True but you don’t get a lot of subject isolation on a 24-70 f/2.8 which is what the op was asking about. The 16-55 f/2.8 gave you about the same subject isolation as a 24-70 f/2.8 shot at f/4. That's just a fact of life when dealing with crop sensors. That's why I bought the Metabones Speed Booster. For myself I appreciate having three lenses with the same 67mm filter size (Viltrox 13mm, Tamron 17-70 and Fuji 70-300mm). Similar to the 16-55, I'm hoping the Tamron can do some wide and tele astrophotography at 2.8 as well; the Lenstip review indicates its coma and astigmatism levels are (relatively) low. We'll see 🤔🙂 Updated 2021. A review of the Fuji XF 16-80mm f/4 R OIS WR and comparison with four Fuji XF prime lenses. Sample images, focal length comparison, and comparing the XF 16-80mm to the XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 and XF 16-55mm f/2.8. Brightin Star 28mm F2.8 Micro-Pancake Review; Brightin Star X-Slim 28mm F2.8 Gallery; Sirui Sniper 33mm F1.2 X-Mount Review; Sirui Sniper 33mm F1.2 Image Gallery; Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 for X-Mount Gallery; Sirui Sniper 23mm F1.2 AF Lens Review Primes – all is not well! Face painting - Spring Festival, Goldfields, Western Australia, 2018. Fuji X-T2, XF 16-55 @ 51mm, 2.8, ISO 1,000. Yes as we’ve discussed, primes offer a lighter package, faster aperture and are usually optically better than zooms – but they have their trade-offs was well.
AFFILIATE LINKS TO SUPPORT THE CHANNEL:Fujinon 16-55mm f2.8:
ZV2CC.
