X-T20 kit - 16-50mm vs 18-55mm

Arnav3103 said:

Hi Fuji family,
I am currently a Nikon user and have been using Nikon since 2010. Currently using the D7200 with 35/50/85mm primes lenses and a Tamron 16-300mm zoom.
Have always been attracted to Fuji and have been thinking about getting the X-T20 for a while now.

The dilemma is, I can't decide between the 16-50mm kit or thr 18-55mm kit.
I like the 16mm focal length on APSC cameras and also planning to do a bit of video using the X-T20. Eventually, I will probably get a couple of primes.
Which kit do you think is better?
TIA.

Arnav

Click to expand...

KwhyChang said:

is that the 18-55/2.8-4 is sharper. They are very close. The MTF charts indicate the 18-55 is a little sharper at the long end, but the 16-50 is significantly sharper at wider focal lengths. I went for the 16-50 because 2mm on the wide end is much more valuable for my shooting than 5mm on the long end. Saving some money on the kit I bought a used 23/2 instead. 16-50 is plastic vs metal and doesn't have an aperture ring.





--
Dave

Click to expand...

KwhyChang said:

is that the 18-55/2.8-4 is sharper. They are very close. The MTF charts indicate the 18-55 is a little sharper at the long end, but the 16-50 is significantly sharper at wider focal lengths. I went for the 16-50 because 2mm on the wide end is much more valuable for my shooting than 5mm on the long end. Saving some money on the kit I bought a used 23/2 instead. 16-50 is plastic vs metal and doesn't have an aperture ring.





--
Dave

Click to expand...

Fujinon XC 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS - Review / Test Report - Analysis

Fujinon XC 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS - Review / Test Report

www.photozone.de

deltabi said:

I have both. Optically, the 18-55 is better. A "true" Fuji lens. The 16-50 is not optically bad however, very light and "plasticky". You obviously loose some light with the second but you'll gain wider view and for me that last point is making the choice.

Click to expand...

Arnav3103 said:

KwhyChang said:

is that the 18-55/2.8-4 is sharper. They are very close. The MTF charts indicate the 18-55 is a little sharper at the long end, but the 16-50 is significantly sharper at wider focal lengths. I went for the 16-50 because 2mm on the wide end is much more valuable for my shooting than 5mm on the long end. Saving some money on the kit I bought a used 23/2 instead. 16-50 is plastic vs metal and doesn't have an aperture ring.





--
Dave

Click to expand...

Thanks, Dave. I also like the fact that 16-50mm is much lighter. I am planning to use it on a gimbal for videos. By the way, is it possible to switch off the OIS on this lens?

Click to expand...

Exit10 said:

KwhyChang said:

is that the 18-55/2.8-4 is sharper. They are very close. The MTF charts indicate the 18-55 is a little sharper at the long end, but the 16-50 is significantly sharper at wider focal lengths. I went for the 16-50 because 2mm on the wide end is much more valuable for my shooting than 5mm on the long end. Saving some money on the kit I bought a used 23/2 instead. 16-50 is plastic vs metal and doesn't have an aperture ring.





--
Dave

Click to expand...

Photozone has alternate facts showing the 18-55 sharper at the wide end

http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x/853-fuji1650f3556?start=1

http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x/783-fuji1855f284?start=1

Click to expand...