[JJ_SO]

A1 at 300dpi that's 69 megapixel, nothing but medium format can resolve that

 
:lol:
 
This good old 300dpi number... you would wonder how low resolutions of big posters really are. But thanks for calculating anyway.
 
300 dpi for inkjet are fine up to A3, the bigger you get, the lower the dpi can go - and at normal viewing distance you would not see the difference between 300 and 185 dpi (26.5 MP for A1).
 
The thing is: With an ultra-wide angle there are so much tiny details that people do come closer to the print, diving in - so, you're not so far off with higher dpi for large prints from ultra-wide. That's why I think, I would never (well, it's in real far distance down on my wish list, so maybe not never, but highly unlikely) buy this kind of glass for an APS-C camera. However, within the Fuji cosmos there's not much of a choice, right?
 
I expect this Fuji 8-16 to be in the same price range like a Sigma 12-24/4 or Sony 12-24. Having bodies for both systems, I would be stupid to limit the possible resolution. If I have to use a Fuji for UWA, I'd rather use the 16/1.4 and stitch 3 vertical pictures.
 

I find the EF-M 22mm f2 perfect for travel work, and the EF-S 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 IS STM perfect for UWA travel wide angle landscape shots. Also not lenses to bring up in this thread

 
Why not? Systems aside, why not talking about the final product: big printed picture on a wall or in a web-gallery?   My impression from the Fuji is more "yeah, you can now have a superfat UWA lens for Fuji, but it's neither saving weight nor size nor money". Plus other disadvantages like the usual filterholder problems and focus by wire. Other than that, it's a WR type, so should take some rain - nothing I can say about a lot of my wide angles (the 16/1.4 being one exception)