crazy question how does the 16-55 f2.8 compare to the 50mm f2?

bowportes wrote:

Truman Prevatt wrote:

DrNeil wrote:

yes id not really considered weight. but i guess it replaces carrying 2-3 primes..

If we do a bean count on weight - between 16 and 50 Fuji has a few primes. One probably would not want to carry all of them. Why carry an 18, 23 and 27? A 23 and 35 are quite close in reality - about a step or two. So unless you are really interesting in the lower range a 23 f2 (which I think you have) and 50 would and a step or two would do it. So the two lenses are probably together 1/2 the weight of the brick and both are one stop faster (on ASP-C 2.8 is quite slow) not to mention the bird is about 2K.

With your 2 lens combo, you don't cover 16 or 55. The 16-55, however, does. To get 16, you'd have to add a heavy third lens. To get 55 you'd have to add another prime. But even if you equate 50 and 55, the 16-55 gives you 16, 23, 35, and 50mm options, which are all quite different FOVs. Your 2 lens combo is much more limited.

Zoom lenses are over sold - they make the camera makers lots of money.

One could as easily argue that primes are oversold. It's a matter of taste and shooting style.

In a weaken moment I got talked into the Nikon holy lens for my D800E, the 24-70 f2.8 which is about the same FOV range as the brick. It to is a brick. I made the mistake of not renting it which I usually do and sold it at a loss after the back pains of lugging it around all day. Sure the argument goes - it replaces a lot of primes. However, add two steps and it replaces fewer.I sold the puppy (losing money in the process) and am quite happy using a 28 and 50 on my Nikon. I don't miss the Nikon brick.

Add two steps and you change perspective, and thus the photo. ... Not the same as standing still and selecting a different FL.

Not if the images have the same field of view.  There will be be minor DOF difference but that is it.

The 16-55 is an amazingly versatile, high quality lens. The weight doesn't bother many of us. I agree that it would be a good idea for the OP to rent first.

There are two issues with zoom lenses.  The first is obvious.  A lens design is a trade off.  That trade of becomes very complex for a zoom with the complexity going up as the zoom range goes up.  While it is possible to design a zoom that has the same quality of a fix focal length at say the center of the zoom range - the quality will not be as good at the ends as a prime designed for those focal lengths.  The zoom - especially a constant aperture zoom is large because the aperture has to be designed for the longer focal length which determines the size of the glass and opening.  So a good constant aperture zoom lens will be quite expensive and quite large.  Because there are no fast zooms on the market.

But zooms can be handy.  I started long before zooms were worth the powder to load them up and blow their elements out so developed my skill craft based on fixed focal length.  I did try one on my Nikon - did nothing I could not do with a couple of primes and it looked like I was packing an elephant's leg on my camera so I sold it.  Should have rented it first and saved some money.

The second issue with zooms depends on the what you are shooting.  There is a reason the Leica became the mainstay of street photography.  People don't notice it.  People are not intimidated by it or put off by it when you take their shot.  Point a camera with a lens with a 77 or 82 mm opening at them - you will get their attention.  I could tell the difference in reception even between my Leica M4 and Nikon FM back in the 70's.

So it depends on what you want to do.  Thom Hogan once said that the mid range zoom was a total waste.  I expect Nikon slapped him around for that since I haven't seen him write that again.  But he is right.  Zooms are nice when they work for what you need.  I've just never seen the need.   If I were into birds or wildlife and wanted to use a Fuji for that - that's not a given but if I did - I am sure the 100-400 would be in my bag.

But for the street which is about all I use my Fuji for and the reason I got the Pro2 - I don't see any of the positives of a zoom out weight the negatives.  If for some reason I wanted to not have to change lenses - simply have two bodies.  About the same weight and a lot of flexibility.