|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Faso www.juzaphoto.com/p/Faso  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Fujifilm XF 16-80mm f/4 R OIS WR Pros: Focal excursion, material quality, minimum focus distance. Cons: Cost based on optical yield. Lower optical quality than almost all focal points and diaphragms compared to 18 55 f 2. 8 f 4. Opinion: I wanted to try to improve the optical quality, already excellent, that I get with my zoom Fuji xf 18 55 f 2.8 - f4. For the highest quality both in landscape and Street use fixed optics, the 14 2.8 and the 35 f 1.4. I bought the fuji 16 80 F 4 to test it and because it has a perfect focal excursion for my way of photographing... That is, trips, Street, mountain.... priceless excursion 24 - 120 with f4 opening in full format! Let's start to say that it is well done, in my opinion it is very well balanced even on xt 20 or 30, better with additional handle. It is light and with an excellent quality of materials and assembly, tropicalized, stabilization of 6 stops (I think real less.. let's say 4?) ... The zoom dial is fluid and has a mown end of running, which from a sense of pro lens. Even aesthetics, with the lens attached to even small bodies like xt 20 by a sense of "serious" goal, and this can be good, but also bad if you want to go unnoticed. So I compared it to the 18 55, at 18 mm, at 35 mm, at 55 mm, with openings of f4, F5.6, F 9, F 11, F 13,F 16. The result was that I made back the 16 80 f 4.?? He practically lost at every focal and diaphragm with my immense pain?? Only at 55 mm at F4 is sharper in the center, but not at the edges. I think it's a great thing to do if you don't want to bang on to change goals and just use that. Otherwise for image quality better keep the miraculous (seen the price) 18 55 f 2.8 - 4, and match fuji quality fixed and the excellent xf 55 200. I use the xt 30, but for larger machine bodies type xt 2 or 3, or h1 is also great the 16 55 f 2.8. If I were to switch to larger bodies I would have to compare it to the little beast xf 18 55 which for now remains unimpressed by changes. This is my experience, obviously there is a lot of talk about variability of lens yield, maybe it's very sharp my 18 55 f 2.8 - 4, or I found a bad version of the 16 80 f 4. sent on January 11, 2020 |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
