Jack Flesher
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.1 #1 · Fuji XF 8-16/2.8 LM WR | |
Not much on this lens here, so I thought I'd open a thread on it and share my initial opinion.
Pros: Super sharp, it's optically among the best if not the best superwide zoom I've owned; it focuses fast and accurately; actually balances well on my XH2; built-in lens-hood with special fitted cap; build quality second to none.
Cons: By Fuji X standards, it's a behemoth, almost as large as say the Nikon Z 14-24/2.8; cannot filter it; has fairly significant fall-off, fortunately that's easily corrected out. (For me, I often add some vignette anyway, but regardless, this lens has a fair amount native.)
IMHO, the first question everyone is going to want to know, is how much better optically is it than the 10-24? There's not a simple answer. I have a very good copy of the 10-24 and it is a lens I use a lot when I travel. The 8-16 is clearly superior to my copy of the 10-24 at 10 to 12mm especially at the edges, but after 12mm the optical advantage is diminished. Of course the 8-16 also covers the 8 to 10 range that the 10-24 does not, and perhaps surprisingly for some, 8mm is a *lot* wider in actual use than 10mm; think about 4 large steps backwards with the 10 to get similar framing to the 8.
The 8-16 is so big I do not see myself traveling with it. Plus for travel, the range of the 10-24 is really flexible and useful. My only nit with the 10-24 is it isn't quite wide enough for me in some situations like inside larger buildings or even outside larger buildings in areas with narrow streets; and here 8mm would be more welcome. But IMHO, it isn't worth the weight penalty unless I knew ahead of time I would appreciate the 8-10 range enough to justify carrying it instead of the 10-24. My 10-24 also shows loss of extreme edge resolution from about 10 to 12mm, not horrible, but definitely visible at 100% view. But it's lightweight and compact and optically more than adequate for 90% of my travel imaging.
All that said, I like the 8-16 enough I don't see myself selling it either. I thought of the 8mm prime for travel, but 8mm by itself is limiting because it's so darn wide. See the "no dogs" image below -- if the Sun is behind you, your shadow may be in the image; if the Sun is in front of you, you may get flare. But for architectural shots, the flexibility of an 8-16 zoom that is this good optically is tough to beat. With such good optics, making perspective corrections in post or otherwise cropping heavily for example will go almost unnoticed in the final image.
My wish if I had Fuji's ear... It seems to me Fuji could have made this lens an f4 and reduced the size by a good third or more. They could probably have then also made it an 8-20 instead of an 8-16 and still kept it smaller and lighter than this f2.8 lens, and then also possibly included a removable hood and filter threads so it could have been filtered -- even if the filters vignetted a bit at 8-10mm. IMHO, assuming that lens would be as optically good as the 8-16, they could have charged as much and it would be slam-dunk for X users, a hit out of the park... But for now, it's still the best thing going IMO...
I'll share more later as it comes to be. I just got it and am still a long way from being fully facile with it, or knowing all of it's weaknesses and strengths, so for now I will leave it here.
A few example images from a short walk around with it today.
|
