Mu-43 Top Veteran
- Jun 29, 2011
Well... the 10-24 Fuji is way better than the 9-18 Olympus...
Also, some of these comparisons just don't work in reality. I own a GX85, and an X-T2. I have tried multiple times to compare low light shots between the two cameras and their zoom lenses (on the Panasonic, the 12-40 and the 35-100 f/2.8 - on the Fuji, the 18-55, 55-200, and 18-135) and even if the m43 lenses are faster, I get consistently better images with the slower lenses on the Fuji. So, no, no need to use the 16-55 on the Fuji setup.
One thing that the GX85 does better is low shutter speed stuff with the primes. The Fuji primes are not stabilized and to get the same level of sharpness you just need to crank up the shutter speed and ISO. But that's about it. Still, in broad daylight it is a totally different story.
Regarding the 18-55 specifically... it has considerably more narrow FOV than the 12-40 or 12-35, so it's not an option if you need wide angle. Which bites, because otherwise it's a killer lens.
As for the IQ comparison you made, do you think the Fuji lens is sharper, or that the advantages offered by the larger format, higher resolution sensor, and better ISO handling are the difference? Because I would have a hard time believing the 18-55 is superior optically than the 12-40mm Pro.