16-55 f 2.8 is my main lens, it is worth every penny spended on it, build quality, sharpness, AF based on linear motor, its not cheap but it is a beast, one of the few Red Badge lenses (top quality)from Fuji.
@@jedemerichjumawan2203 It's as fast as 18-55 if not faster, but it's so fast it's not organic. If I were to do videography, I would look elsewhere. Viltroc focusing is too robotic.
Great video as always! For studio use, I keep the 16-55 on my T4. But when I am out and about, the 18-55 is so much more manageable. I just lock in at F4 with auto ISO and I’m off an running 🏃♂️…
I drag the 16-55 with me everywhere. She lives on a tripod. I do prefer prime lenses, but I sold my 23mm and 16mm as soon as I heard about the new 23mm and 18mm coming out. It's really streamlined my shooting process, in which I juggle at least three different camera systems at any given time. Much gratitude for a little simplification! Images are nearly on par with prime
Thanks for the comparison for video purposes. I have the X-S10 with IBIS and the 16-55mm and the combination is golden for stills and landscape photography. Had the choice of going for a combo with the kit-lens or the body and a lens of my choice. The reviews for the 16-55mm are always praising and that made me spent a bit more for the lens but is proven to be a grand choice so far. Even a long day carrying this around with a tripod, filters, snacks/water etc. feels manageable and not cumbersome at all! Thanks again and looking forward to more of your own topics of interest instead of the comparison videos!
Great review... I have had both of these lenses... and we kept the 18-55 for out X-T20 walk about family camera... I traded in the 16-55 for the 16-80... the video wobble was not an issue for me because I do not do video... and the 16-80 works wonderfully for me on my cameras... and as a fixed f4 and WR and lighter than the 16-55 made it attractive to me...
Thanks for that comparison Chris. I am using 18-55 together with my Fuji X-S10 and I have to agree that it is a very good lens. 16-55 is too expensive for me but maybe in the future...
Thanks Chris - I use the 18-55 primarily for stills but watched the entire video (no games for me). I love that lens and appreciate the comparison greatly since I always "wonder" about that 16. No more - I am good. Only problem is that the 18 is so dog gone flexible, that I over rely on it and do not jump to my other lens. Again Tks.
Good video as always! However, I disagree with the statement that the 16-55 f2.8 is like four primes. That would be very slow primes, I can only think of the 16 f2.8 and 27 f2.8. All other primes are faster and deliver something else. I would choose the 18-55 plus a couple of fast primes over the 16-55 any day. Much more versatile and lighter on the camera.
Great review as usual. I am not a videomaker at all. I own the 18-55 as "kit lens" but, for quality and versatility in still, the 16-55 is my dream. I however think that for amatorial purposes is quite stupid investing so much money in it (I also own 16 1.4 and 35 1.4) ... but sometimes we ARE stupid.
Brilliant as always. The problem with my 18 - 55 is zoom creep. I do lots with the tripod filming smaller objects on the bench and the zoom creep is annoying to say the least.
Thank you for another awesome tutorial/review. I've been following your work awhile after acquiring my fujifilm x-t3. And your channel has provided me me with a great deal of info to navigate fujifilm's world of things photography. I'm about to commence recording my youtube videos with my x-t3 and needed to decide between the fujifilm 18-55mm f2.8 and the viltrox 85mm f1.4. Both of which I owned. So given you concussion I'll give the fujifilm 18-55mm a shot. Thanks a million!
The OIS on the 18-55 can't be overstated in importance for video, even with the x-t4. And if you buy them as a kit like I did, it's quite a bit cheaper.
I haven't noticed better stabilization performance on the 18-55 compared to the 16-55, both on the X-T4. I sold my 18-55 when I bought the X-T4 because of that.
@@creativepicnl that’s interesting, I thought I’d notice a huge difference but it’s been imperceptible to me. I do keep my camera in a cage with an extended grip so perhaps that helps?
@@thomasemory4352 Could be, yes. When zoomed in I have been noticing quite the reduce in micro shakes without losing a significant amount of sharpness. Also on slow shutter I’ve been seeing quite some stable shots.
I have the 16-80mm now and miss my 18-55mm sometimes for the size and weight and that f2.8 @18. But the 16-80mm is WR and does have pretty good auto focus now!
A bit late but this is correct. All the hate on the 16-80 was based on its initial performance but at the moment, the 16-80 is superior than the 18-55 in every way, except maybe size and weight.
Really nice comparison and review! Much more insightful than so many others who recite specs without supporting any real examples. Not that it's necessary, but is greatly appreciated. Again, excellent job! I'll be using it with my still tried and true X-T1 ; )
Hey there! I recently got my hands on the Fujifilm X-H2S, mainly for video purposes. After going through your videos, I'm still a little unsure about which lens to go for. The great news is that being in the military, I can grab these lenses at a sweet discounted price without any tax. You mentioned the 18-55 kit lens as a solid starting point with minimal compromises for video. I'd love to hear your take on which lens delivers the best quality, strikes the right balance in terms of specs for video, and ultimately offers the best bang for the buck. I'm considering three options: the 18-55 kit lens priced at $690, the 18-120 f4 PZ priced at $850, and the 18-135 f3.5 priced at $800. Thank you so much for your insights!
Both great, I prefer the 16-55 with Xt4, I use with rcs2 and everything is good and stable. The other one with smaller camera as xs-10 is a game changer
9:26 Missed opportunity by not removing the digital shake on the "18-55" title. 😆 Edit: Great video Chris! I absolutely adore my 18-55 lens, so I'm glad to see it outperforms the 16 for video.
Hi Chris, always thanks for your great videos. You said you used XT-3 for a majority of your testing while you were showing us XT-4 😂 And there's a glitch at 10:41, you should probably double check your video when you upload on YT. I'm just saying these for you to keep in mind, not to criticise. They're minor issues that won't make your video bad 😎
Thanks for the comparison. I have never used or even considered the 18-55mm f/2.8 to f/4 Fuji zoom because I prefer constant aperture zoom lenses and I need the extra light gathering at the longer focal lengths. I purchased the 16-55mm f/2.8 Fuji zoom as a backup to my fast 16, 23, and 56mm prime lenses. I also like to pair my 16-55 weather resistant zoom with my weather resistant Fuji body to shoot landscapes in bad weather. When I shoot video of operatic and dance performances on stage, I like to pair my 16-55 with a 50-140mm f/2.8 Fuji zoom.
Great comparison! Got the 18-55 and I love it! Weight, size and stabilization in combination with X-S10 is perfect for traveling and video. Also F4 on the long end doesn’t bother me - Still enough bokeh on 55mm imo. Buuuuut I would love to have 16mm on the short end. Same lens, just as 16-50 F2.8-4 would be perfect. Looking forward to the tamron 11-22 f2.8. But I doubt the stabilization will be as good as on native lenses.
Thank you! I'm thinking of holding on to the 18-55 till Sigma releases their 18-50 f/2.8 prime. The 16-55 is definitely more versatile on both ends, but the weight kills me
Your final comments are exactly what makes me keep the 18-55mm. In addition I am traveling a lot and it's size and weight are just amazing. The race to sharpness is great but most people won't even notice any difference. I think today's lens from any makers are very good. Excellent is great but what for if you only post on Instagram?!?!
I use the 16-55 on an XT4 for video with the Zhiyun Weebil S gimbal and it seems to handle the weight just fine. I can't comment about long term wear and tear on the gimbal motors as I haven't used it for long periods, but so far, no problem
Great comparison. Should have given the 18-55 a consideration. But i am happy with the 16-80mm for 500,- as kit. I need the extra range quite often with kids. You should give it another try since its weak point zooming while recording doesn't work out to well on these two testet lenses too?
I use the 10-24 and 16-80 for video with zero issues on an XT-3, granted i manually focus for videos 90% of time but had zero issues when i used autofocus Image quality is less of a concern on a lens for Video, as at 25/30 FPS slight differences are not noticed, good enough is all that is really required
Hi Andrew. Do you use the 10-24 at the wide side of the focal range for video with movements? If so, is there anything in the way of distortion that you notice? I ask because I use an X-T3 and X-S10 for real estate video paired with a Samyang 12mm f2.0 as my main lens. But I'm getting increasingly annoyed with the distortion and was hoping a native Fujifilm lens might work better for my needs.
@@milesian1 Most of my video work is on a tripod with a fluid head, at the wide end you get optical distortion (rooms look bigger, walls further away etc) I used the lens extensively to video groups of dancers over last summer with manual focus (which is easy on a 10-24 at F/4 or F/5.6 as their is several meters of acceptable focus). My recommendation would be to rent one for the weekend/3 days (I was using the original 10-24) in the UK you can rent from Fujifilm themselves for free, i don't know about the rest of the world. then you can see if it will work for you
Wow, thank you so much for the video.. I asked this question on your last live stream. Buying the 16-55mm for my second camera for my studio work since I already own the 18-55mm it would be nice to add a different lens to my setup instead of buying the same lens again. Also digging the image quality.
I have both, bt in my head I just think of the 18-55 as an f4 lens. I get giddy when I shoot at 18, and surprise I can shoot at 2.8! Great video as always!
Another well-done review for video lenses! I have the 16-55mm lens but only shoot stills; in that regard, I believe you get what you pay for when sharpness is key. My preferred lens for the last couple of years is the macro 80mm. But, you have inspired me to get out and use my zoom lens this spring. One day, if I find the right video, I might even learn how to shoot a video; it's on the bucket list! Thanks for your hard work!
Why does the histogram and exposure compensation both drop / both shift left when both lenses zoomed in at your desk (both went to nearly -2) ?....if the fixed 2.8 stays that way through the zoom range, how come the camera reads that you've lost light, just as much light loss at the smaller aperture lens? So confused by this - watched the XT-# monitor like three times to make sure I saw it correctly...
Gee, talk about good timing. I’m stuck. I have the 16mm f1.4 but I was giving serious thought to selling it for the 16-55 mostly because I like the wide angle and the constant aperture throughout the telephoto range. But I love love love the 16 f1.4 for its stunning bokeh and sharpness. But now working it out watching you, I’m going to keep the 16 and get the 18-55. For the money, just an all-around better value and shoot, I was only thinking about the 16-55 primarily for travel with family. Thanks!
Upon purchasing the XT4 last year I really struggled on which lens to get with it. I’m a photographer so my gut went with the 16-55 with no any hesitation BUT: the whole idea for this camera was to shoot video and a little bit of photography with it on my travels. Instead of lugging my giant Canon 5DM4 with me for photo and a go-pro for video I went for a different approach with my Fuji use case. The 18-55 is so much more compact and since it’s not intended for pro photography, the 18-55 would seem to be the go-to for me. Just to be clear: I’m not a pro videographer. I do love to play around with video. At first I went with the 16-55 when ordering the camera but I switched it to the 18-55 simply because of the stabilization and it being a very compact lens. Since I would be doing a lot of handheld video I really had to rely on the OIS and IBIS. The stabilization does require some steady hands but man, it works like a charm! I also learned that I hardly zoom during filming so the variable aperture wouldn’t be that big of an issue for me. From a photography standpoint I REALLY do not recommend a variable aperture. Instead, I got a Speedbooster for my Canon L and a portrait prime lens for my allround travel photography. To this day I’m very happy that I went for the 18-55. It’s a great lens, performs quite well and I really love the Fuji color profiles. From being a Canon user all these years, the Fuji has been a very creative addition to my gear.
I have both lenses as well as others. I don't really do video but if I did I'd use the 18-55 for the OIS. But the 16-55 is just better in every other regard.
Would be very interesting to see a comparison of the upcomming sigma zoom for fuji vs the 16-55.. as the pricedifference would probably favor the sigma - but what about image quality/autofocus and so fourth,
Thank you for the great comparison of the lenses. I recently purchased a Fujifilm XT30 and I'm still learning about it but one of its main uses will be for video. I'm planning to shoot short community stories, documentary style, and at times short films. I want to make sure I have the right lens for this so that it can also be used when I invest on a more powerful Fujifilm camera. I'll also be using EF lenses since I have an old Canon, but right now I've fallen for the Fujifilm! Glad to have found...and the retro style! Thank you again, you have very valuable lessons!
$500 IS a lot of money, true. Chris, you've always spoken favorably about the 18-55 lens, but I love my 16-55 for two primary reasons, and you touched on both in your narrative. I've never been a fan of variable aperture lenses (a big deal for me) and I like the fact that the 16-55 is WR. Those two items made the $500 expense worth it to me. Always enjoy your vlogs, but on this one I'll stick with my 16-55.
Great video. I had the 18-55 but “downgraded” to the 15-45 xc lens. Build what is a downgrade, but in image quality I see NO lost in image quality. The benefits of having a wide field of view and the minimal focus distance of the xc lens is a HUGE PRO for me. I haven’t looked back on the xf 18-55. I actually have a comparison video in my channel of these two lenses. (Shameless plug!) thanks anyways for the great comparison.
For me the QC of the XC lenses is really hit and miss. I've had 2 copies of the 15-45mm, first was great up until around 30mm and then got rather soft, 2nd was average across the RHS of the image
Great video man. Have you ever thought about talking about the slr magic cine primes for video? I use them for short films and documentary work with my xt4 and they work well for me. Do you have any thoughts on them?
I wish Fuji would finally resolve their exposure jumping when zoomig. In video it is incredibly noticeable and at times very quite hard to correct in post.
@@THEJOKEYJOKER 18-55 is just built better, metal mount, aperture ring... 15-45 have a plastic mount and powerzoom, but that 15mm makes a big difference and is more useful than 18mm. I think they have similar image quality
Thanks for the great video! What are your thoughts on the XC 16-50mm OIS II? This is a great alternative to the 18-55mm. I feel it's comparable to the 18-55mm and cheaper as well. Maybe you can review some of the Fuji XC lenses in the future?
Better late than never The 16-50 i believe use a similar af motor and has a similar-ish picture quality to the 18-55 The xc 35 is a plastic xf 35 The 50-230 is a plastic 55-200 And the 15-45 is one of the unique one , retaining the 18-55 af with a bit better quality and same ois
Hi Chris, good suggestions. However I would like to ask you to create new contents on the video…side. There’s still a lot of rooms to discuss on it. Some questions: ok about these two lenses…What about the 80mm, what about the 50-140 in video shooting ? What about third party lenses ? For example..Sigma art series, What about the Tamron, like the 17-70 for fuji…What about Vintage FD Canon manual lenses ? As you see there’s still a lot to say. You are our Guru on Fuji…hope you can help on it as well. Thx. Regars from Italy 😊
That's funny...at 9:30 when you said the winner for lens stabilization was the 18-55 and held both lenses up...the labels under each lens was for the other lens. Great comparison and really like the practical real life use approach. Forgive a stupid question...is lens focus-breathing a software-fixable or a hardware-limited problem?
Wish you’d reconsider and revisit your test of the 16-80. It would be a much more relevant apples-to-apples comparison against the 16-55 than the variable aperture 18-55. I know of many people, myself included, who either own or are contemplating buying the 16-80, who have nagging questions about whether the image quality of the 16-55 is so significantly superior as to merit buying that much more expensive and much larger lens instead. I love my 16-80: I find it’s IQ to be really good, so much so that it is not meaningfully inferior even to that of my 16 1.4 prime against which I compared it at 16 (interestingly, it is a tad wider at 16 than the prime is). The big problem for me With the 16-55 is that it has no OIS. For a lens that size, I don’t believe that its 2.8 aperture would compensate since I have an unstabilized XT-3. I mostly shoot hand held, no tripod. This is why I bought the 16-80, as it seems to be the perfect travel lens. But since I like to print my photos, and display them, in sizes up to 20 x 24, if the 16-55 IQ is so significantly better as to show in prints, then I might consider trading in the 16-80 and getting the 16-55, and just finding a way to deal with the lack of OIS. So I really wish you’d find another 16-80, with the latest firmware, and test it out against the 16 to 55. Many more people would find that comparison of greater interest then your comparison of it with the 18 to 55.
I have the 16 - 80 f4 lens and I love it. It's truly a one lens army when you're going to be in a mixed environment. The dof difference between 2.8 and 4 on an app-s format is negligble. And if dof is a big part of anyones photography they shouldn't be using app-c anyway. You won't regret this lens.
Yannis, is it true you are not interested in video work? Your comments seem to be related to still photography. Just wanted to clarify, as the topic of this video separates still photography and video clearly. For video, the 16-80 is also fairly large and heavy, but balances well on the X-T bodies; on the X-S10 it's a little top heavy.
Zooming is rarely a good look in cinema - a cut between different focal lengths is most common so variable aperture is not such a big deal ( apart from Roy Scheider on the beach in Jaws )
Cheers for the video Chris, I don't think the result will be a surprise to anyone who's seen you talk about this so called 'kit lens' before. Gotta ask, do you have any plans on continuing your NAS series, or maybe a beginners guide to the new kid on the block, Davinci Resolve?
Both yes. NAS we're stuck in a communication holding pattern with their support on something. I need to hit them up today about this. Resolve, I need to actually carve out time to edit Fuji film ETERNA on that one before I'd feel 100% comfortable teaching it. I've been using FCPX for years.
Hi there! First I wanted to say thank you for putting out such great content! I have binged all your videos and love my Fujifilm camera (which I own thanks to getting stoked about them through your channel!). I have a quick question, since you are so honest with your opinions: what are your thoughts on the more inexpensive VND filters that we can get online? I don't want to spend a ton on them, but wanted to purchase one before my next vacation (I'll be shooting a lot outdoors). Let me know!
I work with both lenses for still and video. And you are right. The 18-55 is just an awesome kit lens. My working horse..... I would go for the MK18-55mm T2.9 if ever I would have to go full into video..... this lens is a beast. I love your video,- but you did put the scores in the wrong places compared to how you show the lenses in you hand.... just me. OCD
I have both and find the image quality comparable, especially stopped down to F8, You can’t tell them apart at 1:1. I suggest your 18-55 may be a dud copy if it’s noticeably not as sharp.
I questioned the copy too. Most objective reviews acknowledge very little difference in IQ except wide open at the wide end. In fact, some show the 18-55 to be better at 5.6 and 8 from 23-55mm. I love this channel but I'm a bit dubious of this comparison.
please make a video head-to-head comparison manual macro lenses (cheap) like 7Artisans vs TTArtisans vs Meike vs Laowa. and then another video for macro Fujifilm lenses 60mm vs 80mm. :D
Hey Chris- I’ve been keeping up to date with updates for my xs-10 and 16-80 set up and in my experience the focus wobble issue has not been fixed. Similar to your video experience, when zooming from say 16-50 or anywhere else, it looses focus immediately. Perfectly fine for stills, but I’m better off with an adapted manual focus nikon glass for video. Love the cam and your vids, c’mon _Fujifilm_ let’s get it together!
You know everything about the fantastic X-t4, try to answer this question if you want. I use the zoom 18-55 f2.8-4 for video (great lens), but why if I set the aperture to 4, the iso fixed to 640 and the shutter to 50 (fps 25), if I use the zoom in and out the image darkens and lightens?
Two years into using the X-T4 with the 16-55 as my ONLY lens, primarily for landscape stills, other outdoors, and videos of the grandkids, I'm ready to invest in a second lens. Here's the challenge. I would like to handle both wider angle landscapes, and better long range nature closeups. I know this is about video, but if you have recommendations for stills-first, video second lens, it would be much appreciated. Thanks Chris!
I need this video but for something longer. preferably something that includes third party lenses, even adapted ones, since I do have a fringer pro 2. what I don't like about fuji's is they all seem to have that exposure stepping, which wouldn't be good for filming weddings and plays. I want the sigma 50-100, but man, that breathing turns me off. not to mention its so big.
I really think the 16-80mm should have been included in this comparison. As far as I can tell the wobble issue that you identified in your review is now fixed by firmware.
I wish I could add a gasket to the 18-55. I love the lens, but the lack of WR, I’m always a bit weary when I use it. I do have the 16-55 as well and love it, but sometimes I want to lighten my load and I’m fine losing out on 2mm on the wide angle side. For me, it comes down to the weather resistance.
It's kind of a deal breaker that the 16-55 doesn't have OIS. That's the most important thing here for me. Especially with the gimbal problem mentioned. Very few of the Fuji X cameras have in-camera stabilization.
16-55 f 2.8 is my main lens, it is worth every penny spended on it, build quality, sharpness, AF based on linear motor, its not cheap but it is a beast, one of the few Red Badge lenses (top quality)from Fuji.
Love my 16-55.
It's the sharpest zoom I've ever used and better than some primes.
18-55mm is the best Fuji Lens for its size and value. Not to mention it has ois. I only go out with Viltrox 23mm and Fuji 18-55mm nowadays.
Hows the autofocus on the viltrox for video if you dont mind me asking
@@jedemerichjumawan2203 It's as fast as 18-55 if not faster, but it's so fast it's not organic. If I were to do videography, I would look elsewhere. Viltroc focusing is too robotic.
These are seriously the best videos. I don’t think any other channel does it better.
Great video as always! For studio use, I keep the 16-55 on my T4. But when I am out and about, the 18-55 is so much more manageable. I just lock in at F4 with auto ISO and I’m off an running 🏃♂️…
I drag the 16-55 with me everywhere. She lives on a tripod. I do prefer prime lenses, but I sold my 23mm and 16mm as soon as I heard about the new 23mm and 18mm coming out. It's really streamlined my shooting process, in which I juggle at least three different camera systems at any given time. Much gratitude for a little simplification! Images are nearly on par with prime
Thanks for the comparison for video purposes.
I have the X-S10 with IBIS and the 16-55mm and the combination is golden for stills and landscape photography. Had the choice of going for a combo with the kit-lens or the body and a lens of my choice. The reviews for the 16-55mm are always praising and that made me spent a bit more for the lens but is proven to be a grand choice so far.
Even a long day carrying this around with a tripod, filters, snacks/water etc. feels manageable and not cumbersome at all!
Thanks again and looking forward to more of your own topics of interest instead of the comparison videos!
Great review... I have had both of these lenses... and we kept the 18-55 for out X-T20 walk about family camera... I traded in the 16-55 for the 16-80... the video wobble was not an issue for me because I do not do video... and the 16-80 works wonderfully for me on my cameras... and as a fixed f4 and WR and lighter than the 16-55 made it attractive to me...
Thanks for that comparison Chris. I am using 18-55 together with my Fuji X-S10 and I have to agree that it is a very good lens. 16-55 is too expensive for me but maybe in the future...
Thanks Chris - I use the 18-55 primarily for stills but watched the entire video (no games for me). I love that lens and appreciate the comparison greatly since I always "wonder" about that 16. No more - I am good. Only problem is that the 18 is so dog gone flexible, that I over rely on it and do not jump to my other lens. Again Tks.
Good video as always! However, I disagree with the statement that the 16-55 f2.8 is like four primes. That would be very slow primes, I can only think of the 16 f2.8 and 27 f2.8. All other primes are faster and deliver something else. I would choose the 18-55 plus a couple of fast primes over the 16-55 any day. Much more versatile and lighter on the camera.
Great review as usual. I am not a videomaker at all. I own the 18-55 as "kit lens" but, for quality and versatility in still, the 16-55 is my dream. I however think that for amatorial purposes is quite stupid investing so much money in it (I also own 16 1.4 and 35 1.4) ... but sometimes we ARE stupid.
I was once stupid to buy the 16-55 and dumb to sell it... now I will have to be twice the fool and buy it again.
To be fair OIS count double! It’s urgent that Fuji releases a version 2 of the 16-55mm with OIS.
Thanks for the video Chris!
That's right, thank you!
You know I like the 15 to 45mm .the extra 1mm is so important when it comes to vlogging
That lens is just so good at the wide end. I treat it as a 15mm prime and just forget about the power zoom.
Thanks for the video and also Tetris. Great work as always.
Brilliant as always. The problem with my 18 - 55 is zoom creep. I do lots with the tripod filming smaller objects on the bench and the zoom creep is annoying to say the least.
Thank you for another awesome tutorial/review. I've been following your work awhile after acquiring my fujifilm x-t3. And your channel has provided me me with a great deal of info to navigate fujifilm's world of things photography. I'm about to commence recording my youtube videos with my x-t3 and needed to decide between the fujifilm 18-55mm f2.8 and the viltrox 85mm f1.4. Both of which I owned. So given you concussion I'll give the fujifilm 18-55mm a shot. Thanks a million!
The OIS on the 18-55 can't be overstated in importance for video, even with the x-t4. And if you buy them as a kit like I did, it's quite a bit cheaper.
I haven't noticed better stabilization performance on the 18-55 compared to the 16-55, both on the X-T4. I sold my 18-55 when I bought the X-T4 because of that.
@@GabrielFFontes I really did notice a stabilization difference. I’ve compared the 2 and the OIS does bring quite the stability when hand held.
@@creativepicnl that’s interesting, I thought I’d notice a huge difference but it’s been imperceptible to me. I do keep my camera in a cage with an extended grip so perhaps that helps?
@@thomasemory4352 Could be, yes. When zoomed in I have been noticing quite the reduce in micro shakes without losing a significant amount of sharpness. Also on slow shutter I’ve been seeing quite some stable shots.
I have the 16-80mm now and miss my 18-55mm sometimes for the size and weight and that f2.8 @18. But the 16-80mm is WR and does have pretty good auto focus now!
A bit late but this is correct. All the hate on the 16-80 was based on its initial performance but at the moment, the 16-80 is superior than the 18-55 in every way, except maybe size and weight.
Thanks for the insightful lens comparison 👍👍👍. I bought the 18-55 with the X-T3 as a kit lens and am very happy with this combination.
Really nice comparison and review! Much more insightful than so many others who recite specs without supporting any real examples. Not that it's necessary, but is greatly appreciated. Again, excellent job! I'll be using it with my still tried and true X-T1 ; )
Hey there! I recently got my hands on the Fujifilm X-H2S, mainly for video purposes. After going through your videos, I'm still a little unsure about which lens to go for. The great news is that being in the military, I can grab these lenses at a sweet discounted price without any tax. You mentioned the 18-55 kit lens as a solid starting point with minimal compromises for video. I'd love to hear your take on which lens delivers the best quality, strikes the right balance in terms of specs for video, and ultimately offers the best bang for the buck. I'm considering three options: the 18-55 kit lens priced at $690, the 18-120 f4 PZ priced at $850, and the 18-135 f3.5 priced at $800. Thank you so much for your insights!
Both great, I prefer the 16-55 with Xt4, I use with rcs2 and everything is good and stable. The other one with smaller camera as xs-10 is a game changer
Amazing video , thanks . I use 18-55 with xs10. I love this combo !
Thanks Chris! Love your take on these two lenses. I won at Tetris by the way.
LOL, awesome!!!
9:26 Missed opportunity by not removing the digital shake on the "18-55" title. 😆
Edit: Great video Chris! I absolutely adore my 18-55 lens, so I'm glad to see it outperforms the 16 for video.
Hi Chris, always thanks for your great videos. You said you used XT-3 for a majority of your testing while you were showing us XT-4 😂 And there's a glitch at 10:41, you should probably double check your video when you upload on YT. I'm just saying these for you to keep in mind, not to criticise. They're minor issues that won't make your video bad 😎
Thanks for the comparison. I have never used or even considered the 18-55mm f/2.8 to f/4 Fuji zoom because I prefer constant aperture zoom lenses and I need the extra light gathering at the longer focal lengths.
I purchased the 16-55mm f/2.8 Fuji zoom as a backup to my fast 16, 23, and 56mm prime lenses.
I also like to pair my 16-55 weather resistant zoom with my weather resistant Fuji body to shoot landscapes in bad weather.
When I shoot video of operatic and dance performances on stage, I like to pair my 16-55 with a 50-140mm f/2.8 Fuji zoom.
Great comparison! Got the 18-55 and I love it! Weight, size and stabilization in combination with X-S10 is perfect for traveling and video. Also F4 on the long end doesn’t bother me - Still enough bokeh on 55mm imo.
Buuuuut I would love to have 16mm on the short end. Same lens, just as 16-50 F2.8-4 would be perfect.
Looking forward to the tamron 11-22 f2.8. But I doubt the stabilization will be as good as on native lenses.
Thank you! I'm thinking of holding on to the 18-55 till Sigma releases their 18-50 f/2.8 prime. The 16-55 is definitely more versatile on both ends, but the weight kills me
I picked up the 16-55 and love it for stills. Thank you Chris for a great video!
Your final comments are exactly what makes me keep the 18-55mm. In addition I am traveling a lot and it's size and weight are just amazing.
The race to sharpness is great but most people won't even notice any difference. I think today's lens from any makers are very good. Excellent is great but what for if you only post on Instagram?!?!
I use the 16-55 on an XT4 for video with the Zhiyun Weebil S gimbal and it seems to handle the weight just fine. I can't comment about long term wear and tear on the gimbal motors as I haven't used it for long periods, but so far, no problem
the other factor to add to the advantage on price, is you can find the 18-55 used for a very reasonable amount too.
Really useful comparison and loved the Tetris gag!
Great comparison. Should have given the 18-55 a consideration. But i am happy with the 16-80mm for 500,- as kit. I need the extra range quite often with kids. You should give it another try since its weak point zooming while recording doesn't work out to well on these two testet lenses too?
Agreed, no Fuji lens can zoom while recording without serious exposure issues in the first place
I use the 10-24 and 16-80 for video with zero issues on an XT-3, granted i manually focus for videos 90% of time but had zero issues when i used autofocus
Image quality is less of a concern on a lens for Video, as at 25/30 FPS slight differences are not noticed, good enough is all that is really required
Hi Andrew. Do you use the 10-24 at the wide side of the focal range for video with movements? If so, is there anything in the way of distortion that you notice? I ask because I use an X-T3 and X-S10 for real estate video paired with a Samyang 12mm f2.0 as my main lens. But I'm getting increasingly annoyed with the distortion and was hoping a native Fujifilm lens might work better for my needs.
@@milesian1 Most of my video work is on a tripod with a fluid head, at the wide end you get optical distortion (rooms look bigger, walls further away etc) I used the lens extensively to video groups of dancers over last summer with manual focus (which is easy on a 10-24 at F/4 or F/5.6 as their is several meters of acceptable focus).
My recommendation would be to rent one for the weekend/3 days (I was using the original 10-24) in the UK you can rent from Fujifilm themselves for free, i don't know about the rest of the world. then you can see if it will work for you
Wow, thank you so much for the video.. I asked this question on your last live stream. Buying the 16-55mm for my second camera for my studio work since I already own the 18-55mm it would be nice to add a different lens to my setup instead of buying the same lens again. Also digging the image quality.
I have both, bt in my head I just think of the 18-55 as an f4 lens. I get giddy when I shoot at 18, and surprise I can shoot at 2.8! Great video as always!
Thanks for this! I’ve been on the fence.
Another well-done review for video lenses! I have the 16-55mm lens but only shoot stills; in that regard, I believe you get what you pay for when sharpness is key. My preferred lens for the last couple of years is the macro 80mm. But, you have inspired me to get out and use my zoom lens this spring. One day, if I find the right video, I might even learn how to shoot a video; it's on the bucket list! Thanks for your hard work!
Why does the histogram and exposure compensation both drop / both shift left when both lenses zoomed in at your desk (both went to nearly -2) ?....if the fixed 2.8 stays that way through the zoom range, how come the camera reads that you've lost light, just as much light loss at the smaller aperture lens? So confused by this - watched the XT-# monitor like three times to make sure I saw it correctly...
Gee, talk about good timing. I’m stuck. I have the 16mm f1.4 but I was giving serious thought to selling it for the 16-55 mostly because I like the wide angle and the constant aperture throughout the telephoto range. But I love love love the 16 f1.4 for its stunning bokeh and sharpness. But now working it out watching you, I’m going to keep the 16 and get the 18-55. For the money, just an all-around better value and shoot, I was only thinking about the 16-55 primarily for travel with family. Thanks!
Thanks man for make it easier for my decision with these two.
Upon purchasing the XT4 last year I really struggled on which lens to get with it. I’m a photographer so my gut went with the 16-55 with no any hesitation BUT: the whole idea for this camera was to shoot video and a little bit of photography with it on my travels. Instead of lugging my giant Canon 5DM4 with me for photo and a go-pro for video I went for a different approach with my Fuji use case. The 18-55 is so much more compact and since it’s not intended for pro photography, the 18-55 would seem to be the go-to for me.
Just to be clear: I’m not a pro videographer. I do love to play around with video. At first I went with the 16-55 when ordering the camera but I switched it to the 18-55 simply because of the stabilization and it being a very compact lens. Since I would be doing a lot of handheld video I really had to rely on the OIS and IBIS. The stabilization does require some steady hands but man, it works like a charm! I also learned that I hardly zoom during filming so the variable aperture wouldn’t be that big of an issue for me. From a photography standpoint I REALLY do not recommend a variable aperture. Instead, I got a Speedbooster for my Canon L and a portrait prime lens for my allround travel photography.
To this day I’m very happy that I went for the 18-55. It’s a great lens, performs quite well and I really love the Fuji color profiles. From being a Canon user all these years, the Fuji has been a very creative addition to my gear.
I have both lenses as well as others. I don't really do video but if I did I'd use the 18-55 for the OIS. But the 16-55 is just better in every other regard.
Great video, 18-55 was my only lens for over a year and did the job 90% of the time. It's now just used for video as I prefer primes for that.
Would be very interesting to see a comparison of the upcomming sigma zoom for fuji vs the 16-55.. as the pricedifference would probably favor the sigma - but what about image quality/autofocus and so fourth,
You have cleared my confusion between two for video purpose.. Thanks a ton 🙏❤️
My pleasure 😊
Thanks for the tetris link. It was great fun.
I using 18 55mm for my Canon T7 lens.
I just love both of these lenses. Thanks for sharing.
Thank you for the great comparison of the lenses. I recently purchased a Fujifilm XT30 and I'm still learning about it but one of its main uses will be for video. I'm planning to shoot short community stories, documentary style, and at times short films. I want to make sure I have the right lens for this so that it can also be used when I invest on a more powerful Fujifilm camera. I'll also be using EF lenses since I have an old Canon, but right now I've fallen for the Fujifilm! Glad to have found...and the retro style! Thank you again, you have very valuable lessons!
Just picked up the same lens. What lens did you end up getting?
@@verynick Hi. I ended up getting the 23mm but I also have the Fringer EF-FX adapter so I can use my Canon lenses 😁
$500 IS a lot of money, true. Chris, you've always spoken favorably about the 18-55 lens, but I love my 16-55 for two primary reasons, and you touched on both in your narrative. I've never been a fan of variable aperture lenses (a big deal for me) and I like the fact that the 16-55 is WR. Those two items made the $500 expense worth it to me. Always enjoy your vlogs, but on this one I'll stick with my 16-55.
I have the 16-55 and it has pushed out my other lenses because it's so good. I can't wait to see how it performs on the x-t5.
Waiting for Fuji 15-45mm review. ;) If possible. Great video!⚡
Thanks a lot, for this video... Best regards, from Brussels, Luc
Great video.
I had the 18-55 but “downgraded” to the 15-45 xc lens. Build what is a downgrade, but in image quality I see NO lost in image quality. The benefits of having a wide field of view and the minimal focus distance of the xc lens is a HUGE PRO for me. I haven’t looked back on the xf 18-55. I actually have a comparison video in my channel of these two lenses. (Shameless plug!) thanks anyways for the great comparison.
me too, the 15-45 is a brilliant little lens. In Europe it can be had for 145€ second hand it is a no brainer.
For me the QC of the XC lenses is really hit and miss. I've had 2 copies of the 15-45mm, first was great up until around 30mm and then got rather soft, 2nd was average across the RHS of the image
Why not include the 18-135mm in the comparison? It overlaps the zoom range, and has WR and OIS.
Great video man. Have you ever thought about talking about the slr magic cine primes for video? I use them for short films and documentary work with my xt4 and they work well for me. Do you have any thoughts on them?
I wish Fuji would finally resolve their exposure jumping when zoomig. In video it is incredibly noticeable and at times very quite hard to correct in post.
41.884 in my first attempt with this online tetris. There is an amazing video doc in youtube about the history of tetris.
I would go with 15-45, I had 18-55 and wasn't impressed with it, 15-45 has more useful focal length for me
I want to upgrade from 15-45 to 18-55 , is there another reason other than focal length ?
@@THEJOKEYJOKER manual focusing
@@THEJOKEYJOKER 18-55 is just built better, metal mount, aperture ring... 15-45 have a plastic mount and powerzoom, but that 15mm makes a big difference and is more useful than 18mm. I think they have similar image quality
Wow.. the tetris link is there 👌
thank you for the review!
Awesome! Thanks for helping me make up my mind on which of the 2 I should buy. ;)
Thanks for the great video! What are your thoughts on the XC 16-50mm OIS II? This is a great alternative to the 18-55mm. I feel it's comparable to the 18-55mm and cheaper as well. Maybe you can review some of the Fuji XC lenses in the future?
Better late than never
The 16-50 i believe use a similar af motor and has a similar-ish picture quality to the 18-55
The xc 35 is a plastic xf 35
The 50-230 is a plastic 55-200
And the 15-45 is one of the unique one , retaining the 18-55 af with a bit better quality and same ois
Hello, your videos are simple the best! Small question, does the OIS only applies to video?
Yes! The comparison that i need!
Hi Chris, good suggestions. However I would like to ask you to create new contents on the video…side. There’s still a lot of rooms to discuss on it. Some questions: ok about these two lenses…What about the 80mm, what about the 50-140 in video shooting ? What about third party lenses ? For example..Sigma art series, What about the Tamron, like the 17-70 for fuji…What about Vintage FD Canon manual lenses ? As you see there’s still a lot to say. You are our Guru on Fuji…hope you can help on it as well. Thx. Regars from Italy 😊
That's funny...at 9:30 when you said the winner for lens stabilization was the 18-55 and held both lenses up...the labels under each lens was for the other lens. Great comparison and really like the practical real life use approach. Forgive a stupid question...is lens focus-breathing a software-fixable or a hardware-limited problem?
Very good! I needed this video.
About a "Venus Optics Laowa 9mm T2.9 Zero-D Cinema Lens"?
I plan to buy this lens.
Thanks and I'm loving the channel.
Wish you’d reconsider and revisit your test of the 16-80. It would be a much more relevant apples-to-apples comparison against the 16-55 than the variable aperture 18-55. I know of many people, myself included, who either own or are contemplating buying the 16-80, who have nagging questions about whether the image quality of the 16-55 is so significantly superior as to merit buying that much more expensive and much larger lens instead. I love my 16-80: I find it’s IQ to be really good, so much so that it is not meaningfully inferior even to that of my 16 1.4 prime against which I compared it at 16 (interestingly, it is a tad wider at 16 than the prime is). The big problem for me With the 16-55 is that it has no OIS. For a lens that size, I don’t believe that its 2.8 aperture would compensate since I have an unstabilized XT-3. I mostly shoot hand held, no tripod. This is why I bought the 16-80, as it seems to be the perfect travel lens. But since I like to print my photos, and display them, in sizes up to 20 x 24, if the 16-55 IQ is so significantly better as to show in prints, then I might consider trading in the 16-80 and getting the 16-55, and just finding a way to deal with the lack of OIS. So I really wish you’d find another 16-80, with the latest firmware, and test it out against the 16 to 55. Many more people would find that comparison of greater interest then your comparison of it with the 18 to 55.
I have the 16 - 80 f4 lens and I love it. It's truly a one lens army when you're going to be in a mixed environment. The dof difference between 2.8 and 4 on an app-s format is negligble. And if dof is a big part of anyones photography they shouldn't be using app-c anyway. You won't regret this lens.
Agree. On it.
Yannis, is it true you are not interested in video work? Your comments seem to be related to still photography. Just wanted to clarify, as the topic of this video separates still photography and video clearly. For video, the 16-80 is also fairly large and heavy, but balances well on the X-T bodies; on the X-S10 it's a little top heavy.
1:58 "i use this fijufilm xt-3 camera " and shows the xt-4 😅 . but great video , very well explained. Thanks!
Zooming is rarely a good look in cinema - a cut between different focal lengths is most common so variable aperture is not such a big deal ( apart from Roy Scheider on the beach in Jaws )
0:00 don't do that ever again! My heart literally skipped a beat. :D :D :D As usual - awesome video.
Cheers for the video Chris, I don't think the result will be a surprise to anyone who's seen you talk about this so called 'kit lens' before.
Gotta ask, do you have any plans on continuing your NAS series, or maybe a beginners guide to the new kid on the block, Davinci Resolve?
Both yes. NAS we're stuck in a communication holding pattern with their support on something. I need to hit them up today about this. Resolve, I need to actually carve out time to edit Fuji film ETERNA on that one before I'd feel 100% comfortable teaching it. I've been using FCPX for years.
Nicely Balanced review, and at the right level for me
This is gold review. Superb🎉🎉
Exactly! Very smart. Thank you!
hello another great movie. The fujifilm 18 135 mm is also a good alternative for video. greetings Gil.
Hi there! First I wanted to say thank you for putting out such great content! I have binged all your videos and love my Fujifilm camera (which I own thanks to getting stoked about them through your channel!).
I have a quick question, since you are so honest with your opinions: what are your thoughts on the more inexpensive VND filters that we can get online? I don't want to spend a ton on them, but wanted to purchase one before my next vacation (I'll be shooting a lot outdoors). Let me know!
I was particularly looking at the K&F ones... if you have any affiliate links, please share! :)
I work with both lenses for still and video. And you are right. The 18-55 is just an awesome kit lens. My working horse..... I would go for the MK18-55mm T2.9 if ever I would have to go full into video..... this lens is a beast. I love your video,- but you did put the scores in the wrong places compared to how you show the lenses in you hand.... just me. OCD
I have both and find the image quality comparable, especially stopped down to F8,
You can’t tell them apart at 1:1. I suggest your 18-55 may be a dud copy if it’s noticeably not as sharp.
at 8:01 the 18-55 image shows a double line which clearly suggests movement during the exposure!
I questioned the copy too. Most objective reviews acknowledge very little difference in IQ except wide open at the wide end. In fact, some show the 18-55 to be better at 5.6 and 8 from 23-55mm. I love this channel but I'm a bit dubious of this comparison.
please make a video head-to-head comparison manual macro lenses (cheap) like 7Artisans vs TTArtisans vs Meike vs Laowa.
and then another video for macro Fujifilm lenses 60mm vs 80mm. :D
Hey Chris- I’ve been keeping up to date with updates for my xs-10 and 16-80 set up and in my experience the focus wobble issue has not been fixed. Similar to your video experience, when zooming from say 16-50 or anywhere else, it looses focus immediately. Perfectly fine for stills, but I’m better off with an adapted manual focus nikon glass for video. Love the cam and your vids, c’mon _Fujifilm_ let’s get it together!
I believe the new 18-120 should fix those issues for you. That is what I am waiting for.
You know everything about the fantastic X-t4, try to answer this question if you want. I use the zoom 18-55 f2.8-4 for video (great lens), but why if I set the aperture to 4, the iso fixed to 640 and the shutter to 50 (fps 25), if I use the zoom in and out the image darkens and lightens?
Awesome video!
How do we get past the water issue with the 18-55mm lens?
Two years into using the X-T4 with the 16-55 as my ONLY lens, primarily for landscape stills, other outdoors, and videos of the grandkids, I'm ready to invest in a second lens. Here's the challenge. I would like to handle both wider angle landscapes, and better long range nature closeups. I know this is about video, but if you have recommendations for stills-first, video second lens, it would be much appreciated. Thanks Chris!
13mm Viltrox for wide and 70-300mm for Tele. Trust me I have them all
I need this video but for something longer. preferably something that includes third party lenses, even adapted ones, since I do have a fringer pro 2. what I don't like about fuji's is they all seem to have that exposure stepping, which wouldn't be good for filming weddings and plays. I want the sigma 50-100, but man, that breathing turns me off. not to mention its so big.
I really think the 16-80mm should have been included in this comparison. As far as I can tell the wobble issue that you identified in your review is now fixed by firmware.
is it really? i am planning to get one
@@azizzbulut Yes I think so. For me the 16-80 is a great all-rounder that I will have on my XT4 most of the time if I only bring my camera.
I wish I could add a gasket to the 18-55. I love the lens, but the lack of WR, I’m always a bit weary when I use it. I do have the 16-55 as well and love it, but sometimes I want to lighten my load and I’m fine losing out on 2mm on the wide angle side.
For me, it comes down to the weather resistance.
It's kind of a deal breaker that the 16-55 doesn't have OIS. That's the most important thing here for me. Especially with the gimbal problem mentioned. Very few of the Fuji X cameras have in-camera stabilization.
I’m looking at getting a used 16-55 for my xt2 just concerned about weight. Currently I have a 35 1.4 and A viltrox 23 1.4
Nice review, Chris.
Thanks!
Great video. What’s the little wheeled thing at 3:19?
I take 18-55 for long distance hiking. Believe it or not but 300grams difference maka a difference when you hike for 30 miles or more.
Hi, have you tried the latest firmware update on 16-55 f2.8 ? They say exposure and focus tracking have been improved
Around 1:57 you say X-T3 camera whilst showing the X-T4. Those mind gremlins are at it again!
Great video - Thanks!!!