I’m an event photographer and I own every new Fuji prime and zoom and I just keep going back to the 16-55 because of the versatility as I normally carry the 18mm 1.4 , 33mm and 56 1.2wr on 3 different cameras in one bag but at weddings and events I keep have to changing camera bodies as the environment changes so quickly and now I carry the 16-55 and 56mm wr on another body
Woah that's awesome! I really wish they released a 16mm with the LM instead. The 27mm equiv look from the 18mm is still taking me awhile to appreciate. Unsure why they pushed 18mm more. Do you prefer the 50-140mm over the 90mm too?
50-140 is a lens that’s really underrated because photographers find it boring. It such a sharp and contrasty lens with amazing image quality and I find it’s on par to the 90 for image quality and a lot more versatile
Thank you! I’ve been using it more lately and it hasn’t let me down at all. Wasn’t expecting it to be so great for video! The sigma 18-35mm might be used a little less now.
Nice one Sam. I opted for the 18-35 for some of the reasons you mention with the 16-55 like the extending zoom issue. I realise I am taking a massive hit on the 18-35 in regards to AF, size and weight but at least that extending zoom thing is not an issue and I get f1.8 as a bonus. It's taken awhile now but my kit feels fairly narrowed down, xf16/1.4, Art 18-35, xf56/1.2 WR, XF50-140. Done. I do hope Fuji refresh both the 16-55 and 50-140, we could do with some f2-2.8 zooms.
Thank you! Your kit sounds pretty awesome. I would love to try out the 50-140 sometime. I'm looking at the 90mm a little more lately as I already have a 70-200mm f2.8 for my Sony and I can have something a little different. How are you liking the 16mm f1.4? That's been on my list for awhile.
Hey! I guess it really comes down the conditions you're shooting in and what you're looking for but if I do start pixel peeping between my sony A7IV and the Fuji, the FF does have that slight edge but I wouldn't call this much better. It's the type of difference that a client wouldn't ever pick up and when it's posted online too, often times it won't get picked up on.
Just bought mine, but not getting sharp photos with it at all, also noticed dust inside the lens, so probably why, though I find it far too heavy so will be sending it back.
That's unfortunate! Sounds like you definitely got a defective one. If you want something lighter, check out of the sigma version. Just as sharp but lighter.
The 16-55 is an awesome lens but it has one major drawback for video: It is f2.8 all the way through the zoom range but NOT t2.8. While the aperture remains constant across the range, the transmissivity doesn’t always, and you will occasionally get a sudden brightness change in the middle of a zoom. It doesn’t happen always, but when it does it’s annoying and a lot of work to fix cleanly. The only real way around it is to change the focal length between clips, using it as a “bag of primes” instead of as a zoom. You can’t really blame Fuji for this as it was designed for photography, not for video. It’s an awesome photography lens and probably over-specced for video, at least optically.
Thanks for the comments and completely agree! I believe I touch on this lightly in general when I reviewed the 7artisans cine lens how F stop lenses are not standardised for their light transmission. Fortunately for me, I wouldn’t say I am zooming in and out within one clip and so far I haven’t yet encountered any noticeable change with exposure that could not be corrected when recording in F-LOG. Thanks for watching!
@@andykline1933 never.. contact Fuji perhaps! And make sure the contacts are clean. Also try setting it to A on the lens and adjust it with the knobs to see if it does allow 3.2 or perhaps the blades are sticking
The sigma is still a great option! Much lighter and optically very close too. Hopefully I can get my hands on one again soon for a comparison but from what I've it's a very solid choice. You won't be due for an upgrade for a long time :)
For me, 4K120, faster readout from the stacked sensor which also provides better low light performance and less rolling shutter for video. In theory the X-H2s also has better AF. When I upgraded from the X-T4 it just seemed like the better upgrade as I became more video focused.
Try the cheaper and lighter Sigma 18-50 f2.8 zoom. You're unlikely to miss the optical quality of the Fuji for video work only and gives the same brightness as the 16mm zoom.
@@MichaelFrederickPhoto Sigma have been killing it with their lenses for X mount lately. You will still find some benefits to sticking with Fujifilm but often the differences are so minor the best value becomes the sigma lens. The autofocus will be very slightly better on the Fuji lens but we're at a point that AF is so good that it doesn't really matter and it's half the price. Personally I wanted that 16mm length but now sigma have announced a 10-16mm lens too 😂 I still don't regret getting this lens and I know it's going to get used quite a lot.
Keep doing videos about the 16-55mm I am also torn about the prime lenses vs the zoom, prime lenses are good,yes, when it comes to artistic side because you really need to move and compose, on the other hand the zoom gives you versatility but if you really want to create you can use each focal length and treat it as a prime you will have the versatility and creativity.
Thanks! Zoom lenses used to make me feel lazy but as I started to understand focal lengths better and how to achieve certain looks it has helped me treat zooms like a prime and I still get to move around and this lens definitely keeps up with primes. I would like to have a little more separation at 16mm but I won't know until I get to try out a 16mm f1.4 to really compare.
@@SamNozuhuryes that what i am doing with my zooms, 18-55 and 16-80 , depends on what i shoot and my mood, i treat every focal length as a prime just at f4 all the way that’s I am really interested on trying or maybe owning a 16-55 f2.8.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
I’m an event photographer and I own every new Fuji prime and zoom and I just keep going back to the 16-55 because of the versatility as I normally carry the 18mm 1.4 , 33mm and 56 1.2wr on 3 different cameras in one bag but at weddings and events I keep have to changing camera bodies as the environment changes so quickly and now I carry the 16-55 and 56mm wr on another body
Woah that's awesome! I really wish they released a 16mm with the LM instead. The 27mm equiv look from the 18mm is still taking me awhile to appreciate. Unsure why they pushed 18mm more. Do you prefer the 50-140mm over the 90mm too?
50-140 is a lens that’s really underrated because photographers find it boring. It such a sharp and contrasty lens with amazing image quality and I find it’s on par to the 90 for image quality and a lot more versatile
@@Pixelpeeps-69 awesome! I’m so tempted on the 90mm.. I own a 70-200 for my Sony and been using it more but the 50-140 versatility would be great.
This lens is a gem... great contrast and colors, sharp, built like a tank, handles glare well, def a bag of primes.
Thank you! I’ve been using it more lately and it hasn’t let me down at all. Wasn’t expecting it to be so great for video! The sigma 18-35mm might be used a little less now.
Nice one Sam.
I opted for the 18-35 for some of the reasons you mention with the 16-55 like the extending zoom issue. I realise I am taking a massive hit on the 18-35 in regards to AF, size and weight but at least that extending zoom thing is not an issue and I get f1.8 as a bonus.
It's taken awhile now but my kit feels fairly narrowed down, xf16/1.4, Art 18-35, xf56/1.2 WR, XF50-140. Done.
I do hope Fuji refresh both the 16-55 and 50-140, we could do with some f2-2.8 zooms.
Thank you! Your kit sounds pretty awesome. I would love to try out the 50-140 sometime. I'm looking at the 90mm a little more lately as I already have a 70-200mm f2.8 for my Sony and I can have something a little different. How are you liking the 16mm f1.4? That's been on my list for awhile.
my workhorse lens. hardly ever leaves my camera. fantastically fast, quiet, and sharp!
Love to hear it! Hearing so many others thinking the same really makes it seem like a solid investment. Thanks for watching.
Hi. How does this Lens compare to the Full Frame 24-70 in Image quality? Is the full frame much better?
Hey! I guess it really comes down the conditions you're shooting in and what you're looking for but if I do start pixel peeping between my sony A7IV and the Fuji, the FF does have that slight edge but I wouldn't call this much better. It's the type of difference that a client wouldn't ever pick up and when it's posted online too, often times it won't get picked up on.
Depends on the bodies. If you compare an XH2 and an A7IV, the XH2 should have slightly better IQ
Just bought mine, but not getting sharp photos with it at all, also noticed dust inside the lens, so probably why, though I find it far too heavy so will be sending it back.
That's unfortunate! Sounds like you definitely got a defective one. If you want something lighter, check out of the sigma version. Just as sharp but lighter.
Selling the whole system and moving over to the a7cii
@@NathanHassani-kr4bh can’t go wrong with that! Solid choice
@@SamNozuhur I just can't deal with the autofocus on these fuji cameras ( xh2) miles behind sony, plus I'll be getting full frame for the same price.
The 16-55 is an awesome lens but it has one major drawback for video: It is f2.8 all the way through the zoom range but NOT t2.8. While the aperture remains constant across the range, the transmissivity doesn’t always, and you will occasionally get a sudden brightness change in the middle of a zoom. It doesn’t happen always, but when it does it’s annoying and a lot of work to fix cleanly. The only real way around it is to change the focal length between clips, using it as a “bag of primes” instead of as a zoom. You can’t really blame Fuji for this as it was designed for photography, not for video. It’s an awesome photography lens and probably over-specced for video, at least optically.
Thanks for the comments and completely agree! I believe I touch on this lightly in general when I reviewed the 7artisans cine lens how F stop lenses are not standardised for their light transmission. Fortunately for me, I wouldn’t say I am zooming in and out within one clip and so far I haven’t yet encountered any noticeable change with exposure that could not be corrected when recording in F-LOG. Thanks for watching!
So I have this lens and sometimes when you set for 2.8 it reads is 3.2? Seems like the aperature ring is off. Happen to you?
@@andykline1933 never.. contact Fuji perhaps! And make sure the contacts are clean. Also try setting it to A on the lens and adjust it with the knobs to see if it does allow 3.2 or perhaps the blades are sticking
Beautiful pictures and model! 👍🏼
Thank you! :)
Maybe one day if I have the extra cash I’ll pick one up. But right now the sigma 18-50 is my go to
The sigma is still a great option! Much lighter and optically very close too. Hopefully I can get my hands on one again soon for a comparison but from what I've it's a very solid choice. You won't be due for an upgrade for a long time :)
Nice video sam
Thankyou! 😊
Why X-H2S ? Why not X-H2.?
For me, 4K120, faster readout from the stacked sensor which also provides better low light performance and less rolling shutter for video. In theory the X-H2s also has better AF. When I upgraded from the X-T4 it just seemed like the better upgrade as I became more video focused.
Your version of this lens’ review is so much cleaner I need to redo mine 😂
Not at all! I love how yours looks. What filter did you use for yours? So clean 👌
@@SamNozuhur graded with dehancer in Davinci resolve bro!
@@Fujiboy.mp4 awesome! I just got it too. So it was just 16-55mm (no ND) alone for the video?
@@SamNozuhur I use the KNF 2-32 variable ND but no diffusion I do that in dehancer
Try the cheaper and lighter Sigma 18-50 f2.8 zoom. You're unlikely to miss the optical quality of the Fuji for video work only and gives the same brightness as the 16mm zoom.
Definitely on my list to try! Thank you
Hardest decision ever,
Fujinon 18-50 F2.8-4,
Fujinon 16-55 F2.8,
Sigma 18-50 F2.8,
Tamron 17-70 F2.8
🤣🤣🤣
What do you shoot mostly and what do you prioritise the most? zoom range/size/image quality?
I have the Sigma 18-50 after testing the XF 16-55, they are so close that hard to tell, and saved money getting the Sigma.
@@MichaelFrederickPhoto Sigma have been killing it with their lenses for X mount lately. You will still find some benefits to sticking with Fujifilm but often the differences are so minor the best value becomes the sigma lens. The autofocus will be very slightly better on the Fuji lens but we're at a point that AF is so good that it doesn't really matter and it's half the price. Personally I wanted that 16mm length but now sigma have announced a 10-16mm lens too 😂 I still don't regret getting this lens and I know it's going to get used quite a lot.
@@MichaelFrederickPhoto i tested both and the xf is significantly better in high contrast scenarios.
And now the xf16-50 has to be taken into consideration, too.
👍
Thank you
ufff
🙌
Keep doing videos about the 16-55mm I am also torn about the prime lenses vs the zoom, prime lenses are good,yes, when it comes to artistic side because you really need to move and compose, on the other hand the zoom gives you versatility but if you really want to create you can use each focal length and treat it as a prime you will have the versatility and creativity.
Thanks! Zoom lenses used to make me feel lazy but as I started to understand focal lengths better and how to achieve certain looks it has helped me treat zooms like a prime and I still get to move around and this lens definitely keeps up with primes. I would like to have a little more separation at 16mm but I won't know until I get to try out a 16mm f1.4 to really compare.
@@SamNozuhuryes that what i am doing with my zooms, 18-55 and 16-80 , depends on what i shoot and my mood, i treat every focal length as a prime just at f4 all the way that’s I am really interested on trying or maybe owning a 16-55 f2.8.