Opticallimits

Full Version: next PZ lens test report: Fujinon XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Life is like a box of chocolate ...

Because there was another "Canon outperforms Fuji wide open" comment above, I wanted to see if this guessing has substance. However, I don't have a Canon 24/1.4 L II at hand, only a Sigma 24/1.4 Art which - according to various testers - "outperforms" the Canon, at least in center sharpness. Somewhere the 4 ½ ★ rating compared to the 3 ½ in PZ must be coming from...

 

However, the only thing I see outperforming is: I can use the Fuji with AF and focus is spot on, not matter if it's a border or center, while I have to use the Sigma with a manual adapter and need maybe more than one shot to get the focus right. At least wide open.

 

Here is the 100% crop from center

 

[Image: i-VSswPQT-L.jpg]

 

and her front he right border

 

[Image: i-8Nvcpqr-L.jpg]

 

Ignore the "50 mm" - I can choose one FL when using an adapter or manual lens without chip and I didn't change the setting - it's only for EXIF. All pictures @ f/1.4

 

I don't see a huge difference between those two lenses. That is kind of a relief to me because I thought the smaller wide-angle lenses could cause more problems, but since it's designers didn't need to leave space for a mirror, they somehow managed to bring a "half-the-weight" lens to shine as good as a very good DSLR lens.  Smile

 

Oh, and I discovered an advantage of the focus ring clutch: No matter if the camera is powered ON or OFF, the distance remains visible on the lens.

 

But a lens without that clutch keeps it's focus position as well. So it's not always after a lens change lost.

Honesly, I don't care if Canon's 24/1.4 is better than this lens on APS-C. It weighs almost twice as much and that's without putting the camera body on to the scale. From a practical standpoint, Fuji is a much more sane solution if all you want is a reasonably sharp 24mm equivalent prime for practical photography. Zeiss Batis visually produces very comparable results and is even lighter by miracle. However, it demands more expensive FF bodies to be practical whereas you can simply pop the Fujinon on any Fuji X series body and have the same result.

Zeiss only delivers two (Touit) lenses for Fuji bodies. Two it enuff, or something like that  Tongue 

While the 12/2.8 keeps on impressing me, I also see some limits. Sharpness is less great than with a Sigma dp 0 quattro which has only 2 mm longer FL.

walter_g

There are three (3) Touit lenses for X mount from Zeiss: 2.8/12, 1.8/32 and 2.8/50M

 

Threeit? Throwit? Tongue

Blime, I forgot the Macro  :o This magic thing, with which you can go as close as 12 cm to insects and they don't fly or jump away, if I want to believe the flickr stream of the Zeiss group.  ^_^

Sahib7

Quote:Life is like a box of chocolate ...
I'm really looking forward to your next review!

Just to be sure I've ordered an XF 35mm f2.0 as long as the cash back deals are active ;-)
Oh yes, I forgot to answer to this.

Quote:You use 1.3x crop. Your 24mm f1.4 is a 31mm f1.8 FF equivalent.

The 16mm f1.4 is a 24mm f2  FF equivalent, not sure how that is "squarely" a replacement (but sure, it is fine to want this Fuji lens, just not sure about the similarity).

 

On comparing the charts for the 24mm f1.4 on FF, and this Fuji, the Canon outperforms the Fuji sharpness wide even wide open on your APS-H camera.
I'm not chasing the precise FL/FOV and aperture figures (especially since the former are so fluid due to crop factors). I just have a need for a wide and fast lens (not only for astro), so this Fuji being effectively wider than the Canon is a good bonus for me. In the end, however, it looks like my kit will stay the way it is for a while, because even if the Fuji lens is cheaper than the Canon, the body is most definitely rather expensive. And I'm not ready to ditch the entire Canon system for good just yet.

 

Suppose I could just swap the L for the Sigma and pocket the difference though... Smile

Quote:Suppose I could just swap the L for the Sigma and pocket the difference though... Smile
 

That's what I did. You just need to bare in mind, the price difference is also because both Canon and Nikon 24/1.4 have a pretty solid body with a couple of seals. Optically, the Sigma is the best choice.
Quote:That's what I did. You just need to bare in mind, the price difference is also because both Canon and Nikon 24/1.4 have a pretty solid body with a couple of seals. Optically, the Sigma is the best choice.
Yeah, the lack of a weather sealing on the Sigma is giving me a pause. What were they thinking when they left that out.  :wacko:
Pages: 1 2 3