cogitech wrote:
On another note, I have discovered this lens's biggest wart. Lateral CA / fringe. Especially high contrast edges in the corners of the frame (typical tree branches/leaves against sky situation). Quite abysmal, in fact. Stopping down helps, but it never goes away entirely. This wart only makes me love the lens a tiny bit less, though.
Which software did you use for the raw conversion?
I used 18/2.8 for a little bit on x-t4. It was super noisy and slowish to focus, results were not critically sharp. Sharpness is overrated anyway Images looked very nice and pleasant. You can see a lot of examples on flickr.
I just checked the firmware version on my copy and it was at 3.10. Upgraded it to the latest (3.13 from 2018) and I honestly think it is a bit better, based on some quick test shots.
The firmware update ... Ver.3.13 incorporates the following issue:
1. Fix of slight defects.
Perhaps they added/improved the lens auto-correction data? I'll have to take a walk later and take the same shots I did yesterday to verify my findings, or prove them wrong.
I don't have the 18F2 but do have the 23F2. Its wart being poor close focus wide open. The rest of the time its an awesome little lens. Maybe all the F2's have a wart due to the compromises made for small size. I haven't found the 50F2's yet as I don't use that FL that much, which makes the small expense of it work for me. I feel like some reviews are comparing all lens to the best they have ever seen instead of reviewing the lens in the context of what its best used for, or considering it advantages like size. Love those shots above.
First travel with my 18 f/2, and it’s refreshingly nice using such a small, unobtrusive lens. Between this and the 35 f/1.4, I’m having a great time putting around Denver, CO.
One thing I have noticed with it, is that it has a tendency to slightly miss focus when using Eye-detect AF on my X-T5. Still working out under what conditions it happens, but for now I’m just careful to check my shots and re-do if it missed.