Is this Fujis sharpest lens?

[Zeeke71]

Hi this is my first post but I have been following this and other forums here on DP for many years. This isn't gonna be an very popular post for some people but I think that some one have to take the leef from the mouth and spell it out

IIt's s about the 16-50 kitt lens that don't get the kredit it deserves Yes I know sharpness isn't everything in a picture but let's talk about it this time

Because the 16-50 might be Fujis sharpest lens in the 35-50mm range. It's Sharper than the XF 35mm f2, and the XF 50mm f2 att their sharpest aperture(16mpix camera) and this is tested with multiple samples off each lens and should be considerd a fakt

A good sample of the 16-50 isn't that bad in the borders either in that range and the clarity and contrast also beats the two primes. Don't get me wrong I really like the XF 35mm for its size and wide open sharpness.

What's your experience is the 35mm f1. 4 shaper than de f2 stoped down to f4 or 5.6 have you deard compered your primes to the Kitt.

 

[Vermont3133]

Oh Dear, I agree the 1650 is a pretty good lens....particularly from a price/performance point of view.

But if we are talking about comparing image resolution between it and the 50mm f/2 I would think there are different views to yours....Lenstip being one.

500px

500px.com

 

[lewiedude2]

Welcome! Glad you posted and got that first one out of the way. To make a statement such as the one you are making about the XC16-50 is a bold first post. But, if you don’t go big, don’t bother going at all. As I have said to others when they fall in love with something that hits on all points for them, that’s great! You love your lens and it makes you feel good as you use it and your resulting images look fantastic. Well, I love my XF16-55 too. And, it is a phenomenal lens ... phenomenal. Take a look at this clip from Lenstip.com showing the resolution of my awesome lens. Then, scroll up and check out your lens ... especially the difference in the wide end (16mm).

Keep making images and keep loving your gear! I love mine too!!

 

[Craig268]

The XC16- 50 is a great lens as is the XF16-55 but they are very different lenses and neither one would be considered Fuji's sharpest. Both of those zooms are excellent but I think technically speaking, any of Fuji's prime lenses would be sharper. I believe the 16 mm 1.4 is considered to be one of the sharpest.

 

[lewiedude2]

Agreed...but was just showing the difference between two similar FL zooms and their respective test results. The primes are sharper...but, I take flexibility of an awesome constant aperture zoom over the 16,23,35,50 primes as I hate switching lenses. Tough to do in the travel situations I find myself in many, many times.

The price difference alone tells you that they are two extremely different lenses.

 

[jonikon]

The XC16- 50 is a great lens as is the XF16-55 but they are very different lenses and neither one would be considered Fuji's sharpest. Both of those zooms are excellent but I think technically speaking, any of Fuji's prime lenses would be sharper. I believe the 16 mm 1.4 is considered to be one of the sharpest.

From the reviews I have read, it appears the 90mm f2.0 is the sharpest Fujinon lens.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/fujinon/xf-90mm-f2-r-lm-wr/review/

 

[michaeladawson]

What a joke. Sharpest lens? LOL.

 

[Rod McD]

Hi,

You're probably right that the 16-50 is an underrated lens and more so in a gear-focused site like this one. Despite that, several lab sites have posted tests which indicate that other lenses are sharper. But what's the point of comparing just one characteristic? Lenses need to be evaluated for what they offer in a variety of different ways. Choosing which characteristics appeal and which lens to buy just comes down to personal preferences and your intended uses.

I also can't see any point in comparing primes and zooms, or even primes with primes of a different FL...... They each have different purposes. What does it matter if the 16-50 is or isn't sharper than the 50/2? The 16-50 offers zero performance at f2. The 50/2 offers zero performance at 16-49mm. What does it matter if the Fuji 16mm is or isn't sharper than the Fuji 90mm? They're two excellent lenses, but if you really need a 16mm, a 90mm is utterly useless. And if you absolutely need a 90mm, a 16mm is no better.

Best to use the gear that gives you images you like and investigate other lenses when you actually need them.

Cheers, Rod

 

[Zeeke71]

Thanks I gotten the kind of response I was expecting and I am glad you kept it friendly despite the bold first post

I have read the Lenstip reviews and some others to so when I bought my first XF 50mm I wasn't entirely happy with it I was expecting more... It was a little un sharp on the left side so I thought I gotten a bad sample and returned it. Later I bought a used one that was nicer and sharp at f2. 2-2.8 but the 16-50 kit is still sharper.....

Later I compered the XF 35mm a lens I rely like with the kit att 35mm f5. 6 and gotten the same results the kit was sharper and clearer and that feelt od and makes me wonder if I have a bad 35mm to or isn't they better.So I called a friend and asked him to compere his lenses too as he have the same ones and he gets the same results as I did the 16-50 is overall nicer att 35mm.

I have had two 16-50 ois II lenses both had problems on the wide side but they are both great in the 35-50 range

 

[Zeeke71]

Just to clarify for those how don't understand the Sharpest lens thing was to provoke a little and make people curious ... I know there sharper lenses at least for the m4/3 cameras and probably some of the Fujis to but not the XF 50 or the XF 35 f2

I had the 35 f1. 4 and 60mm f2. 4 with the Xe1 a couple of years ago but sold them when I bought a Sony a99 so I can't say how the 16-50 stands up to them but I remember them as nice lenses.

 

[Vic Chapman]

The XC16- 50 is a great lens as is the XF16-55 but they are very different lenses and neither one would be considered Fuji's sharpest. Both of those zooms are excellent but I think technically speaking, any of Fuji's prime lenses would be sharper. I believe the 16 mm 1.4 is considered to be one of the sharpest.

From the reviews I have read, it appears the 90mm f2.0 is the sharpest Fujinon lens.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/fujinon/xf-90mm-f2-r-lm-wr/review/

Yep!

Vic

 

[Vermont3133]

Just to clarify for those how don't understand the Sharpest lens thing was to provoke a little and make people curious ... I know there sharper lenses at least for the m4/3 cameras and probably some of the Fujis to but not the XF 50 or the XF 35 f2

I had the 35 f1. 4 and 60mm f2. 4 with the Xe1 a couple of years ago but sold them when I bought a Sony a99 so I can't say how the 16-50 stands up to them but I remember them as nice lenses.

This a pretty clear admission of trolling.....not a good way to start off in this forum.

500px

500px.com

 

[Zeeke71]

I could see that coming but I wanted to provoke a little because I think many people want to think that the expensive gear they bought have to be the best and don't you dare to question that. And Fuji people seem to be the worst.

I am a gear head and not in any way a great photographer and right now I use Fuji cameras but I have had many other brand's and they are just as good so I never gone be a Fuji fanboy......

I can not and did not say that the 16-50 is better than the 35 and 50 but I try to figure out if it is the Kit that is extraordinary sharp or the two XF primes that are not very good at smaller apertures as f4 and that should be strange especially for the Fuji fanboys...

 

[kiwi2]

I could see that coming but I wanted to provoke a little because I think many people want to think that the expensive gear they bought have to be the best and don't you dare to question that. And Fuji people seem to be the worst.

I am a gear head and not in any way a great photographer and right now I use Fuji cameras but I have had many other brand's and they are just as good so I never gone be a Fuji fanboy......

I can not and did not say that the 16-50 is better than the 35 and 50 but I try to figure out if it is the Kit that is extraordinary sharp or the two XF primes that are not very good at smaller apertures as f4 and that should be strange especially for the Fuji fanboys...

I moved to Fuji after 15 years of Canon DSLR Rebels and the more budget range lenses. (could never justify the price of L-glass for the Rebels)

Fuji's lens quality is more than I ever could of hoped for. I was stunned the first time I put the 56mm F1.2 on and shot it wide open at f/1.2...


Camera jpg

(be sure to view original size and scroll around corner to corner)

Their lenses are sharp by anyone's standard and I have no excuse that they are a limiting factor for my photography. So I can forget about worrying about the gear and just get on with thinking about the creative aspects of photography. Subject, light, composition.

--

The Colour of Night

Explore this photo album by Pete Oliver on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[eric333]

So the point of this thread is...?

You know what, never mind.

If it isn’t clear by now it’s never going to be.

 

[jonikon]

I could see that coming but I wanted to provoke a little because I think many people want to think that the expensive gear they bought have to be the best and don't you dare to question that. And Fuji people seem to be the worst.

I am a gear head and not in any way a great photographer and right now I use Fuji cameras but I have had many other brand's and they are just as good so I never gone be a Fuji fanboy......

I can not and did not say that the 16-50 is better than the 35 and 50 but I try to figure out if it is the Kit that is extraordinary sharp or the two XF primes that are not very good at smaller apertures as f4 and that should be strange especially for the Fuji fanboys...

Since you only have a few posts to your name and you use the term “Fuji fanboys” you give the appearance at least that you are trolling here in the Fujifilm forum.

However, even if you are trolling, you have made a good point and you picked a good lens to make it. I have used a lot of kit lenses across different brands, but I have never experienced the sharpness that the Fujinon XC 16-50mm ƒ/3.5-5.6 OIS provides across the focal length range. I have even wondered if that is why Fujifilm quit making this lens. This is what the reviewer from Imaging Resource said about the XC 16-50mm ƒ/3.5-5.6 lens.

“Traditionally, kit lenses have gotten a bad rap for underwhelming performance, particularly in sharpness. However, that trend seems to be changing these days, and the new Fujifilm 16-50mm lens is no exception. This lens produces very sharp images, even wide-open, and throughout the entire zoom range. Corner softness is also quite insignificant -- even fully wide at 16mm -- making it a great landscape lens, as well as a general-purpose street and portrait lens at the longer focal lengths. Diffraction limiting softness is equally minimal, with only minor softness appearing around ƒ/22 (ƒ/16 shows just a hint of softness, too). Overall, very impressive results from an inexpensive kit zoom lens!” -Imaging Resource. https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/fujinon/xc-16-50mm-f3.5-5.6-ois/review/

Having used the Fujinon XC 16-50mm ƒ/3.5-5.6 OIS I have to wholeheartedly agree with the Reviewer’s last sentence.

Best regards,
Jon