These are my initial thoughts on the 16-55 2.8. I've been mainly a prime shooter throughout my time as a photographer. I have to say, there are no bad Fuji lenses. Just great lenses and better lenses.
The 16-55 is big for a mirrorless lens. Very solid, well built. But the 16-55 handles well on the X-T1, and I would assume the X-E2. On the X-T10 the 16-55 gets awkward to hold, being extremely front heavy. A lensmate thumb grip may help with the grip on the X-T10. I would recommend staying with one of the larger Fuji bodies for this lens.
16-55 on the X-T1
for a contrast, the X-T10 with 35mm f2
18-135 16-55 55-200
Image quality wise, it is everything you would expect from a high end lens. The 16-55 renders and has separation more akin to the Fuji primes. It is super sharp. The auto focus is lightening quick, falling in the range of the 90mm prime. Overall the experience using the 16-55 combined with the image quality leave me with no regrets replacing my primes with it. Shooting the types of conventions I am covering now have shown the need for versatility. Things are not as formulaic and predictable like they are at a wedding. The light is enough that I don't need the larger apertures of the prime lenses. So the 16-55 is going to be a great fit. Oddly, the size of the X-T1/16-55 feel more familiar, most likely a throwback to the DSLR days. While still remaining lighter than a full frame DSLR with a comparable lens attached.
The 16-55 is big for a mirrorless lens. Very solid, well built. But the 16-55 handles well on the X-T1, and I would assume the X-E2. On the X-T10 the 16-55 gets awkward to hold, being extremely front heavy. A lensmate thumb grip may help with the grip on the X-T10. I would recommend staying with one of the larger Fuji bodies for this lens.
16-55 on the X-T1
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
for a contrast, the X-T10 with 35mm f2
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
18-135 16-55 55-200
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Image quality wise, it is everything you would expect from a high end lens. The 16-55 renders and has separation more akin to the Fuji primes. It is super sharp. The auto focus is lightening quick, falling in the range of the 90mm prime. Overall the experience using the 16-55 combined with the image quality leave me with no regrets replacing my primes with it. Shooting the types of conventions I am covering now have shown the need for versatility. Things are not as formulaic and predictable like they are at a wedding. The light is enough that I don't need the larger apertures of the prime lenses. So the 16-55 is going to be a great fit. Oddly, the size of the X-T1/16-55 feel more familiar, most likely a throwback to the DSLR days. While still remaining lighter than a full frame DSLR with a comparable lens attached.
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
. On my last trip with my trusty F3, three weeks through the highlands of Iceland with constant rain, I had more than 6kg of camera gear in my backpack - 31.5kg total weight, measured on an airport stopover after I already had devoured some of my provisions. The F3 died on that trip, I almost met the same fate and that marked the end of my days with Tri-X, Kodachrome and Ektachrome. So yeah, even if the the X-Pro1, especially with the 1855 is a bit on the large side for me to be carried around all day it's a wonderfully capable and versatile tool and a joy to shoot (not at last thanks to the firmware upgrades).
