Jump to content
veejaycee

New lens roadmap - have your prayers been answered?

Recommended Posts

This is interesting, especially the 16-80. I had previously shied away from the 16-55 due to its lack of OIS and my disdain is well documented here in other threads. This one seems to have OIS and if the size (and weight) is comparable, I'd probably invest in it in lieu of the 18-135. The constant aperture will provide a nice marked ring, making it feel like my primes. 

As for the 33, its way outside my price range, so I hope pros and millionaires enjoy it thoroughly. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your disdain of the 16-55mm f2.8 has been shared by many in the past but is misjudged as can be shown by the fact that most of those doubters, after using the 16-55mm f2.8 are fully converted to the zoom. The weight acts as a stabiliser and I can handhold at shutter speeds lower than the reciprocal.  Likewise the 90mm f2. Okay, so I could shoot even slower shutter speeds with IBIS or OIS but I already have so much more capability in my cameras/lenses than I ever thought possible and since I'm over seventy and not very fit/bendy/etc I'm less adventurous than I would be if younger. If you shoot with primes you have no stabilisation either but I'll guarantee that I can shoot slower speeds with the zoom than with primes - and so could you. Of course, the (fast) primes have the advantage of 2 extra stops if you don't mind the lack of DoF. I expect some time I will move to an IBIS model which makes all my lenses equally stable but I really wish I didn't need to move to a camera model like the X-H1 which is as heavy as a DSLR - in fact I often find myself packing the XT20 instead of XT2 to save weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VJC,

I may not be part of the hypothetical doubters, I actually purchased the lens and used it for a few weeks before returning it. I liked the rendering in good light, but lowlight was another matter. Also, being an amateur, I use my camera for video as well (and as you know XT2 touted its video capabilities when it was introduced). The 16-55 took jittery video when handheld and it was painful to watch. 

I appreciate you and others (and myself) for making do without OIS/IBIS, but if the technology is available and it gives good results, then I'd like it in my gear. Same reason I don't use manual focus for most of my photos, (which is why I only buy Fuji lenses); unless I am taking still life and want to focus on certain elements. 

Personally I have no plans to buy the X-H1, so soon after the T2. I'm holding out to see what they come out with for the next couple of versions of cameras, given that Nikon just announced they are jumping into mirrorless. Just as Tesla forced car makers to accelerate (or release) their EV plans, I'm hoping Nikon's jump spurs Fuji into putting a lot more into their newer cameras. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy, that 16-80 is sooo close. As remarked in my other thread on the 16-55, I always wanted a 24 - 105 2.8 from my employee communications photo days. That's always seemed perfect to me. The f4 max bothers me a bit, even though I know it's needed to keep the size and cost down (relatively speaking).

Oh, well, just yesterday pulled the trigger on a trade for a mint 16-55. We're about to see how that works out.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 16-80 f4 is a much wanted lens - by me too before I got the 16-55mm f2.8 a few years ago. Now I wouldn't be satisfied with any less IQ than the 16-55 f2.8. I've been spoiled and you as a new fellow owner are about to find out just what I mean. I think the quality of the f2.8 bokeh at 55mm will be better than that from the f4 lens even at the longer 80mm focal length.

I view the 16-80mm f4 OIS as a very useful walkabout/general purpose lens but the 16-55mm f2.8 is a replacement for several primes in IQ. My fast primes are now specialist lenses and I keep them mainly to use with XT20 for a lightweight combination or with X-Pro1 for inconspicuous street shooting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VJC, 

I agree with your comment on the 16-55 regarding its IQ, I will disagree that its bokeh is better than the 16-80 (for now). If bokeh is defined as the quality of blurred elements I don't think we can make any assumptions about the 16-80 without at least getting a chance to test it. 

If background separation is what you really meant, then yes, 2 stops would make a difference in the separation.

The one other scenario where the 16-80 may excel is video capture on XT bodies, as the OIS should make it an excellent capture device. I have used my 55-200 for video at a number of events handheld and it has performed remarkably. 

 

 

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

  • Recommended Discussions



×