X-T1 to X-T4 Upgrade - Best General Purpose Lens

KariP wrote:

Jerry,

I did not really notice or think that OP was upgrading his whole system from X-T1 to T4. With a camera body with IBIS a lens like 16-55 could be an upgrade. And T4 is not actually a cheap camera - why not a more expensive WR lens.

When i bought my X-H1 about a year ago it was really a bargain and i did not "upgrade" anything else - kept my X-E3 and lenses . With H1 the 16-55 f 2,8 could be a great combo. Perhaps i should upgrade ;-). Size and weight could be in balance - and WR

BTW I bought a 16-80 in July because in theory it could be something like a traditional 24-105 (on FF camera) - BUT the sample i got was really a lemon (rotten lemon) and i returned it. I have not tried again.

Because of this discussion i checked the prices - there is at the moment a reasonable "cash back". 16-80 is 900€ (no cash back) and 16-55f2,8 will be about 1000€.... i must reconsider ;-). WR has some serious meaning for my "lifestyle" - 18-55 has survived a lot of traveling and boating. So far.

If the cost is acceptable, the best way to assess the handling would obviously be to actually attach one to your camera and see how it feels, if that is an option for you. I had similar concerns when I was considering that lens, but had the benefit of having a local retailer and the opportunity to check out the handling in advance. Renting one was also an option and I honestly can't recall whether I did that first before deciding to purchase it.

Over time, I've gotten used to larger kits -- the X-H1 and 100-400 pretty well made that a necessity. There's not way anyone other than yourself can determine whether you'll find the handling/weight acceptable, and a lot depends on your shooting style and how much kit you tend to haul around. As far as the decision between the two alternatives, a lot comes down to your own priorities. Assuming for a minute that the weight isn't a big issue, then there's a tradeoff between the somewhat longer range of the 16-80 vs. the faster and constant aperture of the 16-55. I can definitely comment on the IQ as I've found the 16-55 to deliver some of the most consistent and excellent IQ across it's FL range of any of my lenses. Since I do a lot of low light work the larger aperture on the long end is another benefit I value. I don't find the lack of a 55-80mm range on the lens to be much of a limitation... but again, that concerns my own specific needs and may not apply to yours. Thus, such a decision would be very easy for me... perhaps less so for you depending on your priorities.

Good luck either way, Kari. I suspect you'll be delighted regardless which way you go.