XF16-80mm vs. XF18-135mm for travel/landscape/architecture photography

wantfastcars wrote:

Flying Fijian wrote:

Third, re: the Tamron 18-300. Despite the high praise I do see for it in individual lens reviews, I saw a review on another website that compared it directly to both the 16-80 and 18-135 at the same focal lengths and the Tamron lens was noticeably softer throughout the image. Granted, that was only one source, but being able to directly compare it to both of the other lenses I was interested in felt like it had more weight to it. I'll look into it more.

Hey just wondering if you have a link for this comparison review as I haven't found anything...thanks

I was mistaken - it was comparing the Tamron 18-300 to the 16-80 and the 70-300, not the 18-135.

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1730838/0

Oh okay fair enough..that was posted here too:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4606440

They aren't perfectly 1:1 comparisons, and are extremely limited in testing scope, but even still, especially at 300mm, the Tamron is markedly less sharp.

This is somewhat of an outlier, but the poster is using the same body as I am with similar lenses to what I'm considering. To me, looking at these particular images at least, the 16-80 looks much better at the 45-50mm range and the Tamron is completely obliterated at 300mm. Granted this is not consistent with the largely positive reviews of the Tamron lens, but having that clear AB test was valuable to me, especially given it's the same body I'd be using.

Yeah well you can't really expect it to be that sharp at 300mm compared to the 70-300 and there could possibly be camera shake at 1/320s @ 300mm. I find the centre sharpness at 300m good enough.

Even that review says "from 35mm to 150mm or so it performs much closer to the Fuji zooms". That's where I mostly use this lens...better then having to switch between 2 lenses.

Taken from the edge of the lake lol my wife was a bit concerned for my safety

I would have never even thought of this shot with the 16-80 or 16-55. The 50-230 would have been in my bag hiding in my bag or at home. I also got nice portraits, environmental portraits and even semi macros all with the one lens so I can't complain! I just received my Cpl filter too so going to use that next time and in better conditions.

If I need better quality then this, I'd put on a prime or pick up  the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 when that comes out. I don't really need any longer reach.

Good luck.