What I had
- Fujifilm 16-55mm f2.8
- Fujifilm 50–140mm f2.8
- Fujifilm 100-400 f4.5-5.6
- Fujifilm 16mm f1.4
- Fujifilm 23mm f1.4
- Fujifilm 27mm f2.8
- Fujifilm 35mm f/2
- Fujifilm 56mm f1.2
- Fujifilm 60mm Macro
- Fujifilm 90mm f2
- Laowa 9mm
I ended up with:
Ultimates, after all the sales of old gear and new acquisitions, this is what I have now, assuming things don’t change for the next little while.
- Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS
- Tamron 28-75mm F/2.8 Di III RXD
- Sony FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS
- Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm F2.8 ZA
- Zeiss 85mm f/1.8 Batis
- Sigma 70mm f/2.8 DG Macro Art Lens
- Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art
Losses & Gains
This table shows the losses and gains. In many cases, these aren’t 100% comparable glass, not because it isn’t available, but because I haven’t gone for it.
- Fujifilm isn’t lighter when it comes to comparing like for like. Where the lenses are comparable aperture and focal length, there is not much of a difference in size, with the Sony sometimes lighter. People can point to quality of Fujifilm glass, but the reality is that for a lens to have comparable aperture and focal length, the lens sizes have to be the same.
- Fujifilm does make lighter aperture/focal length combinations like the 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/2, so people can point to the fact that Sony is the same size, but it isn’t because Sony don’t make a lot of the smaller glass.
- Pricing comes down to quality. Good lenses cost the same in both systems. The Fujifilm 80mm Macro and Sony 90mm Macro are two of the sharpest lenses from Fujifilm and both are comparable in pricing.
- Sony gives more options due to the availability of third-party lenses where Fujifilm is confined to manual focus options only.
- More of Sony’s glass is weather proofed, so Fujifilm is in need of some mk2’s when it comes to the older 1.4 glass.