Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
next PZ lens test report: Fujinon XF 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR
#21
Quote:In-body IS is the future, in-lens IS is the past except maybe for extremely long tele lenses.

 
I thinks so too, but we are now taking photos in the present........

 

 The lack of IS wasn't a panacea for sharpness here though...... 
Dave's clichés
#22
Quote: The lack of IS wasn't a panacea for sharpness here though...... 
True dat!  Big Grin
#23
Klaus,


how dare you to rate a Fuji lens only avarage?


You should have known that could only be a defective lens which has sent you a disappointed Fuji customer.

Fuji lenses are always superior......That said, at least the German Fuji Forum and is upset about your XF16-55 test.


But seriously,

I appreciate your work and am pleased that there is such an independent test site, keep it up.

 

Hans

#24
Quote:Klaus,

.....That said, at least the German Fuji Forum and is upset about your XF16-55 test.
 

Try to catch him. There's a reason he escaped to Australia :ph34r:   :lol:

 

The Forum members could make the effort to read about PZ's rating scale. 3 ★ are "good/average in the true sense". Not that I have an overview about all lenses in this class and their ratings, but I don't think there are a lot of better ones.

 

Edit: After looking at some tests I stand corrected. Most lenses are better than this one  :wacko:

So it was an excellent idea to save the money for it.

  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)