18-55 mm image quality with the 16-80 mm lens

[Normo]

I have an old xe-1 that came with a kit lens, the 18-55mm  with OIS.   There is now a very nicely priced package of an Xt-3 with the XF16-80 mm lens. In the shooting range that covers 18-55 mm, is the new lens image quality as good as or better than the older 18-55.  I.e, is it worth getting the new lens with some extra coverage from 56-80 mm. range and selling the older lens or is the image of the older 18-55 excellent and it is worth keeping and finding another lens for ranges beyond the 55mm. range.  I hope I don't make this sound too confusing.  Thanks.  Norm

[merlin]

My 16-80 has completely replaced my 18-55 for hiking, off-trail adventures, and other outings.  IQ is excellent, and although it is a bit heavier and bulkier, the extra reach at both ends works wonderfully for me.

[Lumens]

I own the 18-55, the 16-80, and the 16-55 "Red Badge".

The 18-55 is a fantastic lens as you know.  If I'm going to be in low light (handheld) I grab it for the f2.8 aperture over the f4 of the 16-80.

The 16-80 is my favorite lens.  The OIS on this lens is INCREDIBLE.  I can hand hold down to 1/10 of a second and still get tack sharp images.  This lens is on my camera 95% of the time.  I love it!

The 16-55 is the sharpest of the 3 lenses, but has no OIS - making it lacking at the longer length hand held.  But for Landscapes or low light on a tripod it is the sharpest and best of the three.  When on a tripod it is the lens of choice.

[Mr.B]

I own both lenses. The 2.8 on the 18-55 is only useful when used on the wide end; as it is not a constant 2.8. I like the size compared to the 16-80 which is a bit bulkier. But the 16-80 is a much sharper lens. My 18-55 may be a bad copy and I never thought it produced sharp images. From what I've seen in other posts, it may be a bit overrated because it has a great build quality for a kit lens.