image courtesy: riflessifotografici
It’s refreshing to see a review, where the focus is also on the images more than just on pages over pages of mere technical data and specs. How does the [shoplink 20414]XF 10-24[/shoplink] perform in several lighting conditions, with different subjects and situations? Donato Chirulli of riflessifotografici had some weeks of time to test it. He will tell and show you the qualities of this lens and its shortcomings.
“Even if it’s a zoom lens, performances are exceptional. It was somehow expected, especially knowing how good the 14mm is, but it’s always better not to take it for granted. This kind of focal range is not so easy to manage during the design phase but also in the field, but Fuji manged to produce a sharp lens with only a slight resolution drop towards the corners, especially at the widest end.”
Now read and see how the XF 10-24 performs on the field at riflessifotografici here (English Version).
Fuji XF 10-24mm: [shopcountry 20414]
17 Responses
This post made me wish I was in Italy. That said, I’m not quite sure what I learned about the lens beyond the fact that the author likes it—except for the loose aperture ring. I don’t mind a lack of specs and charts if there is some subjective analysis instead. In this case we get neither and, at the reduced size being shown on the internet, there’s no way to really evaluate IQ of the posted photos. I would have enjoyed reading his subjective view on the 14mm prime or the 23mm prime vs the zoom. Does he think the zoom is good enough in actual use that the superior IQ of the primes doesn’t matter? He doesn’t say. In the end, it is more enjoyable than useful for me.
If you really need someone to tell you whether a prime has some advantage over a zoom then you’re really out in left field, not to mention that whether HE thinks the IQ is superior to this-or-that wouldn’t necessarily be what YOU conclude.
So MANY commenters on here waiting for some “magic pill” from a third-party reviewer to help someone decide whether something is “good” or not instead of just renting / buying / using the products for themselves and making a personal decision. IT’S PATHETIC. This is why world governments feel the need to control their citizenry — it’s because people don’t want to think for themselves, or be accountable for the decisions they do make. They want someone else to make their choices and if it doesn’t work out, they’ve got someone to blame.
The OVERWHELMING consensus on this 10-24 lens across the internet is that it’s another brilliant piece of work from Fuji. If you can’t see a practical application for that focal length for yourself then so be it — though posting that probably doesn’t add to the discussion.
I now own the 10-24, 18-55, 55-200, and 35mm along with an XE-1 and find this to be an absolutely BRILLIANT kit for travel, vacation, weekend-style shooting but have also shot a couple senior portrait sessions with the 18-55 and 55-200 and my customers can’t tell the difference between the MILC and a FF D600, which is my normal go-to cam for any paid work.
I’ve also had the pleasure of renting and using all of the primes (with the exception of the 18mm) as well — 14, 23, 56, 60 — all of which are SPECTACULAR despite some “loose” aperture rings, which isn’t an issue for someone who pays attention to what they’re doing as they’re doing it.
The fact of the matter is that the 10-24 is as good as the photographer is whose using it. Too much emphasis on pixel-peeping and specs predominate forums like this. The author obviously loves the performance of the lens and explains in his piece how it’s an excellent alternative and more versatile than the 14mm.
If you need more evidence than that, you’re just fixated on pixels and not photography / photographic composition.
Thanks John H, it’s a great point you made here. I liked especially the 2nd paragraph. Although I understand that people think of saving money by reading a review before buying a lens – at the end of the day they have to decide whether they like it or not. And a less expensive solution rather than buying is renting the lens before you buy it.
The thing a lot of people don’t want to do is rent the lens to see for themselves. That is the best test of all. Reviews can be great, or interesting, or unfactual but there’s nothing like trying for yourself. The next best thing is to look at your own pics. People buy based on how good other people’s pics are but they end up not using it themselves. Buy what ignites your passion in the focal lengths you’re already drawn to.
Trouble is …where I live, I have not been able to find a rental on Fuji X stuff – yet. And local shops just laugh if you ask to be able to borrow for a few hours.
I don’t know where you live but in the US lensrentals.com has them.
In France, and I know, I’ve been drooling over the rental possibilities you have in the US. With time it will be possible here too, and that will be the best possible option
Same in Germany, the only rental option I ever found was an X-Pro1 and a 35mm prime ….
Well said, nwcs.
Just wait a month or two, Fujifilm will be forced to offer steep discounts and you can get this lens at a better price.
Dare I say Blah blah Blah ?
It’s mildly amusing that you think anyone cares.
At least you did, poor Ratty Mouse, since you answered. Got it ?
The second paragraph? Really? Not that the idea of world governments trying to control their citizenry isn’t completely relevant to this post and my comment, but I have to admit that after finishing the second paragraph I did wonder if John H had just finished listening to Rush Limbaugh and felt the need to vent, even if it meant equating those who read gear reviews to left-leaning liberals who can’t think for themselves and blame others for everything. 🙂 Maybe it IS Obama’s fault that I can’t answer the prime vs zoom question for myself…
John, I wonder if English is your second language. I get that you LOVE YOUR FUJI GEAR and that you somehow seem to think that I have insulted it. 🙂 However, your little rant is really off point. My comment was directed at the fact that this was referred to as a “review”. It is really a collection of nice travel photos that, at best, demonstrate compositional possibilities of various focal lengths. “I love this lens and it is more versatile than the 14mm”, to use your summary, is not a useful review. There is no significant objective or subjective analysis. Feel free to disagree; that would be a relevant response.
Now I did give an example of something that would have made this post more interesting to me. Apparently it does not interest you. Forgive me if I don’t care. Though the question of prime vs zoom is one that has no right answer, I do enjoy reading how different individuals—particularly if I like their photography—weigh the questions of IQ-vs-convenience and flexibility-in-aperture-vs-flexibility-in-focal-length when choosing their gear. Though the author of the “review” references the 14mm, he does not indicate that he has ever used it nor does he express a preference for one or the other. This goes back to my original point. My son can pick a tilt-shift off my shelf and write a report about how it is the best lens ever but what does that really mean if he has no basis in fact or experience to back it up.
As for the ol’ chestnut ” is only as good as the photographer using it,” it is completely irrelevant in the context of discussing a review. A review is not about the capability of the photographer. It is about the capability of the piece of gear being reviewed.
OK, I’m going to end this now because you’ve probably got a senior portrait to go shoot and I’ve got to keep looking for that f******g magic pill…
Cheers.
LOL. If you find the magic pill, let us all know.
Bad day, John?
I’m reading your first sentence and I’m trying to decide if you’re arguing that folks who ask this question are out in left field because the answer is obvious or because it is subjective. The IQ superiority of Fuji primes (14, 23) over this zoom is objectively superior in terms of sharpness and subjectively superior in terms of bokeh. Does anyone disagree on the bokeh? The sharpness cannot be debated. And there may be OVERWHELMING internet consensus that the 10-24 is a brilliant lens but there is certainly no consensus that the 10-24 is a better choice than the two primes. I think this was probably the OP’s point.