disclose them. Find a better more trusted source of information

Logic. He may get paid if you buy from a link on his site. It does not follow that his review is invalid because of this.

-- hide signature --

Sometimes the light's all shinin' on me,
Other times I can barely see.
Lately it occurs to me what a long, strange trip it's been.

 R_U_Q_R_U's gear list:R_U_Q_R_U's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR +10 more
a_c_skinner Forum Pro • Posts: 10,779
Re: Buying the X-T4 - but which kit lens
1

I shouldn't have started this.  Sorry.

-- hide signature --

Andrew Skinner

 a_c_skinner's gear list:a_c_skinner's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +5 more
Maxxum Fan Regular Member • Posts: 452
Re: Buying the X-T4 - but which kit lens

R_U_Q_R_U wrote:

Maxxum Fan wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

Yep, Ken Rockwell likes it.

He likes everything as it helps his affiliate links. Also gets free trips and doesn't disclose them. Find a better more trusted source of information

Logic. He may get paid if you buy from a link on his site. It does not follow that his review is invalid because of this.

He does kinda suck up to makers tho, my main point

And gets review samples/paid trips. None of which is disclosed which is has to be under FTC rules. Why he doesn't is a mystery nothing to hide then be open about it. So nope I scrubbed him off the trust list a long time ago

Not that I was a huge fan before, but that kinda said a lot to me

Michael Berg
OP Michael Berg Contributing Member • Posts: 876
Re: No question

Hello Joachim,

Thanks for your comments. And for the review on your site - those are very nice shots for sure.

There seems to be a lot of attention given to the 16-55/2.8 for its sharpness, but I was not so unsatisfied with the kit 18-55 that this alone makes me want to upgrade. But there are many other qualities about the lens that are more appealing. I think the contrast and coating is much better, and something less tangible but affects the colors and the light balance of the shot in a way which is difficult to explain. Some of that is due to post processing of course, but I've noticed in many times across different private web sites and review sites alike.

Anyway - thanks again. More to consider.

-- hide signature --
R_U_Q_R_U
R_U_Q_R_U Senior Member • Posts: 1,325
Re: Buying the X-T4 - but which kit lens

Maxxum Fan wrote:

R_U_Q_R_U wrote:

Maxxum Fan wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

Yep, Ken Rockwell likes it.

He likes everything as it helps his affiliate links. Also gets free trips and doesn't disclose them. Find a better more trusted source of information

Logic. He may get paid if you buy from a link on his site. It does not follow that his review is invalid because of this.

He does kinda suck up to makers tho, my main point

And gets review samples/paid trips. None of which is disclosed which is has to be under FTC rules. Why he doesn't is a mystery nothing to hide then be open about it. So nope I scrubbed him off the trust list a long time ago

Not that I was a huge fan before, but that kinda said a lot to me

I really find this kind of OT discussions kind of a waste of time, but...

Since you are making a flatly untrue statement I feel it necessary. At the bottom of almost every page on Ken Rockwell's website appears the following:

Ken Rockwell: Review of Fujinon XF 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR ASPH

As you can read, Ken clearly asks you that if you are going to buy the products he reviews to click the links on his site so he gets paid. This is no secret. He also asks people to make donations to support his work. Nothing wrong with this. No one is forced to click his links or give him any money. The site is not behind a paywall and his knowledge of vintage lenses is extensive and helpful to me.

Also, he differentiates between lenses he owns and those he is just reviewing. How?

At the start of every review he uses one of these phrases:

"I got mine at..." or "I'd get mine at..." the later meaning he does not own it and is just reviewing it. Maybe not as explicit as you wish. But must reviewers do not buy everything they review.

Information form KenRockwell.com

-- hide signature --

Sometimes the light's all shinin' on me,
Other times I can barely see.
Lately it occurs to me what a long, strange trip it's been.

 R_U_Q_R_U's gear list:R_U_Q_R_U's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR +10 more
jhorse Veteran Member • Posts: 4,686
Re: Buying the X-T4 - but which kit lens

AnastieByte wrote:

I own the 18-55 and 16-55. The 16-55 with 2.8 across the range is super sharp and my most used walkabout lens. I have avoided the new zoom due to many reports commenting that it’s not as sharp as expected. Others views may differ.

That's my experience too. Bought the 16-55/f2.8 in the black Friday sales last year. Great IQ and ergonomically with a non battery grip on the XT3 handles well.

-- hide signature --
 jhorse's gear list:jhorse's gear list
Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm X-T4 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 +6 more
JayPhizzt Senior Member • Posts: 1,963
Re: Buying the X-T4 - but which kit lens

Michael Berg wrote:

Hello all,

Recently sold my X-T2 in preparation for my expected GAS ahead of the X-T4 release

Now the time is nearing and since I sold the X-T2 with its kit lens (the 18-55 F2.8-4 OIS), I find myself needing another good, general walk around kit lens.

I kind of planned to get another 18-55 but now Fuji has released the 16-80 F/4 I see that this lens is very highly recommended for just that purpose. Only ... the zoom/focus issues are worrying. I don't do a lot of video work so .. meh. Corner image quality and image quality consistency in general is also somewhat worrying. But the lens just seems to well made.

Now that the X-T4 comes with IBIS, the older 16-55 F/2.8 is suddenly really interesting again. Much better image quality and the X-T4 can now compensate for the missing OIS.

So. Which kit lens would you buy today, along with the X-T4?

I'm a prime shooter so I wouldn't buy any zoom lens Although if I would be choosing between those three lenses I would definitely pick the 16-55/2.8.

 JayPhizzt's gear list:JayPhizzt's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR Fujifilm XF 80mm F2.8 Macro +1 more
Jerry-astro
MOD Jerry-astro Forum Pro • Posts: 16,849
Back to the topic, please...
2

R_U_Q_R_U wrote:

Maxxum Fan wrote:

R_U_Q_R_U wrote:

Maxxum Fan wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

Yep, Ken Rockwell likes it.

He likes everything as it helps his affiliate links. Also gets free trips and doesn't disclose them. Find a better more trusted source of information

Logic. He may get paid if you buy from a link on his site. It does not follow that his review is invalid because of this.

He does kinda suck up to makers tho, my main point

And gets review samples/paid trips. None of which is disclosed which is has to be under FTC rules. Why he doesn't is a mystery nothing to hide then be open about it. So nope I scrubbed him off the trust list a long time ago

Not that I was a huge fan before, but that kinda said a lot to me

I really find this kind of OT discussions kind of a waste of time, but...

Since you are making a flatly untrue statement I feel it necessary. At the bottom of almost every page on Ken Rockwell's website appears the following:

Ken Rockwell: Review of Fujinon XF 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR ASPH

As you can read, Ken clearly asks you that if you are going to buy the products he reviews to click the links on his site so he gets paid. This is no secret. He also asks people to make donations to support his work. Nothing wrong with this. No one is forced to click his links or give him any money. The site is not behind a paywall and his knowledge of vintage lenses is extensive and helpful to me.

Also, he differentiates between lenses he owns and those he is just reviewing. How?

At the start of every review he uses one of these phrases:

"I got mine at..." or "I'd get mine at..." the later meaning he does not own it and is just reviewing it. Maybe not as explicit as you wish. But must reviewers do not buy everything they review.

Information form KenRockwell.com

OK, as you pointed out, this is wandering WAY OT. Let’s please get back to the topic or else this thread will end up in the ever growing pile of locked threads.

-- hide signature --

Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

 Jerry-astro's gear list:Jerry-astro's gear list
Fujifilm X-H1 Carl Zeiss Touit 2.8/12 Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Fujifilm XF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 OIS WR +1 more
jjz2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,043
Re: Buying the X-T4 - but which kit lens

Maxxum Fan wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

Yep, Ken Rockwell likes it.

He likes everything as it helps his affiliate links. Also gets free trips and doesn't disclose them. Find a better more trusted source of information

Sidebar:

The only thing I use Ken Rockwell for is his camera SPECS. He does good product photography and list specs in an easy to read manner, better than most sites.

I hate his actual insanely vivid photography though and don't agree with him 90% of the time.

He's one of dozens of photo sites, and has been around for a long time.

OK back to topic...

 jjz2's gear list:jjz2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R +2 more
57LowRider Veteran Member • Posts: 4,240
Re: No-Brainer! Time to Graduate. Get the 16-55!

Greg7579 wrote:

Yes.... Haha. Just having some fun.

But he really should get the Brick.

I told him. The Brick.

 57LowRider's gear list:57LowRider's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R +11 more
Maxxum Fan Regular Member • Posts: 452
Re: Buying the X-T4 - but which kit lens

jjz2 wrote:

Maxxum Fan wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

Yep, Ken Rockwell likes it.

He likes everything as it helps his affiliate links. Also gets free trips and doesn't disclose them. Find a better more trusted source of information

Sidebar:

The only thing I use Ken Rockwell for is his camera SPECS. He does good product photography and list specs in an easy to read manner, better than most sites.

I hate his actual insanely vivid photography though and don't agree with him 90% of the time.

He's one of dozens of photo sites, and has been around for a long time.

OK back to topic...

Exactly being around a long time doesn't mean quality content. He maxed out his settings to the hilt on contrast/saturation/sharpness so not a good source for judging IQ.

Look fair play to the dude but unwise to base buying choices on that. Some of these sites are just there, and have been for ages Phoblographer another one. Judge for yourself if it's worth it. Again the FTC point requires disclosure on sent review items etc, and he does say he is on the affiliate schemes, but never mentions the other stuff conveniently.

Always use multiple sources for reviews that way you get a much better overall picture. Optical limits, sure pretty good lenstip can be but their processing is odd (always soft for some reason) and just images that are shot by others

Michael Berg
OP Michael Berg Contributing Member • Posts: 876
Thank you all

-for your comments and opinions. So many of you recommend the 16-55/2.8, which is indeed an amazing lens - and no doubt the most useful of the bunch on an X-T4 with the new IBIS system.

I'll have to decide if I want to splurge the extra cash or get a cheap 18-55/2.8-4 which is light weight and absolutely fine optically.

Because how can I afford the 16-55 when I also want to get the 50-140 at some point?

Greg7579
Greg7579 Forum Pro • Posts: 12,724
Re: Buying the X-T4 - but which kit lens
1

jjz2 wrote:

Maxxum Fan wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

Yep, Ken Rockwell likes it.

He likes everything as it helps his affiliate links. Also gets free trips and doesn't disclose them. Find a better more trusted source of information

Sidebar:

The only thing I use Ken Rockwell for is his camera SPECS. He does good product photography and list specs in an easy to read manner, better than most sites.

I hate his actual insanely vivid photography though and don't agree with him 90% of the time.

He's one of dozens of photo sites, and has been around for a long time.

OK back to topic...

OK, but first, what is your opinion of the other big Ken (the Angry Photographer)?  He has more personally acquired gear than anyone in the World and I like his instincts about glass, bodies and the industry in general.  Sure he likes Fuji and Nikon a lot, but is fun to watch as slides off into the occasional (but usually spot-on) rant.  He also taught me how to clean a sensor!

😁

-- hide signature --
 Greg7579's gear list:Greg7579's gear list
Leica Q2 Fujifilm GFX 50R Fujifilm GFX 100 Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 Fujifilm 120mm F4 Macro +8 more
GPAtlanta Regular Member • Posts: 260
Re: No question

Michael Berg wrote:

Hello Joachim,

Thanks for your comments. And for the review on your site - those are very nice shots for sure.

There seems to be a lot of attention given to the 16-55/2.8 for its sharpness, but I was not so unsatisfied with the kit 18-55 that this alone makes me want to upgrade. But there are many other qualities about the lens that are more appealing. I think the contrast and coating is much better, and something less tangible but affects the colors and the light balance of the shot in a way which is difficult to explain. Some of that is due to post processing of course, but I've noticed in many times across different private web sites and review sites alike.

Anyway - thanks again. More to consider.

People like to think they spent more, so it must be twice as good.  Rarely is that true.  More like 10% better..

cmphotonh New Member • Posts: 8
Re: The Brick

I own the 16-55 2.8 and have never owned the 18-55. Find a way to get the 2.8. With every click of the shutter you will know you have the very BEST possible image. Every time.

 cmphotonh's gear list:cmphotonh's gear list
Canon PowerShot G5 X Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm X-T4 Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM +10 more
Il Mostro Regular Member • Posts: 344
Re: The Brick
1

IBIS and the 16-55 2.8 is a match made in heaven. It rarely leaves my X-H1. Wait out a deal on it and it's even better. Fuji's adding IBIS and this stellar lens are the primary reasons I made the decision to go with Fuji as my primary rig.

 Il Mostro's gear list:Il Mostro's gear list
Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Canon EOS 5D Fujifilm X-E1 Canon EOS 6D +39 more
Joachim Gerstl
Joachim Gerstl Veteran Member • Posts: 8,642
Re: No question

Michael Berg wrote:

Hello Joachim,

Thanks for your comments. And for the review on your site - those are very nice shots for sure.

There seems to be a lot of attention given to the 16-55/2.8 for its sharpness, but I was not so unsatisfied with the kit 18-55 that this alone makes me want to upgrade. But there are many other qualities about the lens that are more appealing. I think the contrast and coating is much better, and something less tangible but affects the colors and the light balance of the shot in a way which is difficult to explain. Some of that is due to post processing of course, but I've noticed in many times across different private web sites and review sites alike.

Anyway - thanks again. More to consider.

Thank you Michael. You are right. There is so much more than just sharpness. It is much sharper than the 18-55 but there are many other qualities that are maybe not so easy to measure like color, contrast and behaviour in difficult light.

One of my favourites Fuji lenses is the 23/1.4. Is it the sharpest lens? No but Bokeh, color, contrast is excellent. To some this is important to others it is not.

I like to think in numbers. So the perfect lens gets 10 to worst gets 1. The 16-55 is a 9, the 18-55 in my eyes is a 5 at best.

-- hide signature --
 Joachim Gerstl's gear list:Joachim Gerstl's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +8 more
Greg7579
Greg7579 Forum Pro • Posts: 12,724
Calling all Nikon Z and Alphasevenarefour fans....

Joachim Gerstl wrote:

Michael Berg wrote:

Hello Joachim,

Thanks for your comments. And for the review on your site - those are very nice shots for sure.

There seems to be a lot of attention given to the 16-55/2.8 for its sharpness, but I was not so unsatisfied with the kit 18-55 that this alone makes me want to upgrade. But there are many other qualities about the lens that are more appealing. I think the contrast and coating is much better, and something less tangible but affects the colors and the light balance of the shot in a way which is difficult to explain. Some of that is due to post processing of course, but I've noticed in many times across different private web sites and review sites alike.

Anyway - thanks again. More to consider.

Thank you Michael. You are right. There is so much more than just sharpness. It is much sharper than the 18-55 but there are many other qualities that are maybe not so easy to measure like color, contrast and behaviour in difficult light.

One of my favourites Fuji lenses is the 23/1.4. Is it the sharpest lens? No but Bokeh, color, contrast is excellent. To some this is important to others it is not.

I like to think in numbers. So the perfect lens gets 10 to worst gets 1. The 16-55 is a 9, the 18-55 in my eyes is a 5 at best.

I agree. Sometimes a lens is so good and marries up so well with a specific sensor that you get some kind of special "look" to images that can be described by fans as micro-contrast, 3D-Pop, dimensionality, depth, magic, brilliant and special - all terms that can get you in trouble but help describe what we think we see. There is just something about that kind of great glass.

I think the Mighty 16 is that was with Fuji X, along with the 56, 90, 200 and I will go so far as to say the great zoom Brick 16-55. I think the 23, 45, 32-64 and 110 are that way with Fuji GFX. And I think the F1.7 Summilux 28mm fixed lens on the Leica Q2 is another great example of that kind of special combination.  We argue about sensors and sensor size a lot but it is the glass that often shines and the combination of certain pairs that cause excitement and even joy.

Nikon has a lens like that too.  People talk about it all the time on the Medium Format Board because MF shooters often have high-res top-end FF gear too (and many MF shooters also instead use Fuji X instead of high-res FF as their other system.  The Z is very popular and there is this one great lens that everyone talks about.  Any Nikon lurkers here want to say what it is?

Same with Sony.  There is one new Sony top-end and very expensive lens that Sony guys say turn the alphasevenarefour into a magic time machine of extraordinary capability.  Any of you many Sony guys who read this Board cruising for opportunities care to tell us peons what lens I'm talking about?  😎  This is your opportunity to shine.

-- hide signature --
 Greg7579's gear list:Greg7579's gear list
Leica Q2 Fujifilm GFX 50R Fujifilm GFX 100 Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 Fujifilm 120mm F4 Macro +8 more
Jerry-astro
MOD Jerry-astro Forum Pro • Posts: 16,849
Re: Calling all Nikon Z and Alphasevenarefour fans....

Greg7579 wrote:

I agree. Sometimes a lens is so good and marries up so well with a specific sensor that you get some kind of special "look" to images that can be described by fans as micro-contrast, 3D-Pop, dimensionality, depth, magic, brilliant and special - all terms that can get you in trouble but help describe what we think we see. There is just something about that kind of great glass.

I think the Mighty 16 is that was with Fuji X, along with the 56, 90, 200 and I will go so far as to say the great zoom Brick 16-55. I think the 23, 45, 32-64 and 110 are that way with Fuji GFX. And I think the F1.7 Summilux 28mm fixed lens on the Leica Q2 is another great example of that kind of special combination. We argue about sensors and sensor size a lot but it is the glass that often shines and the combination of certain pairs that cause excitement and even joy.

Nikon has a lens like that too. People talk about it all the time on the Medium Format Board because MF shooters often have high-res top-end FF gear too (and many MF shooters also instead use Fuji X instead of high-res FF as their other system. The Z is very popular and there is this one great lens that everyone talks about. Any Nikon lurkers here want to say what it is?

Same with Sony. There is one new Sony top-end and very expensive lens that Sony guys say turn the alphasevenarefour into a magic time machine of extraordinary capability. Any of you many Sony guys who read this Board cruising for opportunities care to tell us peons what lens I'm talking about? 😎 This is your opportunity to shine.

Maybe a fun exercise, Greg, but given the fact that this is, after all, the Fuji Forum, I'm sort of missing the point. I think it's fair to acknowledge that all manufacturers have what some people might call "magic" lenses, and even providing an example or two is just fine. But, I really would prefer that we keep things more focused on Fuji's lineup and gear. An occasional comparison between a Fuji lens and its competitors is fine, but it's my humble opinion that a broader "whose lenses are magic" exercise here seems to be wandering well OT.

-- hide signature --

Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

 Jerry-astro's gear list:Jerry-astro's gear list
Fujifilm X-H1 Carl Zeiss Touit 2.8/12 Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Fujifilm XF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 OIS WR +1 more
Geekapoo
Geekapoo Senior Member • Posts: 2,582
Re: Calling all Nikon Z and Alphasevenarefour fans....

Jerry-astro wrote:

Maybe a fun exercise, Greg, but given the fact that this is, after all, the Fuji Forum, I'm sort of missing the point. I think it's fair to acknowledge that all manufacturers have what some people might call "magic" lenses, and even providing an example or two is just fine. But, I really would prefer that we keep things more focused on Fuji's lineup and gear. An occasional comparison between a Fuji lens and its competitors is fine, but it's my humble opinion that a broader "whose lenses are magic" exercise here seems to wandering well OT.

Although gear can be very important, I think it less about the magic lens or magic sensor and more about the magic skills (or good eye) of the photographer. People throw money at gear with the hope of taking better pictures but instead should focus more on the process. The good news is that Fuji has an exceptional ecosphere of bodies/lenses..in general, hard to go wrong. Very enabling.

 Geekapoo's gear list:Geekapoo's gear list
Sony RX100 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR Sony RX10 IV Fujifilm X-T3 Sony a7R IV +11 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads