05-23-2020, 08:36 PM
(05-23-2020, 12:37 AM)Hapo Wrote:(05-22-2020, 08:12 PM)thxbb12 Wrote: I have the opposite opinion.
If 18mm is not enough, it's likely that 16 won't be either.
Heck, even 14mm might not be enough either.
What I can say though, is that the 14mm is a very good lens optically. Very well corrected optically (almost no distortion) and very sharp across the frame.
Unless you value some DOF control at wide angle, I don't see the point of the 16mm...
Now, if you want the most versatile package (at the cost of some IQ), the 10-24 f4 might be your best option.
...I was wondering if anyone would mention that lens...
...I was originally concerned that @ f4 it was too slow but in a review I read some where it was noted that the image stabilization more than made up for that in low light situations...
...how much IQ is compromised IYHO...???...Klaus seemed to like his...maybe I should just ask myself, " What would Klaus do ? "...
...I just noticed there is no 8-16mm/f2.8 review...I did consider that lens but it is just too big and expensive and does not have IS...
Compared to the 14mm f2.8, the 10-24 won't be as good optically. Not as sharp. The 14mm is tack sharp at f4. Maybe I had a bad sample of the 10-24, I don't know... But I've never been fully satisfied by its sharpness and this is especially true toward the longer end of the zoom.
In fact, I've never been very impressed by any Fuji zoom I've tested.
The primes are a different story, I find them very good.