That new XF18-120 is perfect for videographers. Excellent price for a parfocal lens with that much range. My only concern is the exposure stepping. I know its been mentioned here and its marketing to have a constant exposure that isn't supposed to change, however, I have seen a lot of reviewers using pre-production models that have had exposure changes when zooming. This appears to be the first footage I have seen where the exposure was maintained during zooming, so I'm hoping it was just firmware or something. I really want this lens to be as great as it sounds!
But this is not OIS lens. I’m afraid the stabilisation would not be as good as those lens with OIS especially using it for handheld video shooting. I’m still waiting for review or comparison for that.
@@suicabokia Depends on the camera body and application. I agree that I would like OIS as well, but I think I'll be fine with just using IBIS. I don't plan on doing walking vlogs or replacing it with a gimbal. If you're standing still or doing simple pans, IBIS should do the job.
Love the fishfarm. Great work. So much info both on both aquaculture and photography, my favorite subjects. What video lens did your crew use? They're brighter. Love your zoom lens though, good for photo, possibly great for video.
In this promo video, there is no exposure fluttering, but the majority of reviews of this lens, show that this lens does flutter. Why is that and can this be fixed? If not why power zoom if the fluttering exists?
I have one question. How this lens (150-600) without teleconverter compares to the 100-400 with the 1.4 teleconverter? It seems to me they are exactly the same! 🤷🏻♂️
@@joshmartonosi5624 no no! I you didn’t read my questing properly. I asked: How the 150-600 compares against the 100-400 (only this lens not both) with the 1.4 teleconverter? I asked because to me, when putting the teleconverter on the 100-400 both lenses seemed to have the same aperture and length! Thus it looks that Fuji did just that to create the 150-600! I rented the lens to test this because no one dares to make a video about it! I ask and ask and no one cooks the bacon!
@@josecolon8143 I'm sorry that I was inaccurate with my statement. When adding a stop to the 100-400, the apertures are very similar to the 150-600. But the price of the 150-600 is a bit cheaper compared to the 100-400 + teleconverter cost if you don't already have the teleconverter.
I started to get excited about the 18-120 and replace my 16-80 for travel. Then I saw that it had no IBIS. Bummer. I have gone down to some very slow shutter speeds with the 16-80 and came away with sharp images. I would have paid more for a lens that includes IBIS, but I won't be getting the 18-120. As for the 150-600 - I WANT IT NOW!
Is this lens really parfocal? The example used is hilarious - the entire scene is in focus when zoomed out. Was this filmed at f11? A better test would be setting manual focus on an object at max aperture at closest focus distance when zoomed in. Then zoom out and see what we get. I'm sure other reviewers will do it.
@@aristotle_4532 you have to compare it with a 900mm.... - Fujifilm customers are much mor price sensitive. I suppose, the 200mm/f2 was a financial disaster for Fujifilm, since their cameras aren't used for sport or wildlife as often as cameras from Sony, Canon or Nikon. The don't have any legacy in this field. The AF / tracking perfomance of the XF cameras were too weak. Until now.
@@lumberjack3008No. The absolute aperture is what counts and it is the same. Same mm, same f stop, therefore same absolute aperture. if you want to compare with 900m, it would have to be f12. But the Sony full frame bodies can zoom to get APS anyway, because they have sensor size to spare and digital zoom is crop in the beginning of their processing chain, so they are as good as native on APS in this mode.
@@ViktorKitov The lens stays the same, but this is irrelevant. You get the results of equivalent aperture and equivalent focal length when you crop the sensor or use clear image zoom. Both multiplied by the crop factor.My f2.8 zooms give me the results of 1.5x focal length and f stop. I would have an ISO advantage if my xt4 bodies were not inferior at the same iso compared to the sony full frame. And sadly the difference is not 1 stop, it is more. Perhaps the new sensor takes it to one stop so the results will also have similar noise at an iso 1 stop lower.
Why don't you deliver an XF18-120 Powerzoom, but F/2.8????? That would be the perfect thing! It will be bigger and a bit larger, but who cares? We all want a pro XF18-120mm F/2.8 lens!! Come on Fuji!!
FUJIFILM... We need a 150-600mm lens at F/5.6 throughout the zoom range! You deliver a good zoom range, but F/8???? Serious? Come on guys! We need F/5.6! It can be a 300-600mm lens, but F/5.6!
@@Bradoslav So why my nikon 200-500mm 5.6 is almost half the price? I had been waiting for fuji to release this lens for quite some time to switch to the xt4 but this ain't doing it for me. and f stop is not just focal length, its also light amount and bokeh.
@@Bradoslav there is not much difference in 150 to 200 and 500 to 600. im not paying $700 more just for a slightly smaller and lighter lens but slower and bigger depth of field. how does it compare to both way cheaper tamron and sigma 150-600? smaller i guess. in my opinion, this lens should cost around $1300 and im being generous.
@@Bradoslav fuji website says this lens is 229-914mm equivalent. so what is the aperture equivalent to?. as far as i know all lens specifications r presented on 35mm film standards (full frame sensor) so i assume this specs are 150-600mm f8 on a full frame sensor (not f5.3 on full frame).
it appears that @biggofwi has deleted all his/her nonsense comments but here they are: "It has 17 elements and is a very long lens. F stop is just focal length / pupil size (the size of the aperture when the lens is fully zoomed in). If you wanted it to be f/4, for example, the pupil size would need to be twice as large. This means all 17 elements in the lens have twice the diameter, but 4 time as much surface area. It would be way more expensive and heavy. This thing only weighs 3.5 lbs"
it appears that @biggofwi has deleted all his/her nonsense comments but here they are: "because it's shorter and isn't an equivalent comparison at all? That's equivalent of a 130-330mm APS-C lens. Another way to write this is the Fuji lens is equivalent to a 100-400 f/5.3, because both the focal length AND the aperture are affected by the crop. It also doesn't cost "almost half". It's 70% the cost. You are naturally going to get slower lenses on APS-C cameras, that's bound by the laws of physics. I'm waiting to see images out of the lens before I make my opinion on if this is worth it or not, but boiling it down to $$$ for isn't productive when you remove all the other factors that go into it."
It is curious and frankly disrespectful by not answering and addressing questions and comments. If you are going to promote an item on your channel, you have the responsibility of responding to those who are customers or potential buyers.
![เจ็บที่ยังฮัก - ม่อน วรวิทย์ [ Official Mv ] จอนนี่มิวสิค](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KALIGSRSjFs/mqdefault.jpg)
That new XF18-120 is perfect for videographers. Excellent price for a parfocal lens with that much range. My only concern is the exposure stepping. I know its been mentioned here and its marketing to have a constant exposure that isn't supposed to change, however, I have seen a lot of reviewers using pre-production models that have had exposure changes when zooming. This appears to be the first footage I have seen where the exposure was maintained during zooming, so I'm hoping it was just firmware or something. I really want this lens to be as great as it sounds!
But this is not OIS lens. I’m afraid the stabilisation would not be as good as those lens with OIS especially using it for handheld video shooting. I’m still waiting for review or comparison for that.
@@suicabokia Depends on the camera body and application. I agree that I would like OIS as well, but I think I'll be fine with just using IBIS. I don't plan on doing walking vlogs or replacing it with a gimbal. If you're standing still or doing simple pans, IBIS should do the job.
Can we use all type of shutter speeds, like slow fast,when vibration reduction is on of the lens,any restriction technically
Love the fishfarm. Great work. So much info both on both aquaculture and photography, my favorite subjects. What video lens did your crew use? They're brighter. Love your zoom lens though, good for photo, possibly great for video.
My 18-120 changes exposure when I zoom while recording. Any way ot fix that? If not, any firmware coming up to fix that?
In this promo video, there is no exposure fluttering, but the majority of reviews of this lens, show that this lens does flutter. Why is that and can this be fixed? If not why power zoom if the fluttering exists?
I have one question. How this lens (150-600) without teleconverter compares to the 100-400 with the 1.4 teleconverter? It seems to me they are exactly the same! 🤷🏻♂️
When using the 1.4 teleconverter it changes your aperture by 1 full stop, so that makes the 100-400 one stop slower at all focal lengths.
@@joshmartonosi5624 no no! I you didn’t read my questing properly. I asked: How the 150-600 compares against the 100-400 (only this lens not both) with the 1.4 teleconverter? I asked because to me, when putting the teleconverter on the 100-400 both lenses seemed to have the same aperture and length! Thus it looks that Fuji did just that to create the 150-600! I rented the lens to test this because no one dares to make a video about it! I ask and ask and no one cooks the bacon!
@@josecolon8143 I'm sorry that I was inaccurate with my statement. When adding a stop to the 100-400, the apertures are very similar to the 150-600.
But the price of the 150-600 is a bit cheaper compared to the 100-400 + teleconverter cost if you don't already have the teleconverter.
Exceptional video
Which lens is best for video?
I own this lens and let me tell you its soft at all ranges. Period. Maybe its bot ment for the bew 40 sensor
Is the 150-600mm parfocal?
I started to get excited about the 18-120 and replace my 16-80 for travel. Then I saw that it had no IBIS. Bummer. I have gone down to some very slow shutter speeds with the 16-80 and came away with sharp images. I would have paid more for a lens that includes IBIS, but I won't be getting the 18-120. As for the 150-600 - I WANT IT NOW!
Why no OIS on the 18-120? Seems like a significant omission from what is obviously a video-oriented lens.
Is this lens really parfocal? The example used is hilarious - the entire scene is in focus when zoomed out. Was this filmed at f11? A better test would be setting manual focus on an object at max aperture at closest focus distance when zoomed in. Then zoom out and see what we get. I'm sure other reviewers will do it.
F8.... (beginning with 400mm?)... is the problem of this lens, when shooting not at bright sunlight.
If sony can do 600 f6.3 at this cost, I would expect the Fujifilm zoom to match that.
@@aristotle_4532 you have to compare it with a 900mm.... - Fujifilm customers are much mor price sensitive. I suppose, the 200mm/f2 was a financial disaster for Fujifilm, since their cameras aren't used for sport or wildlife as often as cameras from Sony, Canon or Nikon. The don't have any legacy in this field. The AF / tracking perfomance of the XF cameras were too weak. Until now.
@@lumberjack3008No. The absolute aperture is what counts and it is the same. Same mm, same f stop, therefore same absolute aperture. if you want to compare with 900m, it would have to be f12. But the Sony full frame bodies can zoom to get APS anyway, because they have sensor size to spare and digital zoom is crop in the beginning of their processing chain, so they are as good as native on APS in this mode.
@@lumberjack3008 Actually the lens is always the same lenght. You would get 900mm if you attach the 600mm Sony to an A6600 for example.
@@ViktorKitov The lens stays the same, but this is irrelevant. You get the results of equivalent aperture and equivalent focal length when you crop the sensor or use clear image zoom. Both multiplied by the crop factor.My f2.8 zooms give me the results of 1.5x focal length and f stop. I would have an ISO advantage if my xt4 bodies were not inferior at the same iso compared to the sony full frame. And sadly the difference is not 1 stop, it is more. Perhaps the new sensor takes it to one stop so the results will also have similar noise at an iso 1 stop lower.
Why don't you deliver an XF18-120 Powerzoom, but F/2.8????? That would be the perfect thing! It will be bigger and a bit larger, but who cares? We all want a pro XF18-120mm F/2.8 lens!! Come on Fuji!!
Why only F8 at 600mm? :(
To make it lighter
FUJIFILM... We need a 150-600mm lens at F/5.6 throughout the zoom range! You deliver a good zoom range, but F/8???? Serious? Come on guys! We need F/5.6! It can be a 300-600mm lens, but F/5.6!
Poor old cupid looking blurry :D
$2000 for an f8 lens!?
@@Bradoslav So why my nikon 200-500mm 5.6 is almost half the price? I had been waiting for fuji to release this lens for quite some time to switch to the xt4 but this ain't doing it for me. and f stop is not just focal length, its also light amount and bokeh.
@@Bradoslav there is not much difference in 150 to 200 and 500 to 600. im not paying $700 more just for a slightly smaller and lighter lens but slower and bigger depth of field. how does it compare to both way cheaper tamron and sigma 150-600? smaller i guess. in my opinion, this lens should cost around $1300 and im being generous.
@@Bradoslav fuji website says this lens is 229-914mm equivalent. so what is the aperture equivalent to?. as far as i know all lens specifications r presented on 35mm film standards (full frame sensor) so i assume this specs are 150-600mm f8 on a full frame sensor (not f5.3 on full frame).
it appears that @biggofwi has deleted all his/her nonsense comments but here they are: "It has 17 elements and is a very long lens. F stop is just focal length / pupil size (the size of the aperture when the lens is fully zoomed in). If you wanted it to be f/4, for example, the pupil size would need to be twice as large. This means all 17 elements in the lens have twice the diameter, but 4 time as much surface area. It would be way more expensive and heavy. This thing only weighs 3.5 lbs"
it appears that @biggofwi has deleted all his/her nonsense comments but here they are: "because it's shorter and isn't an equivalent comparison at all? That's equivalent of a 130-330mm APS-C lens. Another way to write this is the Fuji lens is equivalent to a 100-400 f/5.3, because both the focal length AND the aperture are affected by the crop. It also doesn't cost "almost half". It's 70% the cost. You are naturally going to get slower lenses on APS-C cameras, that's bound by the laws of physics. I'm waiting to see images out of the lens before I make my opinion on if this is worth it or not, but boiling it down to $$$ for isn't productive when you remove all the other factors that go into it."
It is curious and frankly disrespectful by not answering and addressing questions and comments. If you are going to promote an item on your channel, you have the responsibility of responding to those who are customers or potential buyers.