[stoppingdown]

So far Fuji lenses seem a *lot* beter than sony's offering (not just focal length but optical quality). The problem seems to be extremely poor QC.

 

For optical quality it sounds so - for offering not, it's subjective; for me a 10-18 + 16-70 (or eventually 18-105) is quite good and covers 90% of landscape shooting in two lenses; with Fuji I'd have to buy the 10-24 + 18-55 + 55-200. While it's a wider focal range, I don't frequently use 200mm for landscape, but to have the 10-70 range I'd have to buy and carry three lenses. The "inefficiency" is that overlap in the 18-24 range - or, alternatively, the lack of a 24-70.

 

 

 

If Fuji didn't have this failure in filling my range needs, I'd probably go for it in place of Sony, also because I like Fuji's camera ergonomics a bit more than Sony's.