For all the reasons you stated this is a great lens. The OIS is so incredible and breathes new life to the non-OIS Fuji bodies. You can pretty much set-it-and-forget-it at 5.6 and get really good quality through the range. Of course the extremes have the softest edges and the 80mm is the weakest of the range but still useful. Great colour and overall contrast. The F4 I find isn’t really a limitation. With low light I use the lens for slow shutter still captures or motion blur of moving subjects. Also, it is a touch bulky. I could see where some wouldn’t enjoy this as much. Personally found this better overall creatively than using the 18-55mm but I could see the case for preferring the 18-55mm. If you love this lens then you have to check out the 70-300. I find even though heavier and longer it somehow balances even better on my X-E3 with grip. With these two lenses and a couple manual primes I can pretty much capture anything. I typically run with only 1-2 lens at a time and carrying at least one of the Fuji zooms guarantees you have great flexibility.
Thank you very much for the extended thoughts. You’ve summed this up far better than I ever could. I definitely noticed the softness at 80mm but as you pointed out, it certainly not a deal breaker. You’ve got me very curious about the 70-300mm now!
@@KevinWoodland 70-300 is the perfect match to the 16-80, I use the 16-80 on my xt2 parallel to the 70-300 on the xt3 and I am ready for anything.....even indoors
Drafting! Ingenious! As one who has written and re-written many a paragraph, I'm amazed that I never thought to use my zoom lens in this manner for a shot. Kudos to you sir!
I'm so glad the drafting idea resonated with you, Don. Yes, the idea came to me from my graphic design work, since the design process is all about drafting and iterating. Sounds like you have a similar experience with your writing. Thanks for the message, nice to hear from you.
I brought this lens (and this lens only) on vacation with my XT3. It paired wonderfully. Don't expect much bokeh, but I love the shots I got. The stabe worked great for slow shutter night shots that were lit by only my cell phone. The lens OIS works for handheld video for when you are not walking. For my purposes, it could be the perfect (single) travel lens. No sharpness issues in the corners. It's great.
I like the 18-55 for its size. I just set the aperture to F4. It’s a really nice lens for travel. Don’t discount it because of the variable aperture. Nice video I would like to add the 16-80 to my kit.
I appreciate your comment, Bob. Yes, I think it's perfectly reasonable to own both the 18-55mm and the 16-80mm. Two different lenses for two different use cases. I bet you'd be happy with, though watch the corner sharpness as other commenters have pointed out. That wasn't a big concern to me, though, since I'm mainly shooting snapshots.
The 16-80 has the additional focal length range I want for Landscape photography. It also can get very close to subjects which helps in story telling. I currently do not own any Fuji zoom lens and will buy one in the next week or so.
Thanks for the video. Much appreciated. I think this lens has a lot going for it. A couple of notes about the 18-55 comparisons. If you are happy with f4 then your premise about the 18-55 aperture setting being all over the place just doesn't fly. If you set the 18-55 to f4 or above, you have a constant aperture throughout the zoom range, just like the 16-80. Also, I have had several copies of the the 18-55 since it came out years ago and have never had one with sloppy zoom action. Mine current one is perfectly damped with the same resistance throughout, and never moves out of position when in use. There are other reviews of the 16-80 that talk about the uneven resistance of the zoom action. Copy variation happens even to Fujifilm lenses.
@davidsmith3716 I have those two lenses, too, and agree exactly with your description. I think the 18-55 gives the impression of better build quality. The smoothness of the 18-55 zoom is 100 % perfect. It never is sticky at all and moves evenly from the very micrometer beginning of rotation. The 16-80 is acceptable, but not perfect. Also, I was just about to write a similar comment about f/4 as you wrote above, so now I don't have to elaborate more on that.
Thanks for video. All good things as you note. Two drawbacks for me: 1) It is okay, but only okay for sharpness on the edges. 2) I tend to use auto aperture on the lens and adjust the aperture via the dial, but the auto setting is not clicked, so it can be bumped and moved accidentally. I am regularly finding that it has bumped into f22 which is definitely not a good thing.
Ah, I see what you're saying Mark. I pretty much always use the aperture dial itself which tends to keep the aperture setting in place pretty firmly. Curious if you've decided to keep the lens or sell it based on the drawbacks you mentioned.
@@KevinWoodland Yes if you aperture dial, it is clicked at the stops, except, as I noted, at the Auto setting which is why it slips to f22. But, yes, I am keeping the lens. The range matches my kind of shooting. I'm pairing it with a 10-24.
I own XT3, XS10 and 16-80, 23f2, 50f2 and 56f1.2. Sure 16-80 might not be the sharpest but that’s not why I use it. Its price to value is excellent and it is versatile. I keep the XS10 with the 16-80 attached and XT3 with 50 or 56 and with both lying around I have everything I need for photographing my family. When traveling I’ll just take one body, 16-80 and 23f2 and all good!
I bought this lens two years ago for backpacking photography. It fits my needs well. I find myself leaving it home and using primes when I am not backpacking.
Rock solid on the XT 4 for steady video. Feels to me like one of the old retro focus designs with its 72 mm front channeling light to small rear elements minimising distortion
I hear you, Doriyan, I completely agree. Thanks for the comment. Your channel looks great! Can't wait to spend some time going through your videos soon.
My two lenses I use the most....the 16mm 1.4 and the 16-80 F4 with the 16-80 being on more often than not. I have 7 other lenses but those two are my go to lenses.
Good input, Steve, thank you. Yeah, I found myself using the 16-80mm basically all throughout the day, then switching to the 16mm f/1.4 during the darker hours. A really nice combo.
Nice to hear from, Michael. Thanks. Yeah, I just took mine on a little weekend trip and really enjoyed it. Glad you're still getting use out of your X-T2. They are solid workhorses.
I bought this with my X-T5 even though it is not on the Fuji recommended list because of the 40mm sensor. Go Figure. However, it performs very well and I have no problems with it.
That's great info. Thanks. I didn't realize it wasn't on the recommended list for the new 40MP sensor. But I'm glad you're not experiencing any issues with it.
18-55 f2.8-4, 16-80 f4, and 16-55 f2.8 is amazing lenses. I already tried all three and settle with 18-55 f2.8-4 because I using X-T30. it is the least sharpest compared the other two, but still amazing lens. If you using XC 16-50 lenses, 18-55 f2.8 is definitely an upgrade to consider with. But for my liking, I prefer 16-55 f2.8 instead, but unfortunately that lens came without OIS in it. Due I really like taking potraits and if paired with IS-enabled body, that lens is a great one to had. Super sharp, amazing color, constant aperture, build really nice (and Weather Resistant too).
@@KevinWoodland I would be interested in your take on the 16-55 f2.8. I found the "kit" zoom lens to be super-useful on a recent nature trip, but I missed the magical pictures I was getting from my old/original 23mm f1.4. I rented the 16-80 f4 to try it out, and it is a very fine lens, but I still find myself wishing for something brighter and more bokeh-ey. I think I just want this exact lens as f1.4, ;) but, in the meantime, I wonder if the 16-55 f2.8 would be a big step in that direction?
Glad to hear that, Ron, thank you for mentioning it. Many people have brought up the X-S10, which I don't own, so I can't really comment on it. Many thanks.
Love seeing a zoom lens review from the perspective of a prime shooter (which I primarily am). Personally I had the XF 18-55 and while I loved the image quality (I sometimes mistook the photos for being taken with an f2 prime!) and the excellent OIS (I don't have IBIS in any of my bodies), I just hated having a non-constant aperture. I don't do anywhere near enough landscape work to justify the 16-80 currently, but if I ever get into that stuff I know exactly what kind of lens I'd go for. Like you said, it's probably good for all kinds of stuff, so it'd probably come in handy for a lot of stuff if I did all kind of stuff. I remember seeing a RUclips video with a pro photographer where he mentioned that he and all his pro friends do just about everything with unglamerous f4 zooms and to him it seems like the crazy f1.2 are mostly used by ethusiasts. Anyway, thanks for making the video.
Good info, Torb. Thanks for the thoughts on this lens. Sounds like you and I had a similar experience with the XF 18-55. Interesting stuff about the pro photographers using zooms while enthusiasts using big juicy primes. I think that's probably true to some extent (maybe with the exception of wedding photographers who love their portrait lenses). I hope you get a chance to check out the 16-80 at some point. I bet you'll like it.
@@KevinWoodland A friend of mine went for that when he got into the Fuji system (probably partly because I’ve raved about them for so long) after a decade break from photography. He was about to get an X-S20 and an unmarked zoom lens and I was all like: noooo, stooop. Fuji cameras are all about cameras and lenses with marked aperture dials, and recommended he’d go for a used X-T4 instead and the XF 16-80mm purely based on it having a marked physical aperture ring. So I’ll probably borrow it from him at some point.
I ordered X-T5 kit with this lens, since I adore telephoto style of photography. It's my very first camera, never owned one before besides mobile phone camera - Redmi Note 10 Pro. I've had great photos with it, some decent, some great, some okey for casual stuff, but the quality I want lacks. After many years of dreaming of having a camera of my own...ended up being quite expensive :D fm. But I will play so much with it. Seems like I will require to buy a smaller lens in the near future, the 18-55mm.
The 18-55mm is a favorite among Fujifilm users. I like it, as well. Maybe consider investing in the set of small f/2.0 prime lenses offered by Fujifilm. They have terrific quality and are very portable for travel. The variety of the focal length offered by the 16-80mm is hard to match, however! Thanks for your message, nice to hear from you :-)
You prefer that the lens can not open up wider beyond f/4 at the shorter focal lengths. If it could go to f/2.8 you still have the option to set it at f/4 and it would stay at f/4 through all focal lengths.
@@KevinWoodland (After I wrote that comment, I discovered that the topic was covered long time ago). I have both 18-55mm and 16-80mm. I have started to use the 16-80 more lately. The zoom range is an advantage, for sure. Which of those lenses has the best 3-D ("poppy") rendering?
Good question. I would probably say the 18-55mm, though I have never done a side-by-side kind of comparison. Not a bad idea, though. I agree with you, the range of the 16-80 is a big advantage and one of the primary strengths. But it's image quality has never really excited me. That's why I continue to use prime lenses whenever image quality - or a certain amount of 3D pop - is desirable.
Hello Sir … would you recommend Fujifilm XT4 with 16-80 f4 kit lens for daily use and for Streetphotography. ? Sir I’m from India 🇮🇳 and most of the time it’s Hot, humid and dusty and Streetphotography is becoming a very interesting to me though I travel less because of my job . Sir I need your advice 🙏
Hi Joyjeet, thank you for the message. Nice to hear from you. I would love to visit India one day. I can recommend any Fujifilm camera and lens for street photography. But you might benefit the most from the X-T4 and 16-80 combination because of the versatility of focal length and weather sealing to help protect your sensor from dust and humidity. Both can be found used on places like eBay for a discount. However, the X-T4 and 16-80 are fairly large. If you want something smaller for street photography you might consider something like the X-T30 with a prime lens like the 27mm f/2.8, the 35mm f/2.0, or even the 18-55 zoom lens. There are many great options in the Fujifilm system of cameras and lenses. Good luck with your decision. I'd love to hear what you decide. Feel free to keep in touch.
Thanks for this wonderful review! Especially love the editing of your pictures. Do you use a specific recipe or is it done through post-editing? Any editing tips that are worth sharing? Cheers!
Hi Job, nice to hear from you. All the photos in this video were edited with Adobe Lightroom which is pretty much my go-to RAW conversion tool of choice. My formula tends to be lifting the shadows, dimming the highlights, decreasing the saturation just a little, then raising the vibrance. I do those steps for nearly all my photos. After that I tend to use the HSL sliders to scoop the colors into pleasing color palette. That's pretty much my photo editing strategy in a nutshell!
@@KevinWoodland Thanks for reaching out Kevin! Really appreciate you sharing your process :) Got my hands on an XT-5 + 16-80mm yesterday so I guess all that's left to do is to give it a try! Keep it up!
I've been watching quite a bit of reviews on this lens to justify getting it for the OIS. My right wrist hasn't been the greatest these days and have been debating on selling off my 23, 35, and 50 F2 primes. I still have an X-T1 which I love so no need to upgrade to a new body yet. Another option would just save up for an X-T4 and keep my primes, but I kind of like the versatility of the 16-80mm and not having to swap lenses.
Hey, Abraham, thanks for the message. I hear you. Wrist fatigue can be a real pain to deal with so size, weight, and ease-of-use are certainly important considerations. I hope you sort out a nice system that works for you. Have you tried your 23, 35, and 50 f/2.0 primes on a smaller body, like the X-T30 or X-E3? I love carrying around my X-T30 with the 35mm f/2.0. Super light. But, nothing quite matches the versatility of the big bodies (X-T1, etc) with a massive zoom range like the 16-80mm. Good luck in your decision! I'd love to know what you end up deciding.
@@KevinWoodland I do have an XC 16-50mm that came with my X-T1 when I got it but it's nowhere as sharp as the F2 primes and I'm pretty sure it's not as sharp as the XF zooms either from what I've gathered. For now, I'll just shoot with the F2 primes I have with a much faster shutter speed than I'd like to counteract my shaky hands. I'll save up for the X-T4 with the 16-80mm kit down the line since the lens itself has been going up in price even in the used market. Seems like a much better value to get it bundled with the X-T4. I had considered the X-S10 but I'd like to have weather resistant on both body and lenses, plus I like all the dials for easy access.
Great video and very helpful - have you shot with the 16-55mm f/2.8? If so, have you done a comparison between this two zooms? I have a 16-80mm f/4 but I'm debating whether to "upgrade" to the 16-55mm for the LM motor and wider aperture. The price, size, and weight have held me back so far. (Oh, FYI, I have an X-T5 if that makes a difference to any commenters.)
Hi Shep, great question, and thanks for the comment. I decided not to even test the 16-55 f/2.8 even though, from what I understand, the image quality if more desirable than the 16-80mm f/4.0. It's too big and too heavy for me to take seriously as a casual every day sort of lens, especially for travel, so isn't something I would ever use all that often. The 16-80mm is about as big as I'd care to go with a travel lens. However, if I was a professional and was always lugging around a full pack full of gear anyhow then I'd probably opt for the 16-55 due to the wider aperture and linear focusing as you pointed out.
Cool review, thank you. After viewing other reviews of Fuji's weather resistance design, I feel that your understanding of this isn't in line with others. I've seen cameras that are WR and lenses that are WR die in 10 minutes of driving rain.
Good call, Miles. I haven't had my camera out in the driving rain and would certainly slip it into the bag during extremely wet conditions just to be safe. Wouldn't want to needlessly tempt fate. I would hope, however, the WR on this lens and other Fuji lenses would at least block out the rain while seeking shelter!
At F4, the 18-55 has a fixed aperture through its range. It is only variable if you use F2.8 which is not an option with the 16-80. That being said, the range of the 16-80 is fantastic. Love the lens.
@@KevinWoodland I have had no issues with it. Maybe a professional might be able to find something but for my use it is a very convenient setup to have.
Just snagged one off ebay in mint condition for $350 that had no bids all the way down to the last minute, all I paid was the starting bid price. That might just be the best possible price you can get for this lens hahah
Oh wow, that's pretty much rock bottom price which makes me think the second hand market is saturated with them or your timing was impeccable (or a little of both, lol). Hope you enjoy it when it arrives!
Just wish tamron 17-70 had aperture ring because I feel mine 16-80 doesnt feel like a premium lens. Maybe fuji pushed it a bit maybe 16-65/70 would be better with better sharpness. Still hope that there will be 16-35 with no compromises (f2 or f2.8)
Hi, Thanks for your informative review. As I'm deciding whether to get a Fujifilm X-S10 (having been a Pentax user for many years), and "marry" it to the 16-80 I found your review super helpful and encouraging, but for one issue. Bear in mind your review comes about 2 years after this lens was made available, so that the issue I am about to raise may have been rectified by Fuji. Nevertheless another reviewer, whilst extolling the virtues of the lens, had one major objection to make, namely a "wobbling focus" problem when he was zooming in and out while doing a test video. It had noting to do with his technique, bearing also in mind the in-built OIS. He had pre-focussed the lens manually, and yet while filming and zooming it was clear that the focus would momentarily blur and then correct itself. He also noted that other reviewers/bloggers had also adverted to a similar experience. Could you advise if this was ever a problem with you, and/or is still an issue with this lens? Cheers, Fred Jansohn
Hi Fred, sorry to keep you waiting for a reply. I believe you're referring to Christopher Frost's excellent video. His videos are technical and fairly extensive. Mine on the other hand are merely anecdotal and more about user experience than about technical merits. Nevertheless, I can confirm mine suffers from the issue you're describing. It doesn't matter much to me since my videos don't really require that kind of zooming while focusing so I can work around it without any trouble. Not sure if it's a deal-breaker for you or not, though.
@@KevinWoodland Hi Keith, thanks so much for reply. Truth be told I no longer recall whose review it was, but anyway since then I've seen a few more reviews and most say the same thing. Actually I was more curious than anything else, since I don't really buy a camera for videography but for still photography and wanted a more compact, reliable appliance that delivered images with great resolution, which (again according to the reviews including yours) this camera/lens "marriage" seems to provide! Hence no deal breaker for me. In fact I can say I'm now in the process of getting the X-S10/16-80mm kit, though not looking forward to a new learning curve!!! LOL!!! Cheers, Fred Jansohn
You are lucky to have both of those lenses. I really want that new 10-24mm... it's so bad ass. So is that 50-140mm... I don't blame you for skipping the 16-80mm when you have firepower like that!
I love how the 10-24 has a physical aperture lock button. my biggest concern about this lens is that it doesn't have an equivalent physical aperture lock. are you sure that it's hard to move the aperture ring accidentally? can you disable the ring from the camera?
Hey there, thanks for the question. You're right, it doesn't have a physical aperture ring lock. But I can confirm that it's very stiff, comparable to the feel of the little f/2.0 prime lenses in terms of aperture stiffness if you've ever tried any of those. I don't think it's ever accidentally slipped on me at least with normal use like during tripod setups or putting in/out of the camera bag. Maybe it's just my copy but I assume it's a standard characteristic on all of them. It can't be disabled, so it's always active, if that's what you're asking. You can, however, set it to Auto. Hope this helps your decision!
Have to say, I'd still pick the 18-55 f2.8/4 kit lens as the better overall lens bang-for-buck for the average uncle photograher. Not exactly sure why Fuji came out with this one to be honest. Has just slightly more 'reach' but at the cost of being more open when wide...which is beneficial for most indoor 'family/vacation event' type stuff (i.e. low-light/close quarters). This lens seems to sit somewhere between amateur and pro market and I'd really hate to see anyone on their way to pro drop that kind of money rather than saving up a just a little bit more for the 16-55 f2/8. This lens is 1/2 the way there in functionality but 3/4 the cost. Not at all worth the investment in my honest opinion. But, I do suppose it comes down to what you shoot. But, the average 'uncle' photographer is going to be quite disappointed after dropping 'pro-level' coin on this lens when all their evening vacation pictures are blurry, whilst everyone else got better pictures on their phones.
Interesting take on this lens, Joe. I suppose I'd group myself in with the "uncle photographer" demographic as well. Family photos, vacations, occasional projects with somewhat low stakes... I'm very glad I took the X-T4 with this lens on my last vacation. My set of photos from that trip turned out far better than my wife's, who was using her iPhone X. No concerns about sharpness at all for me. Not sure if you were serious about the cell phone comparison or not, just thought I'd mention it in case you were.
The 16-80 is not bad as a macro lens, extended range, weather sealed, and has superior stabilization. So it's not really outclassed in any sense. I do agree 18-55 is probably better for the money although still not as good as the 15-45 in terms of value. The 16-55 is unbelievable in that it offers no OIS and so if you are doing hand shooting, you are not getting full benefit from a 2.8.
@@KevinWoodland Well, I find it's performance very similar to the fx 16-80mm f/4. My copy of the xf 18-135mm is always sharp in the middle of the image, but when you're at 18mm to 23mm or on the telephoto end at 110mm to 135mm, you need to stop the lens down to help the corner sharpness. Everything in the middle of the zoom range is perfectly sharp. I recently switched from X-T200 to X-T30 II and the lens got even sharper with that body. The X-trans IV sensor or rather the new processor does much better image correction job. If you can rent the xf 18-135mm, do it. One thing though, the first generation of the xf 18-135mm was made in China and many of the Chinese copies had quality controll issues (coating issues, sharpness issues, AF issues), not all of them, but many did. Nowadays, Fujinon makes this lens in the Phillipines and improved on the quality, so if you can try to get the newer made in Phillipines copy.
I read in one place online that it is, but I really can't confirm that it is. Fuji's own documentation doesn't seem to mention it. It does, however, seem to keep its focus position pretty well while zooming but it definitely isn't perfect.
Not a bad idea and it’s def crossed my mind before. I really don’t care for the feel of the 18-55mm on the X-T4 body though. The proportions of the 16-80mm seem like a better match to me. I use the 18-55mm on the X-T30 though, which feels more proportional to the size/weight of that camera. Anyhow, I’m a big believer in the 16-80mm lol!
Sorry for the slow reply, Suhail. I think it would feel a bit bulky on the X-T100, though I can't say for sure, having never owned it. I'm sure it would work just fine, though.
I'm confused about composing with this lens and use the 50/f2 for final shot, why do you need to use another lens in the first place for that? that's still changing lenses which defeats the whole purpose of zoom lenses. Why not trying out different compositions with the actual lens (50mm/f2) using your legs? you're indoor and shooting static objects anyway
The example I used in the video didn't describe this idea as well as I would've liked since it was such a simple project (i.e. photographing a row of books). However, it's a helpful trick when working on larger projects where a variety of photos, focal lengths, and/or angles might be needed. You can iterate and explore much quicker with a zoom than swapping primes every few seconds. You can use a zoom lens like this to establish a pretty thorough shot list to help narrow down the exact prime lenses you'd like to use. Maybe it's not for everyone, but it's worked for me.
Hi Mohan, thanks for the question. In terms of size and weight it will feel great. Nice and balanced. The X-T2 doesn’t have a stabilized sensor like the 4, so you won’t be able to get as long of shutter speeds, but you’ll still get great results because of the OIS inside the lens. If you can find one for cheap on eBay I’d definitely go for it. I think you’ll be very pleased!
A gimbal changes the equation for sure. Since you wouldn’t be making use of the 16-80’s OIS you might just opt for the 16-55 (which isn’t stabilized) and then you’d be getting that sweet f/2.8 aperture. BUT! It’s also pricey and very big. You’ve got a tough choice on your hands, my friend!
Erm the 18-55 is the way best for a gimbal for travel. If you want to be portable the Crane M3 works with it really well in my experience. In fact it also is meant to work with the new Crane M2S, but even though the motors could cope, I am not so sure about how it would feel. If you are going for the 16-55 or 16-80 then you are going for something a lot more hefty and will take up a lot more room in your travel bag. And then you won't take as much footage :)
I don't get the issue with the 18-55mm changing aperture? I can set mine to F4 and it stays there from 18-55. However, I do have the flexibility of using F2.8 at 18 if I want to which is better for low light conditions. The 16-80 is not a constant F2.8, otherwise you would have a point.
Ok, I hear you Colin, but it’s worth remembering they’re two different lenses, both with pros and cons, and this video was just meant to be a presentation of six strengths I found during my experience with the 16-80mm. Many people will still opt to prioritize the 18-55 in their collection and that’s totally understandable but for those that can afford it, the 16-80 is a great addition to the lineup especially if they own an X-T4.
@@colinhoward2200 Thanks, Colin, I appreciate you saying that. I wish I could go back and remove that comparison to the aperture on the 18-55. I didn’t do a very good job articulating my point and people have really pointed that out to me in the comments haha. Anyhow, I really appreciate you taking time to watch video.
Hi Jens, yes it will definitely work on the X-T30. I use it occasionally on my X-T30 and it works very well, though it’s a bit front-heavy on that small camera body.
Hello, thanks for this review. There are very opposite reviews about this lens, either very positive other horrible ... I am switching from the XT20 to the XT3 kit with the 16-80 that I should receive this week. Usually I only rely on what opinions provides the 'angry photographer'. Always thrilled ith the purchases I have done thanks to his advices (fuji 16mm f1,4, Viltrox lenses, vintage lenses and so on). Good luck with the hay fever (I have the same). Cheers from France!
@M Tech I pretty much agree with your assessment of the image quality and it's certainly been my experience that it's noticeably poorer than my other fuji zooms. Which is a real shame, as everything else about this lens is so well put together. I wonder would you mind letting me know what adapter you used for your Sony lens? I've had a look at the Sony 16-80 and it's very reasonably priced on the second hand market ... might be worth a try as I do love this focal range.
@M Tech Thanks for coming back to me on this, much appreciated. And I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way about its image quality ... I was begining to think my definition of 'acceptability sharp' was way off 😅 Even compared to the very basic XC 15-45, the 16-80 is distinctly second best. As you suggest, I'd love to see Fuji go again with this lens, but that's unlikely for quite some time I'd imagine.
Bonjour, Je pense qu'il y a eu beaucoup de dispersion dans la qualité de cet objectif, ce qui explique les avis contrastés. J'ai dû attendre le 3ème exemplaire (!) pour être satisfait (je suis client d'un magasin traditionnel de longue date et le commerçant m'a heureusement soutenu, preuves à l'appui à chaque fois, photos à différentes focales, comparaisons avec le 18-135, etc...). J'en suis maintenant très satisfait.
Thank you for the nice comment, Laurent. My hay fever is doing ok for the moment. Hope yours is ok as well. I am curious if what you thought of your 16-80mm, which, I assume you've been using for a little while now.
Interesting take on this, Brendan, especially in regards to the XC 15-45mm, which I own, but only for webcam stuff, like conduction my graphic design classes via Zoom. At any rate, yes, I'm with you in that it would be nice to see Fuji address some of the sharpness issues others have mentioned, though I'm guessing it would require a total redesign of the glass, and therefore not likely to happen as you mentioned.
I have the 16-80mm and am very disappointed. It is soft from 16-20mm and above 70mm. Unusable at 80mm in my opinion. The 18-55mm is so much better as a kit lens. It's the only Fujifilm zoom I fine acceptable and I have had most of them. With Fuji I stick to primes.
Good info, Bill. I wasn't as turned off as you at those particular ranges, though my style of photography is fairly low-stakes, since I'm mainly into casual pictures on trips and whatnot. Yes, people certainly adore the 18-55mm. Can't argue that it's a great little lens.
Probably not a lemon, I think you're right. It's a bit soft compared to other lenses, for sure, but it's due the Swiss Army Knife approach. It gives up a bit of sharpness for the extensive range, fast and quiet focus, and compact size. As with any design challenge, it's all about trade-offs, I suppose.
it is not a sharp lens and pretty soft in the corners what is the point of 16mm it is very soft at 16mm. and there is the horrible wobbling issue while doing video. i used it with xh2 as it came as a kit lens but it seems fuji itself does not include this lens as compatible with the 40 megapixel sensor of xh2 and xt5
All valid points. Thanks for mentioning. You're right, the extreme focal lengths are not perfectly sharp across the frame but that's to be expected with a zoom range this massive. Lenses like this are optimized towards the center of their zoom ranges and this one is no exception.
I've have several copies of the 18-55 over the years and never had any slippage of the zoom mechanism. Also, the 18-55 has the advantage of f2.8 at 18mm - to complain about variable aperture seems churlish when you can easily set it at f4, keep it there and view f2.8 as a bonus if you need it. I'd still choose the 18-55 over the 16-80 - in part because Fuji used to be all about downsizing - and I'll always want a few primes in addition to a zoom. The range of the 16-80 is so large that it will encourage compositional laziness and among less experienced photographers that's a hindrance to the learning process. Beyond the cash-strapped amateur who lacks the confidence to use primes, I'm not sure who this lens is for.
Been a while since you posted this but I wanted to take a minute to say I appreciate the thoughts on this. And happy to add the word "churlish" to my vocabulary after googling its definition (I've never heard it before). I agree most with what you said about compositional laziness, which is something I've definitely felt with this lens.
Apologies for not responding, Evangelos. I wish I had an answer for you about this, but I haven't owned the X-S10. I can't imagine it would cause any damage though. Sounds like a normal use case that you're describing.
Unfortunately it’s not great for night photography. For that it’s probably better to use a prime lens with a larger maximum aperture or even the 18-55mm zoom which can open up to f/2.8
Slap this thing on an X-H1 and one can walk the whole damn Earth with it. The money saved from getting the X-T4 by getting an X-H1 (for the IBIS) can be used for travel expenses.
Good points but you unfortunately didn't mention the consistently poor sharpness and the massive focus breathing of this lens. These are deal breakers for me.
The focus breathing is an issue, I agree. Wish I'd thought to mention that, like you said. The 18-55mm is much better in that regard. The sharpness really doesn't phase me at all. I post images at such small sizes (pretty much only Instagram in my RUclips videos), the softness is hardly discernible in many images. When sharpness really counts, I go to the primes (as mentioned in the segment where I talk about drafting images). Appreciate you adding to the discussion, thank you!
Yes it largely depends on what you use the lens for. I use my Fuji camera for large prints and landscape photography where sharpness throughout the frame is important. Would be nice to have this lens as an all-rounder to spare me the trailer behind my back that hauls the lenses to the mountain ridge.
@@Surmoka Oh, absolutely, the 16-80mm not really the kind of thing you'd want to bring up into the Glencoe Mountains or majestic places like that and make prints afterwards. I would imagine the 10-24mm and 16-55mm might be better zooms for that kind of high quality landscape work. The 16-80 is really in its element when capturing life as it happens (family, friends, vacation, casual projects, etc.).
@@KevinWoodland The f-stop is a ratio between focal length and iris aperture diameter, for the ratio to remain constant at different focal lengths, the aperture iris size has to vary.
@@littleshubunkin7926 Ok, that makes sense. But I'm still unclear on how to describe this lens, then. It sounds like you're saying that everyone referring to this lens (and presumably other zoom lenses with a single maximum aperture value) are using the term "constant" incorrectly. It's listed as a constant aperture lens on B&H Photo and even Fujifilm's page for this lens. So, a better way to describe it might be to say that it has a constant f-stop, rather than a constant aperture? I want to make sure I describe these things correctly in the future and don't contribute to misinformation. Thanks for your help.
Ich stimme zu. Prime-Objektive bieten eine bessere Bildqualität. Die Vielfalt dieses Objektivs eignet sich jedoch hervorragend für Reisen und den Freizeitgebrauch.
Agreed. I don't advise people to buy it just for that reason alone, of course. This lens is a Swiss Army Knife and is a great thing to have on-hand for numerous reasons.
I bought and sold this lens, it's huge, slow, not great for video as it loses focus when you zoom, unusable in low light, borderline unusable indoors, minimal bokeh so no good for portraits, 80mm seems neither here or there, not enough for wildlife or sports, too much for portrait and much else. I ended up replacing it with the 18-55 which is a sexy tiny little lens by comparison with F2.8 on the wide end which is a lot more versatile and gives beautiful bokeh. Together with the 50-230mm, it's still lighter and more travel friendly than the beast of the 16-80mm - it was my least favourite lens in the system and I've owned 10+ different lenses at this point including Viltrox and Samyang. I don't know what I was thinking, F4 is just far too limiting and it's just so heavy! For me many kinds of photos at F4 lose a lot of magic, they lose the 3d pop, the bokeh, the subject/background separation, they just start looking closer to what you get out of a phone vs a quality mirrorless. Even for landscapes, I like to have something in the foreground to convey depth and rarely shoot above F5.6. I also love my F1.4 and F2 primes and usually lean towards them over even the F2.8 at 18mm on the kit lens.
Hey there, just wanted to say thanks for all your thoughts about this lens. Many of the things you mentioned have been on my mind lately concerning the 16-80mm. The 18-55mm really is a great lens as many people have stated in the comments. Glad it works for you. I have them both and use them for different purposes.
Yeah, 1,000 CAD (800 USD) is too much, I agree, which is why I mentioned the benefit of buying this lens used. At used prices it's pretty reasonable, I think.
Dunno why you make such a fuss about the 18-55 being variable aperture, "the aperture goes all over the place" - jeez, newcomers to photography don't need this kind of misleading crap. If you don't want f2.8 at the wide end, just set it to f4 or more and it will stay there. It's not difficult.
The trouble is, Steve, it doesn't stay there, not for me anyhow. I use a top-loading camera bag, and whenever I slide the X-T30 + 18-55mm into bag (with the power still on), the loose unmarked aperture ring nearly always rotates a bit, which is maddening. Maybe my copy is just a little loose or whatever, I don't know. The aperture was always ending up someplace I wasn't expecting it, which feels messy to me, like I said. I'm free to characterize my own experience with a lens however I choose, wouldn't you agree? If a friend that was new to photography just bought an X-T4 and asked me to recommend a great first lens, I'd recommend the 16-80mm f/4.0 for all the reasons I stated here. You'd probably advise otherwise, and I think that's alright.
@@hughjohns9110 Not trying to make enemies, here, Steve, and not claiming to be an authority or give "instruction." Just trying to be a part of the Fujifilm community by speaking about my experience and things that excite me. Photography has been a great joy in my personal life and given me something to work towards outside my professional career as a graphic designer. I want to learn, I want to get better, I definitely don't want to spread negativity or misinformation. If I've said something that needs correcting by more experienced folks such as yourself, I'm certainly all ears. But to suggest I should kick myself off RUclips is a pretty strong claim. This is a social platform where people post videos about their lives, their cats, their kids, etc... it's not The Great Courses or Lynda.com (for better or worse). Not sure if you've even seen my other videos, but they're pretty harmless (maybe you'd disagree, I don't know). I mainly ride my bike and take pictures with Fuji-X Weekly film simulations. Generally, they're just about documentation, not about giving instruction. This is by far my most opinionated video so far, and I do feel self-conscious that my comments about the 18-55mm have ruffled some feathers. But, as of right now, I'm not quite convinced I need to delete it. It's essentially a glowing review about a lens that I think is really good. I don't see the harm in that. You've come to the defense of the 18-55mm, but have been quiet regarding the 16-80mm. Yes, even after you've hurt my feelings and burnt me to a crisp, I am still curious what you think about the 16-80mm if you care to type out your thoughts on that. Take it easy.
@@KevinWoodland naw dude don't be conscious about your opinion. You're basing it on your own experience. I've seen plenty of people shit talking the 16-80 as well, many basing it off their experience with it (that even goes for the comments of this video.) Personally I love the 16-80 since the day I got it. Great travel/all around type of lens. Never used the 18-55 however.
I'm not sure that it does come with the X-T30 as a kit lens. Maybe it can be bought as a bundle option from some sellers, but I don't believe Fujifilm packs it up with the X-T30.
You are talking rubbish. F4 on APC is like an F5.6 on full frame. Who the F would go out and buy a full frame F5.6 24-120mm?? Nobody! I use a Metabones Speed booster with a Tamron MF 35-105mm F2.8 Which equates to F2.0 23-70mm on Fuji mind blowing image quality and depth of field control.
@@TheMichiganShow The depth of field of F4 on APS = F5.6 on full frame. From a field of view 24mm on APS = approx 35mm on full frame. This is why I use a focal reducer, full frame glass and APS-C (fuji) to deliver field of view / depth of field comparable to full frame
@@TheMichiganShow The depth of field seen on F4 on APS-C is not the same depth of field in F4 at full frame. There are plenty of videos on this available. I am not questioning the maths of calculating F4 but the efect of F4 with APS-C versus Full frame. It relates to sensor / aperture ratio.
For all the reasons you stated this is a great lens. The OIS is so incredible and breathes new life to the non-OIS Fuji bodies. You can pretty much set-it-and-forget-it at 5.6 and get really good quality through the range. Of course the extremes have the softest edges and the 80mm is the weakest of the range but still useful. Great colour and overall contrast. The F4 I find isn’t really a limitation. With low light I use the lens for slow shutter still captures or motion blur of moving subjects. Also, it is a touch bulky. I could see where some wouldn’t enjoy this as much. Personally found this better overall creatively than using the 18-55mm but I could see the case for preferring the 18-55mm.
If you love this lens then you have to check out the 70-300. I find even though heavier and longer it somehow balances even better on my X-E3 with grip. With these two lenses and a couple manual primes I can pretty much capture anything. I typically run with only 1-2 lens at a time and carrying at least one of the Fuji zooms guarantees you have great flexibility.
Thank you very much for the extended thoughts. You’ve summed this up far better than I ever could. I definitely noticed the softness at 80mm but as you pointed out, it certainly not a deal breaker. You’ve got me very curious about the 70-300mm now!
@@KevinWoodland 70-300 is the perfect match to the 16-80, I use the 16-80 on my xt2 parallel to the 70-300 on the xt3 and I am ready for anything.....even indoors
I recently bought a XT5 with the 16 to 80 kit lens , still learning my way around it
I was tempted to get the X-T5 but decided to hold off and continue making the most of the X-T4. Hope you enjoy the 5 with the zoom lens!
Drafting! Ingenious! As one who has written and re-written many a paragraph, I'm amazed that I never thought to use my zoom lens in this manner for a shot. Kudos to you sir!
I'm so glad the drafting idea resonated with you, Don. Yes, the idea came to me from my graphic design work, since the design process is all about drafting and iterating. Sounds like you have a similar experience with your writing. Thanks for the message, nice to hear from you.
I brought this lens (and this lens only) on vacation with my XT3. It paired wonderfully. Don't expect much bokeh, but I love the shots I got. The stabe worked great for slow shutter night shots that were lit by only my cell phone. The lens OIS works for handheld video for when you are not walking. For my purposes, it could be the perfect (single) travel lens. No sharpness issues in the corners. It's great.
I agree with everything you said here, Michael. Thanks so much for mentioning your experience with the lens.
I like the 18-55 for its size. I just set the aperture to F4. It’s a really nice lens for travel. Don’t discount it because of the variable aperture. Nice video I would like to add the 16-80 to my kit.
I have bought my 18-55mm after selling 16-80mm. I am more than happy due its form factor and my style of use.
I appreciate your comment, Bob. Yes, I think it's perfectly reasonable to own both the 18-55mm and the 16-80mm. Two different lenses for two different use cases. I bet you'd be happy with, though watch the corner sharpness as other commenters have pointed out. That wasn't a big concern to me, though, since I'm mainly shooting snapshots.
Exactly, it's not rocket science.
The 16-80 has the additional focal length range I want for Landscape photography. It also can get very close to subjects which helps in story telling. I currently do not own any Fuji zoom lens and will buy one in the next week or so.
Yea I just wish the 18-55 was weather sealed
Thanks for the video. Much appreciated. I think this lens has a lot going for it.
A couple of notes about the 18-55 comparisons. If you are happy with f4 then your premise about the 18-55 aperture setting being all over the place just doesn't fly. If you set the 18-55 to f4 or above, you have a constant aperture throughout the zoom range, just like the 16-80. Also, I have had several copies of the the 18-55 since it came out years ago and have never had one with sloppy zoom action. Mine current one is perfectly damped with the same resistance throughout, and never moves out of position when in use. There are other reviews of the 16-80 that talk about the uneven resistance of the zoom action. Copy variation happens even to Fujifilm lenses.
I appreciate the thoughts here, David. Thanks for mentioning your experience with both lenses. Yes, setting to f/4.0 on the 18-55mm makes sense.
@davidsmith3716 I have those two lenses, too, and agree exactly with your description. I think the 18-55 gives the impression of better build quality. The smoothness of the 18-55 zoom is 100 % perfect. It never is sticky at all and moves evenly from the very micrometer beginning of rotation. The 16-80 is acceptable, but not perfect.
Also, I was just about to write a similar comment about f/4 as you wrote above, so now I don't have to elaborate more on that.
Thanks for video. All good things as you note. Two drawbacks for me: 1) It is okay, but only okay for sharpness on the edges. 2) I tend to use auto aperture on the lens and adjust the aperture via the dial, but the auto setting is not clicked, so it can be bumped and moved accidentally. I am regularly finding that it has bumped into f22 which is definitely not a good thing.
Ah, I see what you're saying Mark. I pretty much always use the aperture dial itself which tends to keep the aperture setting in place pretty firmly. Curious if you've decided to keep the lens or sell it based on the drawbacks you mentioned.
@@KevinWoodland Yes if you aperture dial, it is clicked at the stops, except, as I noted, at the Auto setting which is why it slips to f22. But, yes, I am keeping the lens. The range matches my kind of shooting. I'm pairing it with a 10-24.
I own XT3, XS10 and 16-80, 23f2, 50f2 and 56f1.2. Sure 16-80 might not be the sharpest but that’s not why I use it. Its price to value is excellent and it is versatile. I keep the XS10 with the 16-80 attached and XT3 with 50 or 56 and with both lying around I have everything I need for photographing my family. When traveling I’ll just take one body, 16-80 and 23f2 and all good!
That is a great strategy, Patrick. You’re lucky to have the 56mm f/1.2! I do not own that one… maybe one day.
I bought this lens two years ago for backpacking photography. It fits my needs well. I find myself leaving it home and using primes when I am not backpacking.
Sounds like the perfect use for this lens, Jeremy.
That's what I'm planning to do too. Prime for everyday use and 16-80 for traveling
Rock solid on the XT 4 for steady video. Feels to me like one of the old retro focus designs with its 72 mm front channeling light to small rear elements minimising distortion
Well said!
i always tell people the 16-80 is underrated! great video
I hear you, Doriyan, I completely agree. Thanks for the comment. Your channel looks great! Can't wait to spend some time going through your videos soon.
Excellent review! Concise, straight to the point. Subscribed.
Thank you so much.
My two lenses I use the most....the 16mm 1.4 and the 16-80 F4 with the 16-80 being on more often than not. I have 7 other lenses but those two are my go to lenses.
Good input, Steve, thank you. Yeah, I found myself using the 16-80mm basically all throughout the day, then switching to the 16mm f/1.4 during the darker hours. A really nice combo.
The alergy edit earned you a new subscriber...👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿
Glad you enjoyed that. Thank you, my friend!
Excellent video. I love my 16-80mm F4. It’s my Travel Buddy now in my X-T2.
Nice to hear from, Michael. Thanks. Yeah, I just took mine on a little weekend trip and really enjoyed it. Glad you're still getting use out of your X-T2. They are solid workhorses.
If you don’t mind the slightly shorter range, you could just set the 18-55mm to f/4 to avoid the variable aperture of f/2.8-4.
Hi Jeremy, that's a good point and a lot of people have mentioned as well. Thanks!
I bought this with my X-T5 even though it is not on the Fuji recommended list because of the 40mm sensor. Go Figure. However, it performs very well and I have no problems with it.
That's great info. Thanks. I didn't realize it wasn't on the recommended list for the new 40MP sensor. But I'm glad you're not experiencing any issues with it.
18-55 f2.8-4, 16-80 f4, and 16-55 f2.8 is amazing lenses. I already tried all three and settle with 18-55 f2.8-4 because I using X-T30. it is the least sharpest compared the other two, but still amazing lens. If you using XC 16-50 lenses, 18-55 f2.8 is definitely an upgrade to consider with.
But for my liking, I prefer 16-55 f2.8 instead, but unfortunately that lens came without OIS in it. Due I really like taking potraits and if paired with IS-enabled body, that lens is a great one to had. Super sharp, amazing color, constant aperture, build really nice (and Weather Resistant too).
You and others have really convinced me to consider getting the 16-55mm, Aditya. Thank you very much for the input.
@@KevinWoodland your welcome! it's also my goal to upgrade my lens to 16-55 f2.8 too... it's really amazing lens to had.
@@KevinWoodland I would be interested in your take on the 16-55 f2.8.
I found the "kit" zoom lens to be super-useful on a recent nature trip, but I missed the magical pictures I was getting from my old/original 23mm f1.4.
I rented the 16-80 f4 to try it out, and it is a very fine lens, but I still find myself wishing for something brighter and more bokeh-ey. I think I just want this exact lens as f1.4, ;) but, in the meantime, I wonder if the 16-55 f2.8 would be a big step in that direction?
Good for X-S10 as well, with its big grip.
Glad to hear that, Ron, thank you for mentioning it. Many people have brought up the X-S10, which I don't own, so I can't really comment on it. Many thanks.
i will keep 16mm to 80mm f4 is my rugged lens, I already used during a rainy days with my Xt3 perform well.🍻
I think considering the 16-80mm f/4.0 as your "rugged lens" is a smart move. That's kind of how I've been thinking about it lately as well.
@@KevinWoodland i used it again on my Paris Trip never let me down.🍻
Very cool! Looks like you have a couple of vlog videos of your Paris trip on your channel. Were they filmed with your 16-80?
love the Sleeping Bear Dunes! thanks for sharing
Very cool! There's so much to love about northern Michigan. Such a wonderful place.
Love seeing a zoom lens review from the perspective of a prime shooter (which I primarily am). Personally I had the XF 18-55 and while I loved the image quality (I sometimes mistook the photos for being taken with an f2 prime!) and the excellent OIS (I don't have IBIS in any of my bodies), I just hated having a non-constant aperture.
I don't do anywhere near enough landscape work to justify the 16-80 currently, but if I ever get into that stuff I know exactly what kind of lens I'd go for. Like you said, it's probably good for all kinds of stuff, so it'd probably come in handy for a lot of stuff if I did all kind of stuff. I remember seeing a RUclips video with a pro photographer where he mentioned that he and all his pro friends do just about everything with unglamerous f4 zooms and to him it seems like the crazy f1.2 are mostly used by ethusiasts.
Anyway, thanks for making the video.
Good info, Torb. Thanks for the thoughts on this lens. Sounds like you and I had a similar experience with the XF 18-55. Interesting stuff about the pro photographers using zooms while enthusiasts using big juicy primes. I think that's probably true to some extent (maybe with the exception of wedding photographers who love their portrait lenses). I hope you get a chance to check out the 16-80 at some point. I bet you'll like it.
@@KevinWoodland A friend of mine went for that when he got into the Fuji system (probably partly because I’ve raved about them for so long) after a decade break from photography.
He was about to get an X-S20 and an unmarked zoom lens and I was all like: noooo, stooop. Fuji cameras are all about cameras and lenses with marked aperture dials, and recommended he’d go for a used X-T4 instead and the XF 16-80mm purely based on it having a marked physical aperture ring. So I’ll probably borrow it from him at some point.
I ordered X-T5 kit with this lens, since I adore telephoto style of photography. It's my very first camera, never owned one before besides mobile phone camera - Redmi Note 10 Pro. I've had great photos with it, some decent, some great, some okey for casual stuff, but the quality I want lacks.
After many years of dreaming of having a camera of my own...ended up being quite expensive :D fm. But I will play so much with it. Seems like I will require to buy a smaller lens in the near future, the 18-55mm.
The 18-55mm is a favorite among Fujifilm users. I like it, as well. Maybe consider investing in the set of small f/2.0 prime lenses offered by Fujifilm. They have terrific quality and are very portable for travel. The variety of the focal length offered by the 16-80mm is hard to match, however! Thanks for your message, nice to hear from you :-)
You prefer that the lens can not open up wider beyond f/4 at the shorter focal lengths. If it could go to f/2.8 you still have the option to set it at f/4 and it would stay at f/4 through all focal lengths.
Yes, you are absolutely right. And you're referring to a reason you prefer the 18-55mm, I assume.
@@KevinWoodland (After I wrote that comment, I discovered that the topic was covered long time ago). I have both 18-55mm and 16-80mm. I have started to use the 16-80 more lately. The zoom range is an advantage, for sure. Which of those lenses has the best 3-D ("poppy") rendering?
Good question. I would probably say the 18-55mm, though I have never done a side-by-side kind of comparison. Not a bad idea, though. I agree with you, the range of the 16-80 is a big advantage and one of the primary strengths. But it's image quality has never really excited me. That's why I continue to use prime lenses whenever image quality - or a certain amount of 3D pop - is desirable.
Hello Sir … would you recommend Fujifilm XT4 with 16-80 f4 kit lens for daily use and for Streetphotography. ?
Sir I’m from India 🇮🇳 and most of the time it’s Hot, humid and dusty and Streetphotography is becoming a very interesting to me though I travel less because of my job .
Sir I need your advice 🙏
Hi Joyjeet, thank you for the message. Nice to hear from you. I would love to visit India one day. I can recommend any Fujifilm camera and lens for street photography. But you might benefit the most from the X-T4 and 16-80 combination because of the versatility of focal length and weather sealing to help protect your sensor from dust and humidity. Both can be found used on places like eBay for a discount. However, the X-T4 and 16-80 are fairly large. If you want something smaller for street photography you might consider something like the X-T30 with a prime lens like the 27mm f/2.8, the 35mm f/2.0, or even the 18-55 zoom lens. There are many great options in the Fujifilm system of cameras and lenses. Good luck with your decision. I'd love to hear what you decide. Feel free to keep in touch.
Great review! Thank you very much!
Thanks a lot!
I have 2 xt3s and an xt4 I need this lens I never thought about ebay auctions I will give it a try nice video
Thanks for the comment, yeah, you should be able to get one for around $400 if you're patient and persistent!
Thanks for this wonderful review! Especially love the editing of your pictures. Do you use a specific recipe or is it done through post-editing? Any editing tips that are worth sharing? Cheers!
Hi Job, nice to hear from you. All the photos in this video were edited with Adobe Lightroom which is pretty much my go-to RAW conversion tool of choice. My formula tends to be lifting the shadows, dimming the highlights, decreasing the saturation just a little, then raising the vibrance. I do those steps for nearly all my photos. After that I tend to use the HSL sliders to scoop the colors into pleasing color palette. That's pretty much my photo editing strategy in a nutshell!
@@KevinWoodland Thanks for reaching out Kevin! Really appreciate you sharing your process :) Got my hands on an XT-5 + 16-80mm yesterday so I guess all that's left to do is to give it a try! Keep it up!
I've been watching quite a bit of reviews on this lens to justify getting it for the OIS. My right wrist hasn't been the greatest these days and have been debating on selling off my 23, 35, and 50 F2 primes. I still have an X-T1 which I love so no need to upgrade to a new body yet. Another option would just save up for an X-T4 and keep my primes, but I kind of like the versatility of the 16-80mm and not having to swap lenses.
Hey, Abraham, thanks for the message. I hear you. Wrist fatigue can be a real pain to deal with so size, weight, and ease-of-use are certainly important considerations. I hope you sort out a nice system that works for you. Have you tried your 23, 35, and 50 f/2.0 primes on a smaller body, like the X-T30 or X-E3? I love carrying around my X-T30 with the 35mm f/2.0. Super light. But, nothing quite matches the versatility of the big bodies (X-T1, etc) with a massive zoom range like the 16-80mm. Good luck in your decision! I'd love to know what you end up deciding.
@@KevinWoodland I do have an XC 16-50mm that came with my X-T1 when I got it but it's nowhere as sharp as the F2 primes and I'm pretty sure it's not as sharp as the XF zooms either from what I've gathered. For now, I'll just shoot with the F2 primes I have with a much faster shutter speed than I'd like to counteract my shaky hands. I'll save up for the X-T4 with the 16-80mm kit down the line since the lens itself has been going up in price even in the used market. Seems like a much better value to get it bundled with the X-T4. I had considered the X-S10 but I'd like to have weather resistant on both body and lenses, plus I like all the dials for easy access.
Great video and very helpful - have you shot with the 16-55mm f/2.8? If so, have you done a comparison between this two zooms? I have a 16-80mm f/4 but I'm debating whether to "upgrade" to the 16-55mm for the LM motor and wider aperture. The price, size, and weight have held me back so far. (Oh, FYI, I have an X-T5 if that makes a difference to any commenters.)
Hi Shep, great question, and thanks for the comment. I decided not to even test the 16-55 f/2.8 even though, from what I understand, the image quality if more desirable than the 16-80mm f/4.0. It's too big and too heavy for me to take seriously as a casual every day sort of lens, especially for travel, so isn't something I would ever use all that often. The 16-80mm is about as big as I'd care to go with a travel lens. However, if I was a professional and was always lugging around a full pack full of gear anyhow then I'd probably opt for the 16-55 due to the wider aperture and linear focusing as you pointed out.
Cool review, thank you. After viewing other reviews of Fuji's weather resistance design, I feel that your understanding of this isn't in line with others. I've seen cameras that are WR and lenses that are WR die in 10 minutes of driving rain.
Good call, Miles. I haven't had my camera out in the driving rain and would certainly slip it into the bag during extremely wet conditions just to be safe. Wouldn't want to needlessly tempt fate. I would hope, however, the WR on this lens and other Fuji lenses would at least block out the rain while seeking shelter!
At F4, the 18-55 has a fixed aperture through its range. It is only variable if you use F2.8 which is not an option with the 16-80. That being said, the range of the 16-80 is fantastic. Love the lens.
you're right, his argument is not solid using this reason. I smell advertisement in this video ;)
Great points, Alex. Thanks for mentioning this. I also really love the 18-55mm which has grown on my quite a bit since making this video.
Advertisement, huh? You give me too much credit, TRD! It's definitely not an advertisement. Just sharing a few things that excited me about the lens.
Thanks. I was worried about this for X-H2 kit lens
Hi Donald, I'm curious if you ended up using this lens on the X-H2, and if you did, how you liked it on that particular body? Very curious.
@@KevinWoodland I have had no issues with it. Maybe a professional might be able to find something but for my use it is a very convenient setup to have.
Super valuable insights 👍
Thank you very much!
Just snagged one off ebay in mint condition for $350 that had no bids all the way down to the last minute, all I paid was the starting bid price. That might just be the best possible price you can get for this lens hahah
Oh wow, that's pretty much rock bottom price which makes me think the second hand market is saturated with them or your timing was impeccable (or a little of both, lol). Hope you enjoy it when it arrives!
Just wish tamron 17-70 had aperture ring because I feel mine 16-80 doesnt feel like a premium lens. Maybe fuji pushed it a bit maybe 16-65/70 would be better with better sharpness. Still hope that there will be 16-35 with no compromises (f2 or f2.8)
And no need for 80mm when thereis 70-300
Interesting thoughts about this, Michal. I agree, a 16-35mm f/2.0 would be a real game-changer.
Bunch of angry sad “photographers” in your comment section… hope it didn’t get to you! I liked the video ☺️
Hey Michael, just wanted to make sure I thanked you for this very nice comment. Many thanks, my friend. Glad you enjoyed the video :-)
Hi, Thanks for your informative review. As I'm deciding whether to get a Fujifilm X-S10 (having been a Pentax user for many years), and "marry" it to the 16-80 I found your review super helpful and encouraging, but for one issue. Bear in mind your review comes about 2 years after this lens was made available, so that the issue I am about to raise may have been rectified by Fuji. Nevertheless another reviewer, whilst extolling the virtues of the lens, had one major objection to make, namely a "wobbling focus" problem when he was zooming in and out while doing a test video. It had noting to do with his technique, bearing also in mind the in-built OIS. He had pre-focussed the lens manually, and yet while filming and zooming it was clear that the focus would momentarily blur and then correct itself. He also noted that other reviewers/bloggers had also adverted to a similar experience. Could you advise if this was ever a problem with you, and/or is still an issue with this lens? Cheers, Fred Jansohn
Hi Fred, sorry to keep you waiting for a reply. I believe you're referring to Christopher Frost's excellent video. His videos are technical and fairly extensive. Mine on the other hand are merely anecdotal and more about user experience than about technical merits. Nevertheless, I can confirm mine suffers from the issue you're describing. It doesn't matter much to me since my videos don't really require that kind of zooming while focusing so I can work around it without any trouble. Not sure if it's a deal-breaker for you or not, though.
@@KevinWoodland Hi Keith, thanks so much for reply. Truth be told I no longer recall whose review it was, but anyway since then I've seen a few more reviews and most say the same thing. Actually I was more curious than anything else, since I don't really buy a camera for videography but for still photography and wanted a more compact, reliable appliance that delivered images with great resolution, which (again according to the reviews including yours) this camera/lens "marriage" seems to provide! Hence no deal breaker for me. In fact I can say I'm now in the process of getting the X-S10/16-80mm kit, though not looking forward to a new learning curve!!! LOL!!! Cheers, Fred Jansohn
Probably, and unfortunately the single lens which I use the least! The 50-140 and the new 10-24 are just so damn good!
You are lucky to have both of those lenses. I really want that new 10-24mm... it's so bad ass. So is that 50-140mm... I don't blame you for skipping the 16-80mm when you have firepower like that!
@@KevinWoodland actually my GFX50R and the 32-64 f/4 is far far superior :)
Nikon did the 16-80 first in 2016 for there Nikon D500. It's there crop sensor lens Version of there 24-120
Gotcha, good backstory!
I love how the 10-24 has a physical aperture lock button. my biggest concern about this lens is that it doesn't have an equivalent physical aperture lock. are you sure that it's hard to move the aperture ring accidentally? can you disable the ring from the camera?
Hey there, thanks for the question. You're right, it doesn't have a physical aperture ring lock. But I can confirm that it's very stiff, comparable to the feel of the little f/2.0 prime lenses in terms of aperture stiffness if you've ever tried any of those. I don't think it's ever accidentally slipped on me at least with normal use like during tripod setups or putting in/out of the camera bag. Maybe it's just my copy but I assume it's a standard characteristic on all of them. It can't be disabled, so it's always active, if that's what you're asking. You can, however, set it to Auto. Hope this helps your decision!
@@KevinWoodland thanks! yeah it's too bad it can't be disabled.
I really wish Fuji would hurry the phuck up and make a v2 of the 16-55 already.
Totally. That would be great.
Have to say, I'd still pick the 18-55 f2.8/4 kit lens as the better overall lens bang-for-buck for the average uncle photograher. Not exactly sure why Fuji came out with this one to be honest. Has just slightly more 'reach' but at the cost of being more open when wide...which is beneficial for most indoor 'family/vacation event' type stuff (i.e. low-light/close quarters). This lens seems to sit somewhere between amateur and pro market and I'd really hate to see anyone on their way to pro drop that kind of money rather than saving up a just a little bit more for the 16-55 f2/8. This lens is 1/2 the way there in functionality but 3/4 the cost. Not at all worth the investment in my honest opinion. But, I do suppose it comes down to what you shoot. But, the average 'uncle' photographer is going to be quite disappointed after dropping 'pro-level' coin on this lens when all their evening vacation pictures are blurry, whilst everyone else got better pictures on their phones.
Interesting take on this lens, Joe. I suppose I'd group myself in with the "uncle photographer" demographic as well. Family photos, vacations, occasional projects with somewhat low stakes... I'm very glad I took the X-T4 with this lens on my last vacation. My set of photos from that trip turned out far better than my wife's, who was using her iPhone X. No concerns about sharpness at all for me. Not sure if you were serious about the cell phone comparison or not, just thought I'd mention it in case you were.
The 16-80 is not bad as a macro lens, extended range, weather sealed, and has superior stabilization. So it's not really outclassed in any sense. I do agree 18-55 is probably better for the money although still not as good as the 15-45 in terms of value. The 16-55 is unbelievable in that it offers no OIS and so if you are doing hand shooting, you are not getting full benefit from a 2.8.
You should have a look at the XF 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6.
That's a tempting lens but I hear the image quality suffers a bit. Do you agree?
@@KevinWoodland Well, I find it's performance very similar to the fx 16-80mm f/4. My copy of the xf 18-135mm is always sharp in the middle of the image, but when you're at 18mm to 23mm or on the telephoto end at 110mm to 135mm, you need to stop the lens down to help the corner sharpness. Everything in the middle of the zoom range is perfectly sharp. I recently switched from X-T200 to X-T30 II and the lens got even sharper with that body. The X-trans IV sensor or rather the new processor does much better image correction job.
If you can rent the xf 18-135mm, do it. One thing though, the first generation of the xf 18-135mm was made in China and many of the Chinese copies had quality controll issues (coating issues, sharpness issues, AF issues), not all of them, but many did. Nowadays, Fujinon makes this lens in the Phillipines and improved on the quality, so if you can try to get the newer made in Phillipines copy.
Hey! Does this lens do the Parfocal effect?
I read in one place online that it is, but I really can't confirm that it is. Fuji's own documentation doesn't seem to mention it. It does, however, seem to keep its focus position pretty well while zooming but it definitely isn't perfect.
You could always set your 18-55 to f4.. from wide to tele...
Not a bad idea and it’s def crossed my mind before. I really don’t care for the feel of the 18-55mm on the X-T4 body though. The proportions of the 16-80mm seem like a better match to me. I use the 18-55mm on the X-T30 though, which feels more proportional to the size/weight of that camera. Anyhow, I’m a big believer in the 16-80mm lol!
good video keep going buddy
Nice of you to say. Thank you very much!
Agree 16-80 is really underrated.
Yep, glad I'm not alone in thinking that!
Thanks for the video!!!
What about using on the older xt100 considering the form factor
Sorry for the slow reply, Suhail. I think it would feel a bit bulky on the X-T100, though I can't say for sure, having never owned it. I'm sure it would work just fine, though.
great video as always Kevin!
You are very kind, Anik, thank you so much.
I'm confused about composing with this lens and use the 50/f2 for final shot, why do you need to use another lens in the first place for that? that's still changing lenses which defeats the whole purpose of zoom lenses. Why not trying out different compositions with the actual lens (50mm/f2) using your legs? you're indoor and shooting static objects anyway
The example I used in the video didn't describe this idea as well as I would've liked since it was such a simple project (i.e. photographing a row of books). However, it's a helpful trick when working on larger projects where a variety of photos, focal lengths, and/or angles might be needed. You can iterate and explore much quicker with a zoom than swapping primes every few seconds. You can use a zoom lens like this to establish a pretty thorough shot list to help narrow down the exact prime lenses you'd like to use. Maybe it's not for everyone, but it's worked for me.
Hi Kevin, A quick question how well will it suit a XT2?. Cheers.
Hi Mohan, thanks for the question. In terms of size and weight it will feel great. Nice and balanced. The X-T2 doesn’t have a stabilized sensor like the 4, so you won’t be able to get as long of shutter speeds, but you’ll still get great results because of the OIS inside the lens. If you can find one for cheap on eBay I’d definitely go for it. I think you’ll be very pleased!
well i really wanted a lens to go on a gimbal and a zoom travel lens, still thinking between 16-55 f/2.8 and 16-80...
A gimbal changes the equation for sure. Since you wouldn’t be making use of the 16-80’s OIS you might just opt for the 16-55 (which isn’t stabilized) and then you’d be getting that sweet f/2.8 aperture. BUT! It’s also pricey and very big. You’ve got a tough choice on your hands, my friend!
Erm the 18-55 is the way best for a gimbal for travel. If you want to be portable the Crane M3 works with it really well in my experience. In fact it also is meant to work with the new Crane M2S, but even though the motors could cope, I am not so sure about how it would feel. If you are going for the 16-55 or 16-80 then you are going for something a lot more hefty and will take up a lot more room in your travel bag. And then you won't take as much footage :)
I don't get the issue with the 18-55mm changing aperture? I can set mine to F4 and it stays there from 18-55. However, I do have the flexibility of using F2.8 at 18 if I want to which is better for low light conditions. The 16-80 is not a constant F2.8, otherwise you would have a point.
Ok, I hear you Colin, but it’s worth remembering they’re two different lenses, both with pros and cons, and this video was just meant to be a presentation of six strengths I found during my experience with the 16-80mm. Many people will still opt to prioritize the 18-55 in their collection and that’s totally understandable but for those that can afford it, the 16-80 is a great addition to the lineup especially if they own an X-T4.
@@KevinWoodland Sure - I get it. Apologies, if it came over too strong :)
@@colinhoward2200 Thanks, Colin, I appreciate you saying that. I wish I could go back and remove that comparison to the aperture on the 18-55. I didn’t do a very good job articulating my point and people have really pointed that out to me in the comments haha. Anyhow, I really appreciate you taking time to watch video.
@@KevinWoodland no problem - in fact just subscribed 😀
@@colinhoward2200 Very kind of you, Colin, I hope I can bring you a point of view you’ll appreciate. I have many videos in the works.
Please go on showing a little more about zoom photos in detail in the near future.
Good idea, I'll come back to that if/when I have time, thanks!
That was helpful. Thank you very much !(:
Nice to hear from you, thanks!
i have the x-t30, is the lens still good on my camera?
Hi Jens, yes it will definitely work on the X-T30. I use it occasionally on my X-T30 and it works very well, though it’s a bit front-heavy on that small camera body.
@@KevinWoodland thanks!
@@jensvanloon4289 Sure, thank you for checking out my video. Take care and have fun with your X-T30!
Hello, thanks for this review. There are very opposite reviews about this lens, either very positive other horrible ... I am switching from the XT20 to the XT3 kit with the 16-80 that I should receive this week. Usually I only rely on what opinions provides the 'angry photographer'. Always thrilled ith the purchases I have done thanks to his advices (fuji 16mm f1,4, Viltrox lenses, vintage lenses and so on). Good luck with the hay fever (I have the same). Cheers from France!
@M Tech I pretty much agree with your assessment of the image quality and it's certainly been my experience that it's noticeably poorer than my other fuji zooms. Which is a real shame, as everything else about this lens is so well put together. I wonder would you mind letting me know what adapter you used for your Sony lens? I've had a look at the Sony 16-80 and it's very reasonably priced on the second hand market ... might be worth a try as I do love this focal range.
@M Tech Thanks for coming back to me on this, much appreciated. And I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way about its image quality ... I was begining to think my definition of 'acceptability sharp' was way off 😅 Even compared to the very basic XC 15-45, the 16-80 is distinctly second best. As you suggest, I'd love to see Fuji go again with this lens, but that's unlikely for quite some time I'd imagine.
Bonjour,
Je pense qu'il y a eu beaucoup de dispersion dans la qualité de cet objectif, ce qui explique les avis contrastés. J'ai dû attendre le 3ème exemplaire (!) pour être satisfait (je suis client d'un magasin traditionnel de longue date et le commerçant m'a heureusement soutenu, preuves à l'appui à chaque fois, photos à différentes focales, comparaisons avec le 18-135, etc...). J'en suis maintenant très satisfait.
Thank you for the nice comment, Laurent. My hay fever is doing ok for the moment. Hope yours is ok as well. I am curious if what you thought of your 16-80mm, which, I assume you've been using for a little while now.
Interesting take on this, Brendan, especially in regards to the XC 15-45mm, which I own, but only for webcam stuff, like conduction my graphic design classes via Zoom. At any rate, yes, I'm with you in that it would be nice to see Fuji address some of the sharpness issues others have mentioned, though I'm guessing it would require a total redesign of the glass, and therefore not likely to happen as you mentioned.
How does it compare with the Tamron 17-70 2.8?
I haven't tried that lens so I don't really know, unfortunately. I hear it's a good lens though. I'd like to give it a try one day.
hello! would this lens go well with the xs-10? ☺️
Definitely! But also consider the 18-55mm zoom lens for the XS-10 which is a bit smaller and easier to carry around. Either would be great options.
I have the 16-80mm and am very disappointed. It is soft from 16-20mm and above 70mm. Unusable at 80mm in my opinion. The 18-55mm is so much better as a kit lens. It's the only Fujifilm zoom I fine acceptable and I have had most of them. With Fuji I stick to primes.
Good info, Bill. I wasn't as turned off as you at those particular ranges, though my style of photography is fairly low-stakes, since I'm mainly into casual pictures on trips and whatnot. Yes, people certainly adore the 18-55mm. Can't argue that it's a great little lens.
will the tamron 17-70mm f2.8 replace the fuji 16-80?
I think it depends on personal preference. I’m very curious about the Tamron stuff but haven’t used any of it yet.
If they can program the focus ring to work as aperture ring then I am down
Had it, sold it due to being soft and lack of wider aperture. Maybe was a lemon
Probably not a lemon, I think you're right. It's a bit soft compared to other lenses, for sure, but it's due the Swiss Army Knife approach. It gives up a bit of sharpness for the extensive range, fast and quiet focus, and compact size. As with any design challenge, it's all about trade-offs, I suppose.
it is not a sharp lens and pretty soft in the corners what is the point of 16mm it is very soft at 16mm. and there is the horrible wobbling issue while doing video. i used it with xh2 as it came as a kit lens but it seems fuji itself does not include this lens as compatible with the 40 megapixel sensor of xh2 and xt5
All valid points. Thanks for mentioning. You're right, the extreme focal lengths are not perfectly sharp across the frame but that's to be expected with a zoom range this massive. Lenses like this are optimized towards the center of their zoom ranges and this one is no exception.
I've have several copies of the 18-55 over the years and never had any slippage of the zoom mechanism. Also, the 18-55 has the advantage of f2.8 at 18mm - to complain about variable aperture seems churlish when you can easily set it at f4, keep it there and view f2.8 as a bonus if you need it. I'd still choose the 18-55 over the 16-80 - in part because Fuji used to be all about downsizing - and I'll always want a few primes in addition to a zoom. The range of the 16-80 is so large that it will encourage compositional laziness and among less experienced photographers that's a hindrance to the learning process. Beyond the cash-strapped amateur who lacks the confidence to use primes, I'm not sure who this lens is for.
Been a while since you posted this but I wanted to take a minute to say I appreciate the thoughts on this. And happy to add the word "churlish" to my vocabulary after googling its definition (I've never heard it before). I agree most with what you said about compositional laziness, which is something I've definitely felt with this lens.
thank you sir
Is any risk to damage the 16-80 lens if I have the Fuji Xs10 to auto and I rotate the focus rings on the 16-80 lens?
Apologies for not responding, Evangelos. I wish I had an answer for you about this, but I haven't owned the X-S10. I can't imagine it would cause any damage though. Sounds like a normal use case that you're describing.
I agree. Lots of video and photo samples on my channel.
Cool, thanks.
how this lens goes at night photo
Unfortunately it’s not great for night photography. For that it’s probably better to use a prime lens with a larger maximum aperture or even the 18-55mm zoom which can open up to f/2.8
Slap this thing on an X-H1 and one can walk the whole damn Earth with it. The money saved from getting the X-T4 by getting an X-H1 (for the IBIS) can be used for travel expenses.
Whoa that’s a great tip! Thanks for mentioning this.
Good points but you unfortunately didn't mention the consistently poor sharpness and the massive focus breathing of this lens. These are deal breakers for me.
The focus breathing is an issue, I agree. Wish I'd thought to mention that, like you said. The 18-55mm is much better in that regard. The sharpness really doesn't phase me at all. I post images at such small sizes (pretty much only Instagram in my RUclips videos), the softness is hardly discernible in many images. When sharpness really counts, I go to the primes (as mentioned in the segment where I talk about drafting images). Appreciate you adding to the discussion, thank you!
Yes it largely depends on what you use the lens for. I use my Fuji camera for large prints and landscape photography where sharpness throughout the frame is important. Would be nice to have this lens as an all-rounder to spare me the trailer behind my back that hauls the lenses to the mountain ridge.
@@Surmoka Oh, absolutely, the 16-80mm not really the kind of thing you'd want to bring up into the Glencoe Mountains or majestic places like that and make prints afterwards. I would imagine the 10-24mm and 16-55mm might be better zooms for that kind of high quality landscape work. The 16-80 is really in its element when capturing life as it happens (family, friends, vacation, casual projects, etc.).
The aperture isn’t constant.
Feel like elaborating? I’m all ears.
@@KevinWoodland The f-stop is a ratio between focal length and iris aperture diameter, for the ratio to remain constant at different focal lengths, the aperture iris size has to vary.
@@littleshubunkin7926 Ok, that makes sense. But I'm still unclear on how to describe this lens, then. It sounds like you're saying that everyone referring to this lens (and presumably other zoom lenses with a single maximum aperture value) are using the term "constant" incorrectly. It's listed as a constant aperture lens on B&H Photo and even Fujifilm's page for this lens. So, a better way to describe it might be to say that it has a constant f-stop, rather than a constant aperture? I want to make sure I describe these things correctly in the future and don't contribute to misinformation. Thanks for your help.
@@KevinWoodland Yes, maybe 'constant maximum f-stop' would be better.
Northern Michigan 👊
Represent! Nice to hear from you, my fellow Michigander. 👊
just Bild Qualität ist nicht so gut wie prime lenses.
Ich stimme zu. Prime-Objektive bieten eine bessere Bildqualität. Die Vielfalt dieses Objektivs eignet sich jedoch hervorragend für Reisen und den Freizeitgebrauch.
@@KevinWoodland nutze es auch sehr viel. Habe das nur geschrieben weil es im Video fehlt.
I bought that in kit with the XT4 and i'm never using it, like never
I'm curious what lenses you use instead. Probably primes?
Even if they don't have Fujifilm cameras, they should own this? 😀😀😀
Ok, you got me there, Les. I should probably put "all Fujifilm camera owners" into the title just to clarify.
Buying a lens to figure out which other lens to use for your shot is not a good way to spend your money 😂
Agreed. I don't advise people to buy it just for that reason alone, of course. This lens is a Swiss Army Knife and is a great thing to have on-hand for numerous reasons.
I bought and sold this lens, it's huge, slow, not great for video as it loses focus when you zoom, unusable in low light, borderline unusable indoors, minimal bokeh so no good for portraits, 80mm seems neither here or there, not enough for wildlife or sports, too much for portrait and much else. I ended up replacing it with the 18-55 which is a sexy tiny little lens by comparison with F2.8 on the wide end which is a lot more versatile and gives beautiful bokeh. Together with the 50-230mm, it's still lighter and more travel friendly than the beast of the 16-80mm - it was my least favourite lens in the system and I've owned 10+ different lenses at this point including Viltrox and Samyang. I don't know what I was thinking, F4 is just far too limiting and it's just so heavy!
For me many kinds of photos at F4 lose a lot of magic, they lose the 3d pop, the bokeh, the subject/background separation, they just start looking closer to what you get out of a phone vs a quality mirrorless. Even for landscapes, I like to have something in the foreground to convey depth and rarely shoot above F5.6. I also love my F1.4 and F2 primes and usually lean towards them over even the F2.8 at 18mm on the kit lens.
Hey there, just wanted to say thanks for all your thoughts about this lens. Many of the things you mentioned have been on my mind lately concerning the 16-80mm. The 18-55mm really is a great lens as many people have stated in the comments. Glad it works for you. I have them both and use them for different purposes.
Why are all your photos overexposed?
Because I'm not as good at photography as you. I don't know, what do you want me to say, Nick?
It's just ok lens ...but paying 1000 CAD is way too much and I would rather suggest u all to get 18-55
Yeah, 1,000 CAD (800 USD) is too much, I agree, which is why I mentioned the benefit of buying this lens used. At used prices it's pretty reasonable, I think.
Dunno why you make such a fuss about the 18-55 being variable aperture, "the aperture goes all over the place" - jeez, newcomers to photography don't need this kind of misleading crap.
If you don't want f2.8 at the wide end, just set it to f4 or more and it will stay there. It's not difficult.
The trouble is, Steve, it doesn't stay there, not for me anyhow. I use a top-loading camera bag, and whenever I slide the X-T30 + 18-55mm into bag (with the power still on), the loose unmarked aperture ring nearly always rotates a bit, which is maddening. Maybe my copy is just a little loose or whatever, I don't know. The aperture was always ending up someplace I wasn't expecting it, which feels messy to me, like I said. I'm free to characterize my own experience with a lens however I choose, wouldn't you agree? If a friend that was new to photography just bought an X-T4 and asked me to recommend a great first lens, I'd recommend the 16-80mm f/4.0 for all the reasons I stated here. You'd probably advise otherwise, and I think that's alright.
@@KevinWoodland are you really sure you should be giving out photography instruction on You Tube?
@@hughjohns9110 Not trying to make enemies, here, Steve, and not claiming to be an authority or give "instruction." Just trying to be a part of the Fujifilm community by speaking about my experience and things that excite me. Photography has been a great joy in my personal life and given me something to work towards outside my professional career as a graphic designer. I want to learn, I want to get better, I definitely don't want to spread negativity or misinformation. If I've said something that needs correcting by more experienced folks such as yourself, I'm certainly all ears. But to suggest I should kick myself off RUclips is a pretty strong claim. This is a social platform where people post videos about their lives, their cats, their kids, etc... it's not The Great Courses or Lynda.com (for better or worse). Not sure if you've even seen my other videos, but they're pretty harmless (maybe you'd disagree, I don't know). I mainly ride my bike and take pictures with Fuji-X Weekly film simulations. Generally, they're just about documentation, not about giving instruction. This is by far my most opinionated video so far, and I do feel self-conscious that my comments about the 18-55mm have ruffled some feathers. But, as of right now, I'm not quite convinced I need to delete it. It's essentially a glowing review about a lens that I think is really good. I don't see the harm in that. You've come to the defense of the 18-55mm, but have been quiet regarding the 16-80mm. Yes, even after you've hurt my feelings and burnt me to a crisp, I am still curious what you think about the 16-80mm if you care to type out your thoughts on that. Take it easy.
@@KevinWoodland naw dude don't be conscious about your opinion. You're basing it on your own experience. I've seen plenty of people shit talking the 16-80 as well, many basing it off their experience with it (that even goes for the comments of this video.) Personally I love the 16-80 since the day I got it. Great travel/all around type of lens. Never used the 18-55 however.
Not made for xt 30 lol ...this guy lol ..then why this lens come with xt30 as kit lens 😒
I'm not sure that it does come with the X-T30 as a kit lens. Maybe it can be bought as a bundle option from some sellers, but I don't believe Fujifilm packs it up with the X-T30.
@@KevinWoodland they sell regular xt30 with 18-55 kit lens too that how I got mine in 2020..BTW all from fuji store
Yawwwn
Powerful feedback, John, thank you so much my friend.
You are talking rubbish. F4 on APC is like an F5.6 on full frame. Who the F would go out and buy a full frame F5.6 24-120mm?? Nobody! I use a Metabones Speed booster with a Tamron MF 35-105mm F2.8 Which equates to F2.0 23-70mm on Fuji mind blowing image quality and depth of field control.
That's not how aperture works. The focal length can be an equivalent but the aperture is still what it is.
@@TheMichiganShow The depth of field of F4 on APS = F5.6 on full frame. From a field of view 24mm on APS = approx 35mm on full frame. This is why I use a focal reducer, full frame glass and APS-C (fuji) to deliver field of view / depth of field comparable to full frame
@@julesfisher3551 the focal length absolutely can be multiplied by 1.5 to get the full frame equivalent but not the aperture. It’s still F4
@@TheMichiganShow The depth of field seen on F4 on APS-C is not the same depth of field in F4 at full frame. There are plenty of videos on this available. I am not questioning the maths of calculating F4 but the efect of F4 with APS-C versus Full frame. It relates to sensor / aperture ratio.
@@julesfisher3551 ok