Review: Fujifilm XF 8-16mm F/2.8 R LM WR
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 сен 2024
- The latest 'red label' zoom lens from Fujifilm is the XF 8-16mm f/2.8 R LM WR. It reminds me of its sister lens the XF 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR. Both lenses are constant f/2.8 primes, both are WR but no OIS, both are big, heavy and expensive. Both these lenses are also top performers and built like tanks. However, unlike the XF 16-55mm, the new XF 8-16mm has an extreme field of view starting at ultra wide 8mm. The closest lens to compare within Fujifilm's line-up is the very competent XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS. This wider range ultra wide zoom lens has travelled with me everywhere, and is my standard vlogging lens. Can the new XF 8-16mm do everything that the XF 10-24mm can do? Not quite, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Please enjoy my latest review video with sample images. Thanks for watching, don't forget to 'LIKE', subscribe, and tell your friends. Follow the links below for more:
My latest review of the XF 8-16mm lens on Fujilove Magazine: fujilove.com/h...
The red and black braided leather strap featured on the X-H1 by Barton 1972: www.barton1972...
Featuring these cameras and lenses:
XF 8-16mm f/2.8 R LM WR: bhpho.to/2qwOnUM amzn.to/2PlYtCg
XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS: bhpho.to/2wI8bJF amzn.to/2zH8t3U
X-H1 body: bhpho.to/2F5J1Wm amzn.to/2PewuUU
X-T2 body: bhpho.to/2wIj4vj amzn.to/2zD5rxl
X-T3 body: bhpho.to/2O0PKW0 amzn.to/2KRKSC3
*This video was recorded using:
Fujifilm X-T3: bhpho.to/2O0PKW0 amzn.to/2NYVtyZ
Fujifilm XF23mm f/2 R WR: bhpho.to/2wI1XcM amzn.to/2THO7jt
Rode VideoMicro: bhpho.to/2wmQw7H
** Intro music 'First of the Last' by Silent Partner license free music provided by RUclips Creator's Studio. Outro music 'Elysium Medium' license free music provided by Apple iMovie
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*Thanks for all your support for my RUclips channel. I have started affiliated links to B&H Video and Amazon. If you decide to buy any of these featured items, or buy anything on B&H and Amazon, I will receive a commission on the purchase. It won't cost you any more to use these links, but it will help me to continue making content like this. Thank-you so much for your support of my channel:
Affiliate Link to B&H: bhpho.to/2vGUl6O
Affiliate Link to Amazon.com: amzn.to/2erHF0d
Affiliate Link to Amazon.ca: amzn.to/2wpvq8L
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
Check out my most recent pictures on Instagram:
/ bigheadtaco
Follow me on Twitter for extra pictures, videos, links and useless banter:
/ bigheadtaco
Check out my soon-to-be-updated-and-slightly-neglected blog:
www.bigheadtaco...
**Thank-you for your continued support of my RUclips channel, Instagram account and website. There is a cost to reviewing and producing videos and articles. Currently I do not make enough money to maintain or grow the quality and content I want to continue creating. For those who wish to donate, please visit PAYPAL. My account is info@bigheadtaco.com. I appreciate every donation and I personally write back a thank-you email. For those who wish to collaborate or participate in a sponsored video, please contact me: info@bigheadtaco.com. Thanks again for all your support and happy shooting!
The 8-16mm is one of the most beautifully crafted zoom lenses I’ve seen.
InstaBlaster...
The 8-16 was on the Fujifilm lens roadmap when I switched from Canon for all my real estate, interior & architectural photography over 2 years ago. It was my 'dream' lens for this type of work on the Fujifilm mirrorless system and I switched confidently knowing it was in the pipeline. I preordered the 8-16 as soon as it was announced and I'm excited it's finally here. My X-T2 lived with the 10-24 almost permanently attached (I also own the 14mm 2.8) and now that I have the 8-16, it's going to take it's place permanently attached and both of those lenses will likely hit the used market shortly. The lens is expensive, yeah and it's clearly not marketed at the hobbyist, but it's more than paid for itself with the work I've done.
Thanks! Excellent review. I do a great deal of architectural and 'abstract geometrical' photography. I'm absolutely thrilled with my 8-16! (I also have the 10-24 and 16mm WR. ) I'd add two comments: first it's actually a VERY different kind of lens in terms of how to shoot with it. Although rectilinear, handheld I've found that with subtle adjustments in orientation I'm able to effectively control virtually all distortion 'in camera ' at the very widest focal lengths (8mm-14mm) in a way that I can't with the 10,24. That means that at those very wide focal lengths one can ' get it right' SOOC - no need for perspectival adjustments in LR or other post processing programs. So it's an architectural photographer's dream camera. Only at 16mm is it beaten by the incomparable XF 16mm WR. Second comment: it balances terrifically well with the XT-2 and XT-3 IF one uses the battery grips. My personal advice to those wanting to buy it is , if you do, use it a lot to get the hang of those subtle, fine-grained perspectival adjustments I mentioned!
Super informative! I'm just getting into architectural photography and currently looking at fuji's X-series so this literally cleared a lot of doubts I was having. Thanks!
Thanks for your very informative review of this new lens. I can not justify buying it but your demonstrative photos are, as usual, ace.
thanks for watching. Maybe you can rent or borrow for a project if you need ultra wide, although the XF 10-24mm is a competent alternative :-)
This is a really helpful overview. The point about the 8-16 as a video lens wouldn't have occurred to me at all and the point about having access to the 35mm (FFE) field of view is also a good one. If it weren't for the IQ compromise, the 10-24 would be an easy choice for me.
Thanks, glad I could help...
I must ask myself... at the time of me commenting, there are 26 dislikes of this video. Why? What was it that people disliked? The video? The lens? If it was the video, I'm expecting to see 26 better videos, if it was the lens, why give a thumbs down to the video, just move on to your favourite lens/video... I'm new to the Fuji system and I find this video very informative. Thank you for sharing. @Theoria Apophasis - Another awesome source I love watching (no kissy ass, I'm just sayin').
Ha ha, thanks. I'll tell you a secret: dislikes are worth the same as likes, and comments are worth more than both in terms of RUclips algorithms. For instance, if a video gets 1 million dislikes, it still jumps up to the top of the recommended list, and you get better ad revenue. Likes, dislikes and commenting are all considered engagement, where the viewer engages with the video. So if someone truly hated me or my content, they wouldn't engage at all. The worst thing for anyone to do is not engaging, especially if you like the video. So when I get 30,000 views, but only 1,000 total engagements, that's 29,000 that never commented, liked or disliked, which actually hurts the video. So thanks for watching, thanks for commenting, and thanks for 'defending' the video. It took a while to make and I did my best to do a good job on it :-)
@@bigheadtaco I think I did know about this "dislike" stuff, but logically it just makes little to no sense (IMO). - the algorithms are ok, i just don't get the users. :)
@@54V4 ha ha, thanks for your support. You're always going to get dislikers. Often it's because they dislike me, the lens, the brand, etc. I get a lot of Sony guys that just come to my videos to hate on the gear, which makes no sense to me. I guess they spend more time arguing about photography than actually taking pictures :-)
@@bigheadtaco Interesting insight. I'm a fan of a couple RUclipsrs who like to tell viewers to hit the dislike button twice if they don't like a particular video but it sounds like that's actually bad advice.
@@timothylinn it's their pride talking, or else they're just kidding around. Dislikes don't bother me, neither does negative comments, as long as it's done respectfully and if they have a point. Trolls are immediately muted and comments removed and reported...
I would be interested in a comparison at the wide end with the Laowa 9mm and the Samyang 12mm
If I could get a hold of both those lenses I wouldn't mind doing it, but I don't have access to these two brands :-(
I have both of those, the Laowa 9mm and Samyang 12mm, as there is no way I will ever be able to afford this beast of a Fuji lens, and frankly prefer the smaller size and weight of the manual 3rd party lenses. My needs aren’t sufficient to justify the xf 8-16, though on my Canon I do have the Sigma 8-16mm I got second hand at a decent price. It has complex moustache distortion and is not sharp in the corners.
The Samyang and Laowa lenses are both small and light, the Laowa in particular, that thing is tiny. Both vignette, the Laowa much more than the Samyang. I love my Samyang and use it a lot in my urban travels. The Laowa less often, also haven’t had it as long, it is so incredibly wide. Both, being ultrawide, are specialty lenses of course, so only suits certain subjects or situations. For shooting street art in narrow laneways, it is great, as long as you are careful with your angles, as things distort easily, and people on the edge will look funky. But that is part of the appeal, along with my Samyang 8mm. Once imported onto my computer via Photo Mechanic, I create folders for each manual lens and drag the photos of each lens into it so I can run a script on each folder to add all the relevant metadata, before dragging them back into the main folder for further tagging and import into Capture One.
The Laowa has, as they advertise, virtually no distortion, however it does vignette heavily, which is ok with me. I tend to stop it down to lessen it. The Samyang has slight barrel distortion and some vignetting, but nothing to worry about, especially as I tend to shoot it at f5.6 - f8. It does have a fair bit of chromatic aberration in the corners, and heavy purple fringing in high-contrast regions. Photoshop can handle the chromatic aberrations, and with care, the purple fringing (I tend to brush corrections on if there are any purple on the image that might get affected). But for most images I don’t bother correcting them.
@@msandersen yes I think the Fujifilm XF 8-16mm will outperform the Samyang and Laowa, but at the expense of size, weight and price. For most, the diminishing return on this premium lens isn't worth it. The distortion is super low, no vignetting, sharp across the frame, it's beautiful. Optically this lens is a beast, but so is the size and weight. That's why the XF 10-24mm is a good compromise for me.
Oliver Wheeldon does a comparison on his RUclips channel ... He shoot landscapes and travel.
Right after I leave Fuji releases killer lenses. I loved my xf16-55 and I would have bought this for sure. Also 2mm is 20% wider, huge difference when you are at 10mm
I was so looking forward to this lens and it fits well with my 16-55mm and 50-140mm (the red badge trinity). There are so much to love about this lens, but also to dislike this lens. For me, the lack of filter thread is a deal breaker. I know that there are third party filter adaptor. But I'm so invested into H&Y Filter that it takes a considerable effort to invest into another filter system.
Recently, I got laowa 9mm and it works quite well and I think I will go for 10-24mm to complete the gap between 9mm to 16mm. If 10-24mm has WR and 2.8 that will be perfect... I hope that will be true soon :) great video as always!
Thanks for your input. Yes the XF 8-16mm is an amazing lens, but without a front filter, it's not versatile enough for many, including myself. However, for limited projects, I think this lens will be amazing. If I did a lot of interior architecture photography, this lens would be it.
Thanks for another great review. Your photos were also excellent. Often the review photos are just very mundane. But your photos were well done and standup on their own without the interest of a lens review.
Thanks for that Jay, I appreciate it. First and foremost I consider myself a photographer. Most working photographers don't have time to review gear so I decided to stop shooting for work and focus on helping others with my reviews, interviews and travel shows.
Good review and great photo’s; those sun stars are just fab (something Jonas Rask points out as well). However, I just bought the 10-24mm lens. It’s twice as light (400 gr instead of 800) and got IS and as such is much more suited (on my XT2) as a walkaround lens. Also, it’s less than half the price (750 euro instead of 2000). For the difference I can buy 1 or even 2 additional - and very good - Fuji lenses. And 10mm is already plenty wide.
Yes I love the XF 10-24. I wrote an article comparing the two lenses at Fujilove: fujilove.com/how-wide-is-too-wide-the-new-xf8-16mmf2-8-r-lm-wr/
OK , 10-24 it will be on my XT5. Thanks 🎉
As alaways i'm pleased to watch your reviews! I think as long as it cost 2000, the 16 F1.4 is a bargain for most. I would of prefer a prime with ois
Thanks for watching!!
This would be excellent for Astro landscape photography. Thanks for the review!
Nice review I might need a wide angle lens I'm really thinking about getting this guy... But can you please let me know what is ur camera Strap it looks solid n cool. Thank you
The strap is Barton 1972. They also have their own RUclips channel :-)
Please review the Zeiss Touit f/2.8 12 mm lens. I own one of these lenses and use it for Landscape photography. I carry it on my bicycle in a Traffic 24/7 sling bag and I am getting terrific results. If you try it, I think you will love this prime lens. It is relatively light and compact.
Thanks for sharing! Btw, this lens also can install some filter like ND and CPL by nisi s5 filter system. Now, I am torn. Do you think is the large difference in photos rendering like feeling between the 8mm and 10mm?
i got mine, its SHARP AS PISS :P wooo
Ya this lens is insane, but gotta be honest, I'm gonna keep the XF 10-24mm. I need that filter thread in the front for video... but I'll ask for it again when I got to Hong Kong. I need to destroy those skyscrapers with this lens!!
Thanks for a great review. Seems like a fantastic lens but the lack of a filter thread is an issue for me. The 10-24mm suits me better and is a fraction of the price.
Hey man, cheers for the vid. Where did you get the rope camera strap from??? It's ace!
Barton 1972 from Hong Kong.
@@bigheadtaco cheers dude
THANKS great review BUT I HAD MY 16mm. f1.4 which is great in low light and still love it >>then i don't know >> it's hard to trade of
I could only see myself using this lens for skate & snowboarding photography. I never shoot landscapes wider than 12mm & the 10-24 is optically stellar & lightweight.
Good review and beautiful shots. Are you going to do a review on the xt3?
I'm working on a long term review on the X-T3. It's my primary daily camera. So far I'm impressed. My previous daily camera was the X-T2.
@@bigheadtaco nice, I'll be patiently waiting to hear your in depth thoughts on it.
@@KingOkami I also write a monthly article for FujiLove Magazine. Here are my first thoughts on the X-T3: fujilove.com/fujifilm-x-t3-more-than-a-great-video-camera/
I wonder how many of us dual system shooters are still out there. I’m lucky enough to own a Nikon 14-24mm for full frame landscape photography as well as a Fuji 16mm 1.4mm for everything else wide - this lens is phenomenal but not sensible for my setup. I actually steer clear from all mirrorless zoom lenses because it defeats the purpose in my setup (the 18-55mm is the only lightweight value for money exception to the rule). So I tend to use my D810 at the extreme ends, either super wide or telephoto.
Since I sold my sigma 8-16mm, I miss 8 mm view angle on APS-C. I have 10-24mmf4. I am really wandering to replace it.
love your videos BHT. I cannot afford that lens. I don't need that lens. I want that lens. :)
Thanks for watching. I don't need it either, but I too would love to have it sitting on my shelf waiting to be used :-)
The bloody black lens say it would gobble all the light that hits it...great lens... Good review..
Consider the price... I will just take my 16mmf1.4 and do a panorama...but that star is just awesome!!!
You just said the keyword at the end of your video ...”borrow” the lens 😊... this is a fantastic lens .., but to purchase it ... hmm not for now.. if I can borrow definitely will use it..
if you can justify this much money in one lens, that's great, especially if your style of photography calls for it. For instance if you shot a lot of interior pictures, such as realestate, then you can justify the expense. But for me this is a specialty lens and something I would have a specific project in mind. The XF 10-24mm is the perfect balance of speciality and general use at a reasonable size, weight and price.
I guess Fuji plan to put an internal nd filter in an xh2 or and nd adapter for this lens to make it useful in more circumstances
Even if a third party company makes a back mount with drop in filters, similar to what Canon did with the EOS R system.
an internal ND would be a big plus even more than an adapter and in an x-h2 or even x-pro 2, it would seduce so many videographers over some full frame or APS-C competitors.
@@artpertures860 for sure, but for us current X-H1, X-T3, X-T2, etc shooters, a work around would be great too :-)
bigheadtaco I do have the x-t3 and i m thinking to buy a wide angle, that one is too expensive at the moment and I might buy a second hand 10-24 especially as I m into video and long exposure But I think the 8-16 would be even more useful in the next generation of Fuji camera over the present one but for us actual users it’s true an adapter would be what we are looking for but extend the length of the camera would make it feel even more front heavy.
X-T3 and XF 10-24mm is my current vlogging set up
Can the aperture ring be clickless
Not out of the box. It has marked apertures on the barrel and it has a nice click. Perhaps the service department can do it, but my guess is that they can't or won't.
Nice review, but “video for this is out” - I disagree. I’ll post next week video samples. It’s a dream!
I did mention that for certain special applications it's fine, but it's a narrow focus lens for video because it's harder to match FPS to shutter speed.... but not impossible. You'll need a workaround. Look forward to your sample though :-)
Ah, a first, a lens as big as Take's head.
I love the 10-24,it`s permanently attached to my XT1.
8-16 without IS,yeah nah.
Ya I love the XF 10-24mm too. I wish it had WR, not for rain but for dust and humidity. Other than that, I think it's a perfect lens for me :-)
I had thr XF 10-24 for one day, absolutely hated it, IQ not good. Now I have the XF 8-16 and absolutely love it!
No ND FILTERS for LEE filters . 😥
So I guess you’re forced to shoot in black and white and use a red filter... which sucks. Oh well.
3mm on the wide end isn't exactly what I'd call slight.
True, what I was trying to say is 'most' may think 3mm makes little difference, but we know the wider we go, every mm of focal length makes a greater difference. So a 300mm and 303mm makes almost no difference. But 10mm to 7mm is significant. Thanks for calling me out on that.... :-)
For the money, seems like a no brainer. 10-24 all the way.
For me yes, but for some they want that extra performance. I was the same with the XF 16-55mm f/2.8 R WR. I chose the much cheaper XF 18-55mm f/2.8 R OIS as my daily zoom because of the size, weight, OIS and price point. But for some who shoot weddings or event who need that extra performance, their decision will be different
not necessarily -- you get an extra stop and an extra 2mm. for astro, landscape, real estate, etc. there are many reasons to go with the 8-16. However I agree that the price tag is hefty
@@GrantEllman if you could get it for $1200 in used mint cond...would u buy it?
bak2mb probably not. I have the 10-24 already and at this point I’d like to have a 35 prime in my arsenal... either the 1.4 or the mitakon
Imho a 8mm F4 rectilinear and filter friendly Lens would have Been nice. Lets ask Fujifilm for a 12mm F4 Tilt shift filter friendly Lens !
I have one and like iT a lot
That's great! Congrats :-)
great lens for video on my Ronin S Gimbal
Hmmm.... ultra wide is cool, but too expensive. I do with 14/2.8, 18/2, 23/2 ... smaller, lighter... but I still would like to shoot with this new monster !
I felt the same with the XF 10-24mm, that 8mm wasn't a big deal. But when I compared while shooting up at buildings, it made a difference. It's not an every day lens for sure, but it's worth a try on a specific project.
Good system, now if they ditch the x trans, it would be perfect
The randomized colour filter array is only for the main APS-C cameras, minus the X-A and X-T100 and XF10 cameras. That use Bayer colour filter array system. Also the GFX system uses Bayer sensors. I’ve done lots of back to back tests. My thoughts are mixed. When the sensors were 16MP, I did see increase in resolution compared to 24MP full frame sensors that had AA filters. However, at 24MP and with improved algorithms, I’m not so sure it’s such a big deal now. Let’s see what happens with the 5th generation sensors.
Thumbs Up!
Right back at you!
A lens that big and heavy(not to mention expensive) for a crop body should have built-in OIS.
I don't think it's as simple as saying 'because it's a crop sensor lens it should have OIS'. Lens design is complicated and there's always optical compromises when adding OIS. You have floating optics which is not ideal for perfect optics. That's why the best lenses in the world are primes, manual focus and no OIS. Think of Leica glass or cinema lenses for motion picture. If any manufacturer wants to make a top quality lens in any format (M43, APS-C, 35mm, 120, etc.) then OIS is not included. However, OIS is practical and convenient, even for professional lenses.
It will be just bigger and more expensive with is
Your camera strap looks impractical for a lens of this weight.
Your comments about not being able to use filters on the 8-16mm are also untrue.
This lense would be perfect for real estate photography. 12mm isn't wide enough.
Yes great for interior shots of condos and townhouses, or any small spaces.
16 f1.4 still King
BellipotensNYC but it’s a one trick pony that gives you a 24mm composition/crop thanks to an accompanying aps-c sensor. It may be king of fidelity, but I can see what else.
@@mrg6424 I use it for a lot of things. Portrait, street, landscape, pseudomacro, handheld night, indoor etc. I had the chance to use the 8-16 for some time and to me the 16s versatility keeps it on the throne of Fuji lenses.
Astrolens for the wealthier people...
beautiful lens but too expensive and too heavy for my amateur skills.
Completely understand. It's definitely not on the top of my list of 'best buy'. It's a specialized lens. Perfect for rental if you have a specific project in mind.
very subtle way of saying not worth the upgrade.
The Fujifilm 8-16mm does NOT offer an 8-16mm FOV on the camera it was designed for. The FOV on a Fuji X-series camera is 12-24mm. It is important to write and speak precisely regarding crop-sensor lenses.
Hi Ralph, I think you need to understand that field of view based on a metric measurement does not change with the size of the image sensor. You are confusing the equivalence of what angle of view you get in APS-C when you compared to 35mm. So a 12mm lens on M43, 16mm lens on APS-C, 24mm on 35mm and 32mm on digital medium format all have the same field of view, but on different size sensors. We often use 35mm (or full frame) as the standard to which we understand what the 'focal length' is since it was the most common film format for 50 years before digital took over. So using the mathematical equation to calculate a lens' focal length, it doesn't change with the size of the sensor. But as you change sensor sizes, what you actually see does change.
Ralph Jay Wallace an 8-16mm lens is an 8-16mm lens regardless of how you crop it. It looks different than a 12-24 on full frame. We convert to give a ROUGH idea on how a lens will perform. 12-24 f/4 is one way you can do it, but you can actually think of it as having equivalent depth of field to an 8-16mm on full frame and roughly a 12-24 field of view. It is not as simple as you stated. Also for someone who preaches “precision” you are not very precise.
with the cost of that lens, and camera, you can a FF + an actual 12-24 super performing lens. 2K for a apsc lens is ridiculous.
Not if you compare the price with the FF equivalent 11-24mm from Canon which goes around 2.7-3K! Both lenses are in the same leage.
Every RUclipsr wants to copy MKBHD (“Peace!”)
Angry Photographer are you watching, this is how you make a proper review of the Fujifilm XF 8-16mm F/2.8 R LM WR.
But I don't want him to shoot the same style video as me.... he can be himself, and I'll be myself... but thanks :-)
Love his reviews and his unbiased reviews. So many RUclips reviewers are fake and are paid. Unlike Taco and the Angry photographer.
Me and Ken have been around long enough to have shot with almost every brand and style of camera over the years. Plus we both come from shooting professionally so we have a good idea of what pros are looking for, but also what consumers really need versus want. Many RUclips reviewers only have a superficial understanding of gear, which is fine for a quick 5 min overview but not a deep dive. Moreover, this lens is pro spec and shouldn't really be faulted for size, weight and price. Thanks for commenting :-)
@@bigheadtaco thanks for your response I have been watching you since you only had a few subscribers. You and Ken both have different styles of camera reviews. Ken may not be a pro photographer but when it comes to gear he knows his shit. Like him or hate him he knows his shit and isn't paid off. Cheers from Canada's NWT.
Conclusion:
More weight than FF lenses
More expensive than FF lenses
Not better than FF lenses
Why would I buy this lens?
A lens being 35mm or APS-C should have no bearing on weight or price. Also, quantify 'better'. If you shoot with a 35mm sensor camera, you aren't looking at these lenses because they won't fit. If you currently shoot with a APS-C sensor camera, you aren't looking at 35mm lenses. Comparing two different brands using different formats and different type of lenses doesn't make any sense. If you have a 35mm sensor camera, then buy lenses that are available to you within that eco-system, including third party lenses.
@@bigheadtaco I have a Fuji camera, and I have this dilema, Why would I buy this lens if for the same price or less I'll have a similar FF lens? Would not be better to change my camera for a FF camera? If fuji not wins in price, weight or quality what are their advantages?
@@vicgtc please tell me which full frame camera and lens you're comparing with the Fujifilm system and specifically this lens. I think too many people are manipulated by marketing that claims 35mm ('full-frame' is actually a very misleading term and I don't like using it) is intrinsically better than APS-C. Again, I don't like the term cropped because that's under the assumption that the initial intent was to be 35mm. No switching to 35mm sensor just because it's bigger doesn't mean your images will be better or that the lenses will be better. There are many APS-C and M43 lenses that outperform 35mm sensor lenses, but remember that a lens is just one factor in image quality. Unlike the film era, we have to deal with a processor which greatly affects the output of an image. Again, what lens is the same price, size and weight as the XF 8-16mm from Fujifilm?
@@bigheadtaco I am thinking in both Sony 16-35 GM 2.8 or Sony 12-24 F4 if you want the exact same focal range. I think both are lighter, cheaper and have overall better quality paired with a FF sensor.
@@vicgtc well, although it's not possible to compare apples with apples, the Sony 12-24mm f/4 is definitely the equivalent focal length to the Fujifilm's. The image circle on the Fujifilm is bigger than the Sony, even though the sensor size is quite different, so Fujifilm will probably have better optical performance from edge to edge. In terms of special glass, Fujifilm has 4 spherical elements, 3 ED, 3 Special ED and 2 surfaces coated with Nano GI coating to reduce flare. Sony has great specs but Fujifilm is higher spec'd, including a 9 blade diaphragm versus Sony's 7 blade. Fujifilm is also f/2.8 versus Sony's f/4, that's why the Fujifilm is bigger, heavier and more expensive.
I still don't know what you mean by 'better quality'. Do you mean the sensor technology? Do you mean the actual optical quality, because that's what we're discussing right? Because a lens is for a 35mm sensor doesn't automatically make it 'better quality' than a lens made in a smaller sensor format. Lens sharpness, distortion correction, light fall off, micro contrast, there's lots of things you need to compare before you claim one lens is 'better' than another. According to your argument, then Fujifilm's digital medium format lenses are all 'better' than all of Sony's 35mm format lenses because the sensor is bigger on Fujifilm's GFX series?
If your argument is that a 35mm sensor is bigger than an APS-C sensor thus has greater potential for higher resolution, then you are correct. But a bigger sensor doesn't automatically mean it's 'better'. It just has a higher potential for higher resolution. And even if this was your argument, what does this all have to do with the lens? This is a lens review. I'm sorry, your argument of one lens being better than another by just looking at specs at B&H is not logical or sound. Rent the Fujifilm lens and rent the Sony, set up a scenario where you can compare the two lenses, and then compare the final images. That's how you compare. Looking at specs on-line and comparing them isn't a really good argument.