Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f/2.8-4.8 R LM WR lens review
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 ноя 2024
- Hooray, another new kit lens, and this time, one with some promise to it, well - let's see what it can do.
Find it here (Amazon affiliate link - thank you for your support):
geni.us/FujiXF...
Support me on Patreon! / christopherfrost
Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate links):
Canon EOS R5: geni.us/CanonE...
Canon EF-RF Adaptor: geni.us/CanonE...
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 'Art': geni.us/Sigma5...
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM: geni.us/CanonR...
Marumi Fit and Slim CPL Filter: geni.us/Marumi...
AudioTechnica AT2020USB+ Microphone: geni.us/AT2020... Rode Smartlav+
Microphone: geni.us/RodeSm...
Rode SC3 adapter: geni.us/RodeSC...
Zoom H1n Recorder: geni.us/ZoomH1...
DJI Mini 2 Drone: geni.us/DJIMin...
Music: 'Opportunity Walks', Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons....
I'd have to go back to a previous review of the old kit lens to see how this really stacks up, but overall I'm a little under-whelm. The weather sealing and internal zoom are welcome touches but for the price...No.
Maybe if someone is moving one as part of a kit, then for £350 it might be worth it?
But then there's the Sigma?🤔
Edit:
Okay so I went back and re-watched Mr Frost's review of the old 18-55mm lens, and to be fair they're not that dis-similar in their pro's & con's. Given that the new lens is designed to better resolve the newer 40MP sensor, as an everyday lens I guess it stacks up, and like Mr Frost said in his review back then, worth it if you can pick up a white box version.
One last thing, I really have to applaud Mr Frost for his work in curating such a catalogue of reviews, the format is consistent and direct without any fluff. Re-watching that review from 5 yrs ago, it could have easily been made yesterday. Your channel has to be one of THE go-to channels of all lens reviews.👋👋
The sigma is the best option today unless you get this new lens at its bundled price imo
I think that many of your viewers would like to see a comparison between this and the old one (18-55mm).
It would be interesting to see how the old one compares.
It also has a few advantages. Aperture ring, better low light values and image stabilization
Definitely.. and vs the 16-55mm and the Sigma 18-50mm 2.8 on the 40mp sensor 👍
I 3rd this & also would add the 16-80mm kit in that comparison since it came with some of the cameras with 40mp sensor as part of their kit.
I'll keep my twelve year old 18-55, at least until I get a body with the ibis. I still use an x-t3 and x-e1
The old kit lens works very well with the X-T3. I'm keeping mine.
I love the old 18-55 together with my XT-20!
I got a old X-E1 too, just upgraded to X-T5 recently though 😊
The 18-55 is doing alright on my X-T5, though truth be told, it sits mainly on my X-Pro 3 or X-T3.
Thanks. I would say the results are largely as expected. It's a perfectly useable lens for street photography and travel. Maybe not for pixel peepers. I will get it as a kit when I buy the next camera.
I got this lens with my x-t5 and it’s my favourite lens I’ve owned since my lumix 12-35 f2.8 I had with my old G9. I like the size, the images it produces and the fact it’s weather sealed as I’m often caught out in bad weather in the UK. I doubt I’d pay full price for it but in a kit with a camera I think it makes a lot of sense.
How would you compare this to the "old" 18-55 lens Christopher? I think a comparison between the two on the new 40mp sensor would do great viewer-wise!
Thanks for the review!
Mm, lots of negativity here around this lens and, by extension, this review. Wonder how many of the commenters actually have shot with it. I own it and, although I agree that on a stand-alone basis, it is (too?) expensive, this is an excellent travel and casual photography lens which outperforms its obvious competitor, the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8, which I also tested:
16mm on the wide end, (much) better built quality, aperture ring, weather resistant, shorter and lighter, faster and better focusing, and more pleasing images (at least to my eyes) with better colors, more contrast and pop. And the advantages of internal zooming should not be overlooked: less risk of contamination (if you use a UV filter as well) and better suited for street shots, since subjects do not see a lens extending in their direction.
Despite the overwhelmingly negative reactions to this lens, the 16-50 was a delightful surprise to me. So much so that I actually sold both my 18-55 and 16-80 for it. I always loved the 18-55, but 18mm just isn’t wide enough. I always wanted 16mm. However, I was underwhelmed by the IQ of the 16-80, and got tired of its extra heft. The 16-50 solved literally every problem I had with both of these lenses, AND added weather sealing, internal zoom, a boost in IQ, and a weight reduction. The trade offs are perfect for me, I won’t miss the extra .8 of brightness on the tele end.
Same here! I sold both kit zooms for this lens to go with my XT5 and couldn't be happier. It is a different experience: compact, lightweight, discrete, WR, and for my needs, IQ is excellent!
Thank you, Christopher. I love your images, quite apart from the usefulness of your excellent and consistent tests.
Been waiting on this review from you. Thank you!! 🙏
Fuji set a high bar for kit lenses with the 18-55 and I'd say they've met that bar again with the 16-50. No lens at this price and size will be perfect, but the IQ compromises are reasonable for a bright, compact, internal zoom lens with weather sealing and a linear AF motor. 16mm is very nice to have on a kit lens when almost every APS-C offering starts at 18mm - Sony's 16-50mm is an exception, but also makes drastic compromises in the corners at 16mm. I would say Fuji understands these tradeoffs and has integrated them into the lineup effectively - if you want perfect IQ in a standard zoom, get the 16-55 f2.8 and live with the size and weight. If you prefer to shoot wide and compact, 16mm f2.8. For casual photography on 40mp sensors, this looks like a great choice to bundle with the X-T50.
@christopherfrost in thumbnail of the video the GFX lens show up instead of XF
How has Fuji never managed to make the manual zoom work normally?! I'm pretty sure every other manufacturer has! 😅 It's not a massive issue but still, for the price you pay, EVERYTHING should work flawlessly.
As a fuji shooter it drives me insane
Even third party manufacturer are better ...
Indeed, amaze me how they couldn't fix this for so long
What do you mean by “manual zoom work normally” ?
@@jeremytheoneofdestiny8691 what I personally understood this to be talking about, is that, especially during video, but during photos also, when you zoom in and out on a fuji lens it throws everything WILDLY out of focus and takes much longer to correct itself than most other brands in my experience. It's very jarring during video and annoying for photo shooting if youre trying to track a moving subject. Like photo lenses aren't usually parfocal, so some defocusing as you zoom is expected but it's the jerkiness and the degree to which it happens especially on the 16-80mm f4 that really is disturbing.
This lens is fine for travel and for everyday use. I own this lens. I am eagerly waiting for an update for Fuji's 16-55mm 2.8 lens for low light theater photography.
I have this new lens and xf 16-55 2.8. it really is hard to describe just how light and small the new kit lens is. I am considering returning it though as the un-marked aperture ring is bothering me more than i thought it would compared to the 16-55 2.8. I did shoot the 16-50 and the 16-55 side by side at 50mm and the new kit lens resolves more detail on the 40mp than my red badge 16-55.
Improvements for Fuji wallet that wanted primarily to reduce the costs with that new kit lens while keeping the juicy price ( Cheaper lens formula, less glass elements. Removal of the metallic parts like the zoom ring and focus ring. Removal of the OIS ) Worse is that IQ isn't even really better as shown here. I would keep the old one or go to the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 instead.
Considering it don't have OIS wouldn't the sigma 18-50 F2.8 be a better choice ? don't know how it handle the 40mp though
Chris tested it on the 40mp sensor and it was okay
You would probably be fine. Dustin Abott has test images on his website with the sigma on an XH2.
That being said if you have a 40mp Fuji, then you have IBIS so, you don't need to worry about OIS.
No weather resistant
Well, I'm definitely tempted, if only because of the internal zoom. I think this would work great for personal video work on a gimbal, like vlogs or walk around videos. Price is not great, but eventually it'll go down when more of these are out in the wild, which there will be since they'll be kitted in a lot of their bodies.
i alaways appreciate your work. without your inputs i never bought any lens. should we upfrade from 18-55. thank you
Unless the test one here is a bad copy, the old 15-45mm smokes this newer lens and you can get it for not much over £100 used if you shop around, think I'd stick to that and add a couple of used primes at that price.
This one is a head scratcher for me! In reality the 16-50 on my XT5 is RAZOR sharp. I've been very impressed with it. No clue how it performed to poorly in your tests!
i like the intern zoom. hope there will come a similar replacement for the 16-80 f4.
As a kit lens it has some merit. I wouldn't buy this to match with an existing body.
The Tamron 17-70 f2.8 is available from a reputable dealer in the UK, new, for £679. I have one for my X-T5 and it is a cracking lens.
Blows the latest fuji offering out of the water.
While the non kit price is way too high, the kit price of around 400€ is still very competitive. (In Finland with, xt-50 or xt5, 450€ with x-s20)
Based on quickly looking through all the "standard" zoom options currently for fuji x, the tamron seems to be the best option if you dont place any priority on weight.
But when considering kit pricing, and considering size and weight, the new 16-50 seems to be the best option.
Compared to the tamron, the new fuji is significantly shorter and internally zooming, 48-75mm shorter (1.67-1.95x shorter). And 285g lighter (2.19x lighter).
It does lose out on the 2.8 aperture. Image quality seems comparable at similar apertures.
@@b34rzz Hi. I do prioritise weight. My X-T5 plus the Tamron 17-70 and Fuji 70-300 make a light weigh and very flexible package for a range of scenarios. Bits of me don't work as well as they used to and that combo with a set of 3 filters (same size for both lenses) and a spare battery + cloths and blower is a very light weigh set up.
Thank you for the great review Christopher. I'll be getting this kit lens as part of a camera package as I dive head first into the world of photography. Can anyone recommend a lens protector and what size i need to choose please? Many thanks
58 mm diameter
Sounds like a great lens, albeit disappointing in certain scenarios. How do you think it compares to the beloved (if heavy) XF 16-55 f/2.8?
Once prices drop this will be much more interesting. The f/4.8 at 50mm is disappointing for my use, but it makes up for that with WR, weight and internal zoom :)
Nice review photos!
I find it weitd that they ommited the image stabilizer. I own the 2.8-4 version and wouldnt want to miss the osmeven on a xt 50
And i wonder if it would really suffer at 40mp,so far my results have been excellent with it!
Thanks Chris but i think I'll stick to my beloved classic 'kit' lens. On my wishlist is a Viltrox 23 1.2 PRO - now that could be really interesting....
Hey Chris, I think the thumbnail is wrongly used on GF lens
Much happy with the Tamron 17-70 F2.8.
Could you compare to the Sigma 18-50 F2.8?
after watching a hundred or so of your videos, I feel like I need to try Crystal Pepsi
How does it compare to the 16-80mm on the 40mp sensor, in terms of overall resolution and corner sharpness?
I was so looking forward to this lens and I really wanted to like it, but the negatives (price, build, focal length/speed) pretty much doomed it from my perspective. Now, if Fuji were to lower the price say, by $200 USD, I might be in. I am looking at the 16-80 as a “possible” replacement for the venerable 18-55, otherwise, I will likely stick with my battle-worn 18-55. The 2 positives of the 16-50 are the internal focusing and weather-sealing, still not worth the $700 asking price. Another deal killer is the variable aperture, I love my f-stop rings. Like I said I wanted to add this to my arsenal of glass, but at this price point, I'll have to pass.
I guess 18-55 is probably going to be just fine. Unless you have huge need for extra 2mm on shorter end or huge hate for having 5mm more longer end.
I'm a little confused by the poor performance of some lenses when you use them with a high megapixel camera. For example, I bought the Tamron 18-300 for my X-T5 and kept getting disappointing results, with quite soft detail in a lot of pictures. Before returning the lens, I tried it on my X-T30 and am getting beautiful results. They look sharper than the X-T5. So what's the point of all these megapixels? We don't need them for our digital picture libraries, and you have to crop to a ridiculous degree to benefit. Rather than getting rid of the lens, I think I'll say goodbye to the X-T5.
Fuji has listed the lenses that are fully compatible with the new sensor. The mount might fit but that doesn't mean that the glass can cope with the requirements of the sensor.
I buy a Fuji X-S20 in order to get the Fuji XF 16-50mm F2.8-4.8 as a kit lens, only to find that at f8 my ancient Sony 16-50 f3.5-5.6 OSS has a higher resolution. Perhaps lens design hasn't improved much during the last 10 years. But the Fuji is much more solid and I do hate power zoom lenses.
im guessing the only reason to get this over the 18-55 or sigma 16-50 f/2.8 is that its sharp enough for 40mp
The aperture ring (and the manual focus ring) are made out of metal NOT plastic as you claim...
Certainly seems like plastic to me, although if you have a source on that then I'm willing to stand corrected
@@christopherfrost If the lens is put in a cold environment , the aperture ring and the manual focus ring are feeling colder (different to other parts of the lens) as it is to be exptected with metal rather than plastic. And if you snap your finger nail against the rings, you can although hear a metallic noise.
@@muttishelfer9122 I'd be very surprised if those rings are actually made of metal, even if it might feel a bit like it (and they didn't to me). Would you like me to contact my Fujifilm rep and check?
Before seeing your review I was under the impression that the new 16-50 is optically a clear cut above the 18-55 in IQ. Now I'm seriously doubting this!
I see no reason to upgrade from my old kit lens, which has OIS. I like the internal zooming of the new lens.
I'd been hoping for a fuji 18-55ii after ten years but...smaller (no) lighter (yes) sharper (yes) brighter (no) a bit longer (no) a bit wider (yes) weather sealing (yes) internal zoom (yes) image stabilisation (no) but i guess fuji need to sell more primes and new cameras x
Thanks !!!!
Definitely a Tamron design.
I think for this sort of price it's a really bad prospect, the Sigma 18-50 with a constant f2.8 is £400-£450ish new, and although it lacks a little on rhe wide end compared to this lens, I'd much rather have the Sigma.
The Sigma also zooms in the wrong direction compared to Fuji lenses. This would drive me insane. It also lacks an aperture ring - something I don't mind, but many photographers like the consistent controls across their lenses.
The difference between 24 and 27mm (equivalent) is significant, especially if you want to force perspective. What really worries me though is how poorly the Sigma performed on the 32 Mpix Canon R7 at 18mm where it never got sharp. At lest the Fuji offers good corners at f5.6 at normal distances.
No sunstar section?
01:12 this was the best I could get, at f/16
Will you still get video exposure stepping when the aperture changes?
From 2019 to 2024, I went from an XT3 to XT4 to XS20. Loved Fujifilm for the color and feature packed apsc bodies. But after all these years, the mediocre autofocus performance and lack of affordable quality glass made me quit the system. Maybe someday when they address these issues, I'll be back. But for now, the A6700 or Nikon Z Bodies have my attention.
Or maybe Fujifilm is still relying on TikTok (or other social media) influencers to sell their cameras?
Sigma 18-50 2.8 seems like a better choice overall😢
Looks good enough, There is always that "Better then the normal KITLENS" Lens without going full hog F2.8.
So, this is it, nice.
A kit lens. Thanks Chris.
You'd be amazed how many people watch my reviews of kit lenses
@@christopherfrost I know. I am one of them. I was referring to performance of this lens. looks a lot like the 18-55mm
@@1717jbs Oh I see! Haha I thought you were complaining about me testing a kit lens :-)
@@christopherfrost No complaints here. But I can see where what I wrote could be interpreted as something negative. Love the vids.
If bought separately, is Sigma 18-50 better than that lens?
Imagine after all the ruckus, someone wanted to stage a boycott on the next x-summit
6:51 Close focus image quality is especially disappointing given that this lens has high magnification. Fuji designers dropped the ball on this one.
I've been shooting Fuji for a few years and often manually focus. Never noticed the jerky focusing. Went to check and still don't see it. Does anyone else see the same jerkiness as shown here?
It doesn't seem to happen in every Fujifilm lens. But I've noticed it in most of them, and across a large number of Fujifilm cameras I've tested them with.
@christopherfrost I have definitely seen the multiple reviews when you show this clearly happening so don't doubt it. Wondering in broader context if this is a pervasive problem. I have the Fuji X-T3, 16-80 and 70-300 and don't see the issue on either lens. Previously had the XF 35 f2 and don't remember it happening with that lens either.
@@GoProGnome It's confusing to me, too
Sunstars look good at least
Looking at your review, I think Fuji has made a mistake with this lens. For the amount you pay, it's an average performance. The older kit lens was better although I doubt that works well on their new 40mp sensor. Kinda glad I switched from Fuji. I have no idea what direction they're going in with their products now.
The new "affordable luxury"
I agree with bburchell and have commented elsewhere. Fuji is making a number of dubious moves at the moment which takes it away from some of its original ethos and selling points
Little differentiation between x-t5 and x-t50. The 50 is now way too expensive, and perhaps overspecced. Before an x-t30 or 20 was around £900, or later down to £800, with the big brother around £1200-1300. The 50 is a serious outlay of money. If that is the only choice you might as well get an x-t5 for the extra pounds.
Fuji is forced to upgrade lenses so they can work on the 40mp sensor. Often they are sharper than their predecessors, but bulkier and sometimes heavier, and generally of poorer build quality. Also significantly more expensive. Everything is now about sharpness ( to cope with the new sensor). Not to mention the new pc you will need to store your huges files.
In the case of the kit lens shown today, it would seem to me to be in many respects inferior to the 18-55, and from what Chris has suggested, actually struggles in its aim to work on the x-t5/50. Clearly the corners are really bad across much of its range. It would be interesting to see both lenses on say an x-t3 or 4, not surprising if overall the older one is better there.
So to me, by their misplaced actions, fuji are encouraging you to buy 2nd hand bodies (x-t3 or 2) and just keep or invest in 2nd hand older lenses.
Thanks as ever Christopher for the brilliant output.
I think the thumbnail got some mistake here.
I like my X-T5 and my FUJI lenses but 700 bucks for this?
I'd rather buy a used 18-55mm.
I was waiting for your review. Quite disappointed with this lens. I was really expecting better image quality…
I don't know why Fuji makes such a slow Lenses.
Look at their last newly released lenses.
APSC you'll be able to do something revolutionary like 35 F1 or 23 F1. Making Lenses for ages but yet to do their best
28mm 3.7 & we can talking about sharpness. It should be fucking sharp at this cost & this aperture.
Disappointed when chinese cheap lens can do better or same at the same aperture.
I would give up on sharpness over character any day. Make something like typoch eureka
Oh dear.
Not sure why anyone would pick this over the Sigma 18-50/2.8. With these results, I'd just stick with the older model for far less money (unless you're getting it bundled).
Weather sealing, internal focusing, weight, size, aperture ring, wider. I'm not saying it's better, I'm saying why someone would pick this one instead.
@@jimmybgoode-ch yea, Internal focus is a good one.
$400 if you buy the camera with the kit lens!
So, this is the least amount of effort they could have put in, it is the minimum amount of quality they cpuld have gotten away with, but they charge like it's the best thing since sliced bread? Fuji has completely lost their minds, but luckily for them so have their customers. People that accept their AF performance for so long will also accept this lens I guess.
Sigma 18-50 still better way to go
thank You for the review.
this is around 200$ lens. i really don't agree this is a good kit lens, not the best for sure. i would take 16-80 over this any time.
talking about fujinon - my top 3 lenses don't have fujinon in them anymore.
Very friendly review… Fujifilm has lost the plot. 799€ in Germany, for a lens with so many optical flaws. For years now: not a single relevant new prime lens or noisy and slow focusing lenses like the 56/1.2 WR, more than 10 years without any updates for standard zooms like the 50-140/2.8 or the 16-55/2.8.
The price is far, far lower when it's bought alongside a camera. But you are correct in that the stand alone price is too high
a new 16-55 is rumored to be coming soon. No news on 50-140.
Yes, it feels like a downgrade even to the dated 18-55 f/2.8-4 and the 16-55 f/2.8 is so much bigger/heavier than much faster/better/cheaper full frame equivalents, the video AF is also still leaves a lot to be desired, even on the newest bodies/firmwares. I've lost all hope with Fuji and switched to Sony recently. It was a pain to sell all my Fuji lenses but it was well worth it in the end.
What are you smoking? The new line of 1.4 primes (18, 23, 33) came out some 3 years ago. XF30, XF56 WR, XF8 are all 1-2 years old. A XF500/5.6 is rumoured to be announced soon. XF90 is still eye-puncturing sharp despite being old. What exactly needs updating?
16-55 update is already announced, but neither that nor the 50-140 are over 10 years old as you claim.
I reckon fuji takes pride in their old primes, which do indeed still deliver. I just wish they'd update them all with weather sealing and silent focus motors. They're not laser sharp, but they have their own character. If precise sharpness is preferred over "character" I'd suggest Sony.
Great video! 🫣😱😱😱🫣 in my opinion this is a horrible lens that demands being used at no less than f5.6. For $400.00 the quality should be way better (in this economy). I rather buy a manual lens or even spend 200 more on other lens. Fuji is again telling us that they don’t like zoom lenses, they are all about primes. Thank for this great informative video, as always top shelf 🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡! Blessings to you 🙏🏼.
Sorry but this a backward step from Fuji, made it darker and the long end, took away the switches, made focus breathing worse and removed OIS, OIS combined with IBIS gives you a lot better stabilization when shooting video, overpriced and a good 2nd hand XF18-55 f2.8-f4 is just a better all around small mid range zoom in terms of what your getting for the money.. Sharpness isn't everything when it comes to a lens.
Perhaps a bad copy of this Lens?
All I see is moaning 😂 if you’re so upset about anything that Fuji is producing, maybe take a second look at another brand and think about what you actually want from your kit instead of looking at the constant flaws.
jesus christ, 700 pounds? ridiculous! i'm gonna stick with my 18-55 then.
This level of optical quality would have been good about 10 years ago! Just my opinion, but it’s a no from me.
For $700 price tag it looks like an awful lens. If purchased as a kit it's just ok. Fujifilm is starting to loose its way with quality, firmware and pricing. With Nikon making more affordable full frame cameras Fujifilm could start loosing some of there fanboys. Thank you for your review, I'm surprised you recommended but you did not say highly and that says a lot.
5:58 case closed.
First!
Christopher, how can you recommend that piece of shit, do you realise that fujifilm ask £700.00 for that lens.🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Its a kit lens. Nobody will purchase that lens for the stand alone price. Same for the old 18-55.
I /don't/ recommend it for its standalone price. But I DO recommended for its /much/ lower price as part of a kit with a camera :-)
Wow, I’m not usually harsh about sharpness but that wide angle is atrocious.
Seriously? "The lens comes recommended "?? After that review? Do I detect a hint of bias? Unlike you to sugar coat a lemon.
Same question.