XF 16-55mm f2.8 R LM WR: Prime substitute?

To follow up my first impressions here it's time to review and make a few more observations.

Apart from the odd foray with the 90, this zoom has been on my X-T1 all week and has pleased me greatly. Being a prime addict, I've cast a pretty critical eye on the output and have to say, while it can't match the fast primes for aperture and bokeh, it is nonetheless a fine performer. Perhaps because I've been treating it as a deputy for the fixed range and used it as if another prime, the lack of OIS really hasn't been an issue; I've taken quite usable shots at 1/10s which is ok in my book.

It is sharp throughout the range, dropping off slightly at 55mm (not that one would really notice). Talking of 55mm, I took a shot at this f/l wide open and then tried to repeat the exercise with the 56 f1.2 (wide open) - well, the zoom's MFD is a lot closer and I couldn't repeat it (and the AF struggled a little on the 56 once I was at minimum). The zoom went straight to it, no fuss, done - that was a lesson.

No sharpness problem there.

There are a lot of elements in this lens, trying to correct misbehaviour as it crops up at different focal lengths and Fuji's engineers seem to have done pretty well. Sometimes one is slightly aware of some control happening but the end results show the success of it.

The gubbins is hard at work preventing aberrations here. WB error is mine.

The bokeh is nice f2.8 stuff, the colours are pretty accurate, nothing to complain about there at all.

Sharp off-centre, nice microcontrast

It sings in good light, really gets going, maybe suffers a bit with a flatter quality in poor light - a bit of post can vibe it up, or pushing in-camera settings a bit. That will be a bit of a learning curve, finding what it likes best in those circumstances. This is a great lens for going JPG though; I've done very little post-processing and all of the images here are SOOC, flat settings.

A little bit flat, no problem otherwise though - and a couple +1's in the settings would fix it.

All in all, I would feel confident about using this zoom as a substitute for my bag of primes in situations / events where the zoom makes better sense; I really wouldn't be fretting about any IQ shortfall and having regrets, because it really doesn't have such problems. As we've seen, up close and wide open at 55 has it's advantage and the AF just gets right out of the way; it can hesitate in very poor light with the smallest focus box but apart from that, it rocks - and beats most of the primes at that game.

It succeeds in fulfilling my objectives and throws a few bonuses in with the mix. It would be churlish to give it 4.5 (I'd probably be happy giving it 4.75 if I could) because of OIS / weight /size /price. No, it fits the bill and I enjoy using it. 5/5.