XF 18-135 vs XF 18-120

Started Oct 6, 2022 | Discussions
Atsel
Atsel Regular Member • Posts: 300
XF 18-135 vs XF 18-120
1

Currently I have 18-135mm lens for my Fujifilm X-S10 camera.

I consider changing it for the new 18-120mm powerzoom lens. I see smooth zooming as its main advantage.

Another important aspect is image stabilization quality on cameras with IBIS.

From first look, OIS in 18-135mm lens give it an advantage. But from my experience, 18-55mm lens and prime lenses like Sigma 16/1.4 and Fujinon 18/2 give smoother footage handheld at wide angles than 18-135mm lens on X-S10 camera. That's why I search for a comparison between 18-135mm and 18-120mm lenses or some first-hand experience. Maybe it is too early though and nobody has 18-120mm lens yet.

 Atsel's gear list:Atsel's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL2 Nikon Coolpix P330 Nikon Coolpix P340 Samsung GX-20 Canon EOS 550D +46 more
MarcosV Veteran Member • Posts: 6,525
Re: XF 18-135 vs XF 18-120
1

Atsel wrote:

Currently I have 18-135mm lens for my Fujifilm X-S10 camera.

I consider changing it for the new 18-120mm powerzoom lens. I see smooth zooming as its main advantage.

Another important aspect is image stabilization quality on cameras with IBIS.

From first look, OIS in 18-135mm lens give it an advantage. But from my experience, 18-55mm lens and prime lenses like Sigma 16/1.4 and Fujinon 18/2 give smoother footage handheld at wide angles than 18-135mm lens on X-S10 camera. That's why I search for a comparison between 18-135mm and 18-120mm lenses or some first-hand experience. Maybe it is too early though and nobody has 18-120mm lens yet.

If you like to shoot video and use a camera with IBIS, I think the 18-120 is a great choice for zooming while recording.  Constant f/4 is also very nice.

I am not sure there will be very many who will directly compare the 18-135 to the 18-120 given how old the 18-135 is.   Maybe an 18-135 vs. 16-80 and then a 16-80 to 18-120 comparison might give you the information you are looking for?

My 18-135 was the first Fujifilm lens I gave away back in 2018.  I much rather use the 16-55/2.8 on an X-H1 with IBIS than the 18-135 with its noticeably variable max aperture while you zoom.

I'm personally toying with buying the 18-120 to replace my 16-80.  Another option I am considering is saving up for a 150-600 instead --- got to use my 100-400 more often to "justify" the 150-600.   COVID years had really gotten me out of the habit of going outside and shooting with telephoto lenses.

 MarcosV's gear list:MarcosV's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Fujifilm XF 50-140mm F2.8 Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR XF 90mm +28 more
Atsel
OP Atsel Regular Member • Posts: 300
Re: XF 18-135 vs XF 18-120
1

MarcosV wrote:

Atsel wrote:

Currently I have 18-135mm lens for my Fujifilm X-S10 camera.

I consider changing it for the new 18-120mm powerzoom lens. I see smooth zooming as its main advantage.

Another important aspect is image stabilization quality on cameras with IBIS.

From first look, OIS in 18-135mm lens give it an advantage. But from my experience, 18-55mm lens and prime lenses like Sigma 16/1.4 and Fujinon 18/2 give smoother footage handheld at wide angles than 18-135mm lens on X-S10 camera. That's why I search for a comparison between 18-135mm and 18-120mm lenses or some first-hand experience. Maybe it is too early though and nobody has 18-120mm lens yet.

If you like to shoot video and use a camera with IBIS, I think the 18-120 is a great choice for zooming while recording. Constant f/4 is also very nice.

I am not sure there will be very many who will directly compare the 18-135 to the 18-120 given how old the 18-135 is. Maybe an 18-135 vs. 16-80 and then a 16-80 to 18-120 comparison might give you the information you are looking for?

Yes, comparison of 16-80 vs 18-120 on body with IBIS would be nice too. I find stabilization with my 18-135 especially good at telephoto focal lengths though. I suspect that 18-120 will be not that good in 80-120mm range.

My 18-135 was the first Fujifilm lens I gave away back in 2018. I much rather use the 16-55/2.8 on an X-H1 with IBIS than the 18-135 with its noticeably variable max aperture while you zoom.

I wouldn't even try to zoom 18-135mm lens while recording because its zoom ring is quite stiff.

Once I had an option to test 16-55mm lens for a couple of days. I took it in my hands... And gave it back immediately It was the time when 35/1.4 and 18/2 lenses were mainstream so maybe today with bulkier lenses overall my perception could change. Speaking of 16-55mm I find it too large for what it is though. Fujinon 18-135mm lens is also larger than counterpart lenses from Sony and Canon, so there might be some design advantage in these Fuji lenses (bokeh?..).

I'm personally toying with buying the 18-120 to replace my 16-80. Another option I am considering is saving up for a 150-600 instead --- got to use my 100-400 more often to "justify" the 150-600. COVID years had really gotten me out of the habit of going outside and shooting with telephoto lenses.

My Panasonic Leica 100-400mm lens didn't see much use yet too. It is so much smaller than gigantic Fujinon 100-400mm and 150-600mm lenses that I see Micro Four Thirds system as a separate option for telephoto lenses.

 Atsel's gear list:Atsel's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL2 Nikon Coolpix P330 Nikon Coolpix P340 Samsung GX-20 Canon EOS 550D +46 more
MarcosV Veteran Member • Posts: 6,525
Re: XF 18-135 vs XF 18-120
1

Atsel wrote:

MarcosV wrote:

Atsel wrote:

Currently I have 18-135mm lens for my Fujifilm X-S10 camera.

I consider changing it for the new 18-120mm powerzoom lens. I see smooth zooming as its main advantage.

Another important aspect is image stabilization quality on cameras with IBIS.

From first look, OIS in 18-135mm lens give it an advantage. But from my experience, 18-55mm lens and prime lenses like Sigma 16/1.4 and Fujinon 18/2 give smoother footage handheld at wide angles than 18-135mm lens on X-S10 camera. That's why I search for a comparison between 18-135mm and 18-120mm lenses or some first-hand experience. Maybe it is too early though and nobody has 18-120mm lens yet.

If you like to shoot video and use a camera with IBIS, I think the 18-120 is a great choice for zooming while recording. Constant f/4 is also very nice.

I am not sure there will be very many who will directly compare the 18-135 to the 18-120 given how old the 18-135 is. Maybe an 18-135 vs. 16-80 and then a 16-80 to 18-120 comparison might give you the information you are looking for?

Yes, comparison of 16-80 vs 18-120 on body with IBIS would be nice too. I find stabilization with my 18-135 especially good at telephoto focal lengths though. I suspect that 18-120 will be not that good in 80-120mm range.

My 18-135 was the first Fujifilm lens I gave away back in 2018. I much rather use the 16-55/2.8 on an X-H1 with IBIS than the 18-135 with its noticeably variable max aperture while you zoom.

I wouldn't even try to zoom 18-135mm lens while recording because its zoom ring is quite stiff.

Once I had an option to test 16-55mm lens for a couple of days. I took it in my hands... And gave it back immediately It was the time when 35/1.4 and 18/2 lenses were mainstream so maybe today with bulkier lenses overall my perception could change. Speaking of 16-55mm I find it too large for what it is though. Fujinon 18-135mm lens is also larger than counterpart lenses from Sony and Canon, so there might be some design advantage in these Fuji lenses (bokeh?..).

When I bought the X-T1, I wished the 18-135 was available as bundled kit lens --- I figured with  its WR, it would be a good travel lens.  Instead I "settled" for the 18-55, 55-200 (on sale), and 35/1.4 (also on sale).

In the end, I found I just shot with the Fujifilm primes and ignored the zooms.  I never really used the 18-55, taking less than 200 shots with it!  By the time I got back into standard zooms, I bought a used 16-55/2.8.  I bought a used 18-135; but, never really warmed up to it either.

Thanks to IBIS on the X-H1, I became an OIS/IBIS snob.  I only use fast primes with my X-Pro2 and X-T30.

I'm personally toying with buying the 18-120 to replace my 16-80. Another option I am considering is saving up for a 150-600 instead --- got to use my 100-400 more often to "justify" the 150-600. COVID years had really gotten me out of the habit of going outside and shooting with telephoto lenses.

My Panasonic Leica 100-400mm lens didn't see much use yet too. It is so much smaller than gigantic Fujinon 100-400mm and 150-600mm lenses that I see Micro Four Thirds system as a separate option for telephoto lenses.

I really wanted to love m43 for the incredibly compact lenses.  However, I could never get myself to invest heavily into the system because back then I believed Panasonic and Olympus would not significantly invest into m43 sensors with significantly better high ISO performance/resolution.

 MarcosV's gear list:MarcosV's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Fujifilm XF 50-140mm F2.8 Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR XF 90mm +28 more
Atsel
OP Atsel Regular Member • Posts: 300
Re: XF 18-135 vs XF 18-120

MarcosV wrote:

Atsel wrote:

MarcosV wrote:

Atsel wrote:

Currently I have 18-135mm lens for my Fujifilm X-S10 camera.

I consider changing it for the new 18-120mm powerzoom lens. I see smooth zooming as its main advantage.

Another important aspect is image stabilization quality on cameras with IBIS.

From first look, OIS in 18-135mm lens give it an advantage. But from my experience, 18-55mm lens and prime lenses like Sigma 16/1.4 and Fujinon 18/2 give smoother footage handheld at wide angles than 18-135mm lens on X-S10 camera. That's why I search for a comparison between 18-135mm and 18-120mm lenses or some first-hand experience. Maybe it is too early though and nobody has 18-120mm lens yet.

If you like to shoot video and use a camera with IBIS, I think the 18-120 is a great choice for zooming while recording. Constant f/4 is also very nice.

I am not sure there will be very many who will directly compare the 18-135 to the 18-120 given how old the 18-135 is. Maybe an 18-135 vs. 16-80 and then a 16-80 to 18-120 comparison might give you the information you are looking for?

Yes, comparison of 16-80 vs 18-120 on body with IBIS would be nice too. I find stabilization with my 18-135 especially good at telephoto focal lengths though. I suspect that 18-120 will be not that good in 80-120mm range.

My 18-135 was the first Fujifilm lens I gave away back in 2018. I much rather use the 16-55/2.8 on an X-H1 with IBIS than the 18-135 with its noticeably variable max aperture while you zoom.

I wouldn't even try to zoom 18-135mm lens while recording because its zoom ring is quite stiff.

Once I had an option to test 16-55mm lens for a couple of days. I took it in my hands... And gave it back immediately It was the time when 35/1.4 and 18/2 lenses were mainstream so maybe today with bulkier lenses overall my perception could change. Speaking of 16-55mm I find it too large for what it is though. Fujinon 18-135mm lens is also larger than counterpart lenses from Sony and Canon, so there might be some design advantage in these Fuji lenses (bokeh?..).

When I bought the X-T1, I wished the 18-135 was available as bundled kit lens --- I figured with its WR, it would be a good travel lens. Instead I "settled" for the 18-55, 55-200 (on sale), and 35/1.4 (also on sale).

In the end, I found I just shot with the Fujifilm primes and ignored the zooms. I never really used the 18-55, taking less than 200 shots with it! By the time I got back into standard zooms, I bought a used 16-55/2.8. I bought a used 18-135; but, never really warmed up to it either.

Thanks to IBIS on the X-H1, I became an OIS/IBIS snob. I only use fast primes with my X-Pro2 and X-T30.

There was something (form factor) in X-Pro2 that I miss in my current X-S10. X-T20 with MHG-XT10 grip was nice too! I don't like the grip of my X-S10 actually.

I've started buying cameras which could be considered 'serious' with Samsung GX-20 in 2008 then moved to Olympus mirrorless so IBIS was always natural part of camera bodies in my view.

I'm personally toying with buying the 18-120 to replace my 16-80. Another option I am considering is saving up for a 150-600 instead --- got to use my 100-400 more often to "justify" the 150-600. COVID years had really gotten me out of the habit of going outside and shooting with telephoto lenses.

My Panasonic Leica 100-400mm lens didn't see much use yet too. It is so much smaller than gigantic Fujinon 100-400mm and 150-600mm lenses that I see Micro Four Thirds system as a separate option for telephoto lenses.

I really wanted to love m43 for the incredibly compact lenses. However, I could never get myself to invest heavily into the system because back then I believed Panasonic and Olympus would not significantly invest into m43 sensors with significantly better high ISO performance/resolution.

Looks like there is one leading tech in sensor development and they simply cut sensors depending on format (25 MP for 4/3 -> 40 MP for APS-C -> so waiting 90 MP for FF and 160 MP for digital MF). Maybe if Canon begins to sell their sensors to other camera companies we'll see something different.

 Atsel's gear list:Atsel's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL2 Nikon Coolpix P330 Nikon Coolpix P340 Samsung GX-20 Canon EOS 550D +46 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads