Fujifilm 16-80mm F4 Review - Everything You Need to Know

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 28 авг 2024
  • The Fuji 16 to 80mm lens isn't perfect, that's for sure. But every time I think of trying something else, I realize how many things it gets right. Honestly, it is one of the best all-around lenses for the fuji system. This lens, I think, is especially capable as a travel lens. And, I have used it for that purpose quite a bit.
    In this video I talk a little bit about some of its greatest and weakest points, and hopefully give you an idea as to weather or not you will be happy owning it. Thanks so much for watching!

Комментарии • 45

  • @leojonkers3181
    @leojonkers3181 Год назад +10

    This is my best fuji lens I own. The ois is from another world. The reach is nice, the size is nice, this is the best lens/zoom Fuji make.

    • @leovanlierop4580
      @leovanlierop4580 6 месяцев назад +1

      I bought this one for the OIS as well on my X-T3. Now I have a stabilized light weight option to my 16-55, which still is my 1st go to lens. My best will always be the 90F2.

  • @emmgeevideo
    @emmgeevideo Год назад +3

    I traded this for the 16-55. I was a little nervous but no longer. Build quality is fantastic vs. the Red Badge. I can't tell the difference. I'm not a portrait photographer so I don't miss the f/2.8. The foreground/background separation at f/4 is just fine. Weight is considerably less than the 16-55 -- which has the same barrel extension when zooming. I have the X-T5, so I can crop a lot more and simulate a longer zoom than 80. Very glad I made the change.

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  Год назад

      It really is a great lens, glad you're enjoying it.

  • @ghostofgw7781
    @ghostofgw7781 2 года назад +6

    You said it , not my favorite but my most use lens. I can't travel whitout this Jack of all trade lens it is so versatile and IQ is excellent. I ended up selling my 16-55, yes it's a bit sharper but that was the trade off, I have prime for more "sharpness" ... I brought this one in the Sahara , in the rain forest, at the sea and I live in Canada shooting sometime at -30 ,it never failed on me and still work likes its new. Its the first lens I put in my bag with the 33 f1.4. I'm looking for the 70-300 to finish my travel kit. It's not a par focal lens so for video it's not the best if you zoom in and out. Thanks for your review.

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  2 года назад +2

      And thank you for your comment. Do you mind if I ask you why you sold the 16-55? I have considered swapping the 16-80 out for that a few times. Yeah, my setup is very similar. Travel usually with the 35mm f2 and the 16-80, looking to add the 70-300 also.

    • @ghostofgw7781
      @ghostofgw7781 2 года назад +2

      @@john_neil The 16-55 is a great lens I really loved it but when 16-80 came out a friend who own a camera store lend me this lens for a try, the lens never came back to the store. For what I do its really a good lens, travelling backpacking ,hiking , rarely carrying a tripod unless I want to shot long exposure. To have more reach with a crazy stabilisation shooting in low light this lens was a keeper it get me out of trouble so many time. The 16-55 was staying more and more at home it's a more bulky lens compare to the 16-80, when climbing every grams counts . I don't print to sell my photos or when I do it's only for me. I like to pair this lens with prime like the 33 1.4 and thinking about the new 23 or 18 havent decided yet. Versatility over the little more IQ in my case the choice was fairly easy. I still shoot with an X-T3 but if I had bought the X-T4 (IBIS) I would of maybe kept the 16-55 ?.... Now I'm curious about the next X-T5 this one can be a game changer specially with those new 1.4 .... I need to stop thinking about gear, dope ! Is there a vaccine for that ?

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  2 года назад +1

      @@ghostofgw7781 I also rarely use a tripod, much too troublesome for travel. Thanks for all the notes on the 16-55. I think I'll stick with your path and stay true to my 16-80 for now. Unfortunately, I am afraid that gear obsession is incurable. An affliction it seems we both suffer from. ;)

    • @TCinSoCal
      @TCinSoCal 2 года назад +2

      @@john_neil if it helps.. I have the 16-55 right now used on an X-H2S and I’m pretty sure I’m selling it in favor of the 16-80. I’ve reviewed the Lenstip charts and reviews and resolution, in my use case, is so close I’ll take the lighter lens. The 16-55 is a brick and I’m not a small guy. I’m also using the 33 1.4 as well as the 18 1.4 that I picked up today. Both VERY nice lenses and extremely sharp.

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  2 года назад +1

      @@TCinSoCal It does help, and thanks for offering your advice! What kind of photography do you do, primarily?

  • @Bocsaphoto
    @Bocsaphoto 2 года назад +6

    It's so versatile and even for an F4 maximum aperture the bokeh is so creamy. I've been using it for almost a year now and I'm actually struggling to find another lens that can do something that this lens doesn't satisfy already. I am looking at the 27mm WR, 23mm f2, 23mm f1.4 and 16mm f1.4, but i dunno yet. Also considering a vintage canon FD 50mm f1.4. Great vid bud

    • @Bocsaphoto
      @Bocsaphoto 2 года назад +1

      Also, on the topic of external zooming, I wouldn't worry about the lens sucking in air from the barrel extension, because there are rubber gaskets underneath that seal that gap, and the lens has a dust-proof vent at the bottom so air can suck in and out when zooming.

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  2 года назад +1

      Indeed, I was unsure of the f4 limitation when I first bought it, but that turned out to be mostly a non-issue. The Tamron 17-70 f2.8 has my interest, but I'm not sure it would really be worth it from my experience so far. Canons FD 50mm is a classic, can't go wrong there. I own the Fuji 27mm pancake, also love that lens but it's not my favorite focal length. Thanks for the comment!

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  2 года назад +1

      Yeah, I was aware of the sealing, hopefully it does it's job over the long-term. I have a lumix lens that took some dust in, but I don't think that one is as well made.

  • @chrischrischris723
    @chrischrischris723 Год назад +1

    I've got the 23 and 35 primes, looking at this because it just seems easier to travel with not having to switch - as you said more options but ..choices haha

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  Год назад

      Both great lenses. Having taken some trips with 5+ lenses, Zooms, etc... and just one or two, I definitely prefer to take fewer.

  • @hellni79
    @hellni79 2 года назад +1

    Mine is coming this week, can t wait to test it in walks. I moved to Fuji one year ago and started with 16-55 2.8 and 35 f2. They were basically giving the same quality, the zoom being a bit too heavy and the 35 not fast enough for night shoots, so I sold them , got the new 23 1.4 which is amazing in IQ, great bokeh and everything, and now I m waiting the 16-80, smaller than the 16-55, reaching also 80 and the shoots I ve seen so far on the net are very nice looking. Hope it doesn’t delude me, on paper it seem a more balanced couple of lenses 23 1.4 + 16-80 f4 to me, each having its own use. 35 f2 + 16-55 felt a bit overlapping and really look the same

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  2 года назад

      Congratulations, I hope you like it. I've been pretty happy with my 16-80. Definitely need a fast prime for those lower light situations, though I've gotten away with quite a bit with f4. What did you think of the 16-55 2.8, other than the weight?

    • @hellni79
      @hellni79 2 года назад +1

      @@john_neil the 16-55 is fantastic, it gave me the same quality of the 35 f2, so I guess it's basically having the f2 prime lens line in one zoom, from 16 to 55, just accepting the 2.8 limit, which actually looks good and at 2.8, at least for me, it's where you start really separating from the background and getting a nice bokeh. I'm curious to test the 16-80 at 80f4 and see what kind of separation I get. For sure I'm happy I'm carrying circa 200 grams less around, and get a more balanced system in the hand. The 16-55 was a bit too big even for the x-t4, just a little. I still had it around my neck for a week in Stockholm one year ago and it was absolutely doable, maybe just not the most discreet set for street ph.

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  2 года назад +1

      Well, I absolutely love the 35mm f2, so that's a great endorsement. I might still try out the 16-55 at some point, but I'm not sure. I travel a lot so I think the weight might bother me. Thanks for the info! Report back on once the 16-80 arrives. Curious to hear your thoughts. Cheers!

  • @TurboPersonalTraining
    @TurboPersonalTraining Год назад +3

    Great review man thanks

  • @nicoschmalzl4002
    @nicoschmalzl4002 6 месяцев назад

    Hi John! Thanks for the video! Have you had time yet to test the Sigma 18-55, 2.8? Especially in combo with the 40mp sensor?

  • @BIOSHOCKFOXX
    @BIOSHOCKFOXX Год назад

    I watched some other YT-ber about this camera, and for video or professional video usage it was recommended to use Fujifilm X-S20 if not mistaken, if not X-E equivalent type of model, that costs a bit more but is purposefully made for videos, where X-T series focuses on photos. That's the general idea I got from that photographer YT-ber.
    And the camera itself is rated water and dust protected and sealed in 53-57 places, not sure about the lens, but logically it should be protected as well from equal amount of environmental hazard, because why have the camera protected and not the lens you use with it, it's like, you think you are safe to take photos in rain or dusty environments, but the moment you put that lens on it basically renders your camera useless as well, since what you want to take cannot be taken anymore, unless you wrap it up in a plastic bag and tape it around the end, like doing DIY stuff.

  • @rasidsaranovic7921
    @rasidsaranovic7921 2 года назад +3

    I do agree with everything, tho the biggest disappointment was that zoom in which for me is a bit "jumpy" and loses focus... Are there any workarounds for that asides from buying other lenses? Also video is nice, you got a new subscriber!

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  2 года назад

      Hey there, thanks for watching and subscribing! No workarounds for the zoom issue, unfortunately. I just end up editing them out of my work, but it's not ideal. Do you use this lens mostly for video or photos?

    • @rasidsaranovic7921
      @rasidsaranovic7921 2 года назад +1

      @@john_neil Hey, thanks for the reply! I use them for photos mostly, but I do want to make some documentaries and maybe small time commercials for some local cafes etc. Also it seems like this camera or lense is shaky regardless of what stabilization I use which I noticed today, I'll try to upload a video so you can see the sample of what I'm talking about. Maybe it's normal but I expected better stabilization

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  2 года назад

      @@rasidsaranovic7921 Yeah, let me know if you put up a video. My experience with the OIS is that it's been pretty good.

  • @onlymeatsui0796
    @onlymeatsui0796 7 месяцев назад

    I love this review how about you make a comparison between 16-80 vs 18-135? I’m stucked between this two for travel. Idomt really care about the size

  • @Claas650
    @Claas650 Год назад +1

    hi, I have a question about lenses. I need to choose between 16-55 f2.8 and 16-80 f4 for my xt4. I will record videos from agriculture (tractors in the field, harvesters, etc.). I mainly consider them because of the WR as there is dust when recording tractors on field. The light in the field is independent of me, I record at different times and under different lighting conditions. I also thought about 18-55 f2.8-4 but it is not sealed :(
    The 16-55 is heavier and more expensive than the 16-80 but also brighter and can be zoomed while recording. 16-80 f4 is cheaper, lighter but has a darker light and you can't zoom while recording.
    The camera will be on the gimbal while recording.
    Which of the two will be a better option?
    Thanks for help!

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  Год назад

      Both are great lenses, ultimately it comes down to price, the need for the extra reach of 80mm or the extra light of 2.8. Both lenses have great optics, so it's just a matter of your need and budget. IMHO.

  • @damirook8342
    @damirook8342 Год назад +1

    Thanks for the neat review . Can you recommend this lens for everyday use ? I'm new to fuji (xs-10)and looking for a light kit , should mention that I already own viltrox 56 mm -amazing lens for portraits .

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  Год назад

      It's a great lens for everyday use, but it is fairly heavy. Personally if I could only use one lens every day, it would probably be prime lens. But the 16-80 has gotten a ton of daily use from me as well.

    • @damirook8342
      @damirook8342 Год назад

      @@john_neil I'm split between prime and 16-80 mm , I own xc35 and Viltrox 56 mm on XS-10 . What prime lens would you suggest ? Thanks in advance

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  Год назад +1

      It all depends on what you like to shoot. My favorites are the 50mm f2, the 27mm 2.8, the 35mm f2 (but you already have the XC), and the 16mm 2.8. The xc35 and the 56mm already give you a really great range of options. You could shoot with just those for a very long time I think. If you like wide-angle photography, you might look into one of those as your next options.

  • @amitdey5903
    @amitdey5903 Год назад

    How this lens is compared to tamron 17-70 f2.8.. Should i get that?

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  Год назад

      I haven't used the Tamron, unfortunately. But from the reviews I've seen it seems good. If you like the aperture ring and the metal build, I'd go Fuji. If you need f2.8, then the Tamron.

  • @donnlowel2387
    @donnlowel2387 2 года назад +1

    I have one its a great lens… it was not as sharp as the 16-55 f2.8, if your in a budget this lens is perfect. I bought mine US$400 brand new, but if you want the best and you have the funds the 16-55 is the way to go. The comparison for both lenses in the real world was not so significant. No one really cares really, you only notice the difference when you zoom the photos in your screen.

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  2 года назад

      Thanks! That has seemed to be the consensus from everyone that has owned both, so I think I am comfortable sticking with the 16 - 80 for now. It really is a great travel lens, which is what I use it for primarily. Thanks for the info and for the comment. :)

  • @sshmus
    @sshmus Год назад +1

    Pro videographers do not use zoom in and out

    • @john_neil
      @john_neil  Год назад +5

      Go watch... two seconds of The Office. Definitely not filmed by professionals though.

    • @jeremytheoneofdestiny8691
      @jeremytheoneofdestiny8691 Год назад +1

      Stanley Kubrick’s Barry Lyndon disagrees with you