I've had my 16-55mm for a few weeks now. Shot with it for day long trips and a couple of events. I'm not a pro, but I do love photography .
I agree with the general sentiment that others have said here, that the "it's sooo big" feedback from initial reviews is way overblown. Granted, it depends where you're coming from. I came from Canon a year ago, first with the 550D + 17-55mm f2.8 EF-S, then the 5Diii + 24-70 F2.8 ii. Let me tell you, the X-T1 with the 16-55mm is laughably small and easy to handle vs either of those Canon setups. As far as fixed f2.8 mid-range zooms go for APS-C or FF, this has to be one of the most compact (albeit, not by much).
Focusing is fairly fast and silent. I'm patiently waiting for v4.0 firmware where I think this lens will really shine.
I'll admit, my first event I was a bit perplexed. It was in a large room with plenty of sunlight pouring in from 10 foot windows along a wall, and in aperture priority set to f2.8 the whole time, my X-T1 kept wanting to give me 1000+ ISO with my minimum shutter speed of 1/30. A LOT of those pictures came out slightly blurry, esp. on the long end. I had to manually set SS to 1/60 and keep ISO at 800 for hand shake to stop being an issue. Not sure if the X-T1 was having a metering issue or what, but it was a little annoying.
As for the picture quality, images are definitely sharp. Pretty damn close to prime, if not prime sharp. I compare side by side with images I took with my 24-70 ii, and they're easily on par, but for a total of $3,000 less for glass+body .
That all being said, I'm still evaluating if I want to keep it. I used to be a zoom shooter, but after switching to Fuji, I've really enjoyed the performance of primes. Currently I own the 23mm, and decided to give the 16-55mm a shot. I'll admit, I'm pretty tempted by going the 56mm f1.2 route for the long end, and maybe picking up a wide angle. I found myself reaching for my 23mm yesterday at Disneyland because I really needed the f1.4. I've been spoiled with the bright primes. Takes a lot to make f2.8 feel slow..lol. I'll probably wait for the v4.0 firmware with the new AF tracking to see if the 16-55mm will work for me.
I'm in a position where I wouldn't mind at all to just rock primes, but having 2 kids running around, sometimes a mid range zoom is required.
I just got mine, a minty used copy from a dealer for $960 in the original packaging. Looks like new.
I have used only primes with the X-T1 until now, but have wanted a top tier general purpose zoom to avoid lugging a bunch of lenses around.
Fast focus, very sharp, as a good as a prime for me. BUT, a bit heavy at first, then you don't notice. Much lighter than the equivalent Nikon gear I sold ;-)
I just got my 16-55mm lens today. Like everyone said the quality is no question about it. Its build to last, heavy but in a good way. I like the rubber on the zoom and the "clik" feeling on the aperture ring. Haven't had a chance to try it but once i try i will share it with you guys. I've done research before buying that lens, and decided to buy after that. Some minor chromatic aberration and distortion in some point of focal range but easily corrected.
I have this lens and love it.
I used to have the 18-55, maybe I had a bad copy, but I find the 16-55 is a huge step up in performance and image quality.
If it's cycling events in pouring rain, animals in the rain forest or pictures from a boat I'd say go for the 16-55.
If it's for walking around and shooting still stuff in ok conditions grab the 18-55 and enjoy the OIS when you're inside buildings or generally handeld in low-light. For outside keep in mind that if you want to shoot sharp with plenty DOF you'll be around f/8 and thus the 2.8 doesn't matter at all, and they'll probably be extremely near in terms of quality well stopped down.
icarm reacted to Noah in XF 16-55mm f/2.8 WR Lens