Photozone.de reviews

[frod]

Just noticed Photozone have added a few reviews recently, the pro zooms and the 90mm.

 

http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x

[Marc G.]

Yeah but the 16-55 review is next to useless. They obviously have a faulty lens if that is the result. There's definitely a bigger optical difference between the 18-55 and 16-55. So their 18-55 is really good and the 16-55 really bad.

[darknj]

Fuji vs Fuji has quite a good comparison of the 16-55 vs 18-55 if you are looking for one.

[ccoolliinn]

I think the 90mm review showed what we already knew. My one has been stuck on my XT1 since I bought it. 

[frod]

The standout things for the 16-55mm for me are the pre-corrected distortion and vignetting, can those really be down to a bad sample?

[JaapD]

I also find the Photozone’s 16-55mm lens test results disappointing. However I do not immediately think that this is related to a bad copy or something. It might have something to do with field curvature. Photozone is testing with a flat surface on a relatively short distance. Any field curvature could easily result is lesser performance at the edges and in the corners. This differs from Fuji vs Fuji lens tests as they test against ‘real world’ situations.

 

I don’t photograph test charts myself therefore I take such kinds of tests with a grain of salt. They are by no means irrelevant though……

 

It is always best to judge lens performance on several test sites and check out ‘how’ the lens test is performed.

[frod]

The Fuji vs Fuji comparison picked out the 18-55 as having the best vignetting performance too.

[ccoolliinn]

The problem of making such a good standard 18-55 zoom higher or pro versions can struggle to improve. Canons cheap 18-55 starter lens is a cracker for the money and next lens up [17-85] is hardly better.