Amazing! Just yesterday I received a 12mm Zeiss, I was a little worried because I did not find useful information about this lens. I also have a 10-24 which is one of my favourite but it has a big issue with flare and it is not capable to manage direct lights as well as a lot of lenses that I have. In my tests the Zeiss is a little bit sharper until F16 compared to the 10-24 but when it comes to get some direct lights into the frame the Fuji loses contrast and definition, sometimes it shows artifacts and the images looks unusable. While the Zeiss performs much much better in these situation, I think also the starburst effect is better on the Zeiss, plus it has an impressive minimal focus distance, a fact that personally I like too. Finally I want to thank you for all of your work. I watched your videos many times in the past and now I am satisfied about my Fuji system and all the lenses I have and it is also thanks to you :)
Wish it was a bit shorter in actual physical length (looks like a short tele), but when I see the results... WOW!!! I used a 20mm Nikkor for decades, and this just blows it away- my go to Fujifilm lens... corner to corner near perfection.
The 14mm f2.8 is excellent for landscape and architectural photography. It is very sharp wide open, relatively compact and light, and has no distortion. I have been using mine for more than a year and I am very satisfied.
Thanks for mentioning the close-focusing features of each lens. The close-up of the wet leaf was beautiful. It's nice to know I'm not the only one who wants a close-focusing distance prime.
thank you so much. you finally help me to decide between the 8-16 and the 10-24mm i will go for the 10-24 mm. less weight les budget and good quality + IOS just perfect
I've first bought the 16mm f/1.4 because of your recommendation and what a great decision it was!! Currently I own the 8-16mm which is outstanding opticaly. The catch with that lens is the zoom, aperture ring (too soft),the weight and the lack of a filter thread. I've tried the 10-23 f/4 and while it's a good light lens with great IQ, in direct sunlight the whole image becomes a smudge. Looking back I can see the magical quality that the 16mm f/1.4 has (same thing about the 35mm f/1.4) I'll sell the 8-16, buy back the 16 and the Zeiss 12mm to see if I can find peace. If not, I'll switch to Sony, not because I love their system, but because of one lens and that's the 16-35mm f/2.8 GM.
Great video, thank you. As someone who’s passion is architectural photography, I too am on the hunt for the perfect ultra wide. I currently use the 16 1.4 as my main lens, and carry the 10-24 for when I need to go wider. I’d love to see a Fujifilm prime in the 10 or 12mm range.
I'm a hiker/trekker primarily. Love taking photographs along the way. Is 10-24 for me considering it is f4.i love taking photos of alpine lakes after dusk.
For me there is a noticible difference between 24mm and 21mm. I use the 14mm Fuji-Lens and just love the focallength. Reproduktion-ratio is also quite good ... the lens just works for me (and i got a good deal on a used copy). Great Video on your quest for the ultra wide.
That Zeiss is just so prohibitively expensive; my Samyang 12mm suits me pretty well in terms of price, performance, and size; if I lost it, I would replace it as soon as I could, it’s one of my most-used lenses where my 18-55mm just can’t manage. From there, I also have the Laowa 9mm, to fit more of my urban environment in. It’s got a heavy vignette, but shooting it at between 5.6-8 as I do, it’s manageable. I don’t know if it’s because I dropped it on concrete once, but it is softer on one edge, where the other edge is sharp. In the centre to midway to the edge, I have no complaints of sharpness, at least not how I shoot with it. It is so small and light, it has a permanent spot in my bag; and in the end, the best lens is the one you have with you. As for the Zeiss, I just can’t make myself spend that much money on a lens.
Just this week I got the 16 2.8 and I already know I'm really going to like it. I just started into photography about 2 years ago. For at least the first year I used the kit lens 15-45. I found myself using the 15 end probably 80% of the time, so I trained myself to see compositions at that focal length. My first prime was the 35 F2 going off so many recommendations of getting that "nifty fifty" to start with. I like it, but I just had issues with getting my composition where I wanted it. No such issue with the 16. I guess I see the world in 16mm now!
I still love the XF10-24mm even though I recently purchased the XF8-16mm. primes I use 8mm Samyang Fisheye ,12mm zeiss Touit and XF14mm f2.8 all capable of producing outstanding quality images. But I find this applies to all the Fujifilm lenses even the XC very underrated because of the construction materials used. Excellent review as always.😊👍
great video! excellent review. I have the 16mm 1.4 , 10-24 and i keep using the 16mm 1.4 focal length as i prefer the 16mm length more with its close focusing! one important note is that i have the fuji 16-55mm zoom lens and i find that at 16mm the fuji 16-55 lens has way better sharpness and colour rendering than the 16mm 1.4 or the 10-24 lenses.
As a beginning photographer I initially went the many primes route because I wanted to deep dive into a focal length and really learn it and get that consistency. But recently I sold most of them and got a 17-70 f/2.8 Tamron. I was getting frustrated constantly needing to switch lenses, or finding my shot limited by the aperture of the Fuji 18-55mm. I find that as I'm still figuring out how and what I like to shoot a good fixed aperture zoom is just fantastic. They allow be to be flexible and explore and find the things that I enjoy. Eventually I plan on buying more primes once I figure out what focal lengths I really like and what subjects I like to shoot and what lens best intersects with those things and my own individual shooting quirks and requirements.
I have a sad/funny story on the Rokinon. When I bought it the first picture I took was of our first dog Georgia who has since passed. Since I wasn't used to manual focus it was horribly out of focus as she reacted to my calling to her by moving instead of just turning her head. To this day, I still love that image even though she is out of focus and instead my grill stand is in focus. I can't say I've had any other really great images from the Rokinon since but I can't get myself to part from it because of that one first image. Other than that, I did pick up the XF 16 2.8 this year and I am enjoying it. The size and price are just perfect for me. I'm not an expert with the XF 16 but I do enjoy it.
Hi Andrew, great comparison. As others already mentioned is the XC 15-45 as 15mm with a magnification ratio 0.24x / 1:4.2 (at 15mm) wonderful. 13 cm min distance, wow. From watching your video of the 16 mm prime, i love this Style of close focus of a flower pretty sharp and very much Background but as bokeh somehow seperated. And that is pretty easy with that Lens. I also have the 12mm Rokinon (Walimex) which was my favorite before - but the aperture star of that one is quite a challenge, as you need a tree or so to partly hide the sun. And in nature with family and friends, you sometimes might be happy for the emergency-zoom option of the 15-45.
I got the Zeiss 12/2.8 as one of my first lenses when I first got a Fuji camera some years ago (X-T2) and I have taken some of my favorite pictures with it! I love the combination of close focusing distance and sharpness, which is good even when focusing in close :) Edit: I btw bought it "as new" but second hand for about 500$.
I haven’t watched this yet Andrew, but I had great success with the Samyang/Rokinon 12mm f/2 - that’s despite having also owned Fuji’s 10-24mm. The Samyang was great value for money and optically very good, apart from the disappointing 5-pointed sun stars (although that is a matter of opinion of course). It was also nice and small. It’ll be interesting to see what you concluded in this vid.
Second this! Had it for my Sony E system and bought it again for my Fuji X mount. Hard to beat price to performance! Shoot astro with it and it's great.
Andrew & Denae Very interesting outcome indeed! I had my eyes off the screen for a mo and when you mistakingly said 16mm I thought to myself “I know he loves 16mm but surely not two of them!!” 🤣 then I rewinded back and saw that you meant 12mm (Zeiss). Also it’ll just be a matter of time before Viltrox enter this arena too. Ha I’m not even a Fuji shooter any more but the quality of your vids keep me here. Great stuff as always.
I have the 14 and 16 and totally agree. I reach for the 16 more often just because it has that close focus option which is kind of a bummer because I really like the 14's image quality (although they're both really pretty superb). Thanks for the great content!
Really hoping Fuji comes out with second version of 10-24 with WR to complement 16-80 and upcoming 70-300(confirmed by FujiRumors). All of them 72mm thread, ultimate travel kit
Thanks and enjoyed the prez. I must ‘fess I flip-flop between prime and zoom. I am not a pro but an entusiast and on our recent trip, to Australia, I added my 16-55 and 70-300 to my X-Pro2 and most Fuji shots were with the 16-55. But most of my shots overall was with my beloved Ricoh GRIII! I do regret however, exchanging my 14mm when I purchased the 16-55 - that I do not regret. Maybe picked up a used one. One new candidate must be the Viltrox 13mm … ? BTW you state you like the consistency of primes but don’t you crop? Stay well.
Good to see a touit lens. I am also considering this lens but like you said it's a bit expensive. I hope you also take a look at the Zeiss Touit Makro Planar 50mm f2.8. I want a 50mm and a macro lens so this looks like it could fill the niche.
shdala111 I have the 12mm and the 50mm macro Touit lenses both purchase used mint you will not be disappointed with either in fact I prefer the 50mm Touit to my Fuji XF 80mm f2.8 macro it’s cheaper lighter and with XH1 I still get ibis.
The Zeiss Touits were the first of the sleek redesigns followed by Batis, Otis etc. I used a 32mm planar exclusively for several months for the look of that traditional Zeiss double Gauss. Your images with the 12mm look beautiful, esp the black and white and the skin tones, fantastic! Honestly the Zeiss is a far more interesting lens than the Fuji 14mm which I’ve used a lot. Great video.
I was looking at a Zeis Tuit 12mm today with a lens flaw for cheap. So I dropped by. Then, when you said the Zeiss fills a spot no other lens for Fuji did...I remembered the new Viltrox.....
Thanks for the comparisons :-) I love my 10-24. Coupled with the 16 1.4 it's got all the wide-angleness I need covered. I just wish there were a 16-35 or so equivalent for the GFX system.
Ok so, aside from the interesting topics you display, I just want to say the IQ of your videos is absolutely amazing, your frame, your lighting is just over the top, I can not believe the horrendous quality of some photography RUclips videos out there, thank you for your dedication, it’s truly inspiring.
14mm f/2.8 is the sharpest ultra-wide. I don't consider 16mm ultra-wide. I have both the Rokinon 12mm f/2 and Fuji 14 and find myself going back to the 14mm consistently for landscapes and even for large group shots. It's so sharp and doesn't have distortion. I love it for astrophotography. It's also a great lens when you have architecture. No distortion in the lines of the building. You should rent this lens. One of Fuji's best prime lenses and it's probably the reason I haven't gone to the 10-24 zoom I found the 14mm much sharper. It's small and compact, great for landscapes, astrophotography and I use it quite a bit in large groups for events and weddings.
Andrew & Denae did you find out why very wide lenses have the “ultra” designation while very telephoto lenses use the “super” designation? If there’s no good reasoning behind it, then I have will have to start using the term super wide and ultra telephoto 😂✌️
I plan to test the XC 15-45mm for landscape work this weekend. I have heard, multiple times, that it performs very well when used as a 15mm prime lens. I believe the minimum focus distance is less than six inches.
It's less contrasty than for example the XF16mm 2.8 so I ended up switching it for that (in addition I just like primes). However, the XC15-45 is an excellent and honestly underrated lens.
I’ve been using the 7Artisans 12mm 2.8 and I love it. I looked around at a lot of the other lenses and got put off because they’re made from plastic and then a few where slightly out of my price range. It’s not a lens I’d use enough to spend that tons on but one handy to have when I needed it. But the 7Artisans is metal and they do, do a filter adaptor for it. CF is 0.2m or 8 inches, how can you calculate that into reproduction ratio? But could be a good lens to have a look at and I’d be interested to know your option. I have noticed at 2.8 you do get slightly soft edges, but then I don’t tend to shoot wide open and also you do get a bit of a vignette from it.
Thanks for the great content. I first bought a Fuji camera after watching your videos, but I'm on a budget and couldn't really get great lenses (I'm using an old Pentax 55mm f1.8 glass and Olympus 50mm f3.0 macro with adapters). The trouble I've had is that I teach in a windowless science classroom - on a normal year I need a wide angle to catch the whole room of kids working and I'd like to do more landscape photos, but in this past Covid year I needed a wide angle to record my lessons. I ended up with my camera mounted 24 feet away to record myself (and lots of mic line) or my tripod fully extended above the table with my macro lens on to capture how to record a science notebook. It was a real pain in the butt. After watching this video (and others in your ultra wide journey), I think I'm going to get the Fuji 16mm f2.8. I don't think I need my shots to be "ultra-wide", good color is important (I love my old Pentax, but hate my old Olympus color), and the other options looked expensive and of questionable quality. Other commenters mentions a Viltrox lens supposedly coming out in early 2021. I might be interested in it if it's any good and I figure I can get a used Fuji lens now and resell in a year at very little loss (if any) better than I could resell a third-party lens. So thanks again. You provided useful practical information. I'll get the 16mm f2.8 for now, and if I can swing it, the 60mm Fuji macro that will hopefully replace my two heavy vintage lenses.
Excellent comparison. I'm hoping your video helps prompt Fuji to release a compact, ultra wide prime with close-focusing ability, preferably with a focal length of 10mm.
Each company has lower tolerances, so there is the opportunity for wide variance. So it's conceivable that an individual 12mm Samyang lens would be softer than a 9mm Laowa. However, this would be the exception, based on the patterns I've experienced myself and from other reviewers.
@@AndrewGoodCamera maybe there was a bad batch of these lenses around in America, I have the 9mm 2.8 and it's exceptional good and most people here in the EU agree.
I usually do not worry about close focus ability with my wide angle lenses. When I need close-focus, I use a macro lens. When I was looking for a wide angle for my Fuji APS-C mirrorless cameras, I looked for a 12mm lens to give me the same angle-of-view on the APS-C cameras that my 18mm had given me on my 35mm cameras. I ordered the Rokinon 12mm f/2 and the Zeiss 12mm f/2.8 lenses. My intent was to keep the lens I liked best. After trying them, I decided to keep them both.
Hi Andrew! Enjoyed watching that video, I am also a great fan of the 16 1.4 and the 10-24 for its versatility. You mention the 14mm 2.8 at some point in the video (in a text listing) but you don't really have it in the video, or did I miss it? Whats up with that? Best to you Max
Hi Andrew. Are you still shooting with that Zeiss 12mm 2.8? Will you be updating your video by adding and comparing the new Viltrox 13mm 1.4? Have you had the chance to check out the Viltrox if yes what's your opinion? Thanks.
really enjoying the photography in the videos, just as important and nice. You really have some nice natural composition. I have the 10-24 F4 for property work. I think the Zero D also is compelling for architecture and becoming highly sort after in the UK.
Cheers. One thing to watch out for when comparing reproduction ratios is that you have to take the focal length into account if you would like to calculate minimum focus distance. This is because the focal length changes the effective magnification of the lens, impacting the size of the object on the sensor at a given distance. So think about if you’re six feet away from an object and you shoot it with the 12 mm vs a 50 mm lens. And let’s say that hypothetically both of these lenses had a six foot minimum focus distance for the sake of this example. The size of the object is going to be substantially different on the sensor between the 12 and 50 mm lenses. As a result the reproduction ratio for those lenses would be very different. This is of course, all theoretical and a simplification. Nothing is going to beat actual testing. And certainly I would expect that third party manufacturers are more likely to spec a minimum focal distance more sloppily than Fuji or Zeiss would. But if close focus is the name of the game, you need to consider both the focal length and the reproduction ratio when choosing a lens.
You've accurately outlined the dilemma on the ultra wide end. The 10-24 has been my workhorse for the past three years, but still end up carrying the 16 1.4 and rokinon 12 f2 on my landscape trips for different use cases. I wish there was one lens to rule them all... if Fuji could release a fast prime in the 10 to 12mm range with close focusing ability, well, that might save my back.
You hit home the point well. Always wondered why Zeiss Touit does not get the attention it deserves. Great sharpness, colour rendition, build quality and aesthetics. The output was really pleasing. While the 16mm has more character and finesse, the 12mm felt clinical. Never liked the Samyang colours, looked weak imho!
Andrew, yesterday I posted a comment about Lee making an adapter for the 8-16mm 2.8 After I saw that you reacted to that comment I reread it. It appears as cold and unfeeling. Please accept my apology I love your channel and greatly appreciate the kindness and truthfulness that you give in your videos. Thank you for it Andrew.🔥👍
Zeiss makes my favorite glass the loxia series is great I wish they made a new series just for fuji of the same quality. that would be my dream lens kit. Man the 16 1.4 was a dream too noting better tbh. have you done the viltrox giveaway yet? I managed to get my hands on a xt1 and a canon fd 50mm 2.0. I need to find something wider but its hard to find good inexpensive lenses. hmmm
Here on the same quest...shame to hear about the Laowa, my 12 and 15 Laowas for full frame Canon DSLR are just super sharp. Moving to Fuji from FF Canon I'm in a similar struggle trying to find an ultra wide. Thanks for the info, saving time and money is appreciated.
Hi Andrew, thanks for another great informative video first of all. Knowing how much you love the 16mm/1.4 - which you totally talked me into buying one and a camera to go with it, and knowing why you love it, I am wondering if you are aware of the LAOWA 15mm f/4 1:1 Macro. It is not available on Fuji X-mount though, but it is available on Canon EF.
I just picked up the Zeiss. Image quality is superb, as expected, but it has some ergonomic issues. I'd love to see a refresh of this lens with more traditional & tactile focus and aperture rings, and an analog focus scale printed on the barrel. Also, since I always manually focus UWA, I'd prefer fully analog focusing over the focus-by-wire system. Oh well, still a great lens. It just takes a bit more work to get the best out of it.
I have just purchased FUJI XT4. It is APS-C Camera. How can i use tokina 11-15 ? I will get 16-29 in 35mm format with adopter ? Which adopter is better for Fuji ?
One question runs through my mind after seeing this nice video though. If you find close focus important, why before buying any of these lenses didn't you check the specifications (if you did it becomes even weirder) for here you can easily find what the closest distance is a lens can provide. Keep up the good work and best wishes from The Netherlands!
Interesting. I've followed your search avidly. My journey was almost 180 degrees. I started with the Zeiss: great heritage glass and German engineering, what could go wrong? I hated it, so soft at the edges. Sent it back the after testing and spent more on the Fuji 10-24 which I've now had about 4 years and almost lives on the body; what a great lens. Out of interest I believe recent examples of the Zeiss no longer have the aperture ring.
Hey Andrew ! As a new Fuji guy , your channel became like an old friend ;) Any experience with shooting videos with these lenses. As a hybrid shooter myself, I can't decide between the OIS and versatility of 10-24 but at the same time, I chose fuji for the compact and lightweight feeling and the 16 2.8 is also another great choice. Any though ? All the best !
I like 16mm wide angle fast lens, does Rokinon or anyone make a cheaper 16mm F2 or faster lens? I tested the sigma 16mm F1.4 both on canon and sony, very nice! I hope I can find one like it for fuji. Thanks!
My pairing is XF16mm 2.8 and Samyang 8mm. Yes the Sam is a fisheye, but I sometimes need to document som very wide or cramped spaces for my job and I needed as wide as I could get it. Addition to budget I guess, the Laowa was simply too expensive for me. Thanks for the video!
8-16mm is now my go to lens for landscapes; however, I'd rate myself highly advanced with PS luminosity masks, so I don't need the filters. I also am not close to woodlands, so I don't need a polarizer.
I've always had ultra wide angle lenses but I always found myself struggle with them. Sometimes they were just too wide and I always cropped in. The 16 1.4 is wide enough generally but yeah there are times when it just isn't wide enough for what I want to capture. I can try taking vertical frames and stitching them together and that works some of the times for landscapes but I'd prefer to do it optically. I had the same feeling about the Rokinon 12mm. Its great for astrophotography but I couldn't stand the colors. It processed so different than Fuji glass and sometimes when photographing landscapes with blue sky, it would be dark in the center as if there was a polarizer on. I got the 10-24 and put to the test next to the Rokinon and it didn't have that issue at all. It looked so much better. Since I shoot video too with my Fuji system, I'd probably get the 10-24 for having it as an option when I need ultra wide angle and using it for videos. The 18-55 with the 2.8 is pretty good for video too but a little tight indoors for my RUclips videos. Great video Andrew! The Zeiss seems like a great option for a auto focus ultra wide angle prime.
Zeiss is a bit too expensive for me, so mainly because Fujis 16mm f1,4 does the job most of the time, I'll stick to the Samyang / Rokkinon, at least for now. Now what bothers me personally about that Samyang is not the close up focusing, nor manual focus, nor absence of WR. I could live with that strange hue,maybe, but the fact that same hue turns greenish the moment you set the lens wide open, that drives me crazy...
Got 2nd hand as new 12mm zeiss for 600 euro, after trip with Samyang , Fuji 10-24 f4 and after few days did not bother with borrowed chinesium stuff and to be honest 12mm Zeiss beat the crap out of them.
I've done a lot of Luxury Real Estate Videography with the Fuji 10-24mm and I can tell you that the f/4 was very problematic for me. It's a great lens overall, but F/4 is simply not bright enough for a wide range of interior *video* shots and I had to push the ISO and SS to expose correctly, causing an image quality that was not up to my standards and required a lot of editing. I've seen some guys on RUclips who are great with cleaning up high ISO video on Fuji and other platforms, so maybe there is some room for me to learn some tricks there, but you would have to know you have that skillset in my opinion. When you're dealing with a client who expects the highest standards, I would not rely on slapping a denoiser on the footage to get the job done. I love the lens, but for what I'm doing with video, I'm going to have to change it up and go with something faster.
I'm not sure if I agree with this assessment😂 because I love the 8-16 for landscape, architecture, and works well for video, but I did build my own filter system, and I don't care too much about minimum focusing distance, but I guess to each their own. The Rokinon worked very well as well, great for astrophotography, I'd love to see a comparison video between the 16mm f1.4 Fuji for astrophotography.
Of course I have. It's an excellent lens. It has a reproduction ratio of 1:8.3 which is fine. But I prefer the 16mm 1.4 that gets double that. And after that, they are too close, as far as focal length. So it's an easy decision for me. But yeah, nothing wrong with the 14mm 2.8.
Ahhh gotcha. I’m still new on reproduction ratios and everything. I was just surprised based on my own experience. Great video! Always enjoy your content 🤙🏻
I have bought the laowa and it’s the perfect pairing for my x pro 2. Small like the f2 fujicron lenses it looks and feels well balanced when on the camera. All metal construction, indexed aperture ring and nice focusing ring I love it!!! Also a 2.8 Sure there’s vignetting on the corners at 2.8 and I’m pretty sure i have done some super close focusing with it! All to say there is nothing really like it in its class and I have gotten reasonably sharp images with it. Sad the channel so easily dismissed it.
I love it for all the reasons you said. But it cannot sharpen on the corners, regardless of aperture, meaning I'd have to crop, meaning it's not 12mm. So it is worthless to me
Wait for viltrox 13 1.4. personally i tried the laowa 9mm. Amazing lens, very good build quality super small good max aperture value close focus not bad. BUT i had to send it back because it was soft on the extreme corners also at f5.6/f8. And than i regret it. I'll try to put my hands on another one and I'll using it cropping the extreme corners and that's it. Im gona use it as a 10mm basically. I also own the fuji 16mm, Which is an amazing lens but is not wide enough for what i want to do. I'll probably end up selling it, because i take pictures just for hobby and honestly if i want to buy something wider the 16 won't be used much anymore and even if i can afford it i cannot justify the fact of having it on my shelf taking dust. I tried the samyang, and also there i didn't pick a good copy probably. I can confirm that it feel cheap. I shoot a lot handheld so its f2 aperture could have been handy but it didn't convinced me. Zeiss is the only one remaining to test for me, but i don't really like it. Its way too big and i already struggle to make my 16 fit in my bag let alone the zeiss with that enormous lens hood.
There is one more lens that you better check: xc15-45. It does auto focus and focus pretty close. It sucks at tele side, but the wide angle side is surprisingly outstanding. I found Samyang 12mm too wide sometimes and the xc15 side is pretty useful, also cheap enough and good for carrying.
Yeah it's good. But I decided not to include it as it's zoom range and where it performs the best, technically, places it outside of "ultra" wide angle. However, if used as a prime at the wide end, it's really not a bad option, that is true
In my small Peak Design Everyday 5L sling-bag, I have the XT1 body, a sharp copy of the Laowa 9/2.8, the Fuji 16/2.8, and the Fuji 35/2.0, plus filters, charger, extra battery, flash, and a 30yr old Bogen table-top tripod. It’s a tiny lens kit!!! Funny, I just got a new iPhone 11 Pro, and its three cameras have almost exactly the same equivalent focal lengths. But the Fuji images, of course, are way better in **almost** all situations. It’s too bad you got two poor copies of the Laowa. But I totally understand because recently I got a bad copy of the Pergear 25/1.8 and was so put off, I didn’t even try a second copy.
I think when you get at that ultra wide range (where appropriate) it becomes magical - the wow factor! Inside generally you won't get anything near the same shot that your eye takes in without it. The same outside when you think a 16 or 24 (full frame) is wide. It's not for many great scenes. I disagree here (but great content on other videos). The 9mm Laowa is the best solution IMO (but takes some getting used to). Really get into the corners (ie the things closest) and hit the Fuji magnify button, turn to red for focus and nail manual focus. Then (depending on light availablity and aperture choice) up to a higher f-stop . The Samyang/Rokinon distorts massively!! And it's designed for DSLR so is also a massive lens compared to the Laowa. I really cannot understand why you didn't even mention this. Distortion free (or near is a massive asset of the Laowa at this very demanding focal length). So you lose even more wideness over the 9 Laowa (which doesn't need to be corrected in post so you don't lose some of your picture after correction). The Laowa is already very well corrected with regards distortion...The only plus the Samyang/Rokinon has is the f2 over the Laowa f2.8...But the Laowa is tiny (so hand holding at lower shutter speeds is possible) soldily built and a far higher quality lens construction. The Zeiss I've not tried, but it's not particularly wide (12 against 9 and when you're wide that's massive) so I have no interest in it...I would recommend the Fuji 16 f1.4 (I know you love it as do I) and the Laowa for ultra wide. As a professional landscape photographer Andy Mumford is also a fan of the Laowa.
The Laowa 9mm is very sharp indeed, my guess is that you wanted to focus to infinity and turned the focus all the way. You need to actually focus back a little on this lens and align the to the infinity symbol, going past all the way that will not focus to infinity and will render a blurry image.
This is not my first rodeo. I never focus infinity and trust that a lens is in focus unless I've tested and proven that that is the case. The two copies of the Laowa 9mm were not sharp at all anywhere but at the center, unfortunately.
Amazing! Just yesterday I received a 12mm Zeiss, I was a little worried because I did not find useful information about this lens. I also have a 10-24 which is one of my favourite but it has a big issue with flare and it is not capable to manage direct lights as well as a lot of lenses that I have. In my tests the Zeiss is a little bit sharper until F16 compared to the 10-24 but when it comes to get some direct lights into the frame the Fuji loses contrast and definition, sometimes it shows artifacts and the images looks unusable. While the Zeiss performs much much better in these situation, I think also the starburst effect is better on the Zeiss, plus it has an impressive minimal focus distance, a fact that personally I like too. Finally I want to thank you for all of your work. I watched your videos many times in the past and now I am satisfied about my Fuji system and all the lenses I have and it is also thanks to you :)
This is great info Emanuele. Thank you for sharing!
I was wandering the performance of the video autofucos of this touit 12 2.8？
Di Maio sei sempre una garanzia
14 2.8 is perfect for single ultra wide lens. It`s sharp, bright, well corrected, light and small.
Wish it was a bit shorter in actual physical length (looks like a short tele), but when I see the results... WOW!!!
I used a 20mm Nikkor for decades, and this just blows it away- my go to Fujifilm lens... corner to corner near perfection.
What brand is it?
I am in the hunt for a wide angle lens. I got the Xt3 and 18-55 kit kens
I am looking for more background blur for vlog.
like one 16.mm 1.4 Sigma can give.. and fuzi lense can do that?
@@idharudharkibkar5717 The Fuji 16mm 1,4 could do that! Though the focus can hunt a bit.
14 2.8 is my favourite lens because of its sharpness, compactness.a good combination with xt30 and xf27 for hiking.
All of them lined up, 14mm f/2.8 shows the least amount of vignetting and distortion...it's tack sharp as well. As always, great video Andrew.
The 14mm f2.8 is excellent for landscape and architectural photography. It is very sharp wide open, relatively compact and light, and has no distortion. I have been using mine for more than a year and I am very satisfied.
Thanks for mentioning the close-focusing features of each lens. The close-up of the wet leaf was beautiful. It's nice to know I'm not the only one who wants a close-focusing distance prime.
thank you so much. you finally help me to decide between the 8-16 and the 10-24mm
i will go for the 10-24 mm. less weight les budget and good quality + IOS just perfect
I've first bought the 16mm f/1.4 because of your recommendation and what a great decision it was!!
Currently I own the 8-16mm which is outstanding opticaly. The catch with that lens is the zoom, aperture ring (too soft),the weight and the lack of a filter thread.
I've tried the 10-23 f/4 and while it's a good light lens with great IQ, in direct sunlight the whole image becomes a smudge.
Looking back I can see the magical quality that the 16mm f/1.4 has (same thing about the 35mm f/1.4)
I'll sell the 8-16, buy back the 16 and the Zeiss 12mm to see if I can find peace. If not, I'll switch to Sony, not because I love their system, but because of one lens and that's the 16-35mm f/2.8 GM.
Great video, thank you. As someone who’s passion is architectural photography, I too am on the hunt for the perfect ultra wide. I currently use the 16 1.4 as my main lens, and carry the 10-24 for when I need to go wider. I’d love to see a Fujifilm prime in the 10 or 12mm range.
I'm a hiker/trekker primarily. Love taking photographs along the way. Is 10-24 for me considering it is f4.i love taking photos of alpine lakes after dusk.
For me there is a noticible difference between 24mm and 21mm. I use the 14mm Fuji-Lens and just love the focallength. Reproduktion-ratio is also quite good ... the lens just works for me (and i got a good deal on a used copy).
Great Video on your quest for the ultra wide.
That Zeiss is just so prohibitively expensive; my Samyang 12mm suits me pretty well in terms of price, performance, and size; if I lost it, I would replace it as soon as I could, it’s one of my most-used lenses where my 18-55mm just can’t manage. From there, I also have the Laowa 9mm, to fit more of my urban environment in. It’s got a heavy vignette, but shooting it at between 5.6-8 as I do, it’s manageable. I don’t know if it’s because I dropped it on concrete once, but it is softer on one edge, where the other edge is sharp. In the centre to midway to the edge, I have no complaints of sharpness, at least not how I shoot with it. It is so small and light, it has a permanent spot in my bag; and in the end, the best lens is the one you have with you. As for the Zeiss, I just can’t make myself spend that much money on a lens.
Just this week I got the 16 2.8 and I already know I'm really going to like it. I just started into photography about 2 years ago. For at least the first year I used the kit lens 15-45. I found myself using the 15 end probably 80% of the time, so I trained myself to see compositions at that focal length. My first prime was the 35 F2 going off so many recommendations of getting that "nifty fifty" to start with. I like it, but I just had issues with getting my composition where I wanted it. No such issue with the 16. I guess I see the world in 16mm now!
XC 15-45mm for me, cheap, great shaarpness, light and small for travel, and minimum focus distance of 0,13 m.
I still love the XF10-24mm even though I recently purchased the XF8-16mm.
primes I use 8mm Samyang Fisheye ,12mm zeiss Touit and XF14mm f2.8 all capable of producing outstanding quality images.
But I find this applies to all the Fujifilm lenses even the XC very underrated because of the construction materials used.
Excellent review as always.😊👍
great video! excellent review. I have the 16mm 1.4 , 10-24 and i keep using the 16mm 1.4 focal length as i prefer the 16mm length more with its close focusing! one important note is that i have the fuji 16-55mm zoom lens and i find that at 16mm the fuji 16-55 lens has way better sharpness and colour rendering than the 16mm 1.4 or the 10-24 lenses.
As a beginning photographer I initially went the many primes route because I wanted to deep dive into a focal length and really learn it and get that consistency. But recently I sold most of them and got a 17-70 f/2.8 Tamron. I was getting frustrated constantly needing to switch lenses, or finding my shot limited by the aperture of the Fuji 18-55mm. I find that as I'm still figuring out how and what I like to shoot a good fixed aperture zoom is just fantastic. They allow be to be flexible and explore and find the things that I enjoy. Eventually I plan on buying more primes once I figure out what focal lengths I really like and what subjects I like to shoot and what lens best intersects with those things and my own individual shooting quirks and requirements.
I have a sad/funny story on the Rokinon. When I bought it the first picture I took was of our first dog Georgia who has since passed. Since I wasn't used to manual focus it was horribly out of focus as she reacted to my calling to her by moving instead of just turning her head. To this day, I still love that image even though she is out of focus and instead my grill stand is in focus. I can't say I've had any other really great images from the Rokinon since but I can't get myself to part from it because of that one first image. Other than that, I did pick up the XF 16 2.8 this year and I am enjoying it. The size and price are just perfect for me. I'm not an expert with the XF 16 but I do enjoy it.
Isn't if funny the value we place on objects because of our associations to people (or pets) we love? That's a sweet story.
Hi Andrew, great comparison. As others already mentioned is the XC 15-45 as 15mm with a magnification ratio 0.24x / 1:4.2 (at 15mm) wonderful. 13 cm min distance, wow. From watching your video of the 16 mm prime, i love this Style of close focus of a flower pretty sharp and very much Background but as bokeh somehow seperated. And that is pretty easy with that Lens. I also have the 12mm Rokinon (Walimex) which was my favorite before - but the aperture star of that one is quite a challenge, as you need a tree or so to partly hide the sun. And in nature with family and friends, you sometimes might be happy for the emergency-zoom option of the 15-45.
Zeiss 12mm is my go to wide. Glad I grabbed this at a good price.
I bought my copy of Zeiss touit 12mm in 2014 - and I have used it ever since. With pleasure.
Yeah by far the 10-24 is probably the best lens they make. Idc about it being f4 that should be zero issue in almost all cases.
I got the Zeiss 12/2.8 as one of my first lenses when I first got a Fuji camera some years ago (X-T2) and I have taken some of my favorite pictures with it! I love the combination of close focusing distance and sharpness, which is good even when focusing in close :)
Edit: I btw bought it "as new" but second hand for about 500$.
I haven’t watched this yet Andrew, but I had great success with the Samyang/Rokinon 12mm f/2 - that’s despite having also owned Fuji’s 10-24mm. The Samyang was great value for money and optically very good, apart from the disappointing 5-pointed sun stars (although that is a matter of opinion of course). It was also nice and small. It’ll be interesting to see what you concluded in this vid.
Yeah. It's got some quirks, but otherwise a lens I generally recommend right up against the 10-24mm f4 also.
Second this! Had it for my Sony E system and bought it again for my Fuji X mount. Hard to beat price to performance! Shoot astro with it and it's great.
Andrew & Denae Very interesting outcome indeed! I had my eyes off the screen for a mo and when you mistakingly said 16mm I thought to myself “I know he loves 16mm but surely not two of them!!” 🤣 then I rewinded back and saw that you meant 12mm (Zeiss). Also it’ll just be a matter of time before Viltrox enter this arena too. Ha I’m not even a Fuji shooter any more but the quality of your vids keep me here. Great stuff as always.
Jaron Barendse Hope you’re enjoying your setup mate - I went the other way (Fuji to Sony) but clearly still miss my Fuji gear too. Brilliant gear!!
I have the 14 and 16 and totally agree. I reach for the 16 more often just because it has that close focus option which is kind of a bummer because I really like the 14's image quality (although they're both really pretty superb). Thanks for the great content!
You never have to worry about Zeiss taking any pride. Incredibly fine machining and select materials are often mistaken amongst RUclips reviewers.
This is great! I was actually thinking of getting my hands on an ultra wide lens. Good info!
Really hoping Fuji comes out with second version of 10-24 with WR to complement 16-80 and upcoming 70-300(confirmed by FujiRumors). All of them 72mm thread, ultimate travel kit
XF 70-300mm has 67mm thread...
@@rfa2381 yeah, my comment was pre release. Adaptor ring it is
@@gabrielrosu3977 just an update after the release! :)
Thanks and enjoyed the prez. I must ‘fess I flip-flop between prime and zoom. I am not a pro but an entusiast and on our recent trip, to Australia, I added my 16-55 and 70-300 to my X-Pro2 and most Fuji shots were with the 16-55. But most of my shots overall was with my beloved Ricoh GRIII! I do regret however, exchanging my 14mm when I purchased the 16-55 - that I do not regret. Maybe picked up a used one. One new candidate must be the Viltrox 13mm … ? BTW you state you like the consistency of primes but don’t you crop? Stay well.
Good to see a touit lens. I am also considering this lens but like you said it's a bit expensive. I hope you also take a look at the Zeiss Touit Makro Planar 50mm f2.8. I want a 50mm and a macro lens so this looks like it could fill the niche.
shdala111 I have the 12mm and the 50mm macro Touit lenses both purchase used mint you will not be disappointed with either in fact I prefer the 50mm Touit to my Fuji XF 80mm f2.8 macro it’s cheaper lighter and with XH1 I still get ibis.
I absolutely love my 16 mm 1.4 WR!
The Zeiss Touits were the first of the sleek redesigns followed by Batis, Otis etc. I used a 32mm planar exclusively for several months for the look of that traditional Zeiss double Gauss. Your images with the 12mm look beautiful, esp the black and white and the skin tones, fantastic! Honestly the Zeiss is a far more interesting lens than the Fuji 14mm which I’ve used a lot. Great video.
Thank you!
I was looking at a Zeis Tuit 12mm today with a lens flaw for cheap. So I dropped by. Then, when you said the Zeiss fills a spot no other lens for Fuji did...I remembered the new Viltrox.....
Thanks for the comparisons :-)
I love my 10-24. Coupled with the 16 1.4 it's got all the wide-angleness I need covered. I just wish there were a 16-35 or so equivalent for the GFX system.
Ok so, aside from the interesting topics you display, I just want to say the IQ of your videos is absolutely amazing, your frame, your lighting is just over the top, I can not believe the horrendous quality of some photography RUclips videos out there, thank you for your dedication, it’s truly inspiring.
14mm f/2.8 is the sharpest ultra-wide. I don't consider 16mm ultra-wide. I have both the Rokinon 12mm f/2 and Fuji 14 and find myself going back to the 14mm consistently for landscapes and even for large group shots. It's so sharp and doesn't have distortion. I love it for astrophotography. It's also a great lens when you have architecture. No distortion in the lines of the building. You should rent this lens. One of Fuji's best prime lenses and it's probably the reason I haven't gone to the 10-24 zoom I found the 14mm much sharper. It's small and compact, great for landscapes, astrophotography and I use it quite a bit in large groups for events and weddings.
Categorically (and I was very careful to research this), lens databases/ecommerce systems consider 24mm full frame the beginning of "ultra wide".
Andrew & Denae did you find out why very wide lenses have the “ultra” designation while very telephoto lenses use the “super” designation? If there’s no good reasoning behind it, then I have will have to start using the term super wide and ultra telephoto 😂✌️
Balanced and thorough. Well done on the video - very useful. Thanks
Fuji 8-16 $500 off sale for a couple more weeks!!! Love it!
This sale is on again. It’s now only £150 more than the new 10-22. I’m still undecided between the two 🤔
I plan to test the XC 15-45mm for landscape work this weekend. I have heard, multiple times, that it performs very well when used as a 15mm prime lens. I believe the minimum focus distance is less than six inches.
Yes, it a higher reproduction ratio than even the 16mm 1.4.
not the greatest at night, but with decent lighting it works amazing for landscape work. One lens covers the range, for day hikers etc.
It's less contrasty than for example the XF16mm 2.8 so I ended up switching it for that (in addition I just like primes). However, the XC15-45 is an excellent and honestly underrated lens.
Great Review. I am a Architecture and Cityscapes Photographer and the XF10-24 "pays my bills". On one body it is permanently sitting since 4 years :-)
I’ve been using the 7Artisans 12mm 2.8 and I love it. I looked around at a lot of the other lenses and got put off because they’re made from plastic and then a few where slightly out of my price range. It’s not a lens I’d use enough to spend that tons on but one handy to have when I needed it. But the 7Artisans is metal and they do, do a filter adaptor for it. CF is 0.2m or 8 inches, how can you calculate that into reproduction ratio? But could be a good lens to have a look at and I’d be interested to know your option. I have noticed at 2.8 you do get slightly soft edges, but then I don’t tend to shoot wide open and also you do get a bit of a vignette from it.
Thanks for the great content. I first bought a Fuji camera after watching your videos, but I'm on a budget and couldn't really get great lenses (I'm using an old Pentax 55mm f1.8 glass and Olympus 50mm f3.0 macro with adapters). The trouble I've had is that I teach in a windowless science classroom - on a normal year I need a wide angle to catch the whole room of kids working and I'd like to do more landscape photos, but in this past Covid year I needed a wide angle to record my lessons. I ended up with my camera mounted 24 feet away to record myself (and lots of mic line) or my tripod fully extended above the table with my macro lens on to capture how to record a science notebook. It was a real pain in the butt.
After watching this video (and others in your ultra wide journey), I think I'm going to get the Fuji 16mm f2.8. I don't think I need my shots to be "ultra-wide", good color is important (I love my old Pentax, but hate my old Olympus color), and the other options looked expensive and of questionable quality. Other commenters mentions a Viltrox lens supposedly coming out in early 2021. I might be interested in it if it's any good and I figure I can get a used Fuji lens now and resell in a year at very little loss (if any) better than I could resell a third-party lens.
So thanks again. You provided useful practical information. I'll get the 16mm f2.8 for now, and if I can swing it, the 60mm Fuji macro that will hopefully replace my two heavy vintage lenses.
Phantastic overview video!
Why don’t you use an extension tube on the Rokinon? Too much hassel putting the ring on and off in the desert?
Excellent comparison. I'm hoping your video helps prompt Fuji to release a compact, ultra wide prime with close-focusing ability, preferably with a focal length of 10mm.
In my country of Bulgaria, the samyang 12mm and the fuji 16mm f2.8 share the same price which made my choice easy.
You typed wrong under the description
Should be Zeiss 12 2.8, not 23 2.8, am I right?
I’ve use the 9mm Laowa and love it. Very sharp in my opinion. I Tried the Samyang 12mm and thought it was horrible!
Each company has lower tolerances, so there is the opportunity for wide variance. So it's conceivable that an individual 12mm Samyang lens would be softer than a 9mm Laowa. However, this would be the exception, based on the patterns I've experienced myself and from other reviewers.
@@AndrewGoodCamera maybe there was a bad batch of these lenses around in America, I have the 9mm 2.8 and it's exceptional good and most people here in the EU agree.
I usually do not worry about close focus ability
with my wide angle lenses. When I need close-focus, I use a macro lens.
When I was looking for a wide angle for my Fuji
APS-C mirrorless cameras, I looked for a 12mm lens to give me the same
angle-of-view on the APS-C cameras that my 18mm had given me on my 35mm
cameras.
I ordered the Rokinon 12mm f/2 and the Zeiss 12mm
f/2.8 lenses. My intent was to keep the lens I liked best. After trying them, I
decided to keep them both.
OH MAN! I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR THIS VIDEO FOR SO LONG!
Finally!
already pinned to watch as soon as I can.
Thanks for validating my choices. I have the Fuji 16mm f2.8 and the Zeiss Touit 12mm f2.8. I am looking forward to trying 12mm Milky Way time lapse.
milky way with Laowa 9mm f/2.8 500px.com/photo/1020607749/milky-way-alentejo-by-rui-figueiredo-almeida
Hi Andrew! Enjoyed watching that video, I am also a great fan of the 16 1.4 and the 10-24 for its versatility. You mention the 14mm 2.8 at some point in the video (in a text listing) but you don't really have it in the video, or did I miss it? Whats up with that?
Best to you
Max
Hi Andrew. Are you still shooting with that Zeiss 12mm 2.8? Will you be updating your video by adding and comparing the new Viltrox 13mm 1.4? Have you had the chance to check out the Viltrox if yes what's your opinion? Thanks.
really enjoying the photography in the videos, just as important and nice. You really have some nice natural composition.
I have the 10-24 F4 for property work. I think the Zero D also is compelling for architecture and becoming highly sort after in the UK.
Great overview! What is the square thing on the 16mm 1.4? And why is it square? Is it just a lens cap? If so, why square? Thanks!
Cheers. One thing to watch out for when comparing reproduction ratios is that you have to take the focal length into account if you would like to calculate minimum focus distance. This is because the focal length changes the effective magnification of the lens, impacting the size of the object on the sensor at a given distance. So think about if you’re six feet away from an object and you shoot it with the 12 mm vs a 50 mm lens. And let’s say that hypothetically both of these lenses had a six foot minimum focus distance for the sake of this example. The size of the object is going to be substantially different on the sensor between the 12 and 50 mm lenses. As a result the reproduction ratio for those lenses would be very different. This is of course, all theoretical and a simplification. Nothing is going to beat actual testing. And certainly I would expect that third party manufacturers are more likely to spec a minimum focal distance more sloppily than Fuji or Zeiss would. But if close focus is the name of the game, you need to consider both the focal length and the reproduction ratio when choosing a lens.
You've accurately outlined the dilemma on the ultra wide end. The 10-24 has been my workhorse for the past three years, but still end up carrying the 16 1.4 and rokinon 12 f2 on my landscape trips for different use cases. I wish there was one lens to rule them all... if Fuji could release a fast prime in the 10 to 12mm range with close focusing ability, well, that might save my back.
Agreed
You
hit home the point well. Always wondered why Zeiss Touit does not get the attention it deserves. Great sharpness, colour rendition, build quality and aesthetics. The output was really pleasing. While the 16mm has more character and finesse, the 12mm felt clinical. Never liked the Samyang colours, looked weak imho!
Andrew, yesterday I posted a comment about Lee making an adapter for the 8-16mm 2.8
After I saw that you reacted to that comment I reread it.
It appears as cold and unfeeling.
Please accept my apology
I love your channel and greatly appreciate the kindness and truthfulness that you give in your videos.
Thank you for it Andrew.🔥👍
I didn't feel that it was cold at all. It's good info and I hadn't heard Lee made those. But I appreciate your follow up. All best!
Andrew & Denae 🔥👊🔥
Fantastic video - huge amount of work you put into this - thank you so much for the generosity of your sharing.
Zeiss makes my favorite glass the loxia series is great I wish they made a new series just for fuji of the same quality. that would be my dream lens kit. Man the 16 1.4 was a dream too noting better tbh. have you done the viltrox giveaway yet? I managed to get my hands on a xt1 and a canon fd 50mm 2.0. I need to find something wider but its hard to find good inexpensive lenses. hmmm
Here on the same quest...shame to hear about the Laowa, my 12 and 15 Laowas for full frame Canon DSLR are just super sharp. Moving to Fuji from FF Canon I'm in a similar struggle trying to find an ultra wide. Thanks for the info, saving time and money is appreciated.
You really are spoiling us with such quality content,
once again, thank you for the video!
Hi Andrew, thanks for another great informative video first of all. Knowing how much you love the 16mm/1.4 - which you totally talked me into buying one and a camera to go with it, and knowing why you love it, I am wondering if you are aware of the LAOWA 15mm f/4 1:1 Macro. It is not available on Fuji X-mount though, but it is available on Canon EF.
Which one would be enough for property interior photography?
I just picked up the Zeiss. Image quality is superb, as expected, but it has some ergonomic issues. I'd love to see a refresh of this lens with more traditional & tactile focus and aperture rings, and an analog focus scale printed on the barrel. Also, since I always manually focus UWA, I'd prefer fully analog focusing over the focus-by-wire system. Oh well, still a great lens. It just takes a bit more work to get the best out of it.
I have just purchased FUJI XT4. It is APS-C Camera. How can i use tokina 11-15 ? I will get 16-29 in 35mm format with adopter ? Which adopter is better for Fuji ?
One question runs through my mind after seeing this nice video though.
If you find close focus important, why before buying any of these lenses didn't you check the specifications (if you did it becomes even weirder) for here you can easily find what the closest distance is a lens can provide.
Keep up the good work and best wishes from The Netherlands!
Awesome info on this video man
Thanks!
Interesting. I've followed your search avidly. My journey was almost 180 degrees. I started with the Zeiss: great heritage glass and German engineering, what could go wrong? I hated it, so soft at the edges. Sent it back the after testing and spent more on the Fuji 10-24 which I've now had about 4 years and almost lives on the body; what a great lens. Out of interest I believe recent examples of the Zeiss no longer have the aperture ring.
Man I love the look of Zeiss lenses
my answer to this was laowa 15mm f2 ( sony).... i wen t the same path, super close focus aka uwa macro, screw filters, f2, very sharp
Hey Andrew ! As a new Fuji guy , your channel became like an old friend ;)
Any experience with shooting videos with these lenses. As a hybrid shooter myself, I can't decide between the OIS and versatility of 10-24 but at the same time, I chose fuji for the compact and lightweight feeling and the 16 2.8 is also another great choice. Any though ?
All the best !
I can't recommend the 16mm 2.8 for video as the focus breathing is pretty bad. I would choose the 10-24 for hybrid ultrawide.
@@AndrewGoodCamera Thank you so much for your tips. Do you know where we can find information about the focus breathing on fuji lenses?
The 12 Rok. I luv 💗 it
Please suggest a bought autofocus ultra wide angle lens for indoor Real Estate videography with Sony ZV-E10 camera ?
I like 16mm wide angle fast lens, does Rokinon or anyone make a cheaper 16mm F2 or faster lens? I tested the sigma 16mm F1.4 both on canon and sony, very nice! I hope I can find one like it for fuji. Thanks!
My pairing is XF16mm 2.8 and Samyang 8mm. Yes the Sam is a fisheye, but I sometimes need to document som very wide or cramped spaces for my job and I needed as wide as I could get it. Addition to budget I guess, the Laowa was simply too expensive for me.
Thanks for the video!
8-16mm is now my go to lens for landscapes; however, I'd rate myself highly advanced with PS luminosity masks, so I don't need the filters. I also am not close to woodlands, so I don't need a polarizer.
Every ultra wide has terrible corner wobble on Fuji in walking video, any solution to that?
New background!....Did Denae make you sell all those cameras? 😱
Nope! Haha
Because he bought the Touit
Who tf downvotes this? Thanks for your videos dude
I've always had ultra wide angle lenses but I always found myself struggle with them. Sometimes they were just too wide and I always cropped in. The 16 1.4 is wide enough generally but yeah there are times when it just isn't wide enough for what I want to capture. I can try taking vertical frames and stitching them together and that works some of the times for landscapes but I'd prefer to do it optically. I had the same feeling about the Rokinon 12mm. Its great for astrophotography but I couldn't stand the colors. It processed so different than Fuji glass and sometimes when photographing landscapes with blue sky, it would be dark in the center as if there was a polarizer on. I got the 10-24 and put to the test next to the Rokinon and it didn't have that issue at all. It looked so much better. Since I shoot video too with my Fuji system, I'd probably get the 10-24 for having it as an option when I need ultra wide angle and using it for videos. The 18-55 with the 2.8 is pretty good for video too but a little tight indoors for my RUclips videos.
Great video Andrew! The Zeiss seems like a great option for a auto focus ultra wide angle prime.
I'm considering the 16mm 2.8 ,if I were to add an extension tube behind it wouldn't it get closer focus and if so do you see a downside to that?
Zeiss is a bit too expensive for me, so mainly because Fujis 16mm f1,4 does the job most of the time, I'll stick to the Samyang / Rokkinon, at least for now.
Now what bothers me personally about that Samyang is not the close up focusing, nor manual focus, nor absence of WR. I could live with that strange hue,maybe, but the fact that same hue turns greenish the moment you set the lens wide open, that drives me crazy...
Got 2nd hand as new 12mm zeiss for 600 euro, after trip with Samyang , Fuji 10-24 f4 and after few days did not bother with borrowed chinesium stuff and to be honest 12mm Zeiss beat the crap out of them.
I've done a lot of Luxury Real Estate Videography with the Fuji 10-24mm and I can tell you that the f/4 was very problematic for me. It's a great lens overall, but F/4 is simply not bright enough for a wide range of interior *video* shots and I had to push the ISO and SS to expose correctly, causing an image quality that was not up to my standards and required a lot of editing. I've seen some guys on RUclips who are great with cleaning up high ISO video on Fuji and other platforms, so maybe there is some room for me to learn some tricks there, but you would have to know you have that skillset in my opinion. When you're dealing with a client who expects the highest standards, I would not rely on slapping a denoiser on the footage to get the job done. I love the lens, but for what I'm doing with video, I'm going to have to change it up and go with something faster.
It's also not as sharp at f/4, which contributes to poor video image quality in low light situations. I found the sweet spot was around f/7ish
I'm not sure if I agree with this assessment😂 because I love the 8-16 for landscape, architecture, and works well for video, but I did build my own filter system, and I don't care too much about minimum focusing distance, but I guess to each their own. The Rokinon worked very well as well, great for astrophotography, I'd love to see a comparison video between the 16mm f1.4 Fuji for astrophotography.
Would love to know more about your DIY filter system.
Dude!! Have you shot with the 14mm 2.8? I have it and it focuses SO close! I don’t know how they could get closer honestly.
Of course I have. It's an excellent lens. It has a reproduction ratio of 1:8.3 which is fine. But I prefer the 16mm 1.4 that gets double that. And after that, they are too close, as far as focal length. So it's an easy decision for me. But yeah, nothing wrong with the 14mm 2.8.
Ahhh gotcha. I’m still new on reproduction ratios and everything. I was just surprised based on my own experience. Great video! Always enjoy your content 🤙🏻
I have bought the laowa and it’s the perfect pairing for my x pro 2. Small like the f2 fujicron lenses it looks and feels well balanced when on the camera. All metal construction, indexed aperture ring and nice focusing ring I love it!!! Also a 2.8 Sure there’s vignetting on the corners at 2.8 and I’m pretty sure i have done some super close focusing with it! All to say there is nothing really like it in its class and I have gotten reasonably sharp images with it. Sad the channel so easily dismissed it.
I love it for all the reasons you said. But it cannot sharpen on the corners, regardless of aperture, meaning I'd have to crop, meaning it's not 12mm. So it is worthless to me
I USE SAMYANG 10MM F2.8 AND LOVE IT
Andrew is spoiled by the 16 1.4's close focusing ability. I know how that feels😆.
I’ve wanted to buy that lens for a bit now, just noticed it’s also a WR lens. Just keeps getting better and better :p
@@Roysphotos8 It's a great lens for sure but the whole WR thing is a marketing myth. Same with other brands touting resistance.
@@marion_roberts could be. I just wouldn't risk it haha.
Hi bro can i use the zeus lens for interior design?
Wait for viltrox 13 1.4. personally i tried the laowa 9mm. Amazing lens, very good build quality super small good max aperture value close focus not bad. BUT i had to send it back because it was soft on the extreme corners also at f5.6/f8. And than i regret it. I'll try to put my hands on another one and I'll using it cropping the extreme corners and that's it. Im gona use it as a 10mm basically.
I also own the fuji 16mm, Which is an amazing lens but is not wide enough for what i want to do. I'll probably end up selling it, because i take pictures just for hobby and honestly if i want to buy something wider the 16 won't be used much anymore and even if i can afford it i cannot justify the fact of having it on my shelf taking dust.
I tried the samyang, and also there i didn't pick a good copy probably. I can confirm that it feel cheap. I shoot a lot handheld so its f2 aperture could have been handy but it didn't convinced me. Zeiss is the only one remaining to test for me, but i don't really like it. Its way too big and i already struggle to make my 16 fit in my bag let alone the zeiss with that enormous lens hood.
There is one more lens that you better check: xc15-45. It does auto focus and focus pretty close. It sucks at tele side, but the wide angle side is surprisingly outstanding. I found Samyang 12mm too wide sometimes and the xc15 side is pretty useful, also cheap enough and good for carrying.
Yeah it's good. But I decided not to include it as it's zoom range and where it performs the best, technically, places it outside of "ultra" wide angle. However, if used as a prime at the wide end, it's really not a bad option, that is true
any thoughts about the Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 Di II adapted from canon with viltrox speed booster?
In my small Peak Design Everyday 5L sling-bag, I have the XT1 body, a sharp copy of the Laowa 9/2.8, the Fuji 16/2.8, and the Fuji 35/2.0, plus filters, charger, extra battery, flash, and a 30yr old Bogen table-top tripod. It’s a tiny lens kit!!! Funny, I just got a new iPhone 11 Pro, and its three cameras have almost exactly the same equivalent focal lengths. But the Fuji images, of course, are way better in **almost** all situations. It’s too bad you got two poor copies of the Laowa. But I totally understand because recently I got a bad copy of the Pergear 25/1.8 and was so put off, I didn’t even try a second copy.
since the 10-24 f4 can let in as much light as the 8-16 2.8, can the 10-24 be a decent astrophotography lens?
great in-depth reviews
I think when you get at that ultra wide range (where appropriate) it becomes magical - the wow factor! Inside generally you won't get anything near the same shot that your eye takes in without it. The same outside when you think a 16 or 24 (full frame) is wide. It's not for many great scenes. I disagree here (but great content on other videos). The 9mm Laowa is the best solution IMO (but takes some getting used to). Really get into the corners (ie the things closest) and hit the Fuji magnify button, turn to red for focus and nail manual focus. Then (depending on light availablity and aperture choice) up to a higher f-stop . The Samyang/Rokinon distorts massively!! And it's designed for DSLR so is also a massive lens compared to the Laowa. I really cannot understand why you didn't even mention this. Distortion free (or near is a massive asset of the Laowa at this very demanding focal length). So you lose even more wideness over the 9 Laowa (which doesn't need to be corrected in post so you don't lose some of your picture after correction). The Laowa is already very well corrected with regards distortion...The only plus the Samyang/Rokinon has is the f2 over the Laowa f2.8...But the Laowa is tiny (so hand holding at lower shutter speeds is possible) soldily built and a far higher quality lens construction. The Zeiss I've not tried, but it's not particularly wide (12 against 9 and when you're wide that's massive) so I have no interest in it...I would recommend the Fuji 16 f1.4 (I know you love it as do I) and the Laowa for ultra wide. As a professional landscape photographer Andy Mumford is also a fan of the Laowa.
I’m in love with the 16mm 1.4 can’t wait to add it to my kit. Current only have the 23 F2 and the 56 f1.2
This video is from a While ago... but you should try the laowa 15mm f/4 with a 1:1 magnification ratio.
The Laowa 9mm is very sharp indeed, my guess is that you wanted to focus to infinity and turned the focus all the way. You need to actually focus back a little on this lens and align the to the infinity symbol, going past all the way that will not focus to infinity and will render a blurry image.
This is not my first rodeo. I never focus infinity and trust that a lens is in focus unless I've tested and proven that that is the case. The two copies of the Laowa 9mm were not sharp at all anywhere but at the center, unfortunately.