Jump to content


Any reviews of the 16-55 (for 18-55 users)?

16-55 2.8

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#21 Jaco van Lith

Jaco van Lith


  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts

Posted 18 May 2017 - 08:27 PM

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)

It is a waist of money !!! The size of the APS-C is for amateurs; most of the time. I do not say "amateurs are bad photographers". A professional tries to earn his living bij making photographs. An amateur makes photoos just for fun. Forget those figures. Enjoy the hobby. Stop talking about good and better. By today's standards the old optics should be bad ? People talk too much. People think bigger is better. All nonsense.


In the U.S.A. Full Frame is the standard for the Pro. In Europa Full Frame is the standard for the amateur.  Mr. W. Eugene Smith was a great American photographer, even with the tiny Olympus Pen F 18 x 24 mm camera. 


Show me two identical pictures; made with the two different Fujinon zoom optics. Do the same with a 135 mm optic at 6 x 6 cm neg. and  with a 210 mm at 4 x5 inch.  Can you see the difference of DOF at 80 x 100 cm enlargements.


I never said that a Fujinon optic was bad. Hardly anybody needs the oversized wide apertures. Is not it the same like todays motor cars. Smaller engine with big turbo. 

#22 CDBC


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 41 posts

Posted 19 May 2017 - 02:10 AM

I rest my case.


Hope you get the help you need, and soon.  :rolleyes:


Registration is free

Not registered? Really?

Discover the full potential of the Fuji X Forum... register now!
Registration is free and done in a few minutes!

As registered member you can discuss, post your questions and present your images.
And get in contact with Fuji X photographers worldwide!

We are looking forward to you!

The Fuji X Forum Team

Register Close