mawz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
carstenw wrote:
I did say "interesting" lenses, not total lenses  Fuji's lenses are much stronger on average. How many people here would own NEX cameras if they could not adapt their other system lenses? 0? Recently this has improved, but I am not reassured at all by the apparent lack of strong direction in the release schedule. It seems very hap-hazard.
Umm, really? Of the Fuji lenses only the 35 looks really outstanding, although the 14 may well be, it hasn't been out long enough to really tell (I suspect it will be). The 18 is at least as disappointing as the Sony 16 and for much the same reasons (lousy extreme corner performance), and at least double the cost while the 60 is merely meh, being a mid-speed macro of average performance for a macro. Good lens but not a system seller.
The Fuji system to me looks like an RF system, buy it for the normal, and maybe buy something else to round out your system if needed.
On the Sony side, the 24, 35 and 50 are all excellent lenses. Sure the Fuji 35's arguably better than the Sony 35, but it's not by that much and the Sony 35 and 50 are both stabilized, which more than makes up for the half-stop difference.
Frankly with the release of the 35 and 10-18 and the announcement of the 20 pancake I'd have to say Sony's lens line is currently a fair bit stronger than the limited Fuji lens line. The pending arrival of the 23/1.4 and 56/1.4 from Fuji will even things up but the X lineup is still completely missing any real telephoto options.
Personally I'd have been perfectly happy shooting NEX purely with native lenses, the 24/50 combo worked pretty well for me. I sold my 50 because I liked the rendering from other 50's better, not because the optical performance was lacking (it was in fact superior to either of the lenses I chose over it, not that they were bad)
|
