Fuji XF 10-24mm f/4 R OIS WR lens review
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 авг 2024
- A nice little update to a classic Fuji lens. This one is a bunch of fun...but how does it cope with the challenges of a 26mp sensor?
Find it here (Amazon affiliate link - thanks for your support):
geni.us/FujiXF...
Support me on Patreon! / christopherfrost
All pictures taken by me on a Fuji X-T3 camera.
Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate links):
Canon EOS R5: geni.us/CanonE...
Canon EF-RF Adaptor: geni.us/CanonE...
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 'Art': geni.us/Sigma5...
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM: geni.us/CanonR...
Marumi Fit and Slim CPL Filter: geni.us/Marumi...
AudioTechnica AT2020USB+ Microphone: geni.us/AT2020...
Rode Smartlav+ Microphone: geni.us/RodeSm...
Rode SC3 adapter: geni.us/RodeSC...
Zoom H1n Recorder: geni.us/ZoomH1...
DJI Mini 2 Drone: geni.us/DJIMin...
Music:
'Opportunity Walks', Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons....
I've owned the original non-WR version for years and taken so many landscape shots with it, especially long exposures. I even got it to work with my smaller Lee Seven5 filter system with only a tad of vignetting at 10mm. Definitely a favourite in the system for me.
This is definitely the most enjoyable UWA lens I've ever tested - I can imagine it being a real workhorse, too :-)
@@christopherfrost a lot of the long exposure shots in my In Camera book were taken with it on an X-T1, so admittedly only 16mp, but I was always happy with it. Haven't used it in a while, but should take it for a spin again with my NDs!
@@cameralabs I've got an X-T4 and love using this lens with it. Combined with the 16-80 and 70-300 makes for a perfect travel trifecta. I'm also picking up a secondhand X-T1 to use with my 27, 35 and 50mm primes for when I just want happy snaps of the kids
@@avonperera2187 my XF travel triplet were the 10-24, 35 f2 and 56 1.2!
@@cameralabs My travel triplets are Sigma 200-500 f/2.8, Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6 and a bazooka
For C1 users in order to enhance corner sharpness one can reduce "Threshold" to 0 in sharpening tab and use "sharpness falloff" slider in lens correction tab. That is true for pretty much every lens but it makes a slightly bigger difference in the case of 10-24mm.
That's what I did when I had mine. You do not need to do this for every photo but it did make a significant difference for the 10-24
I own the Mark 1 version of this lens and was very happy to see this review! Good objective data on a lens's optical characteristics is always very valuable information, and the objectivity of your channel is one of the main reasons I love your videos. It's a great fun lens to carry around. I've been too busy recently to go take photographs but this video reminded me of how fun it is to walk around with an ultra-wide-angle lens and I'm now inspired to go for a photo walk soon.
Only problem with the review is it only tests the far ends + 16 mm, but a zoom lens pretty much never performs optimally at either ends. You have to back it off a bit, that's when you start seeing decent corner sharpness. Treat it like a 11-23 wide angle zoom lens.
I bought this to go with my XT3 which has no in body stabilization. The stabilization on this lens is quite good with 3.5 stops and doesn’t have the jittery characteristic that the 18-55 stabilization has. I also love that it’s internal zoom and you can use filters with it, two things most wide angle zooms rarely have. Also the weather sealing and close focusing is nice. Unfortunately I haven’t gotten a chance to use the Fuji system much, perhaps on my next trip.
Ive watched about 10 other reviews and nobody is talking about video issues. You are a life saver as I wanted to get this for video.
I have owned the older version for a while now and it never disapponts it seems to have that magic ingredient one cannot describe. Character, superb colours and aways a pleasure to use .There's more to a lens than fantastically sharp corners it's a keeper for me . Keep the great reviews coming ,regards, Tim
I have the 8-16mm and it is a fine lens, but you really have to commit to it to put it in your bag for the day, it’s so big and heavy.
Thank you for the great review, as always, Christopher. You are the gold standard among RUclips reviewers, along with Gordon Laing, Dylan Goldby, Take, and Dustin Abbott.
I own this lens, and this is a very fair review. Thanks. I'd love to see a video where you list (a) what you consider to be the top 10 best lenses for fuji, and (b) what are your personal favorites (if there's a difference).
he likes samyang manual lenses a lot :) avid viewer and samyang user here
The exposure changes because it is not a true fixed aperture.
It actually has a variable aperture, but closes/opens the aperture blades electronically to keep the aperture value while zooming - which can be seen in faster zooms.
I don't understand why they wouldn't unlock the entire aperture, particularly with this strange behavior with the compendium. The 16-80mm does something similar, but also tries to adjust the focus point and it just looks horrendous. Fuji need to make the process snappy enough that it's not noticeable or disable it entirely.
All fast zooms have variable apertures because you need to change the iris shape accordingly. F-stop = focal length/aperture diameter, hence aperture diameter = focal length / f-stop. E.g. at 10mm f/4, it is 10/4 = 2.5mm. At 24mm it is 24/4 = 6mm.
The problem with Fuji zooms is that they are the only company that does the iris changes electronically after you zoom the lens. Other lenses have the iris mechanically coupled to the zoom ring. (e.g. Sigma 18-35 and many others) They also seem to be adding lens profile correction in steps. For this reason alone it makes Fuji zooms not worth the money.
@@professionalpotato4764 *for video shooters.
@@OxKing Or hybrid shooters. Pure photography doesn't seem to be in the same demand? unless one is super good (5 digit budget per project), and I'm certainly not there yet. Idk. When I was in marketing we only got a super pro photographer for regional campaigns. Anything else that was for local reach it was just me trying to shoot photos and videos at the same time.
@@professionalpotato4764 Sure. I was just saying I don't care for video and therefore it's not a problem for me. I think who want to do video gets a sony anyway. And yes, this is a big reason why. But it seems Fuji is shifting priorities lately and trying to compete more with the other brands in the same fields then doing their own way. For me this is really sad, as i don't want an PASM wheel etc, but overall it would be a good move if the will produce better video capable gear in the future.
I mean, they KNOW how to do it, because of thier Profesional TV Cameras.
I owned this lens back when I had my X-T3. Whilst I did shoot bangers with this lens, I always felt like for what you got optically and for how much it was, the lens was honestly quite disappointing. Re-using the optics from the older non-WR version was a bit of a miss, in my humble opinion. I liked everything else about the lens (other than it somehow being a bit of a dust magnet) but those optics in the current era isn't exactly great.
I recently got the Nikkor Z 14-30 f/4S and that lens (at least my copy) shows how far we've come in terms of optics as it was heaps superior to the Fuji for about the same price over here. I think it was a missed opportunity for Fuji to not update the optics, especially when you see just how good some of their newer lenses with overhauled optics are.
Probably my favorite walkabout lens and also,the first lens I ever bought (original,version). It’s not perfect, but good enough for most situations.
Long waited for this review, great honest, my own experience is the same, but I love the flexibility of the lens and it's small size ... thx Christopher 💪😊
Never offended by accurate representations of a lens or camera. Many thanks for your clear presentation. Nicely done. I am considering this lens for fun since I wouldn't be doing any critical architectural work. I just have to decide if I really want to give up my 23mm fuji to get it. 😉
The exposure flickering is a long-standing issue that plagues ALL Fujifilm zoom lenses, even so-called fixed aperture ones. It's extremely unfortunate that Fujifilm has never addressed it, and indeed very frustrating for video makers. I have never seen this type of issue on any other camera system. Personally, I found this lens to produce very unpleasantly soft and fuzzy photos at the 24mm end.
The exposure issue is simply because the lens, like many similar constant aperture lenses, isn't actually f/4 wide open, but slightly faster, so the lens is stopped down to maintain constant aperture. Same with the 16-80.
I agree with some of the earlier comments about this lens...I found the image quality to be really quite disappointing. BTW...I purchased this lens based on reviews from Andy Mumford, who absolutely loves this lens.
So, although I loved the focal range of this lens, the IQ just wasn't there for me. I now use several of Fuji's prime lenses...not as convenient, but the results are much better. Thanks for your reviews....they're great.
Its amazing how much something can be 'loved' if its part of a promotion 😏
Great review!
Watching another review of this lens (vs Samyang 12mm f/2) I was quite surprised at their insistence of stopping down to f/11 and f/16 for landscapes - surely diffraction will be creeping in at those settings? It does show yet again, that for the price, the little Samyang is a great lens.
Interesting thing about fuji 10-24mm is that when you crop images to something like 16:9 they end up slightly wider.
If you go to crop raw file in C1 or DxO it's like it has a little more info left and right that is left out when you see 3:2 image.
Anyway a really fun lens to play around with.
Thanks for the observation. I assume what you find is due to barrel distortion. In 16:9 the very top and bottom, the most distorted/shrunken part can be cropped off for a wider middle bit. The worst part of corner sharpness is cropped too!
It's not just 10-24, same happens on 18-55. IG it's the distortion correction.
Thanks for another excellent review! I bought it and dont sell it, because my sample was even sharper than my Zeiss Touit 12 2.8 and this not only in the middle. Naturally it could be, that the Zeiss was a not so good copy and the 10-24 was. Otherwise it is right as we see here, that the 10-24 is not an alternative at 23mm = 35mm KB. It is good for people, who want flexibility between 10 and 18mm. Over this mark you can use it, because it is perhaps as „always on“ on your camera, but better use a 18-55 or 16-55 or a prime lens in this area, if you shoot there.
I've owned both versions, and upgraded for the WR. it's my goto lens for video and ultra-wide stills
Just recently I bought the good old 14mm, because going wider distorts things too much in my opinion. Though I had some doubts comparing it to the 10-24, Christopher has made them vanish into thin air!
the 10-24mm is so much better than the old 14mm.
@@muttishelfer9122 I will take Chris his word for it, not yours.
@@leovanlierop4580 fine, then you have to live with the worser lens- ok, thats not my problem ;). I owned both the 14mm and 10-24mm. I have the direct comparison over several years and know what im talking about.
@@muttishelfer9122 you must have had a bad copy then, mine is very sharp even in the corners.
In terms of corner sharpness, the 16-50 Version II does it better. And has very good closeup range. And center sharpness is simply perfect. With OIS, and costing about 160 dollars, and the fact that it's focusing on later Fuji bodies is lightning fast.... well, you get the idea. Oh, and it weighs nothing.
Thank you for this review. It’s a been a long time waiting for the 10-24mm and now I think bolt rod has designed something better. I’ve wanted this lens for awhile and now the 13mm by voltrox seems to be a better way to go for wide angle lens.
I didn't think the corners were that bad in these samples, certainly not out of character for an ultra wide zoom. Honestly was expecting a lot worse
I'd love to trade my 10-24 f/4 for Fuji's 8-16 f/2.8, but there are a lot of negatives to consider for the improved sharpness and faster aperture (size, weight, cost, no filter thread, no OIS).
Just don't use the 10 and 24 mm ends, then the corner sharpness is comparable.
it's not my top priority for now, but eventually i will get this lens. thank you for the review.
Thanks for an interesting review. I hsve this lens and it's perfect for my needs. People only see softness if they actually look for it with a magnifier, so it's a bit irrelevant imo.
As for bokeh...in the days a film, this had not been invented and is a product of marketing. If you have to worry about what's out of focus, then it doesn't say much for what is in focus.
Hello Christopher from Adelaide, South Australia. I agree with your review, well done. I have the previous lens and love it, but it's corners are not as sharp as I would like.
I've been waiting for a good comparison between the new and old versions though I wasn't expecting much because the optics are the same. Unfortunately since this is the go-to ultra-wide zoom for Fujifilm, we'll have to take what we can get. I've been seriously thinking about 'upgrading' to the WR because getting dust in the old lens is quite annoying and nearly impossible to clean without a Fujifilm service.
Both the original and the WR version I have found are soft around the edges and as you rightly say fuji knows this. On another point that you picked up on regarding the exposure flickering/stepping in video mode while zooming. I think this is inherent in most fuji XF zoom lenses due to their design. The best explanation I found for this is here: ruclips.net/video/VsOf2LEdx6E/видео.html Fujifilm Lens Flickering effect in video when zoomed. It's still a really great lens.
Soft at f4 . Look at those distortions ! Forget it . Thanks for the review .
Sure , do we really need something that under performs ? Great ideas sometimes don’t make great products . Save your money . Invest in greatness
Not mediocrity , companies make more of what sells .
Thank for your review! Definitely something I’ll be picking up over the 8-16 because I need ND filters on it 🫡
And I don’t want to be dealing with mat box
For critical edge to edge sharpness look at Viltrox 13/1.4
I imagine this is a top lens for people who bought the X-S10 for vlogging. For me, I just like ridiculously wide street photography. I always shoot f4 and above with my X70, so that little package looks great.
It seems to work better on non-IBIS bodies for vlogging. Fuji IBIS is really bad for video use at the moment and you get lots of warping.
Dear Christopher, the Fluctuations in the lighting when zooming in and out may be mitigated with auto ISO. I saw that your Iso was locked at 800. I saw this issue with the 16-50 ois ii. The issue was resolved when put to auto iso
I just did a quick test on the X-T3, as you said and with the aperture on 4 or auto. Unfortunately, I don't think putting the ISO on auto helped.
@@Paul_Rohde aww damn! I'm sorry to hear it didn't work for you. It was just a thought as I had this issue with my XC lens... And for some unknown reason,, auto iso was a workaround!
@@boxeriain It may be a slightly different situation happening between the two lenses. I assume the XC lens doesn't have a constant aperture, so the flickering with the XC lense may be due to the camera being in an auto exposure mode, so that it may adjust the aperture which is apparently a bit jumpy. But when you set the ISO to auto, this would appear to be more linear/smooth to maintain an exposure. The XF10-24 being a constant aperture lens, is trying to adjust (maintain) that aperture in zooming no matter what other exposure levels are happening. If your XC lens experience is true and universal, perhaps the constant aperture lenses could be given an option in settings to lose constant aperture in favour for auto ISO levels for video zooming?
@@Paul_Rohde yeah that's actually very interesting! So I remember setting the xc to f5.6 so it wouldn't deviate. And then zooming in and out gave flickering with set ISO. It turns out the camera has different internal corrections for different focal length. And the auto iso does a good job of blunting that effect. .. surprisingly great job. But I don't know what's happening with this high end wide angle lens 😳
Hmmmm this was definitely on the top of my wishlist. I could find many people talk about it, but not much about the technical details and the mft charts didn't inspire much confidence. I'm a little sad that your findings match what I feared. It's probably still much better than I áctually realistically need. But for that money I expected a little bit more. I wish they would have made it 10-18 or 10-20 and made it a bit sharper.
Great video! Quick question as I'm looking for recommendations. I have the Fuji X-T200 and primarily use it in video mode with the standard lens. As vloggers, it is hard to stand the camera up and back far enough while we are doing a food review for our heads to still be in the picture.. So thinking a wider angle lens might just do the trick.. Our other big issue is we cannot use the flip out viewscreen in conjunction with our Crane M2 gimbal so I am wondering if built in stabilization from a lens like this could allow us to discontinue using the gimbal? Ideally, we want stable on-the-go vlogging as well as the ability to stand up the camera on a joby to get us and the food in a shot at once! It's been a tricky problem so far!! Thanks so much! :-)
The corner sharpness of this lens is miles better than any lenses that I've previously used with the exception of the PL 8-18, which I found to be about on par. Still way better than say the Canon 17-40mm L or Sigma 10-20mm that I started off with in my Canon days.
@星座書上NZ-Aquarius I said lenses I've used. I've never owned a Sony camera or lens so can't comment on them 🤷♂️
As always a brilliant review! Is it worth over it's predecessor though?
Still waiting for your review on the Fujifilm 90mm f2 & the new 23mm f1.4 R LM WR. Any chance you might review them in the near future? Thanks!!
your voice is so relaxing
It's really unfortunate that Fuji didn't update the optics of this lens. It's not good enough for 26mp bodies and higher megapixel bodies are just around the corner. In addition, there is no real alternative, other than going with something like 8-16 2.8 or maybe Samyang 12mm F2. Hopefully Tamron will port 11-20 2.8 soon to Fuji X mount as well.
@@djstuc I've used this lens a lot actually, so I'm pretty familiar with its performance. As Chris mentioned in this review, it performs great on 16mp bodies and it was genuinely a good lense at the time when it was released (mark 1 version). At that time, I had Zeiss 12mm f2.8 and I was quite surprised when I found out that Fuji 10-24 was actually slightly sharper than Zeiss at equivalent apertures and focal length.
The fact that someone has created great images using this lens has nothing to do with its objective qualities measured according to 2022 standards. People have created great images with lenses much worse than this one.
If you think this review does not do justice to 10-24, then I encourage you to ping Fuji to update their MTF charts to meet your expectations as well.
@@djstuc @DJ STU-C I'm well aware of how sharp this lens is because I've used it a lot. Relatively speaking, it's sharper than 18-55 and about similar performance as 55-200. It was pretty good for me in the 10-20 range, I've avoided using it in the 20-24 range because it was too soft for my taste.
But that's all subjective feel and MTF charts and reviews like this one try to put everything into more objective terms. Terms like "pin-sharp" are not objective terms, it's more like "pin-sharp according to my expectations or my definition of pin-sharp". And if you are only shooting Fuji and if you comparing to other Fuji lenses, this lens is pretty much top of the line as far as Fuji zooms go. I was never disappointed with results from this lens sharpness-wise, at least in the 10-20 range.
So if you are happy with the results of this lens, that's great, and I hope you will be happy with the results on higher resolution bodies as well. For those who are not happy, Tamron 11-20 f2.8 might be the answer, as soon as it's released on Fuji mount.
Love your unbiased simple and quick lens reviews assessments. Thanks a mil. Are there any other make lenses within this range that would be better, even if manual. I need something link this for interiors. Please let me know of you do have any suggestions. Thanks again.
Sorry, Mr. Frost but i the corners are looking very sharp to me!
Will this fit Fuji X-S10 camera body?
Great vlogging lens for Fujifilm system.
this was the review I was waiting for, now I now I can keep using my samyang 12mm af and don't need to "upgrade" ;-)
How the fuck can you handle the insane flaring and color fringing of the Samyang? Does the new AF model at least have a properly designed lens hood that won't cause an insane amount of vignetting? Because the old MF lens had a horrendous lens hood
@@liviuvelichi6847 I don't have a lot issues with flaring, as I understand the new af lens handles flaring much better than the old one. Also the lens hood seems to be shallower then the old manual focus one. It's not a perfect lens, but I see no reason for me to get the fuji 10-24. Although I probably would love the zoom range on the fuji lens.
@@dano5739 Good to hear that they fixed the lens hood. And yeah you are right, the AF model actually flares a little less than the old MF model but even so, that's a type of flaring I can't stand. I really don't like it when a lens flares extra hard if light hits at just the right angle. Btw I don't own the Fuji 10-24. I'm not even a Fuji user, I'm a Sony user and I was incredibly disappointed with the old Samyang 12mm
@@djstuc I also enjoyed shooting astro with my MF model but any other type of photography was rather disappointing due to the flaring and color fringing
@@djstuc good price! Which grey seller did you buy it from. Many of them have disappeared unfortunately like eglobal etc
Thanks for another great review, I had the first version with mixed results, mainly the AF was inconsistent. Be Must be RUclips? Because I couldn’t see any difference from centre sharpness compared to corner! Both looked pretty sharp to me.
Beside my Kit Lens this i pretty much my second one, but way more on my camera.
I've got a Samyang 12mm f/2 mechanical prime lens too first, but i am just no prime guy, misses the zoom option and i like to check my EXIF Data at wich aperture i shot the image too. Also i felt the camera wasn't working as well with this dumb lens in auto exposure as it does with the XF Fuji lenses.
So i quickly looked for sales on the non WR version of the 10-24mm XF Lens, because of the dropping prices after the WR release, and i'm really happy with it!
I tend to shoot 80% of my pictures with it, only bring out the 18-55mm Kit Lens for lower aperture or mostly the higher focal length.
Wonder if you'll play with any Medium Format equipment. Probably super niche, but think it'd still be fun to look at a Fuji or Hasselblad.
Does somebody know how this lens perform with the 40mp sensors?
Hrm, shame about the corner sharpness! I guess there wasn't any low-hanging optical fruit they could pick here while they were updating the rest of the lens? :(
Thank you excellent as always. Is there a better option from 3rd party. How about the Fujifilm 8-16 f2.8?
I think Fuji's wide zooms leave a lot of compromises, this suffers from corner softness, while the 8-16/2.8 is big and lacks a filter thread. Perhaps the Viltrox 14/1.4 is actually the best wide option if a zoom is not a crucial requirement.
13mm*
Fujifilm 14mm f2.8 is one of the most optically correct wide angle lens out there.
Yes I just recently got the Viltrox 13mm f1.4. Highly recommend it. It’s as sharp if not slightly more then the Fuji 14mm which is reassuring, however it’s AF seems smoother and allows a massive 4 times more light in, which is the main reason I got it, a lot of the events I do are low light.
I know one one photographer mentioned on RUclips about this lens: this lens is good but not very good. Now we have the scientific result. I'm into FUJI to replace my Micro Four Third system in order to have something lighter than my Canon full frame gear; yes my EOS RP is lighter than a X-T3 and not bigger, only the grip, but zoom lenses can get pretty big and heavy. The neu STM zooms are not good enough so I use the good old EF L lenses like the EF 16-35mm f4. And that is the question. Do I take my RP with this huge and heavy EF lens to photograph a lakeside sunset or do I want to go light. When going out on purpose to take especially this landscape photo I would only take the best gear I own. And the Canon EF 16-35 f4L is sharp everywhere no matter what. I won't consider this Fujinon lens. As much as I want a small convenient package the end result is more important. Olympus images always fall apart when the light slowly disappears on sunsets, this is not an option for me.
Thanks Chris another great review. Will you be doing one on the new Viltrox 13f1.4? Would be eager to your results.
He already made a Viltrox review, look on the channel
@@unn4medfeel1ng Thanks! I just found it.
I wonder for the corner sharpness, is it possible to test if it is an issue of field curvature impacting the focal plane?
I have the mk I and I have a constant like motor sound... even if a turno of AF and stabilization. Does it happen to everybody?
I have a feeling the lens can go brighter than F4 when wide open but it is locked down to a constant F4 by the Firmware. The exposure becomes brighter when you zoomed out and darker when zooming in. Would be interesting to see if the firmware can be modded to test that
All 'constant' aperture zoom lenses' maximum iris opening will be larger than the aperture value stated on the lens. However, with increasing aperture values on zooms, more optical flaws appear and thus manufacturers decide to 'limit' their lens to a slower aperture.
@@opalyankaBG understandable, but this lens feels sharp enough to open up a few stops i feel like
I have this lens and find it fine but yes, I'm not surprised the optics are a bit weak for 2022. Fuji have been dragging their feet with updates recently in many ways. I consider this a reasonable lens but not spectacular.
@@djstuc Lack of meaningful Kaizen releases, the X-30 II... The optics on the 10-24 should have been updated and people have been asking Fuji for years to update the lenses they've finally started (slowly) doing. I remember the Fuji that made my X-T1 and it's quite different to the Fuji now. Lots of cameras could easily have film sims added but they refuse to bother. The phone app is diabolically bad. I'm happy enough with my X-T3 mind, great camera but it took them how long to get IBIS? Yes I know the X-T3 does not have IBIS. Oh and how long to release better batteries? I have to battery grip my X-T3 for a good days use.
Fuji still my main system but I'm not a brand myopic fanboy. Got an A7IV a couple of weeks ago and I hate to say it, night and day. I will use both systems as there are pros and cons with everything but Fuji don't seem to be focused on the customer the same. Plus the new releases are very expensive for what they are. This from a Fuji admirer.
@@djstuc Cool story.
It's a mixed bag I'd say. The new 18mm/23mm/33mm/arguably 70-300mm are all nice, but it is somewhat disappointing the likes of 10-24mm and 27mm had no change in optics. And true, Kaizen isn't really a thing anymore.
It's disappointing as basically every other brand is sleeping right now in the APS-C space, Nikon has no lenses, Canon seems to have given up on EOS M and Sony is still using an almost 10 years old sensor. Fuji should've tried harder to become the undisputed leader in APS-C, but they seem content with doing their thing.
@@djstuc OK thanks I'll get right on that.
Funny, i was just thinking about how you had never reviewed this lens even though you're a landscape shooter.
Wouldve been nice to see the optics get a small update as well with the new version.
I ended up getting this lens after seeing Andy Mumford's landscape work with this lens, he uses it almost exclusively for wide angle shots and his work is fantastic, so if its good enough to achieve that level of photography it's more than good enough for me.
Though the tamron 11-20mm f2.8 could be an interesting one if it comes over to fuji, although the corner quality at wide angles seems comparable.
I wonder if the zooming exposure jump could be caused by the "fake" constant f/4. It might actually a 10-24mm f/2-4 but artificially locked to f/4, just like the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 for full frame (which is actually a f/2-2.8).
i would have thought a F2-4 will be more desirable than a straight F4 especially for Astro and would be advertised as such ...unless the corners are too soft at10mm F2
All constant aperture ratio zooms are actually variable aperture, because mathematically maintaining the constant ratio over a changing focal length requires changing the size of the aperture to compensate. This means that all constant aperture ratio zooms are actually stopped down when zoomed out. This can sometimes be seen as straighter sided heptagonal, nonagonal, or hendecagonal bokeh balls at the widest focal lengths.
This Fuji lens seems to have a delay in electronic communication which is not adjusting the aperture fast enough to compensate for the zooming.
Hello, have you tried it with 40 mpix sensor?
The 10-24 F4 always seemed like too much of a compromise to me, just so they could have something sort of equivalent to the 8-16 F2.8 that allows the use of screw on filters.
Physics don't allow for such a lens. Of course we would all love to have a 8-500mm f/1.0 lens that is compact, affordable, and allows filters. But it just is not physically possible.
Want this one so bad
Perhaps the aperture is in fact brighter than f4 but Fujifilm limits it to f4 by firmware so when zoomming in or out the exposure was changed.
Τhey do this in 8-16 and 16-55 also.
@mipmipmipmipmip I remember 16-80 does 4 steps. 16-55 3 steps. 8-16 1 step. I dont remember the 50-140 doing it.
All zooms have to compensate for aperture diameter. F-stop = focal length/aperture diameter, hence aperture diameter = focal length / f-stop. E.g. at 10mm f/4, it is 10/4 = 2.5mm. At 24mm it is 24/4 = 6mm.
Idk why Fujifilm can't just mechanically couple the iris changes to the zoom ring. These electronic changes are really annoying. As a hybrid shooter, I use the primes for photography and adapt Canon EF lenses for video. Far superior performance than Fuji native zooms especially the 16-55. Overpriced and only useful for stills.
@@professionalpotato4764 That is irrelevant. These lenses are not designed to be constant aperture.
These lenses are very useful for video. You cannot zoom during a shot, but manual focus is usable in the linear setting in the f2.8 lenses. I treat these lenses as primes. If you dont need photogrqphy autofocus functionality, Fuji make two plastic manual cine zooms that are remarkably good for the price.
The Fuji f2.8 photo zooms are excellent purchases for their price. Their offers are quite regular and this makes the price a lot better. The abberation correction in the optical design in the three f2.8 lenses, the sharpness, the bokeh, and the geometry correction in the camera are the best on the market for the price. I have used the Sony f4 zooms that are equivalent and the optics are garbage. Chromatic aberation, nd bokeh are all laughable in comparison. The f2.8 Sony are a lot better than the f4 and the wide angle zoom is very good, but they cost a lot more. Lenses for the new Canon system are excellent but very expensive.
The Fuji system is a very unique proposition for filmmakers that have control on their shoots and want very high image quality on a very low budget. Most people would be more happy with a Sony camera or a Blackmagic studio camera.
@@aristotle_4532 I'm sorry, I don't quite get what you mean by "These lenses are not designed to be constant aperture" when they are constant f/4 and f/2.8 zooms?
There's no need and use for the Fuji MK cine zooms. Not when there isn't a single X-mount camera capable of ProRes RAW/BRAW. Maybe on the C70 or something, but not on an X-T4. Until Fuji makes an X-mount cinema camera, EF/PL or E/RF mount cine lenses are more "future-proof" and easier to sell in the future.
I beg to differ especially with regards to the 16-55. Manual focus is not usable simply due to the fact you can't customize the focus throw. I missed lots of shots because it is like a 360? or 720 degree throw? It is also not smooth and focuses in rather minute "steps". Not too bad I guess, but nah... not for me. Fuji also doesn't allow a quick single point AF using back-button focusing while rolling video. The image quality is good, I agree. But usability in video is really bad. Which is a shame cos I was hoping for it to be the perfect hybrid shooting lens.
The Sony 24-105 looks pretty good, similar optical quality, and has further range + OIS for the same price. The 24-70 f/4 is garbage, totally, even the Fuji 18-55 kit lens is better. Idk, the 16-55 is just not for me. I prefer adapting my Sigma 18-35. Maybe if the 16-55 was selling at $800, I think that's ok. But $1,200 retail is pushing it.
Any suggestions for ultra wide zoom lens alternatives that have better corner sharpness? This is the only option as far as I know.
@@djstuc Yea. I just complain the lack of choices with the Fujifilm system. For me, I just need a fast wide prime lens. 18mm f1.4 is ideal for me. Already got the new 23mm f1.4 and 33mm f1.4.
Can you test the Pergear 10mm F5.6 please?
So you get the bizarre exposure jumping even in manual mode?
Seems like an electronic communication issue, if the aperture was mechanically coupled to the zoom mechanism like zoom lenses of old then this would not happen, these days with all electronic lenses, the aperture adjustments need to be properly synced to compensate for the changing aperture size as you zoom, and here it must be malfunctioning. Whether this is an isolated issue with Chris' particular copy, or a bug in the lens model itself is unclear.
@@Bayonet1809 It happens with Fuji zooms. (Haven't tried the tele zooms yet though). Other brands don't have this issue. Sony, Canon, Nikon none. Just Fujifilm being shortsighted because they only planned/designed these for pure photography. At their retail price, I don't think Fuji zooms will ever be worth it.
If only Fujifilm made XF 15-45mm lens.
@@djstuc The 15-45mm is very compact and my unit can also be very sharp, however the build quality is not ideal. Sticking zoom ring and unresponsive focus ring in sub 10°C temperatures are two of the main flaws. That's why I would like to see a XF version.
This is most hated fuji lens by me. Hasn't got any sharpness in the corner I hate in it. I have to crop image all the time to avoid soft corner, Probably my copy is useless I don't know.
@@djstuc Thank you, Appreciated your free advice. God bless you.
But to be honest, you don't know what you talking about my friend.
Beware before buying this lens! Unfortunately some of these 10-24 lenses have really big IQ problems. Mine is always soft in certain areas of the frame (like, smudgy soft even at f10) due to extreme field curvature. I sent it for repair 3 times with no improvement.
Once Viltrox figures out zooms, Fuji can pack up and close business completely.
Fuji should make f2.8 version for the 10-24.
Would that not be both a much larger and more expensive lens?
@@djstuc have u ever heard of 16-35/2.8 for full frame? There is a market for such lens which is very versatile for landscape and documentary photo. Based on your logic, sony canon should kill off their 16-35
@@robertcudlipp3426 yes bigger n more expensive. But provide more choices. Some people dont want to buy the 8-16.
@@djstuc Hey troll. It’s what I want for the 10-24 to have a F2.8 option. It’s not what u want. If you’re not happy, just piss off. TROLL!
I really can't understand why fuji can't fix those problems on all zoom lenses!
@@djstuc Other companies mechanically couple the iris to the zoom ring so that there is no exposure stepping. Fujifilm was just really short sighted because they designed all these zooms for pure photography only.
The only way to fix it would be to release mark ii versions where zoom ring is mechanically coupled to the iris. No amount of electronic control can give the same smoothness.
@@djstuc Not necessarily I think. I'm not 100% sure. But dslr lenses didnt have this issue. And those were autofocus lenses.
Could it be that the exposure changed when you zoomed in and put because the amount of sky in the frame changed? Did you test this with a scene where the brightness of the light coming through the lens didn’t change wile zooming?
Good point, but I just tried it zooming in and out on my wooden floor. It still flickers.
@@Paul_Rohde Ah okay. Then my only other guess is that when you zoom in the lens just lets in less light and the camera compensates for that instead of just letting it become darker. After all, the F-number is not about light, so even if it has a constant aperture/F-number, it might not have a constant T-number. But I’m only guessing. I’m not an expert on lenses.
@@just_eirik Other comments here say that, it has to compensate. Some comments state that other brand constant aperture zooms use a physical connection between the zoom and the aperture so it stays smooth. I don't know, maybe Fuji needs to use a different motor type (linear) to control the aperture more smoothly, or better prediction or sensing of zoom changes. Pity.
Yeah I can see how that’s annoying for film makers. Shouldn’t matter too much for photography though, right?
@@just_eirik Right. But Fuji excel at video, in performance and value, so it's a pity these lenses will have video zooming issues.
2:35 the exposure issue maybe from a similar issue on a tamron 28-75mm constant 2.8.
That issue was the the 2.8 was in fact a 2.0 to 2.8 but the 2.8 constant was artificially created by the lens stopping itself down at wider angles.
Perhaps similar going on here?
Easy to tell just by looking down the lens while zooming.
ruclips.net/video/Z8M0DTsDIuA/видео.html
All constant aperture zooms do this, and almost all zooms period do as well.
Aperture is just maths, the size of the aperture opening is your focal length/your aperture value. At 24mm f4, the aperture opening has to be 2.4x the diameter compared to 10mm f4. In this case, the electronics are just too slow when closing down the aperture when zooming out.
@@0M0rty They really don't physically close/open the aperture on a constant nor should exposure jump.
What you said how f number is calculated is slightly incorrect too. It's not calculated on the size of the aperture but it's entrance pupil of the lens (the apparent size of the aperture when viewed through the front of the lens). This is why real constant lenses are expensive because it takes great optical science to achieve this.
It should not ever physically change size when zooming in or out.
Thats pretty poor. Hows it going to cope with a 40mp sensor? Not well!
Never a big fan of this lens. Seemed to lack the character of their wide-angle primes. Good review as always Chris.
u can clearly see how Chris is scared and taking extra carefulness for wording lol. come on folks don't be mean, be friendly be nice
So let me get this straight there is some weirdness in this lens with exposure jumping...that is not good and I wouldn't buy it...Love your reviews...Come on Fuji unacceptable.
Tbh, I will most probably skip this lens. While the build quality is excelent, optics are indeed a bit dated. I am waiting for Tamron 11-20mm 2.8 to be released for Fuji, which should happen this year.
exactly my thoughts, but I'm not sure yet if I will get that one. I own a samyang 12mm af, so I'm looking forward to a review of that tamron lens.
@@dano5739 IQ wise, that Tamron is very good. You can check Christopher's review for this lens, albeit for Sony E mount. Shouldn't be too different for Fuji. I was also eyeing a Viltrox 13mm 1.4, which could eventually still end up on my shopping list.
First! (I think)