Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Martin P Wilson

Fuji 18-135mm lens

Recommended Posts

I got my Fuji 18-135mm lens yesterday and while generally pleased, especially with the range (simplifies walkaround kit) I do have a couple of concerns.

 

First: do other people find the last bit of the zoom range ~100-135mm a bit tight and not as smooth as the rest of the action?

 

Secondly: I am finding significant chromatic aberration at the 18mm end of the range. It just about cleans up with the CA correction in Capture 1 Pro but there seems to be a hint of residual fringing. (I will sort out some 100% crops in due course). In the light of recent discussions about QC failing images for CA I am very concerned that this lens might not be usable for Alamy! I need to run more tests as all the images I noticed it on were taken at around f13-14 which will be getting into diffraction territory or is it perhaps an artifact from the C1Pro demosaicing of the X-Trans data?

 

The ooc jpegs seem well corrected (see below).

 

First the uncorrected raw:

_XT14116.jpg

 

And now the ooc JPEG

_XT14116%201%20.jpg

 

Anybody else with this lens have any thoughts?

 

Thanks

 

Martin

Edited by Martin P Wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been using this lens for a couple of weeks now and have had several images taken at the wide end (18-20mm) pass QC.  Any CA has cleaned up in LR with no problems.  I don't tend to use small apertures though, preferring f8-f11.

 

All images have passed QC BTW.

 

Pearl

Edited by Pearl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too found the long end of the zoom to be a little tight and have put it down to the water resistant seal on the lens barrel. It does not concern me and I have become used to it, just applying a little extra pressure on the last part of the zoom.

 

As pearl says the CA cleans up in LR but it does not appear to be significant with my lens at the wide end. Generally I do not shoot above f11 and generally stay with f8 so perhaps that is probably the reason I do not have significant CA either.

 

Allan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I will try actively limiting myself to f8-11 with this lens especially at the short end. I usually aim for about 2 stops down from wide open anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problems with mine either, shot wider aperture than your shots. Love this lens, mine is sharp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone, I am happy with the sharpness from what I have seen. I already appreciate the extra range - I am less likely to get caught between lenses. It was just that I have not had to worry about CA with my other lenses (Canon & Fuji) and we had a discussion elsewhere about QC failures due to CA - bad timing!

 

To be honest I should not be shooting at smaller apertures than f11 on such a short focal length and a small sensor!

 

I will do some my experiementing over next few days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin, I click on 'Remove CA' in LR5 with every image. It's the first move I make in Post. And most zooms have problems at the far ends. I try to pull back a little from each end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks

 

Martin, I click on 'Remove CA' in LR5 with every image. It's the first move I make in Post. And most zooms have problems at the far ends. I try to pull back a little from each end. 

 

Thanks Ed, I think that is what I will do especially as lenses are increasingly desisgned for the final corrections to be made in software (on or off the camera). For that reason I already have the auto distortion correction switched on in C1 Pro, I often use the purple fringing option, so it is no big deal to switch on CA correction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have found that clicking "remove CA" in LR does not always remove all the fringing and need to double check to manually remove what is left.

 

Allan

Edited by Allan Bell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took a few more pictures with the lens today and I see CA on slightly out of focus areas in reasonable light (alloy wheel of a classic car) at 19mm and f5. It is fully cleaned up and sharp in the ooc JPEg but C1Pro leaves a hint of fringing on the raw file.

 

I only seem to have default CA correction, not analyse which is supposedly better. Anyone who uses C1Pro know how to force it to analyse for CA and make it default? Sounds like an evening with the manual for me.

 

I just looked at some images from my 18-55mm at 18mm and f10, it too had a trace (less than the 18-135mm but that is pushing lens design limits much harder) of CA that cleaned up with lens correction tool. I may be getting paranoid as a result of others being failed for CA by QC!

Edited by Martin P Wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin, if CA can't make you paranoid, what will? Zooms are so handy and convenient . . . but they do come with a bag of snakes.   :ph34r:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using LR and it cleans up well. I seldom get CA with my T1 and any of the lenses, but ticking the box in LR does the job when I do.

On another note.

Two and a half years ago, Images I took of a snake in a tree, swamp, moss, Louisiana, had so much CA I couldn't use the images. Nothing I did made the images useable. The tree, snake and moss was against a bright sky, of course. I revisited those images yesterday. Not in LR, but CC PS. Ticking the box removed every bit of it, and CA was about as bad as it can get before!

Amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I have to come up with another snake story, Betty?  I remember this black mamba called Fred. . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its interesting as I was under the impression that the Fujis did lens corrections to the JPG's in camera... 

 

Although this link seems to suggest RAW also... but extreme CA caused by lighting would not be corrected,, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its interesting as I was under the impression that the Fujis did lens corrections to the JPG's in camera...

 

Although this link seems to suggest RAW also... but extreme CA caused by lighting would not be corrected,,

Yes the ooc JPEGs are very clean and sharp - no hesitation sending them to Alamy (as I do for news). I don't see any lens correction in RAWs - I suspect his converter  (ACR) was automatically acting on the correction metadata in the file - CI gives the option. My issue is with the RAW images, As Betty and Allan suggest current version of LR cleans them up nicely, Capture 1 Pro which I use does not quite match the ooc Jpegs when it comes to cleaning up CA but I believe it has other benefits.

 

I have sent Phase One a couple of files and raised a support case.

Edited by Martin P Wilson
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been using this lens for a couple of weeks now and have had several images taken at the wide end (18-20mm) pass QC.  Any CA has cleaned up in LR with no problems.  I don't tend to use small apertures though, preferring f8-f11.

 

All images have passed QC BTW.

 

Pearl

 

+1. I read somewhere that the sweet spot was between f/8 - f/11 although I have had good results up to f/13. 

 

It isn't my favourite lens in terms of IQ but I've kept it for those bad weather days and general stock use. I find this lens requires a lot more sharpening than any other Fuji lens.

 

If I'm out in the hills on good weather days, I opt for the X-T1 with the 56mm and the Pro one with the 23mm. Both attached to backpack harness straps with Capture Clips from peak design. That way I have two popular FL's and the weight is on the Backpack and not my neck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the lens and for travel I can get away with one lens, or two if I am likely to need to go wide. For news stuff it is also ideal as I was frequently running out of reach with the 18-55mm and the 55-200mm on my E1 focusses too slowly to use as a second body. I could actually imagine reducing mytravel/soft news kit to the X-T1 with 10-24mm and 18-135mm; perhaps adding the X-T3 in due course!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I read somewhere that the sweet spot was between f/8 - f/11 

 

 

 

Thats a good general rule to apply to most lenses... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I read somewhere that the sweet spot was between f/8 - f/11 

 

 

 

Thats a good general rule to apply to most lenses... 

 

 

When I can I aim around 2 stops down from maximum aperture which is effectively much the same thing except on fast lenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The general rule used to be: divide the f/ stops into thirds, find the point where the second third begins out from the widest opening. The sharpest f/ stops are that one and one stop in each direction from that one. So with an f 2.8 lens that would be f/5.6 and f/8 and f/4. Having trotted that old rule out, I do do lens tests on new lenses. Not bench tests on a tripod, but handheld shots of a poster on a wall in bright light. The tests usually show that the rule is correct. The difference between f/5.6 and f/8 is usually very slight, if there is a difference. But lenses do vary, and of course there are other considerations.

 

I once owned an Olympia Sonnar 180mm f/2.8, and that was as sharp wide open as it was at f/8. My Nikon 180 f/2.8 is almost as good. 

 

I bought a Nikon 24-120 f/4 zoom when it came out. It had been given mostly bad reviews . . . but I bought one anyway, thinking I might well have to return it. It turned out to be a very good lens. It is a refurbished lens, by the way, and that could well have made a positive difference. 

 

Edo

Edited by Ed Rooney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I have to come up with another snake story, Betty?  I remember this black mamba called Fred. . . .

 

I don't name my snakes.  I just turn them into snake butter.  Well...at least one copperhead that I beat with a piece of angle iron.  A personal vendetta, caused by one biting my husband on the toe and the ensuing fright over it. 

The next one I saw after that event paid the price.  I don't get mad, I get even.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revenge is a dish best eaten cold ...

 

BTW I have Phase One R&D looking at the Capture One Pro CA issue with my Fuji 18-135mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do I have to come up with another snake story, Betty?  I remember this black mamba called Fred. . . .

 

I don't name my snakes.  I just turn them into snake butter.  Well...at least one copperhead that I beat with a piece of angle iron.  A personal vendetta, caused by one biting my husband on the toe and the ensuing fright over it. 

The next one I saw after that event paid the price.  I don't get mad, I get even.

 

 

I once knew a French actress in Rome who kept a King Cobra in her apartment. It was in a large glass enclosure, but the glass didn't look that thick to me. And this was after I had seen two of them in Vietnam, so this animal made me nervous. Kings are normally shy snakes and avoid humans . . . unless they find themselves cornered. Like in a glass encloser.

 

I did post some lens comments at the bottom of Page 1, before drifting back into snake talk. Sorry, OP. 

Edited by Ed Rooney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.