>>4058985>Best kit lensLmfao, the absolute nonsense fujicucks come up with is hilarious.
It's shit
Looking at optical limits, the Fuji resolution maxes out at just under 3000 lw\ph, the Sony kit lens at just under 4900 lw\ph.
The Sony kit lens is also slightly faster at f3.5-f5.6 (the Fuji FF equivalent is 28mm-84mm f4.3-6.1)
Distortion at the wide end is also 4.6% for the fuji, and just 2.5% for the Sony.
So the Sony is faster, higher resolution and less distorted. Oh and the Sony has an almost completely internal zoom, whilst the Fuji front element protrudes out like a dog erection when zoomed in.
Let's check prices, surely the objectively worse lens that covers a smaller sensor wins here at least right?
The Fuji is $700, the Sony is $400
Weight, the Fuji MUST win on weight, right?
Sony - 295g. Fuji - 310g.
Oh no, it turns out the Fuji didn't win at anything, at all, even against a 10 year old kit lens that is widely considered to be mediocre at best.
>Inb4 wahhh you can't compare resolution like that, it's not fair >:(Even more hilarious, for the same price as the Fuji kit lens, you could get the extremely good Sony mount tamron 28-75 f2.8, which is 1 to 2 stops faster on equivalence and absolutely obliterates the Sony and Fuji kit lenses.
