Shot a wedding using only this lens and I really don't have much to complain about! Wouldn't have minded just a *little* more shallow DoF but the versatility was perfect for my case Really nice video! Just straight to the point and informative
Hi Jacob! I was surprised at the ratio of photos I took with this and the 50-140 at the weddings I've done. It's about 75% with the 16-55. It covers the sweet spot of focal length, for sure. Many thanks for your comment - it really appreciate your feedback. Take care and have fun creating photos!
I actually prefer it when the background isn't blown (blurred) to smithereens as it helps the image tell a story of which otherwise can be and quite often is lost.
Hi Karl! Thanks so much for this comment. I think it’s important, whatever the choice to render background focus, it should be intentional and serve the creative vision of the photo as well as the personal preferences of the photographer.
Hello Michael! Great review! I have the lens and I like it very much! It is a nice acquisition for a crop sensor camera! Your pictures show exactly what this lens is like! I have a comment and hope it will help people understand some important missing details. It's a lens for a crop sensor camera. Because of that, everything is cropped by 1.5: The F number, the ISO and the focal distance. We must multiply every number by the crop factor of 1.5. It's simple like this! So, it is not an F/2.8 lens at all! It is a F/2.8 x 1.5 = F/4.2!!!! It is for real an F/4.2 lens. That's why the bokeh is not the best! It's an F/4.2 lens. The ISO case: if you are shooting at ISO 100, you are in fact shooting at 100 x 1.5 = ISO 150. If you are shooting at ISO 800, you are in fact shooting at 800 x 1.5 = ISO 1200 and so on! And the focus distance falls within the same case, as we all know: shooting at 16mm is in fact shooting at 16 x 1.5 = 24mm. So, every time we buy a cropped camera, we must crop everything, not only the focal distance, but nobody talks about that, right? Companies do not want us to know everything! So, any cropped sensor will "crop" everything! If we really want an F/2.8 lens in a cropped body, we must buy an F/1.8 lens, which will give us the equivalent of F/2.7. If we want the effect of a F/1.8 lens in a crop sensor camera, we must buy a lens with maximum aperture of F/1.2! Then we have all the mathematic behind it: F/1.2 x 1.5 crop = F/1.8! If we want the real focal distance, real ISO and real F number there is no other way, but buying a full frame camera. That's the only way! We can, instead, buy a camera with a bigger sensor! If you buy medium format, then, we will always have better performance when compared to a full frame. The mathematics are the same every time! We must understand it all and see the problems and advantages of each system and sensor size. And remember that camera manufactures always lie, always deny us access to vital information. They don't want us to think about all this details. And the pixels in the sensors: Quick math here: a 20MP cropped sensor is equal a 45MP full frame sensor in terms of pixel size and light exposure to the sensor. So, if you have, for example a NIKON D500 and a D850, you have the same possibilities concerning image quality. But you must buy better lenses to match with the cropped sensor. If you want the F/2.8 effect, you must buy and F/1.8 lens with equivalent focal distance and equivalent for the crop camera. Then, it will neutralize the ISO difference between the full frame and the crop sensor. If we use a micro four thirds sensor ... it's like coming from "worse to horrible"! The smaller the sensor, the more complicate it is to match re results.
Great review, thanks! I just got mine yesterday! I shoot mostly videos and needed an all-rounder zoom lens with constant aperture. Most of the time f/2.8 offers depth of field which is shallow enough for my style, and I truly appreciate the Fuji colors and this lens seems to preserve them well. Oh, and I shoot with X-T4. I look forward to shooting many videos with this lens!
Really liked this review. I've heard other reviewers say this lens lacks personality, which is quite interesting. I notice you shoot wide open quite a bit, so I guess it's a bokeh/out of focus thing... I'm considering this lens for landscape use...the image quality and WR really appeal to me :)
Hi! I’m so glad you liked the review. I am most definitely being super picky in my critique of this lens. I think for landscapes, especially at 5.6 or 8, the image quality will be spectacular and the technical awesomeness of this lens will render the scenes really well.
Totally agree! Its a good lens jack of all trades! But unfortunately master of none. I also use the Fuji systems for my weddings but this zoom stays most of the day in may camera bag as a backup, occasionally i bring it out to photograph guests during canapes or when people are Mingling etc its great for that, but for the creative stuff its hard for this lens to compete with fujis newest lenses, at the moment im using these 5 primes and they are amazing. Viltrox 13mmf1.4, 18mmf1.4, 33mmf1.4 56mmf1.2, & the 90mm f2. Personally though, for my family, travel and landscape images, the 16-55 is awesome u cant go wrong for do it all lens.
Hi Elias! Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts - I really appreciate it. I'm starting to use primes more, and am enjoying all the benefits (especially so much more light!!!) of these lenses. I just got my Viltrox 13mm, and am looking forward to putting in through its paces. Cheers!
Hi Michael, your long-term review made me more determined to buy this awesome lense, might make good pair with X-T4. Thank You, best regards from Indonesia.
Awesome video, thanks and i'm glad to find this 2 years later. I think you sold me on this lens for what i would like it for. I need a sharp lens with great IQ and this seems like it can be used on camera for most of the time and if i need to really specialize i'll use the 56 1.2 or some of my other prime lenses.
Hello. I totally agree with you ..... I own this lens I bought second hand 1 year ago on eBay around 700 € and it’s a dream on my XT4. Contrast, micro contrast, colors, sharpness, AF and even Bokeh as well as it is not his strongest point. This zoom is glued to my camera very often. To sum up, it’s a killing. I own also the 50-140 with the 1.4 extender. This 2 guys form an infernal couple. 😀
Hi JB! Yep, I bet my feelings about this lens would get even better if I had a camera with IBIS. Combined with the 50-140, it's a really great duo, indeed. Cheers!
Late to the party but I just ordered this lens specifically for use with the new 40mp Fuji bodies. I do a lot of city architectural, travel, and landscape photos. The 18-55 has is just to soft in the corners and the 16-80 looks even worse. I tried the Tamron 17-70 but the chromatic aberration was terrible at the wider focal lengths. I think Fuji is going to sell a lot more of these lenses now that they brought out the new 40mp bodies.
Hi Paul, and welcome to the party! The 16-55 should pair very nicely with the new 40mp sensor, and I hope you really enjoy it. Since I made this video, the 16-80 has become my daily driver (size, weight, extra reach, closer focus) over the 16-55. I still use the 16-55, but it's either for my talking to camera video or "pro" work. For grins, planning a video comparing the XF 16-55 vs the Sigma 18-50 ;)
Hi Michael, Great review! I’m considering this lens but just noticed your comment about recently switching to the 16 to 80 but I had heard that lens had many focusing issues in video Are you experiencing any issues with the 16-80? I shoot food videos for RU-vid and was hoping I could use the 16 -80 for photography and video work Currently using the 18-55 and was thinking about an upgrade...would appreciate your thoughts. Thank you!
@@SavoryThymes Hi Andrew! Thanks for watching and sharing your comment. I have not used the 16-80 much for video, so am not confident on speaking on its vid focusing capability. My suggestion would be to rent one for a week or so to try for yourself and see how it works in your specific use cases. Hope that helps!
@@MSladekPhoto Thanks for the quick response Great advice. I’ll give that a try. I had heard that in video there was a focus wobble issue among others with the 16-80 but I’m not sure if that’s been fixed with recent updates .. appreciate the help!
Awesome review! I think this lens is perfect for my use-case. I rediscovered photography as a hobby and I'm on the look for a versatile lense to take pictures of my family. Children running around me, some portraits, walking in the woods and the family life at home (sometimes in low light). I really like the bokeh of my F1.8 but sometimes it's just annoying. For example: A couple portrait of me and my wife. I knew that it's important to have the same distance to the camera because of the DoF and tried to position myself accordingly. The picture looked great on the camera screen. But at home i discovered that her face was in focus, mine was not.
Hi! I like this suggestion, but I don’t have access to the Tamron 17-70 and am not personally interested in lenses without aperture rings on the lens. Thanks for watching and sharing this idea!
Thanks for the in-depth review, apologies if I didn't catch it but what would you say is an alternative to this in Fuji's line up? I have an X-H1, so IS isn't the biggest concern for me, I was looking at more of picking up a lineup for travel/street and this seems to fit the bill. I only have a 23mm f/2 at the moment.
Hi! Thanks for watching and sharing your question. Some alternatives to the 16-55mm f2.8 are: 1) XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 2) XF 16-80mm f/4 (this is my daily use and travel lens), 3) Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 4) Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8. I really like the Sigma for small size and low weight with very nice image quality. I have not used either the Fuji 18-55 or Tamron 17-70. Hope that helps and good luck!
Brilliant review, thanks for the video. Curious what your camera/lens/lighting setup you used to make this video. The video looks exactly like what I’m trying to achieve for my wife’s small business videos.
Hi! Thanks for your kind words about the lighting setup. There's a total of eight light sources ;) Here's what I'm using: MAIN LIGHT Godox VL 150 in an Aputure Lightdome Mini II with grid; FILL LIGHT Aputure Amaran H528W with a small soft box and grid; HAIR LIGHT Aputure Amaran F1; ACCENT LIGHTS Aputure MC, one to blue, other to orange; PRACTICAL LIGHTS Ikea Hektar floor lamp (pointed at ceiling), Target clamp light with Lifx smart bulb set to pink(ish) to light Lego Saturn V, String lights up wall and across ceiling. Hope that helps!
Hey Michael. Great review. Is the 16-55 image quality much much better than the 16-80/F4? I always have an itch to upgrade to the 16-55 especially during low light? I’m a hobbyist 😅
Hi! This could be a long answer (see below), so here's my short version: if I didn't already have the 16-55 f/2.8, I would not get it as I have the 16-80 f/4. Question: what do you feel you're "missing" with the 16-80 that has you considering the 16-55? I think that answer will help you decide.... Also, I'm a fan of getting the gear you will enjoy using, regardless of whether you will make income or your level of "seriousness" about photography ;) To my eye the image quality on the 16-55 is a very small bit better than the 16-80. Maybe 2-5%, if I had to put it in numbers? I mostly use the 16-55 at events where the f/2.8 is helpful, and also it's on my X-T3 I use for recording office videos for RU-vid for the shallower depth of field of 2.8 in my small office. The extra telephoto reach of the 16-80, it's lighter weight, and image stabilization is what makes the 16-80 the lens that's on my camera most of the time. I hope that helps! I'd love to hear what you decide... Cheers!
Hello! Thanks for watching :) I have NOT had any issues with the aperture ring on my copy of the 16-55. I haven't heard/read about that being a common problem, so might be good to have it looked at by Fujfilm? Best wishes!
Great video and images Michael, well done. I currently have a few primes and was looking to purchase this, as I never know what situation/focal length I need and sometimes miss the shot. I'm not completely sure about is the size of this lens for day-to-day adventuring?
Hi Chris! So glad you found the video helpful. Regarding size/weight of 16-55 for everyday adventuring - to me, it’s a little on the large and heavy side, and the lack of image stabilization is a bit of an issue with my X-T3. That’s part of the reason I picked up a second copy of the 16-80 to replace the one that was damaged in a fall. It’s slightly smaller and lighter with OIS. You give up one stop of light (f/4 vs 2.8) but the OIS helps with that for most of our and about photo situations. I just released a video about the 16-80 a few days ago - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CbUXDbjCdXo.html. Many thanks for taking the time to share this comment!
Great review, Michael! Thanks for the information. Any thoughts on the 16-80mm F/4 with OIS in contrast to this 16-55? Thanks for your time. All the best!
Hi Nico! Glad you liked the review. I have 16-80, but did not get to use it a lot before it got dropped and now focus is off on right side of frame. In limited time with 16-80: great lens for casual, walk around photos. Fast focus. OIS works really well. Image quality was really nice to my eyes. It’s lighter and slightly smaller than 16-55, which is nice for casual photos. I primarily use the 16-55 for weddings and events. I really like the image quality and f/2.8, but do miss the OIS on my X-T3. The 16-80 is on a big sale right now in US. Not sure about EU. Hope that helps!
Hi Nik! Many thanks for your very kind words. They are much appreciated. I have never had two of the same body before, nor the 16 1.4 or the 56 1.2, sooooo, no I have not really considered this option. I've thought a couple of times about a 2-body configuration, but since I only do a few weddings a year, it never really made financial sense. Plus, I'm pretty fast at changing from 16-55 to 50-140 now ;) Do you use a 2-body setup???
Hi, i 100% share your experience. I had this lens, it has to go because lack of ois was crucial, but AF speed and sharpness were both just superb. It was good workhorse, bokeh not special, sometimes quite nervous, but overall ok. I found that to my work im more happy with 10-24 and 55-200 which is great at short end plus some nice prime for that bokeee :)
Hi! Thanks for sharing. I've had fun doing these reviews, as it's made me think about my experiences of the lenses in a whole new way. Have fun out there!
@@MSladekPhoto its great that you have those lenses for long time, its much deeper and with more insight that reviews based on two weeks of testing. Very inspirational! Take care!
In your conclusion you say say that it's "Not the first lens you'd pick up" - So which lens would that be that you would pick up? - Great video, as I try to decide what lens to choose between this and the 16-80
Hi Edward! Thanks for your comment and question. For casual use, I pick up the 18-135. I've had it over 6 years, and really like it's versatility, value and image quality. I have the 16-80, but it got dropped fairly soon after I got it, so did not really get a chance to know if it was "the one." Choosing lenses is sooooo personal, and I know my use cases and picture preferences are not the same as lots of folks, so your mileage will vary :) Having said that, on a paying gig, I'm definitely grabbing the 16-55 along with the 50-140. Together, they are superb! Hope that helps a bit...
@@MSladekPhoto thank you Michael! I plan to buy this lens for a do-it-all lens for Weddings. It may not have enough reach, but with approximately the 82.5mm FF equivalent, I think it shouldn't be too bad 😁
@@francissosing I use the 16-55 with the 50-140 for weddings and really like the combo. I’ve recently added the Viltrox 23mm f1.4 for low light and that shallow depth of field look. Not a perfect lens, but I like the character is at with event photos. Best wishes!
@@MSladekPhoto with those 2 zoom lenses, did u ever have any instances where you didn't have enough light or your AF wasn't quite up to snub? Say for instance at a wedding inside a dark church or venue. I've watched your review of the Viltrox 23mm 1.4 and you among others are the reasons why I bought it. Seems like it focuses faster than my Viltrox 33mm 1.4 but I heard that I need to update the firmware and it will focus faster (33mm). The Viltrox 85mm is my favorite prime for its reach and low light capability.
@@francissosing I've used both the 16-55 and 50-140 in dark reception spaces, and the autofocus has worked well for me on my X-T3. Hope that helps! I've had my eye on the Viltrox 56 and 85... may have to give up my "zoom guy" credentials. Lol. Those Viltrox lenses really seem to be a great value, with image quality that works well for my use cases. Cheers!
Very, very useful review. I do wish it had IBIS. But I make up for it with my XH-1’s IBIS. I also deal with the weight with the better grip of the XH-1 and/battery grip/J.B. Camera Designs gives me vs. my XPro-3 (even with an additional grip on it). For Bokeh would the 50-140mm work better?
Thanks, Bill! I do prefer the bokeh and “personality” more of the 50-140, but at lots of events I need a wider view that the 16-55 gives. A nice problem to have though, as the 16-55 is still pretty awesome.
Hi! Yep, the 16-55 becomes a stronger option when used with a camera with IBIS. One reasons I switched to Fuji from Nikon full frame was the cost, weight and size of lens differences. Thanks for watching and sharing your comment!
Good review as a user of this wonderful lens (but as I paid my hard earned cash - I am bias!). I upgraded from the XT3 to the XT4 for IBIS and it was certainly worth adding IBIS for me as I now do not have constantly to check the shutter speed, which I found myself doing with the XT3. However, I am not sure I understand the 'personality' point.
Hi Jules! I agree about the peace of mind that IBIS will provide with this lens. Looking forward to my next camera upgrade ;) Regarding personality - every lens, especially Fuji lenses, seem to have a "look" to them. Whether it's how they treat background blur, how they deal with color and skin tone, and just the overall rendering of the image. Of all the Fuji lenses I have, this one has the least "personality" for me. It's awesome, and I'm definitely keeping it, but the images are almost to "Clean," if that makes sense. Obviously, this is hard to find the right words for... Have fun creating photos and many thanks for your comment!
Hi! Great question!!! Until the last wedding two weeks ago, I didn’t use any primes at weddings. For this last wedding, I also used the Viltrox 23mm f/1.4 a lot. I really like (mostly!) how it worked. I’m doing a review on this lens in my next video out on August 24. What do you use???
@@MSladekPhoto I just recently purchased 2 Fujifilm x-s10 paired with 16-55 and 50-140. In the past I shot with Nikon DSLR with 24, 50 and 85mm f1.8 primes. Upgraded to mirrorless aps-c after using Fujifilm X-E2 on vacation paired with a 35mm f2 xc and a 60mm f2.4 macro lenses. Thinking about buying a 23mm f1.4 and 56 mm f1.2 primes to bring with me in case of very low light venues. For now I'll bring 35mm f2 xc and 60mm f2.4 macro as the price tag of the former two primes is too high at the moment for me.
@@Nessunego Nice! I’m pretty impressed with the Viltrox 23mm, especially for the price. Fairly strong vignette good wide open, as well as chromatic aberration in string contrast areas (especially white clothes in weddings), but I still really like it overall. Considering their 56mm as well…
@@MSladekPhoto As I often use in camera JPEGs, I prefer lower/better in camera corrected vignetting and chromatic aberrations. I think I will wait and then buy 23 mm f/1.4 and 56mm f/1.2 from Fujifilm.
I have the XT3 and the 18-55 and w9uld like to upgrade. Only thing I am worried about is the absence of OIS on the lens since ny XT3 lacks it too. Any suggestions on what I should do?
Hi! If you feel you need OIS, I'd recommend the Fujinon XF 16-80mm f/4. It's the lens I have on my camera most of the time, and I made a video about it here - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CbUXDbjCdXo.html. Another lens with OIS (and one of my FIRST lenses) to consider is the Fujinon XF 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6. I like this lens a lot, and still use it occasionally, and my video for that lens is here - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-6aVwH8_oG_0.html. Hope that helps!
Bummer!! Was so interested in this earlier. No OIS on a $1200 red-badge Fujinon lens that only gets 3x zoom is unacceptable. If it was ~$800, then it is more justified for it to have no image stabilization.
I hear you! I think Fuji made some different choices with this lens than I would have. It's already a large lens, so the extra bit of size/weight/cost for OIS would have been worth it to me. Image quality = no complaints. Glad I don't have to make those decisions :)
I'd wager you could use this single lens for the entirety of a wedding - perhaps with the exception of evening/indoor work, where perhaps another lense with an F1.2/1.4 aperture would work better.
Hi Ewan! I agree from an image quality standpoint and about needing faster aperture. For weddings, I use the 16-55 f/2.8 and 50-140 f/2.8 along with the Viltrox 23mm f/1.4. Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts. Cheers!
Awesome review. What kind of feedback have you received from yo it wedding customers and other audiences from your photos with this lens? Do you think your customers/non-photographer audience has different preferences regarding bokeh?
Oh, it’s definitely a photographer thing! Wedding clients have been very happy with images. It’s so wonderful to have so many high quality choices that we can muse about “personality” of a lens. Thanks for taking the time to comment! I appreciate your kind words.
I actually wonder if not only less blurriness is “good enough” but maybe even better for them. Watch the Tony Northrop Bokeh Intervention video: “Why did you take us to a lake and then hide it from us?” The people generally a lot of time and/or money on the venue and other ambient details in an event. It’s good to have these things blurred but not completely obliterated in every shot. Generally we should generally emphasize the subject, not isolate them.
@@asdf6892 Hard to say - I think all of that is a personal choice and preference. Hopefully, when folks hire us for a life event, they are well aware of our unique visual voice, so there will be less chance for surprises. Speaking of personal preference, I can’t watch Tony Northrop. Lol.
Hi Ethan! Or, the XF 16-80mm f/4? For day-to-day, the 16-80 is my current lens of choice. The lack of aperture ring on the Tamron is a personal deal breaker.It’s great to have so many choices now! You pretty much can’t go wrong with any of these options. Love to hear what you decide!
Hi! Thanks for the question. My favorite lens for value and flexibility is the 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6. My favorite lens for image quality is the 50-140mm f/2.8. I have review videos for each of those. Hope that helps!
Спасибо за обзор! У меня муки выбора... хочу универсальный объектив (и фотоаппарат) для любительских фотографий и видео, но меня пугает размер и вес, а в руках подержать до покупки не получится. Компромиссы тоже не для меня.
Hi! Here's my answer, based on Google Translate: I think the X-T series (3 or 4) would be a great size and low-weight camera. For a universal lens, the Fujinon 16-80mm is smaller and lighter than the 16-55mm, but let's in 1 stop less light. I usually have the 16-80 on my camera, with the 16-55 used for these RU-vid videos and some client work. Hope that helps!
Good video! If this lens, is not your favorite, as for this focal range, then I think no Fuji zoom will be, since 18-55 and 16 -80 are quite lower in terms of image quality, definition, contrast, and the fact that they have stabil What do you prefer then?
Hi! Thanks for taking the time to share this comment and question. Don't get me wrong - I REALLY like this lens. Great image quality, etc... It's the lens I use to record my YT vids. I use it for weddings, and other paying gigs. But, for my PERSONAL take a camera out and create photos days, I don't bring this. I can cover the range in a lighter, more versatile package with 16-80, with little sacrifice in image quality for my personal taste. Hope that makes sense!
Thanks for your quick response! I have the 18-55, (I suppose that in terms of quality it is quite similar to the 16-80), and now I am considering buying the 16-55, for its superior image quality, I am a fan but I like to bet on the best, do you think it is not worth the expense ?? the difference, in quality, is not so appreciable?
@@ulisesmedina3043 Hi again! I got the 16-55 for it’s 2.8 aperture and image quality for use at weddings,etc… if I did not have that need, I would not have purchased the lens. I really am liking the 16-80, and find very little to complain about in image quality or performance. Again, the 16-55 is a great lens, but the 16-80 is not too far behind in image quality (for most people’s needs) and f/4 is also ok in most situations. I’ve never used the 18-55, but have heard many nice things. This is the downside of having so many choices - it’s hard to choose. Best wishes!
So I’m dying to know…. Does the 16-80 have more “personality”? This is crucial to me. I love your long term review of the 16-55 & will go watch more of your work. Your photographic style is relatable as well very much appreciated that you acknowledge that as a factor in the lens reviews.
I Dave! Thanks for your kind words! In my experience, the 16-80 is a lot like the 18-135 in the it’s predictable and consistent with image quality that works well for me. Not a lot of “personality” that detracts form my personal experience of the lens. It’s part of my new 3 lens “everyday” kit: 10-24, 16-80 and 70-300. It’s a relatively small and light kit that fits in a sling bag. Happy holidays!
@@MSladekPhoto Got mine a used unit and I'm really happy with it... shoot videos and some photos and its quality is just amazing, glad I've picked it :)
Hi! That's a tough one!!! Kind of like asking, "which is my favorite kid?" That's why we only have one child ;) Anyway, my favorite lens is probably the 50-140mm. I really like the images I've created with that lens. Which is YOUR favorite?
@@MSladekPhoto only one child... Nice one :D Well, I'm a beginner, so I don't have a favorite yet ;) I'm buying a new lens though and the 16-55mm and 50-130mm are my top contenders right now. Very hard to choose ;)
@@DonBuonasera Got it! Those lenses both have AMAZING image quality and performance. The choice would be, do you prefer the "big picture" (wide angle 16-55), or the "intimate picture" (telephoto 50-140). Also, the 16-55 is lighter and smaller than the 50-140 - does that matter? Personally, I started with the 50-140, and then added the 16-55 a year or two later... Hope that helps, and have fun!!!
Hi! Sorry that bugs you. It’s how I talk. There’s a few other RU-vid photography channels for you to check out. Best wishes. Also, please STOp ending a sentence with a preposition 😉
Hi Steve! My wife is a cancer survivor. My son works in a grocery store. This video was recorded in March of 2021 - before my family was vaccinated, and there was a VERY strong surge of cases. Remember, you don't wear the mask for you, you wear it for other people. Stay well!
