Sharp, but too bulky and heavy

lewiedude2 wrote:

Saving a few millimeters here and there doesn't make for a more 'noticeable' lens stuck on a real camera body - as opposed to a phone. I really don't buy into, and never have, the street photography issues pertaining to size of the camera gear(really just the lens we are talking about) being obtrusive or not. In this day and age, just the hand holding of a camera will make one stick out amongst the crowd.

lewiedude, no one's asking you to buy in. They're telling you what they feel. You just appear to be having a hard time accepting a view that differs from your own, to the point where you're trying to negate the opinions of others with charts. To me that's just silly because my opinion of what I what I see when looking at a lens on a camera and what I feel when I hold it is not affected by charts.

Personal preference, indeed. I absolutely don't find the lens to be heavy at all. In fact, compared to the lack of heft of the 23f2, it makes the handholding even easier for me and many others here.

Well I'm pleased you like your lens. "Many others" have stated the opposite view. Horses for courses and all that...

Looking for balance and that's all I do when it comes to proposing an alternative opinion of the 16-55's size and weight.

It was a review stating the reviewer's opinion of a lens they owned. It wasn't a very detailed or IMO very informative review, but it was nevertheless the view and opinion of the reviewer. He doesn't need to balance or justify his opinion, it's just his opinion, his feelings about a product he used. That's it. We're all obviously welcome to ask him about his opinion, but to demand "balance" or to expect him to justify his views beyond what he has written is just being overbearing.

If you want balance, the best and only sensible way to do that is to publish your own review, not berate him for his.