Since I do a lot of shooting in low light situations, I purchased the 16mm f/1.4, 23mm f/1.4, and 56mm f/1.2 prime lenses for my Fuji mirrorless. Since I also need a wedding backup kit, I purchased the 16-55mm f/2.8 zoom. When I shoot landscapes, the weather resistant 16-55 is my lens of choice. I pair it with a 12mm f/2.8 Zeiss Touit and an adapted 105mm f/2.8 Nikon macro lens. When I shoot video, the 16-55 is my lens of choice. When I shoot individual portraits, I prefer the 50-140mm f/2.8 or the 56mm f/1.2 Fujinon lenses. I did not understand why until I saw the 55mm center sharpness performance charts in your video. Thank you.
You're doing some wonderfully informative yet succinct reviews. It would be helpful if you would also publish the methodology for the TB scoring system and a more detailed explanation of the lab testing in general so that people are aware of how you come to your results. Looking forward to the rest of the series!
I have thought about sharing my algorithm and how it do my testing. But I worried some wouldn't agree without my weighting behind some values. But in the end how much value I add to each measure is still only my opinion and as such my reviews should not be taken as a hard and fast proof, but more as facts to help people make thier own decision. The graphs though I have mentioned before and will cover in a little more detail in the future videos. Cheers for support.
Great video. Most of my photography is in the mid-range so I have the 16-55 and 16-80. I use both at times and the weight isn't an issue with the 16-55. The 16-80 has a longer reach though.
I have the 16-55 2.8, and 55-140 2.8 and It's a dream set up and I LOVE IT. The 16-55 is perfect for pretty much anything and this with the XT3. For basic Handheld stuff with a small rig cage I can get pretty decent stable footage and just pop it in post and warp it a touch. I traded in my 1DXii and 4 lenses in for the Fuji system and not only did I free up about $4000 after buying into the Fuji system, I freed up so much more space in my camera bag.
Great review and comparisons! For me, it’s easy: if I’m getting paid it’s the 16-55 (plus 10-24 & 50-140 if I need them). If it’s travel, family, or walkaround, 16-80 all the way. They’re both great lenses. I pair them with the H1 & T4.
Great review and my personal experience of this lens fully aligns with your conclusions. It is a beauty but it is a big lens. For my needs I prefer the smaller primes. Thanks for this series of reviews - great stuff and keep them coming!
I use this lens as a photojournalist on my channel along with the fuji xt3 just because I shoot everything from housefires to portraits and video . Weather sealed is primo and can’t live without it . Came from canon , Sony and Leica q-p and Fuji just works . Ps: it’s good to be able to adjust the settings with the camera off as a scene changes
Honestly never thought of that as a perk, being able to change and set settings when the camera is turned off. But now that you've mentioned it I do it all the time at weddings, they can see how it be phenomenally useful for photojournalism. Thank you for sharing.
I love this lens. Its a great all round swiss army knife that u need in your kit for any pro event shooter. I admit it lacks a bit of magic sauce compared to the F1.4 primes especially the 16mm f1.4 and 56mm f1.4 but there are some situations when action happens so fast u just don’t have time not only too change lenses but to switch to a second body. Its Gold in that sense.
Finally it's here! Thanks for this review. It is indeed a great lens but it is too heavy for my own liking. Came from Sony and Canon fullframe and the reason why I wanted to go to Fuji was because of their small and minimal setup they offer. And regarding the video side of things which I asked last week, I think I am gonna stick to the f2 primes instead. Your review made my decision to go with the f2 primes as they are light weight, yet sharp and renders amazing images nonetheless! And I feel primes makes you move your feet and find angles to compose and frame your shot, rather than a zoom lens where you have the ability to stand in one position and have that versatility of focal length and capture moments. Both have their pros and cons and have their own uses. I have been using zoom so I think the primes will push my creativity further :) Thanks and keep up the good work mate!
Oh man there is something so nice about using a prime. For me it unlocks this next level of creativity I love it. Very happy you liked the video man and I very much agree with your comment / views. Cheers for the support.
Great video. Your video definitely helped in my decision to buy the 16-55. Added to my 50-140, this rounds out my kit very well. I love my primes, but the versatility of the zooms just makes my life much easier on my event shoots. I’m curious to see how the 16-55 handles on my gimbal.
Great vid Thomas, very informative. Are you going to do a vid on the XF 18-55 F2.8-4? I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the 'kit' budget beast! Keep up the great work 😎👍
It really did, IBIS for some lenses and content didn't have that big of effect, but for this lenses and for what most people would use this lens for it was like a whole new lens
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography I personally just don't think IS or IBIS is that important for this focal length. Telephoto, yes, but not this one. If you're shooting in the dark you're probably going to need a tripod anyway. Even the professionals who reviewed their use case in the promo for this lens stated they do almost all their work with this lens and didn't miss or need the IS. I've not needed it and idk anyone else that has except videographers who if they're really serious would probably be using a rig anyway.
@@jp2503 I personally would mostly agree with you, but there very much are situations in high end commercial work, portraiture, wedding etc that still make use of a good IS/IBIS in lower light when a tripod just isn't a option. However for landscape and Astro work etc... stabiliser really doesn't help much at the wider field of views like you said, but it does depend on the person and the job. Also in my job I meet plenty of people with unsteady hands either for medical or age related reason who all love photography and buy lens and cameras very much based on every little bit of stabilization performance they can get.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography I know it's not impossible to need it I just think a lot of modern enthusiasts rely too much on it. I'm not talking about you btw. For weddings I think most people use at least a very low powered and diffused speed light in those situations to get highlights on the face in dark places anyways. But for sure there are always instances and I wouldn't NOT want it if it was available. They purposely didn't put it in when designing it though I don't remember exactly why. maybe just the weight and size and price.
If I had the choice between two exact wide-angle lenses, but one with and one without IS (but that was cheaper or small etc) I would choose without. I also below that far to many people put a lot of weight behind a stabilizer when they should be using better shooting techniques instead. Just being clear though this isn't my view for all photographers and situations, but it is for many.
Have to say, the 16-80 is my one and only lens at present but really loving the experience... Also with ibis on the xt4 ime finding the f4 not as restrictive as I thought..... Another great review 👍
Maybe I should do a little awards video at the end of this series, giving out superficial awards. E.g. for the lens that surprised me the most, which would be the 16-80mm.
fantastic review! ive had this lens since it came out and i find it produces stellar images of prime lens sharpness and its great to use at events with its 2.8 aperture but for personal use on a day out i find it a bit heavy on my xh1 as i tend to stick with my prime lenses and im seriously considering buying the 16-80 as a travel lens,but i couldn't sell the 16-55 as its too good with its quality and 2.8 aperture for weddings and event photography.
Oh man that's is the exact tricky situation I've been in. The 16-80 is fantastic for travel and casual shooting etc, the 16-55 is fantastic for the higher in professional side of work.
Boom, another beaudy, thanks mate. While I fully understand the emphasis on sharpness I be interested in your thoughts on how this affects most people's images. I mean, not everyone is entering competitions or even printing thier images. At what point does sharpness start to really really matter to regular joe blows?
That is a very good point, I am a massive pixel peeper and like to do big prints. I don't want to give it away yet but this wide angle lens series is going to end with something I think you'll really like.
Would you be so kind to suggest which lens in the quietest for the video with a good low light performance? Very very quiet ones. Like your top 3. Thank you so much.
I moved to Fuji from an aging (still works just fine!) Nikon D3300 to the X-T4 and I picked up this lens as my go to catch all type, which fills that job perfectly. This purchase wasn't a price factor, but had price been a factor, I would have chosen the 15-45mm kit lens, but I wanted that weather seal and f/2.8 lol. But as others have mentioned, having a smaller, lighter prime lens is a better option in terms of the feel for shooting throughout the day. It's been super hot, like reaching 100 degrees the last week or two so I haven't been out at all to shoot. But honestly, now I have no choice but to get off my arse and do at least a little bit of light shooting! Just bought plenty of sunscreen, so I have no excuse and I'd dedicate my shooting in honor of this channel, at least in a spiritual sense :P But other than that brother, another solid video! It got me thinking, perhaps you could, just a suggestion not a demand, showcase how to use this lens or others like it. Like, we've got the technical and scientific style video of it down, now in the future perhaps a video on how to shoot this best for a sunrise/sunset, or a how to use this lens to shoot the best portrait shoots, or wtf is f/2.8 vs f/22 actually look like from photo to photo? I dunno man, I'm just throwing stuff out there, but do what you like to do with this channel, i'll keep watching and supporting mate so no worries! Thanks again for making this content brother and have yourself a lovely weekend/week depending on what time it is in kiwi island! Cheers
Thank you very very much for your time and support mate. I actually have a few tutorial videos up on the channel depending on what you'd like to learn. I'm doubt I'll do a "how to use each lens" video BUT I very much plan to have much more content on how to shoot certain content with nearly any lens. But every project/series takes a while to make, and the back log list of ideas keeps getting better.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography Ah no worries mate, I'll be sure to scope out the back catalog of some of your videos then and try out some of the suggestions! Keep up the great work and very appreciative to have thoughtful replies from you instead of just an empty abyss of comments with no replies :P
The RUclips studio app is fantastic for managing comments, though I hope one day I get to the point where my channel is so big answering all of them isn't feasible sorry.
Thank you for your excellent review. You got me. Subscribed to your youtube channel. I m using the XF - 10-22, XF 16-55 2.8 and the 55-140 2.8 in combination with the X-H1. Often without a tripod. It works perfectly.
All fantastic lenses. You just need the 150-600 and a macro and you'll never have to own another lenses ever again 😄. Cheers for the support man, I really appreciate it.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography I realized that I m seldom using a vocal length over 140 mm. But thinking of buying the 1.4 teleconverter. Right know I ve got the XC 55-230 and a tamron 16-300 (Finger adapter) for the long vocal length. Well the thing with lenses is the same with women. You want them all, but you just can keep a few. Because they are not working as you thought at the first glance :-).
Yeah they did so bloody well for such a short lived system
3 года назад
Hi Thomas!! Between the 16-55 f2.8 and the 15-80 f4 using a xt4, witch opcion you recomend for a hybrid shooter (Photo and video)? Without considering the price.
Corner of the lens star detail is much better at 18mm compared to 16mm, but even just bumping the zoom lens around just a smidge so it’s not on 16mm will make a good difference
Although it's not on the list, it seems I'd get better results with my Fujifilm 18mm 1.4, though I will try your setting while on adventure when bringing only by beloved 16-55mm. Thanks for the quick response! Cheers!
Given the kit lens 15-45 mm stands above the red badge 16-55 mm in terms of overall score, how justifiable is it to buy one (if the 2.8 aperture is not a deal breaker) considering the cost of it? Also, can you tell me why the kit lens is ranked so high in the list?
The list considers all things like price, weight, sharpness, aperture, features etc using a algorithm I made up. It doesn’t mean one lens is better than another for a certain situation but it’s more of a general overall score.
Hello, this Lens is on sale right now for $899 on BH Photo vs $799 for FUJIFILM XF 16-80mm f/4. I am thinking about buying XT-4, would spending $100 more worth getting 16-55mm F2.8 over 16-80 F4 for 1st general purpose zoom lens? I am thinking of getting 23 vs 35mm F2 along with 16 F.14 for prime and ultrawide.
Loving the xt4 with the right lens. I have been using the 23mm f/2 but have just changed to the 18-55 and using it as a 18-23mm just for that small variation in shot in the newer videos
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography Nice - what do you think of the 18-55 in terms of sharpness for talking head videos? Do you tend to stick to primes for their sharpness? Been thinking of swapping from a sony system - just trying to get an idea of the primes (which I prefer).
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography I'll check it out - do you have other content showing what you use the Fuji system for? I'm primarily looking to swap to it for video content creation for RUclips and other platforms - educational content, talking-head videos, product reviews and some narrative work too.
I have a question regarding the sharpness. Do you know if the sharpness is impacted by the length of an exposure duration? I am doing a lot of long exposures (1-2 min) and find that some objects in some pictures are a little soft. Any thoughts?
Yes, if you get camera shake, or if you are using bad filters etc to get longer exposurer time. Find a real solid table, or even just on a hard floor, double check your focus, turn on 2sec timer, hold your breath, turn off all forms of IS and IBIS and don't let anything move around you, and do a long exposure. If it's sharp, then when you are shooting in a real life situation something else causing camera movement.
This is a great review! I have a X-T30 with the mind in getting the X-T4 in the future, but I'm in betwixt the decision of either getting the 16-55mm f2.8 or the 16-80 f4 because I'm a hybrid shooter that also do low light situations. The weight doesn't bother me, but I'm looking at performance and the versatility of it when doing proper and solid work in photography and videography and what is the difference betwixt the two. So more to my question is which one seems more of fitting, or do you recommend me getting?
This answer would be different for everyone, but from what you've just said I'd suggest the 16-55mm. Both have their pros and cons but if you have more of a "professional" end goal in mind, the 16-55mm would be my suggestion for you. Best of luck 😀
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography You do make a great point that it does differ, but I definitely do have that end goal in mind. Lol Thank you, I really appreciate it!
For some reason RUclips (or my phone) is being odd and not letting me copy and paste a link to this video on my channel, but it should help answer it for you. In short if you are shooting something that needs different mm options quickly e.g doco, wedding etc then the slight drop in quality you get from picking a zoom over a prime will more than make up for it in quality of shot Fujifilm Primes Vs Zooms - How sharp do you really need
For video it has some pros and cons. I am sure that AF shimmer will get fixed in a firmware update, if it hasn't already. But the 16-80 has some good counter points for video as well. It depends on what kind of video work you do and how you shoot it.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography i own it, the AF is quite smooth. almost sony reliable, but the shimmering is still happening, especially in Low light. still crosing fingers for firmware Fuji!!!
Since I do a lot of shooting in low light situations, I purchased the 16mm f/1.4, 23mm f/1.4, and 56mm f/1.2 prime lenses for my Fuji mirrorless.
Since I also need a wedding backup kit, I purchased the 16-55mm f/2.8 zoom.
When I shoot landscapes, the weather resistant 16-55 is my lens of choice. I pair it with a 12mm f/2.8 Zeiss Touit and an adapted 105mm f/2.8 Nikon macro lens.
When I shoot video, the 16-55 is my lens of choice.
When I shoot individual portraits, I prefer the 50-140mm f/2.8 or the 56mm f/1.2 Fujinon lenses. I did not understand why until I saw the 55mm center sharpness performance charts in your video.
Thank you.
You're doing some wonderfully informative yet succinct reviews. It would be helpful if you would also publish the methodology for the TB scoring system and a more detailed explanation of the lab testing in general so that people are aware of how you come to your results. Looking forward to the rest of the series!
I have thought about sharing my algorithm and how it do my testing.
But I worried some wouldn't agree without my weighting behind some values.
But in the end how much value I add to each measure is still only my opinion and as such my reviews should not be taken as a hard and fast proof, but more as facts to help people make thier own decision.
The graphs though I have mentioned before and will cover in a little more detail in the future videos.
Cheers for support.
Great video. Most of my photography is in the mid-range so I have the 16-55 and 16-80. I use both at times and the weight isn't an issue with the 16-55. The 16-80 has a longer reach though.
I have the 16-55 2.8, and 55-140 2.8 and It's a dream set up and I LOVE IT. The 16-55 is perfect for pretty much anything and this with the XT3. For basic Handheld stuff with a small rig cage I can get pretty decent stable footage and just pop it in post and warp it a touch. I traded in my 1DXii and 4 lenses in for the Fuji system and not only did I free up about $4000 after buying into the Fuji system, I freed up so much more space in my camera bag.
And aside from the heavy sigma's it seems like no one else does consistent sharp glass across the whole range.
Fuji lenses are outsanding.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography Oh yeah I'm always loving how sharp this lens is
Great review and comparisons! For me, it’s easy: if I’m getting paid it’s the 16-55 (plus 10-24 & 50-140 if I need them). If it’s travel, family, or walkaround, 16-80 all the way. They’re both great lenses. I pair them with the H1 & T4.
That was a perfect summary, thank you.
Great review and my personal experience of this lens fully aligns with your conclusions. It is a beauty but it is a big lens. For my needs I prefer the smaller primes. Thanks for this series of reviews - great stuff and keep them coming!
Thank you for the comments and support, cheers mate.
I use this lens together with the X-T3 on my hikes as a walk-around lens. You can often buy this lens at
I use this lens as a photojournalist on my channel along with the fuji xt3 just because I shoot everything from housefires to portraits and video . Weather sealed is primo and can’t live without it . Came from canon , Sony and Leica q-p and Fuji just works . Ps: it’s good to be able to adjust the settings with the camera off as a scene changes
Honestly never thought of that as a perk, being able to change and set settings when the camera is turned off. But now that you've mentioned it I do it all the time at weddings, they can see how it be phenomenally useful for photojournalism.
Thank you for sharing.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography 🤘
I love this lens. Its a great all round swiss army knife that u need in your kit for any pro event shooter. I admit it lacks a bit of magic sauce compared to the F1.4 primes especially the 16mm f1.4 and 56mm f1.4 but there are some situations when action happens so fast u just don’t have time not only too change lenses but to switch to a second body. Its Gold in that sense.
Couldn’t agree with this statement more, spot on
Finally it's here! Thanks for this review. It is indeed a great lens but it is too heavy for my own liking. Came from Sony and Canon fullframe and the reason why I wanted to go to Fuji was because of their small and minimal setup they offer. And regarding the video side of things which I asked last week, I think I am gonna stick to the f2 primes instead. Your review made my decision to go with the f2 primes as they are light weight, yet sharp and renders amazing images nonetheless! And I feel primes makes you move your feet and find angles to compose and frame your shot, rather than a zoom lens where you have the ability to stand in one position and have that versatility of focal length and capture moments. Both have their pros and cons and have their own uses. I have been using zoom so I think the primes will push my creativity further :) Thanks and keep up the good work mate!
Oh man there is something so nice about using a prime.
For me it unlocks this next level of creativity I love it.
Very happy you liked the video man and I very much agree with your comment / views.
Cheers for the support.
Just bought a XT4, your channel is incredibly helpful! Thanks!
Thank you!
Great review, I love the 16-55 mm its a beast of a lens.
Cheers mate
Great video.
Your video definitely helped in my decision to buy the 16-55.
Added to my 50-140, this rounds out my kit very well.
I love my primes, but the versatility of the zooms just makes my life much easier on my event shoots.
I’m curious to see how the 16-55 handles on my gimbal.
On a gimbal it will be fantastic, and cheers for the feedback
Shot a bunch of portraits on one of these. Sharp as all hell!
It is a very impressive lens for a zoom.
Great vid Thomas, very informative. Are you going to do a vid on the XF 18-55 F2.8-4? I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the 'kit' budget beast!
Keep up the great work 😎👍
I am though it is a little while away, but I am planning on doing something very special for that "kit" lens.
And cheers for the comment/support.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography Great! In that case, I look forward to it.
This lens relaunch itself with the XH1 and XT4 IBIS!
It really did, IBIS for some lenses and content didn't have that big of effect, but for this lenses and for what most people would use this lens for it was like a whole new lens
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography I personally just don't think IS or IBIS is that important for this focal length. Telephoto, yes, but not this one. If you're shooting in the dark you're probably going to need a tripod anyway. Even the professionals who reviewed their use case in the promo for this lens stated they do almost all their work with this lens and didn't miss or need the IS. I've not needed it and idk anyone else that has except videographers who if they're really serious would probably be using a rig anyway.
@@jp2503 I personally would mostly agree with you, but there very much are situations in high end commercial work, portraiture, wedding etc that still make use of a good IS/IBIS in lower light when a tripod just isn't a option.
However for landscape and Astro work etc... stabiliser really doesn't help much at the wider field of views like you said, but it does depend on the person and the job.
Also in my job I meet plenty of people with unsteady hands either for medical or age related reason who all love photography and buy lens and cameras very much based on every little bit of stabilization performance they can get.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography I know it's not impossible to need it I just think a lot of modern enthusiasts rely too much on it. I'm not talking about you btw. For weddings I think most people use at least a very low powered and diffused speed light in those situations to get highlights on the face in dark places anyways. But for sure there are always instances and I wouldn't NOT want it if it was available. They purposely didn't put it in when designing it though I don't remember exactly why. maybe just the weight and size and price.
If I had the choice between two exact wide-angle lenses, but one with and one without IS (but that was cheaper or small etc)
I would choose without.
I also below that far to many people put a lot of weight behind a stabilizer when they should be using better shooting techniques instead.
Just being clear though this isn't my view for all photographers and situations, but it is for many.
Wonderful video. Always glad to see your new posts.
Cheers mate, all appreciate your support and comments!
Have to say, the 16-80 is my one and only lens at present but really loving the experience... Also with ibis on the xt4 ime finding the f4 not as restrictive as I thought..... Another great review 👍
Maybe I should do a little awards video at the end of this series, giving out superficial awards. E.g. for the lens that surprised me the most, which would be the 16-80mm.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography sound like an idea 😁
fantastic review! ive had this lens since it came out and i find it produces stellar images of prime lens sharpness and its great to use at events with its 2.8 aperture but for personal use on a day out i find it a bit heavy on my xh1 as i tend to stick with my prime lenses and im seriously considering buying the 16-80 as a travel lens,but i couldn't sell the 16-55 as its too good with its quality and 2.8 aperture for weddings and event photography.
Oh man that's is the exact tricky situation I've been in.
The 16-80 is fantastic for travel and casual shooting etc, the 16-55 is fantastic for the higher in professional side of work.
Boom, another beaudy, thanks mate. While I fully understand the emphasis on sharpness I be interested in your thoughts on how this affects most people's images. I mean, not everyone is entering competitions or even printing thier images. At what point does sharpness start to really really matter to regular joe blows?
That is a very good point, I am a massive pixel peeper and like to do big prints.
I don't want to give it away yet but this wide angle lens series is going to end with something I think you'll really like.
Would you be so kind to suggest which lens in the quietest for the video with a good low light performance? Very very quiet ones. Like your top 3. Thank you so much.
Nearly all of the newest lenses are very silent.
The 16mm f/2.8, 23mm f/2 etc. Won't make a sound.
I moved to Fuji from an aging (still works just fine!) Nikon D3300 to the X-T4 and I picked up this lens as my go to catch all type, which fills that job perfectly. This purchase wasn't a price factor, but had price been a factor, I would have chosen the 15-45mm kit lens, but I wanted that weather seal and f/2.8 lol. But as others have mentioned, having a smaller, lighter prime lens is a better option in terms of the feel for shooting throughout the day. It's been super hot, like reaching 100 degrees the last week or two so I haven't been out at all to shoot. But honestly, now I have no choice but to get off my arse and do at least a little bit of light shooting! Just bought plenty of sunscreen, so I have no excuse and I'd dedicate my shooting in honor of this channel, at least in a spiritual sense :P
But other than that brother, another solid video! It got me thinking, perhaps you could, just a suggestion not a demand, showcase how to use this lens or others like it. Like, we've got the technical and scientific style video of it down, now in the future perhaps a video on how to shoot this best for a sunrise/sunset, or a how to use this lens to shoot the best portrait shoots, or wtf is f/2.8 vs f/22 actually look like from photo to photo? I dunno man, I'm just throwing stuff out there, but do what you like to do with this channel, i'll keep watching and supporting mate so no worries! Thanks again for making this content brother and have yourself a lovely weekend/week depending on what time it is in kiwi island! Cheers
Thank you very very much for your time and support mate.
I actually have a few tutorial videos up on the channel depending on what you'd like to learn.
I'm doubt I'll do a "how to use each lens" video BUT I very much plan to have much more content on how to shoot certain content with nearly any lens.
But every project/series takes a while to make, and the back log list of ideas keeps getting better.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography Ah no worries mate, I'll be sure to scope out the back catalog of some of your videos then and try out some of the suggestions! Keep up the great work and very appreciative to have thoughtful replies from you instead of just an empty abyss of comments with no replies :P
The RUclips studio app is fantastic for managing comments, though I hope one day I get to the point where my channel is so big answering all of them isn't feasible sorry.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography ha ha no worries mate, if/when you make it bigg(er) at least I'll always know you had very modest and humble beginnings!
Hahahahaha cheers buddy
Very helpful! Thank you
Thank you for the comment!
Thank you for your excellent review. You got me. Subscribed to your youtube channel. I m using the XF - 10-22, XF 16-55 2.8 and the 55-140 2.8 in combination with the X-H1. Often without a tripod. It works perfectly.
All fantastic lenses.
You just need the 150-600 and a macro and you'll never have to own another lenses ever again 😄.
Cheers for the support man, I really appreciate it.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography I realized that I m seldom using a vocal length over 140 mm. But thinking of buying the 1.4 teleconverter.
Right know I ve got the XC 55-230 and a tamron 16-300 (Finger adapter) for the long vocal length.
Well the thing with lenses is the same with women. You want them all, but you just can keep a few. Because they are not working as you thought at the first glance :-).
I wish you could test Samsung NX 1 with lens 16-50 F2-2.8. That S lenses are phenomenal and have OIS, but live in short-lived ecosystem.
Yeah they did so bloody well for such a short lived system
Hi Thomas!! Between the 16-55 f2.8 and the 15-80 f4 using a xt4, witch opcion you recomend for a hybrid shooter (Photo and video)? Without considering the price.
Hi! I noted on your recommended astro setting to shoot at 18mm for the 16-55mm, why not 16mm?
Corner of the lens star detail is much better at 18mm compared to 16mm, but even just bumping the zoom lens around just a smidge so it’s not on 16mm will make a good difference
Although it's not on the list, it seems I'd get better results with my Fujifilm 18mm 1.4, though I will try your setting while on adventure when bringing only by beloved 16-55mm. Thanks for the quick response! Cheers!
@absolu222 yes the new 18mm would now be the best Astro lens from Fujifilm
Given the kit lens 15-45 mm stands above the red badge 16-55 mm in terms of overall score, how justifiable is it to buy one (if the 2.8 aperture is not a deal breaker) considering the cost of it? Also, can you tell me why the kit lens is ranked so high in the list?
The list considers all things like price, weight, sharpness, aperture, features etc using a algorithm I made up.
It doesn’t mean one lens is better than another for a certain situation but it’s more of a general overall score.
Hello, this Lens is on sale right now for $899 on BH Photo vs $799 for FUJIFILM XF 16-80mm f/4. I am thinking about buying XT-4, would spending $100 more worth getting 16-55mm F2.8 over 16-80 F4 for 1st general purpose zoom lens? I am thinking of getting 23 vs 35mm F2 along with 16 F.14 for prime and ultrawide.
Do you use the 23mm fujicron for talking head videos like this? Also, how are you finding the Fuji X-T4 for studio video recording like this?
Loving the xt4 with the right lens.
I have been using the 23mm f/2 but have just changed to the 18-55 and using it as a 18-23mm just for that small variation in shot in the newer videos
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography Nice - what do you think of the 18-55 in terms of sharpness for talking head videos? Do you tend to stick to primes for their sharpness?
Been thinking of swapping from a sony system - just trying to get an idea of the primes (which I prefer).
All I've used the 18-55mm for is this studio talking head stuff and I thi k it's fantastic for video.
I have a review for it up on my channel
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography I'll check it out - do you have other content showing what you use the Fuji system for?
I'm primarily looking to swap to it for video content creation for RUclips and other platforms - educational content, talking-head videos, product reviews and some narrative work too.
I'm not 100% sure of what you're asking me sorry?
I have a question regarding the sharpness. Do you know if the sharpness is impacted by the length of an exposure duration? I am doing a lot of long exposures (1-2 min) and find that some objects in some pictures are a little soft. Any thoughts?
Yes, if you get camera shake, or if you are using bad filters etc to get longer exposurer time.
Find a real solid table, or even just on a hard floor, double check your focus, turn on 2sec timer, hold your breath, turn off all forms of IS and IBIS and don't let anything move around you, and do a long exposure.
If it's sharp, then when you are shooting in a real life situation something else causing camera movement.
Hey Thomas, What your thoughts on this lens vs the XF 18-55mm kit lens? I've got the kit lens and am considering upgrading.
The 16-55mm is a fantastic upgrade, in pretty much every single way.
This is a great review!
I have a X-T30 with the mind in getting the X-T4 in the future, but I'm in betwixt the decision of either getting the 16-55mm f2.8 or the 16-80 f4 because I'm a hybrid shooter that also do low light situations.
The weight doesn't bother me, but I'm looking at performance and the versatility of it when doing proper and solid work in photography and videography and what is the difference betwixt the two.
So more to my question is which one seems more of fitting, or do you recommend me getting?
This answer would be different for everyone, but from what you've just said I'd suggest the 16-55mm.
Both have their pros and cons but if you have more of a "professional" end goal in mind, the 16-55mm would be my suggestion for you.
Best of luck 😀
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography You do make a great point that it does differ, but I definitely do have that end goal in mind. Lol
Thank you, I really appreciate it!
Any time and all the best!
Will you choose this over 16 F1.4??
I have personally done exactly that for my type of work
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography Hahaha what do you mean actually :)
Sorry typo, I’ve fixed it
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography May I know what is 16-55 most suited for?😅
For some reason RUclips (or my phone) is being odd and not letting me copy and paste a link to this video on my channel, but it should help answer it for you.
In short if you are shooting something that needs different mm options quickly e.g doco, wedding etc then the slight drop in quality you get from picking a zoom over a prime will more than make up for it in quality of shot
Fujifilm Primes Vs Zooms - How sharp do you really need
92nd.
You do not suggest this lens for video purpose then.
For video it has some pros and cons.
I am sure that AF shimmer will get fixed in a firmware update, if it hasn't already.
But the 16-80 has some good counter points for video as well.
It depends on what kind of video work you do and how you shoot it.
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography i own it, the AF is quite smooth. almost sony reliable, but the shimmering is still happening, especially in Low light. still crosing fingers for firmware Fuji!!!
My 16-55mm makes a noise when I focus... Is this normal are these the motors I hear?
In every case i have heard about this, yes it is normal specially on the older lenses
@@ThomasBusbyPhotography okay thanks! Do you think I did good with buying this lens for interior photography?
As long as the 16-55mm focal range suits you I can’t think of a reason why it would be a bad choice