Dear Nasim, interesting lens you just tested. Reminds me of the times I used the Fujis more regularly. Saw rumors of the lens, maybe 3 years ago? And of course of the Sigma 12-24/4 Art for FF which is at least in Switzerland roughly 350.– cheaper than the Fujinon. And weighs roughly 300 grams more. I don’t buy it, I went for the 14-24/2.8 instead as I often use it indoors
It’s good that everybody needing a ultra wide angle in the Fuji system has now a premium option more to choose from.
However, looking at your sample pictures I saw many one could also take be using a longer FL and stitching it as panorama. Sure, there are shots you only can take as one single exposure. Long exposures, kind of action (like inmidst a wedding), typical UWA fun shots with people in.
In architecture not everybody likes converging lines.
In your comparisons the Touit 12 mm was not that bad and better than this zoom. I didn’t like the Touit and never missed it after I sold it. IF I wanted to go ultrawide, I mostly got away with stitched panos from the fantastic 16/1.4.
For me it’s now the moment I like to reply to your mantra “not everybody needs FF”. Which is as true as “not everybody needs an APS-C”. But when I see the added weights, costs, sizes, I only could justify such a lens to buy if I’d be head over heels and exclusively into Fuji cosmos. Otherwise each 24 MP FF with said Sigma would deliver better image quality, and if that’s not enough resolution, I still could get a higher MP body. Not so in Fuji cosmos, currently 26 MP is all there is.
Joachim, thanks for dropping by as usual, your comments and feedback are always appreciated!
In regards to stitching an UW panorama with a wide-angle lens, while it is possible, it is quite a difficult task to do in post, as it requires lots of distortion correction using different tools in Photoshop. In some cases, moving a wide-angle lens can significantly alter the perspective if you are not careful, making it impossible to stitch a panorama. It requires precision, a nodal slider and one has to know precisely where the lens needs to be on the slider for each focal length in order to avoid parallax issues. Obviously, a tripod is a requirement, as well as steady lighting conditions. My point is, it is often much easier to take one shot with the right lens than to deal with all this in the field.
Some of the images in this review would be very painful to try to stitch using multiple images, especially the skyline of Dubai where there are moving cars, changing lighting conditions, changing lights on buildings, etc. The same with the images where there are people, or the sun in the frame – by the time you are done shooting 3-4 images, the person moves, or the sun is no longer where it needs to be. Ghosting and flare can also be a problem with the sun in different positions within the frame.
But I do agree that this is a prohibitively expensive lens for most photographers, including myself. This was one of the biggest criticisms in my review – I wish Fuji found a way to make it cheaper and more practical. The Touit 12mm isn’t my favorite lens either (AF issues were tough to deal with), but it does offer a wider angle of view compared to the Fuji 14mm, so it has its place in the line-up.
For me personally, the point of going with APS-C is to keep a lighter and more portable setup. That’s why I don’t own lenses like the 8-16mm f/2.8, 16-55mm f/2.8 and 50-140mm f/2.8 – they are too big and too heavy for me. If I have to lug such lenses with me, I would rather take a FF or MF system…
I didn’t reply because I thought others would also like to have their saying. Apparently not. I agree on what you said, stitching is not the answer to every challenge one needs an UW zoom. APS-C has it’s place in the photographic world. I just think, it is not possible to miniaturize camera sizes beyond a certain limit if someone has to manufacture them (in much tighter tolerances, the equivalence also goes the other way round). And someone else will have to operate it.
So, the 8-16/2.8 may be a hell of a complication to manufacture, at the end of the day the result might be less convincing than an FF with a 12-24/4. I think the more wide I want to go the better a bigger sensor is (stitched or one-shot) as in “more details”. Another question is, If I can enjoy all these details fully in normal size prints. But thinking along this path all current wide-angles would be sufficient.
But I don’t need to print to enjoy a lot of details.
Dear Nasim, interesting lens you just tested. Reminds me of the times I used the Fujis more regularly. Saw rumors of the lens, maybe 3 years ago? And of course of the Sigma 12-24/4 Art for FF which is at least in Switzerland roughly 350.– cheaper than the Fujinon. And weighs roughly 300 grams more. I don’t buy it, I went for the 14-24/2.8 instead as I often use it indoors
It’s good that everybody needing a ultra wide angle in the Fuji system has now a premium option more to choose from.
However, looking at your sample pictures I saw many one could also take be using a longer FL and stitching it as panorama. Sure, there are shots you only can take as one single exposure. Long exposures, kind of action (like inmidst a wedding), typical UWA fun shots with people in.
In architecture not everybody likes converging lines.
In your comparisons the Touit 12 mm was not that bad and better than this zoom. I didn’t like the Touit and never missed it after I sold it. IF I wanted to go ultrawide, I mostly got away with stitched panos from the fantastic 16/1.4.
For me it’s now the moment I like to reply to your mantra “not everybody needs FF”. Which is as true as “not everybody needs an APS-C”. But when I see the added weights, costs, sizes, I only could justify such a lens to buy if I’d be head over heels and exclusively into Fuji cosmos. Otherwise each 24 MP FF with said Sigma would deliver better image quality, and if that’s not enough resolution, I still could get a higher MP body. Not so in Fuji cosmos, currently 26 MP is all there is.
Joachim, thanks for dropping by as usual, your comments and feedback are always appreciated!
In regards to stitching an UW panorama with a wide-angle lens, while it is possible, it is quite a difficult task to do in post, as it requires lots of distortion correction using different tools in Photoshop. In some cases, moving a wide-angle lens can significantly alter the perspective if you are not careful, making it impossible to stitch a panorama. It requires precision, a nodal slider and one has to know precisely where the lens needs to be on the slider for each focal length in order to avoid parallax issues. Obviously, a tripod is a requirement, as well as steady lighting conditions. My point is, it is often much easier to take one shot with the right lens than to deal with all this in the field.
Some of the images in this review would be very painful to try to stitch using multiple images, especially the skyline of Dubai where there are moving cars, changing lighting conditions, changing lights on buildings, etc. The same with the images where there are people, or the sun in the frame – by the time you are done shooting 3-4 images, the person moves, or the sun is no longer where it needs to be. Ghosting and flare can also be a problem with the sun in different positions within the frame.
But I do agree that this is a prohibitively expensive lens for most photographers, including myself. This was one of the biggest criticisms in my review – I wish Fuji found a way to make it cheaper and more practical. The Touit 12mm isn’t my favorite lens either (AF issues were tough to deal with), but it does offer a wider angle of view compared to the Fuji 14mm, so it has its place in the line-up.
For me personally, the point of going with APS-C is to keep a lighter and more portable setup. That’s why I don’t own lenses like the 8-16mm f/2.8, 16-55mm f/2.8 and 50-140mm f/2.8 – they are too big and too heavy for me. If I have to lug such lenses with me, I would rather take a FF or MF system…
I didn’t reply because I thought others would also like to have their saying. Apparently not. I agree on what you said, stitching is not the answer to every challenge one needs an UW zoom. APS-C has it’s place in the photographic world. I just think, it is not possible to miniaturize camera sizes beyond a certain limit if someone has to manufacture them (in much tighter tolerances, the equivalence also goes the other way round). And someone else will have to operate it.
So, the 8-16/2.8 may be a hell of a complication to manufacture, at the end of the day the result might be less convincing than an FF with a 12-24/4. I think the more wide I want to go the better a bigger sensor is (stitched or one-shot) as in “more details”. Another question is, If I can enjoy all these details fully in normal size prints. But thinking along this path all current wide-angles would be sufficient.
But I don’t need to print to enjoy a lot of details.