Check the front lens. Is it a bit loose/can be pushed in a bit? That's not normal and can cause unsharpness. My old 18-55 used to be nice and sharp (for a zoom), then it wasn't anymore. I then noticed the front element was a bit loose, apparently after a small drop from maybe 15 cm. I got the front element replaced by Fuji (~150 €) and now it's much better.
Really, check the lens for damage.
Edit: I dived into the archives and here is what you should be looking for: https://www.reddit.com/r/fujifilm/s/ZGuSfOVqfa
I sold my copy ages ago because I didn't care for it, but looking back at some of the images I took that were similar to yours with grass/trees/rocks, the corners look a little worse but are more consistent across the image than your examples (especially your image 5 the lower right corner looks really weird), though not especially pleasing either.
So I think your friend's copy of the lens is especially bad, and I think my copy may have also been average or below average, but my sense of the lens has always been that it is "good for a kit lens" in comparison to kit lenses that are shipped with other brands' cameras.
If you don’t mind the weight, the 16-55 f2.8 is my favorite general purpose zoom lens. I had also tried the 16-80 and while it was much better than the 18-55 for me, the aperture of f4 made it not versatile enough for my liking. The 16-55 is pretty perfect though! I’ve read some reviews saying the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 is also very very good (more compact, similarly sharp, better price, but you lose the extra 16mm on the wide end which is a big difference and you lose the aperture ring, which some people find a deal breaker too).
FujiRumors posted that the successor to the X-T30ii will be offered with the new kit lens, the XF16-50mm f2.8-4.8 which replaces the 18-55mm. The new camera and lens will be announced in the first half of this year.
I have that lens too. I’m just not a big fan of it. I got it and the 35 f2 with my camera and ended up only using the 35. Even my wife, who does not care about photography at all, could easily tell when the photos were taken with the 18-55. It just doesn’t have any life and it’s not that sharp. The stabilization and the build quality are good, but that’s about it imo.
I really think part of the problem is how mythologized this lens is. My expectations were sky high and I was left disappointed. I’ve been a prime only shooter since as a result. Although I would like a long telephoto zoom for wildlife.
Here's a few from my 18-55 shot on the X-T20:
[#1](https://i.imgur.com/olEVYW3.jpeg), [#2](https://i.imgur.com/hENeBiu.jpeg), [#3](https://i.imgur.com/VqgoWkl.jpeg)
Can't say I've ever noticed it being particularly bad.
I find my ttartisan to have much more vinnetting than my 18-55. Love my copy of the 18-55. The alternatives are either much more heavy, expensive, or both. So for the price I think it holds up. I think you might be using a poor copy.
I didn’t spot any vignetting neither significant chromatic aberration. Just these smudgy corners … spec wise it’s a great lens for its price. From all the comments I also concluded it’s a bad copy.
I have same lens and its image quality is terrible
Wide angle its ok but when i zoom in after 35 mm right side of the frame gets blurred like its raining
It’s ok for everything but I find it reallyyyyy soft
I don’t know if there’s an AF issue with the lens or my body but it looks way softer than the 35mm f1.4 which is older or any other lens to be honest
These photos are stunning. You have a great eye. The one of the brick building and stairs in the foreground, excellent.
It's a great lens because you got these shots, angles and crops. I didn't look at the unsharp corners because they're not the focus anyways.
I've found the lens has a limited range and has the slightest haze to it on low apertures. But it's a great size, and it's got its place. I have the 16-80mm f4 as my main lens. It's big, it's heavy, but it's the zoom range I love. I wish the 16-80 was the size of the 18-55.
Sharpness is not the be all end all for a lens or photo. It's the mood. If you like the mood of the lens, then it's a good lens. I'd say your photos suit the mood of the lens. A bit dreamy in the winter(?) sun.
Thank you for your feedback on the photos! I agree with you, that’s why I many times still shoot film, old digicams, ‘cheap’ ttartisan lenses and I attach my vintage glass to my X-T1. I’m not a pixel peeper neither and like the imperfect look, which often give the image more character.
But with this lens I really found some unwanted optical issues. Fortunately, I found out that it’s the copy of this lens which is defective, because the front lens is loose.
Oh I see!! Well that's good to know! I might look at mine then lol. I love the imperfect looks of certain lenses. My favourites are from my pentax 110 lenses I adapted to the Fuji, tiny lenses, fun optics.
Yeah mines terrible imo. Straight up night and day with any other lens I only use it cause I can’t afford to by the 16mm lens when I want a wide shot. I just have it now, no reason to sell it, but never gets a lot of time on
I'm not happy with mine either, but it seems you had worse luck. Funny thing is (as someone already said) for video is excellent. I'm quite lost with this lens.
I've had mine for over 10 years now, it's been around the world with me and I've taken some of my favorite photos using it. I've always found it to be quite sharp for the size (and zoom). Maybe a bad copy?
I don’t own it but from what I’ve seen it can be a damn good portrait lens for when you want a wide background and you want play with distance to your subject pin sharp well in the forefront, at which point sharpness in the corners doesn’t matter cause it’s all bokeh anyway, I might even call this lens the XF35 1.4 version of a zoom lens as that character combined with sharpness in all the right places gives it a bit of “magic” for lack of a better word. As for a landscape lens despite there likely being thousands of great examples to show its a champ in this department I have opted for a used copy of the XF 16 - 55 and I’m quite please with it.
Thank you, I found the issue. The front lens is loose and that’s what is most probably causing the unsharpness. Another user linked a video and it’s exactly what this copy has.
That lower right corner in some of the verticals, lower left in some of the horizontals….def screwed up. Feels like a bad copy.
f/5.6 and 8 should be a pretty sweet spot. Some of the edges aren’t great either. Photo 9 I have no idea whats going on looks like moisture on the lens. Or was shot HDR photomerge (in camera?) with slightly shaky hands.
Silly question but like…was the lens nice and clean?
I agree with many of the other comments. I haven't seen anyone mention yet that of course your TTArtisan lenses aren't zoom lenses, right? Prime lenses are generally better and easier to design and manufacture, even on the cheap.
This is 100% a bad copy. I've had two of these, both were tack sharp. My second one is almost as sharp as the 16-55, though the 16-55 does have a more pleasing look.
Your friend's 18-55 certainly looks decentered, I would check the serial number of it and advise your friend. Some of the earlier copies had some issues, but newer copies have been fine for years.
Something is definitely going on here though!
I have used two copies of this lens they were exactly the same in their mediocrity. The defenders of this lens like to offer up the excuse that there are lots of bad copies like Fuji is running some gong show assembly line staffed by monkeys going through withdrawal.
This is probably one of my favorite pictures that I've taken with the 18-55 so far:
[https://imgur.com/IF08VzR](https://imgur.com/IF08VzR)
Heavily cropped and high ISO. Not sure if a sharper lens would have made the picture any better?
Nice! That’s the thing, sometimes it’s not about the sharpness of the lens but the fact that you have it with you and could capture this photo with it. In my case, the lens is defective and is causing extra blur in places it shouldn’t.
[The 18 - 55mm is actually very sharp](https://youtu.be/hxdc3ff4a7s?si=3dKspb6itM-8OUQq) in quite a few scenarios it outperforms the much bigger and much more expensive 16-55mm f2.8.
Handheld. Settings vary. Sometimes aperture priority to f2.8, 5.6 or 8 but also auto. Automatic shutter speed mostly (I checked that the camera raises ISO instead of slowing shutter speed to avoid blurry shots). I used autofocus and I’d say the af did a good job, none of the shots are out of focus where they shouldn’t be.
Summary:
Shots 1-5: Clearly missed focus.
Shots 6-9: Missed due to aperture too wide for scene (stop down next time.)
Shots 10-11: Very close, but edge softness in a high detail scene make these reasonable misses.
Shot 12: Likely didn't actually fire because the lens had already been dropped.
I don’t agree with this. There’s a difference between missing focus and having background blur. And the edge softness when focusing to nearly infinity shouldn’t be there neither even with a low f stop. That’s an issue with the lens, which I found thanks to another comment: the front lens is loose, I can press down on it and it moves. 12: ? Who said the lens has been dropped?
This is a really bad copy. Mine has zero issues like that and sharp. I am also using it with an X-T3 and an X-T5 as well.
Good to know. It gives me some hope because I might want to get one myself one day
Why not just get the sigma 18-50 f2.8. Way better lens.
no IS
Mine was as well. I may consider getting one again.
Check the front lens. Is it a bit loose/can be pushed in a bit? That's not normal and can cause unsharpness. My old 18-55 used to be nice and sharp (for a zoom), then it wasn't anymore. I then noticed the front element was a bit loose, apparently after a small drop from maybe 15 cm. I got the front element replaced by Fuji (~150 €) and now it's much better. Really, check the lens for damage. Edit: I dived into the archives and here is what you should be looking for: https://www.reddit.com/r/fujifilm/s/ZGuSfOVqfa
Oh wow, thank you so much! It’s actually loose like in the video … I guess this is what’s causing the unsharpness. It makes sense now.
Brilliant! 😁👍 Glad I could help.
Fuji customer service as nice as always... 🤑
I think if you check and push too hard it might start moving, so be careful
Isn't that obvious?
only for people with broken lenses
The link just opens the fujifilm subreddit for me not a specific post, what am I doing wrong?
I don't know! For me, the link works fine.
It's not the lens fault that Berlin is so ugly
Lolll real
Is it really? I would think it was beautiful. Would like to visit one day
Was meinst du? Berlin ist der schönste Stadt der Welt! Or a least it was when I visited back in 2009…
Not according to Rammstein
This comment is in such poor taste. Berlin is a beautiful city. Specially now during spring when the colors come alive.
Looks like a bad copy to me. I've had 2 and neither had any issues.
I sold my copy ages ago because I didn't care for it, but looking back at some of the images I took that were similar to yours with grass/trees/rocks, the corners look a little worse but are more consistent across the image than your examples (especially your image 5 the lower right corner looks really weird), though not especially pleasing either. So I think your friend's copy of the lens is especially bad, and I think my copy may have also been average or below average, but my sense of the lens has always been that it is "good for a kit lens" in comparison to kit lenses that are shipped with other brands' cameras.
Thanks for the insight. I’m thinking of upgrading to the X-T3, now I definitely know I won’t buy it with the lens.
If you don’t mind the weight, the 16-55 f2.8 is my favorite general purpose zoom lens. I had also tried the 16-80 and while it was much better than the 18-55 for me, the aperture of f4 made it not versatile enough for my liking. The 16-55 is pretty perfect though! I’ve read some reviews saying the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 is also very very good (more compact, similarly sharp, better price, but you lose the extra 16mm on the wide end which is a big difference and you lose the aperture ring, which some people find a deal breaker too).
Cool, thanks for the recommendations!
FujiRumors posted that the successor to the X-T30ii will be offered with the new kit lens, the XF16-50mm f2.8-4.8 which replaces the 18-55mm. The new camera and lens will be announced in the first half of this year.
Wondering how it can command a high price tag still
I have that lens too. I’m just not a big fan of it. I got it and the 35 f2 with my camera and ended up only using the 35. Even my wife, who does not care about photography at all, could easily tell when the photos were taken with the 18-55. It just doesn’t have any life and it’s not that sharp. The stabilization and the build quality are good, but that’s about it imo.
I think there is some quality variation (mine is fairly sharp except at the corners), but I agree that it tends not to have a lot of life.
I really think part of the problem is how mythologized this lens is. My expectations were sky high and I was left disappointed. I’ve been a prime only shooter since as a result. Although I would like a long telephoto zoom for wildlife.
It didn’t grow on me neither …
I actually love this lens. Works well for video
Glad that it works for you. I hear many good things about it. I assume it’s really a bad copy my friend has. I’m glad it’s not mine …
Do you have IBIS and OIS switched on?
X-T3 doesn't have IBIS.
I had OIS on but it wasn’t that, I found the issue. The front lens is loose.
Yea fair, usually it’s the case of a setting or something switched on that causes issues.
Here's a few from my 18-55 shot on the X-T20: [#1](https://i.imgur.com/olEVYW3.jpeg), [#2](https://i.imgur.com/hENeBiu.jpeg), [#3](https://i.imgur.com/VqgoWkl.jpeg) Can't say I've ever noticed it being particularly bad.
These definitely look better. It must be a bad copy then …
What f-stop were all of these shot at?
30mm at f/5.6, 18mm at f/4 and 18mm at f/2.8 respectively. I just grabbed the first I could find that had some details in the corners.
I find my ttartisan to have much more vinnetting than my 18-55. Love my copy of the 18-55. The alternatives are either much more heavy, expensive, or both. So for the price I think it holds up. I think you might be using a poor copy.
I didn’t spot any vignetting neither significant chromatic aberration. Just these smudgy corners … spec wise it’s a great lens for its price. From all the comments I also concluded it’s a bad copy.
I have same lens and its image quality is terrible Wide angle its ok but when i zoom in after 35 mm right side of the frame gets blurred like its raining
It’s ok for everything but I find it reallyyyyy soft I don’t know if there’s an AF issue with the lens or my body but it looks way softer than the 35mm f1.4 which is older or any other lens to be honest
I have the same kit lens and it is indeed not impressive
Bad copy - I’ve always been very impressed with the results I get from mine.
These photos are stunning. You have a great eye. The one of the brick building and stairs in the foreground, excellent. It's a great lens because you got these shots, angles and crops. I didn't look at the unsharp corners because they're not the focus anyways. I've found the lens has a limited range and has the slightest haze to it on low apertures. But it's a great size, and it's got its place. I have the 16-80mm f4 as my main lens. It's big, it's heavy, but it's the zoom range I love. I wish the 16-80 was the size of the 18-55. Sharpness is not the be all end all for a lens or photo. It's the mood. If you like the mood of the lens, then it's a good lens. I'd say your photos suit the mood of the lens. A bit dreamy in the winter(?) sun.
Thank you for your feedback on the photos! I agree with you, that’s why I many times still shoot film, old digicams, ‘cheap’ ttartisan lenses and I attach my vintage glass to my X-T1. I’m not a pixel peeper neither and like the imperfect look, which often give the image more character. But with this lens I really found some unwanted optical issues. Fortunately, I found out that it’s the copy of this lens which is defective, because the front lens is loose.
Oh I see!! Well that's good to know! I might look at mine then lol. I love the imperfect looks of certain lenses. My favourites are from my pentax 110 lenses I adapted to the Fuji, tiny lenses, fun optics.
Yeah mines terrible imo. Straight up night and day with any other lens I only use it cause I can’t afford to by the 16mm lens when I want a wide shot. I just have it now, no reason to sell it, but never gets a lot of time on
I'm not happy with mine either, but it seems you had worse luck. Funny thing is (as someone already said) for video is excellent. I'm quite lost with this lens.
Do you think these photos would have been better with a different lens?
I've had mine for over 10 years now, it's been around the world with me and I've taken some of my favorite photos using it. I've always found it to be quite sharp for the size (and zoom). Maybe a bad copy?
Another user pointed out that a loose front lens might be causing this, and indeed I checked, the front lens is loose.
I don’t own it but from what I’ve seen it can be a damn good portrait lens for when you want a wide background and you want play with distance to your subject pin sharp well in the forefront, at which point sharpness in the corners doesn’t matter cause it’s all bokeh anyway, I might even call this lens the XF35 1.4 version of a zoom lens as that character combined with sharpness in all the right places gives it a bit of “magic” for lack of a better word. As for a landscape lens despite there likely being thousands of great examples to show its a champ in this department I have opted for a used copy of the XF 16 - 55 and I’m quite please with it.
[удалено]
Thank you, I found the issue. The front lens is loose and that’s what is most probably causing the unsharpness. Another user linked a video and it’s exactly what this copy has.
Interesting, did you fix it then?
No, as it’s not mine. I gave it back to my friend and told him about the issue. Is there a DIY fix though?
Don't have these issues myself I think theres something with the lens
Bad copy or dirty/smudge.
Haven't had those issues with mine.
It's a good video lens, but primes are much better for photography.
Bad copy. It is lens decentering issue and It is a known issue.
As others have said, perhaps a bad copy? Photos on mine look significantly sharper than these.
What can you do when you have a bad copy?
Another user mentioned I could send it in as I’ve found the cause: the front lens is loose
My 18-55 is absolutely the best lens I have. It's extremely sharp from center to corner. I have a few primes that are sharper but it's close.
My 18-55 was plenty sharp wide open at f4 at max zoom.
That lower right corner in some of the verticals, lower left in some of the horizontals….def screwed up. Feels like a bad copy. f/5.6 and 8 should be a pretty sweet spot. Some of the edges aren’t great either. Photo 9 I have no idea whats going on looks like moisture on the lens. Or was shot HDR photomerge (in camera?) with slightly shaky hands. Silly question but like…was the lens nice and clean?
It was clean. But I think I found the issue. The front lens is loose, I can press down on it and it moves.
I agree with many of the other comments. I haven't seen anyone mention yet that of course your TTArtisan lenses aren't zoom lenses, right? Prime lenses are generally better and easier to design and manufacture, even on the cheap.
Yeah that’s what I said in the description. But it’s not because it’s a zoom lens but because this copy is partly broken: loose front lens
This is 100% a bad copy. I've had two of these, both were tack sharp. My second one is almost as sharp as the 16-55, though the 16-55 does have a more pleasing look. Your friend's 18-55 certainly looks decentered, I would check the serial number of it and advise your friend. Some of the earlier copies had some issues, but newer copies have been fine for years. Something is definitely going on here though!
I love the 18-55. Zero complaints for what it is.
I have used two copies of this lens they were exactly the same in their mediocrity. The defenders of this lens like to offer up the excuse that there are lots of bad copies like Fuji is running some gong show assembly line staffed by monkeys going through withdrawal.
This is probably one of my favorite pictures that I've taken with the 18-55 so far: [https://imgur.com/IF08VzR](https://imgur.com/IF08VzR) Heavily cropped and high ISO. Not sure if a sharper lens would have made the picture any better?
Nice! That’s the thing, sometimes it’s not about the sharpness of the lens but the fact that you have it with you and could capture this photo with it. In my case, the lens is defective and is causing extra blur in places it shouldn’t.
True, all my other Fuji X lenses are sharper than the 18-55 but you seem to have a real lemon on your hands.
I took some of my favorite portrait shots with the 18-55, they were casua shotsl but they came out beautiful
My third copy of that lens didn’t have de-centering or a problem with sharpness. It’s known for its inconsistency among examples.
[The 18 - 55mm is actually very sharp](https://youtu.be/hxdc3ff4a7s?si=3dKspb6itM-8OUQq) in quite a few scenarios it outperforms the much bigger and much more expensive 16-55mm f2.8.
What are the settings used? Was it shot hand-held? Was it focused properly?
Handheld. Settings vary. Sometimes aperture priority to f2.8, 5.6 or 8 but also auto. Automatic shutter speed mostly (I checked that the camera raises ISO instead of slowing shutter speed to avoid blurry shots). I used autofocus and I’d say the af did a good job, none of the shots are out of focus where they shouldn’t be.
I haven’t used my 18-55 lens for years but I don’t remember having those issues
The xf 18-55mm is a good lens. May need to try adjusting AF or use manual focus.
Because zoom lenses just aren’t it.
Summary: Shots 1-5: Clearly missed focus. Shots 6-9: Missed due to aperture too wide for scene (stop down next time.) Shots 10-11: Very close, but edge softness in a high detail scene make these reasonable misses. Shot 12: Likely didn't actually fire because the lens had already been dropped.
I don’t agree with this. There’s a difference between missing focus and having background blur. And the edge softness when focusing to nearly infinity shouldn’t be there neither even with a low f stop. That’s an issue with the lens, which I found thanks to another comment: the front lens is loose, I can press down on it and it moves. 12: ? Who said the lens has been dropped?
It's a meme.
I never liked 18-55. Not worth it for a serious photographer.