The Fujifilm 16-55mm f/2.8

[rhythmworx]

Fujifilm has officially announced the 16-55mm f/2.8, a lens that the world has known of since last year when Fuji released a

detailed roadmap of upcoming products.

The XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR is the equivalent of 24-84mm in 35mm terms, and features a constant f/2.8 aperture across

its zoom range. Autofocus speed is a blazing 0.06 seconds, and the focusing system has “whisper quiet” autofocus that pairs

well with Fuji’s latest “silent shutter” firmware updates.

On the outside is a durable, weather-resistant and dust proof exterior that was designed with photojournalists in mind. There

are 14 sealing points that help keep the weather out. The front lens element has a Nano-GI coating that reduces ghosting and

lens flare. Inside the lens is a 9 blade aperture that helps produce smooth and circular bokeh. Minimum focusing distance is less

than a foot. The 16-55mm f/2.8 will start shipping in February 2015 at a cost of $1,200.

http://petapixel.com/2015/01/06/fujifilm-16-55mm-f2-8-strong-silent-lens-designed-photojournalists-mind/#more-155191

[sunshine51]

Back at Christmas Day 2013 the missus bought me Fuji's X-Pro1 with

Fuji's M mount adaptor. I was quite surprised to receive the nifty little

camera. However....since I have enough cameras already and after

using the XP-1 a bit with mainly Leica's Nocti 50mm f1.0 attached I

tended to tuck the camera away and not use it that often. The missus

began using it and nowadays has kinda latched on to it with my gracious

approval (she always asks) and is quite proficient in its use.

Yesterday afternoon she was on her computer looking at stuff and called

me to "Have a look at this...." It's the same Petapixel website RW!

Yes...there was...and still is...a twinkle in her eyes.....

This could very well be a sweet lil lens.

Edited January 8, 2015 by sunshine51

[rhythmworx]

David Hobby swears by his Fuji so much he has stopped travelling with his NIk's and only uses them for pro work.

I've also seen some other pro guy do portrait work with a Fuji and the results were impressive.

Looks like you might have to put your hand in your pocket and treat Mrs sunshine, she might treat you in return.

Edited January 8, 2015 by rhythmworx

[sunshine51]

RW...Ahhhhhhhh...treats...yes...that's what makes the world go 'round!

An old friend of mine, Tim Page, also uses Fuji's these days & swears by em.

Link...http://fujifilm-x.com/photographers/en/tim_page/#01

In a limited way...so do I...meaning I like what my....errr...the missus XP-1

does....but I need to pry it outta the hands of babes (she is) so I can really

get into what it does in more detail by my own hands!

From what I have done with it before it...ahhhh...was...damn I can't find

the word at this moment....OK...Shanghai'd...I loved it dearly. Maybe that's

why Mrs. SS latched on to it!

[Goshawk]

nice lens indeed . . . almost recently jumped ship myself from Nikon to the Fuji X-T1. (glad i didn't)

the thing is, it ain't just there yet . . . maybe the X-T2 in 2016?

[sunshine51]

^^^ GH...In what ways do you feel the X-T1 isn't there yet?

The missus & occasionally I, wish Fuji had more lenses

in their X series but then again...there are adaptors out

there such as my Fuji M mount adaptor which enable me

to use most all my Leica lenses of the XP-1. There's also

an F & G mount adaptor available (Nikon) and most assuredly

there's a Canon adaptor and others. Perhaps not made

by Fuji but other reputable makers. BTW missus has the

35 @ 1.4 & 56 @ 1.2...both she bought all by herself!

I wanted to buy her the 18-55 @ 2.8-4.0 however she

said she's happy with what she has. No need to argue

there! Metabones make great adaptors to X mount.

That's just for lack of lenses though....what else do you

reckon? BTW...you have Nik's 7100 correct? That's a

mighty nice camera IMO.

Edited January 10, 2015 by sunshine51

[Goshawk]

^^^ GH...In what ways do you feel the X-T1 isn't there yet?

image quality.

let me explain . . . while the IQ is good it just doesn't compare to my D7100 (which it was going to replace) particularly when fine detail is required in wide expansive landscape photography. It definitely falls short in this field (& this is one of my main interests) and i'm not alone with this view - read many others coming to the same conclusion. When i was busy researching this cam quite a few month ago now, i was constantly comparing files and i really wanted it to awesome-to-great . . . i eventually found it to be good, and that's not enough for me to ditch the awesome 7100. That's my only gripe with the X-T1, love everything else about it . . . size, evf, etc . .

When the X-T2 or X-PRO2 arrives (with rumoured 24mp sensor), i'll look again.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Goshawk

[sunshine51]

^^^ Good enough reason to stick with your 7100!

The missus & when I get to have a play with the XP-1

it's used for mainly "people pix"....aka street stuff &

it's very good at that.

[Goshawk]

The missus & when I get to have a play with the XP-1

it's used for mainly "people pix"....aka street stuff &

it's very good at that.

agree . . the little fuji's really excel in this situation.

[fimgirl]

^^^ GH...In what ways do you feel the X-T1 isn't there yet?

image quality.

let me explain . . . while the IQ is good it just doesn't compare to my D7100 (which it was going to replace) particularly when fine detail is required in wide expansive landscape photography. It definitely falls short in this field (& this is one of my main interests) and i'm not alone with this view - read many others coming to the same conclusion. When i was busy researching this cam quite a few month ago now, i was constantly comparing files and i really wanted it to awesome-to-great . . . i eventually found it to be good, and that's not enough for me to ditch the awesome 7100. That's my only gripe with the X-T1, love everything else about it . . . size, evf, etc . .

When the X-T2 or X-PRO2 arrives (with rumoured 24mp sensor), i'll look again.

Reference the X-Trans files.

You might wish to investigate the Capture One Raw developer which seems to have countered the negativity surrounding the green and foliage problems. I have a few files shot in this environment which look ok to me.

Just a thought

[Goshawk]

^ i did check that out during the scrutinizing period . . . seemed ok, but just that. Certainly better than LR, in which X Trans raw files (generally) suck.