Glass is glass, or at least that’s what you normally think. To a large degree, you would expect the focal lengths to at least stay static, but that’s not always the case has my recent move from Fujifilm to Sony shows.
There are the obvious items, like the availability of lenses in specific focal lengths, If it’s not available, it’s not available, but that played less of a factor than I expected.
What I had
Here the list of lenses that I had at the time of switching to Sony:
- 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.
The bottom line is deceptive, largely due to the missing 4 lenses, one of which is sizeable, but in the same light, I have selected zooms over primes on the wide end and picked incomparable primes which are heavier (despite lighter options being available) like the 135mm f/1.8 so I would call it a tie.
What is clear to me:
- 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.
theoverratedphotographer.com 
If you really want an alternative to the XF 16mm, Sony’s new 24mm 1.4GM is supposed to be fantastic, and of course there’s the (purportedly) excellent Batis 25mm f/2. Though, unless you need the fast glass, maybe your 16-35 covers you just fine!
I’ve nearly gone with the a7III – but I’m waiting it out for a Z6 or Z7 because of all of my Nikon glass.
My blog is currently under construction, but will be posting articles soon! I’ve really enjoyed reading your posts!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nikon makes sense if you already have Nikon glass.
Would love the Batis 25 or the Sony 24 but for now, my budget is depleted. 🙂
LikeLike
The weather sealing may be light on the Sony’s but the lenses I was comparing it to aren’t weather sealed at all, so even light weather sealing is an improvement.
LikeLike
Sony offer two format on the same lenses, since they are compatible with both full frame and APS-C cameras
I consider this really profitable especially on telephoto side. If you attach an APS-C camera to the 100-400 it become a 200-600, and no, it is not the same to shot full frame and than crop….
In this perspective Sony is a more versatile system and the rumoured top notch APS-C pro camera make a lot of sense to me
I had the Sony 70-200 f4 and I can tell that it is an amazing piece of glass (if this focal range suits your needs)
P
LikeLike
Thanks for your comments. Nikon’s glass is compatible as well, but the issue I’ve found is the focal lengths are a little screwed with some of the brands. Nikon (and Sony) don’t offer a 50-140 focal length to match a full frame 70-200 which I think they need to fix. That said, if you are using longer lenses, APSC can offer a lot of advantages.
LikeLike