Fuji 100-400 also announced

[mbaginy]

I agree the extra weight has to be taken into consideration.
But the fixed f 2.8 is quite a benefit to the 16-55 and I found it sharper overall than my 18-55 which I thought was a good lens.

I agree about the weight and the IQ.  I've come to shoot ,ostly primes with my Fujis.  Wonderful iamge Quality!  I very seldom use the 16-55; it probably constitutes a wasted investment for me.

[Alan Smallbone]

It's lighter than the Canon 100-400 f/45.-5.6    Yes, I know that's a FF lens.

Some comparisons

Fuji 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 WR  - APS-C
Cost:     $1899.95
Weight:  1375g/3.03 lb
Length:  211mm/8.29"
Filter:     82mm

Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 WR  - FF
Cost:     $2099.00
Weight:  1570g/3.46 lb
Length:  193mm/7.6"
Filter:     77mm

Panasonic 100-400 f/4.0-6.3 WR  - M43
Cost:      $1799.99
Weight:   985g/2.17lb
Length:   172mm/6.75"
Filter:      72mm

I think the actual Fuji specs say the outside is 77mm, so that is good for me. I have one on "pre-order" at Lensrentals so I can give it a whirl once they become available.

Alan

[Rand47]

... I have one on "pre-order" at Lensrentals so I can give it a whirl once they become available.

Alan

Alan,

We'll be very interested to have your impressions and some sample images posted!  Be sure to follow up if you would be so kind.
Thanks!

Rand

[Petrus]

But the fixed f 2.8 is quite a benefit to the 16-55
Paul

I find it quite funny that fixed aperture for zooms is considered a good thing and more "professional", while the fact is that (in very simple theory) a f/2.8 16-55mm lens could with proper design be a f/0.8-2.8 variable aperture zoom. I would definitely prefer that!

[Telecaster]

…the fact is that (in very simple theory) a f/2.8 16-55mm lens could with proper design be a f/0.8-2.8 variable aperture zoom.

Hah! I've thought about this too. Give me access to that extra light even if the lens performs "poorly" at such apertures. 

-Dave-

[rdonson]

I think the actual Fuji specs say the outside is 77mm, so that is good for me. I have one on "pre-order" at Lensrentals so I can give it a whirl once they become available.

Alan

You're correct.  Sorry 'bout that.  When I originally looked the Fuji global page wouldn't come up and DPReview had that spec wrong.

[Alan Smallbone]

Alan,

We'll be very interested to have your impressions and some sample images posted!  Be sure to follow up if you would be so kind.
Thanks!

Rand

Sure no problem, have no idea when it will happen, they do not have an availability date, Amazon is saying middle of Feb. we will see.

Alan

[armand]

This will make sense more than the other zooms outside of the 10-24 as it provides a range inaccessible by other zooms or primes.

A kit like 10-24 F4(or 14 F2.8), 16 F1.4, 23 F1.4, 35 F1.4, 56 F1.2 (or 60 F2.4), 90 F2 and 100-400 F4.5-5.6 will cover an impressive range with good to excellent quality and great light gathering capability. It wouldn't be that heavy either.

PS. as it happens I have all the above lenses outside of 100-400

[rdonson]

Lucky dog!