Please ignore my opening criticism of the 16-80's inability to hold focus whilst filming and zooming! I and other reviewers got it completely wrong, it's a 'Varifocal' lens, so NOT a fault as it was designed for stills, not movie shooting! For constant focus on your subject throughout the zoom range, a 'Parfocal' lens is needed and these cine lenses are very expensive in comparison. Anyway, since it was introduced, the 16-80 has had several firmware updates to cure bugs etc and is now an excellent lens to use!
Exactly. It has to do with the way Fuji designed this lens. It is actually varifocal but Fuji corrects the focus electronically after the focal length it is set.
CORRECTION! The 16-80 is a Varifocal lens, so there's no fault, it's just way it was designed! If you must zoom whist filming, then you'll need a Parfocal (movie) lens that will hold focus, but they are expensive and cost a helluva lot more. Cheers!
Nigel, thanks for the test. I owned an 18-55 and was never impressed with it. Sure, the build quality was great but the image quality was dull. Anything shot below f7.1 was not sharp and looked a little smudgy. I purchased the 16-80 and what a world of difference. Much sharper images. Now for grins and giggles. I converted from Nikon which I loved. I still have a Nikon 18-55 DX VR; basically a low end kit lens. I mounted it on an X-T20 and XT3 with a K&F Concept adapter (manual focus). The images I got from that test were sharper than any shots I could get with that Fuji 18-55. Now, I like Fuji cameras for their compactness, overall build quality, and styling. However, I can't honestly say that Fuji lenses are better. They're great but I still think they have a way to go. I used to do weddings with pro Nikon gear. I retired from that and just need some decent lighter weight cameras for leisure. So Fuji fit the bill.
Thanks for your comments! You must have had a bad copy, as I found my 18-55 to be very good. The 16-80 is on my camera most of the time as it's a perfect all round lens. Like you, I ditched Nikon after 20 years shooting with most of their cameras, from D1X on (last pair being D610's) looking at mirrorless I thought the Z6 & 7 were just to expensive (although I prefer full frame) and had heard great things about the Fuji XT3. I wanted to do a lot more filming so it fitted the bill, being affordable and excellent quality! After 30+ years as a wedding photographer, I've now retired the business and having fun shooting for myself! Cheers!
Thanks for the review Nigel,. I thought you would show us the improvement with the version 1.02 update, just to make sure the wobbling issue disapear in video mode. About photo, the 16-80mm looks pretty good :-)
I don't think my 18-55 was bad at all! It was a good lens and for all the reasons I explained in my video, it was swapped for the 16-80. And, I'm very happy with it. Cheers!
How's the _rendering_ compared of the 16-80 compared to 18-55? I'm more about loosing the wonderful (prime-like imo!) color/contrast/tonality of the 18-55 than the sharpness.
Thanks for your comment. I was only looking to see how the 18-55 compared to the 16-80 regarding sharpness across the frame. There was not a lot of difference to be honest, with the 16-80 just edging it. For me, colour, contrast etc is not lacking in the 16-80 as far as I can see, as it's been used extensively over a wide range of subjects after selling the 18-55mm. However, the 18-55mm is generally acknowledged to be one of the better kit lens out there! It all depends on what you want from a lens, as there's usually a compromise somewhere down the line. Cheers!
@@NigelHarperPhoto Thanks! In all honesty my main motivation for getting the 16-80 would be the constant f4 and marked aperture dial. I find it annoying with the 18-55 I never quite know here the aperture is and that it could end up changing when I zoom in. The extra reach in both ends sounds nice too, as I only use zooms for landscapes, architecture and that kind of thing. Again: thanks for the video and info! I really appreciate it!
Exactly this is what i also like about the 18-55. Image quality wise keep the 18-55. It's way better. I have both and the 16-80 only comes close around 35mm. At the center they are about equal, but out of center the 18-55 is clearly sharper. Imo you can see this only in real world shots with foliage and fine detail.
You failed to mention how soft the 18-55 is at 18 f4. It's really smeary, and I'd only imagine worse at f2.8. Fuji isn't the best when pairing small size, wide-angle, and close subject together. The 16-80 looks beautiful, though.
Yes, looking at the files again the 18-55 is a tad softer than the 16-80. Still my pixel peeping days are now done with . . . I think? Despite all the adverse the reports and reviews, the 16-80 is a better lens overall! Cheers!
@@NigelHarperPhoto It definitely is the better lens, but at the same time it's a lot more expensive. If you want to grab one zoom for versatility and fill the rest of your bag with good quality primes, I'd still say that the 16-80 is the way to go.
@@Audimann Yes, the 16-80 is far better overall. But the 18-55 is certainly not useless below F5.6, maybe for high quality technical work, (where you would stop well down) but it's not useless for most subjects, particularly portraits at F2.8.
As I mentioned at the start, it wasn't an exact scientific test, and the differencesI could detect were minimal. The 18-55 is a very good zoom, but I find the 16-80 much more flexible and use it extensively for filming (but Not zooming) and it's fine for me. Cheers!
Owned an LX100 (first gen) and it is an awesome camera. I moved to a Fuji X-E3 to get similar hands on control and to combine with manual lenses. The 16-80 will be more responsive in its zoom action, focus speed, as well as have better OIS. The LX100 mark II would still be a great choice and very portable. The newer Fuji X-S10 sensor is truly a step above both LX100 versions in image quality, image stability, performance and flexibility. I'd say get the X-S10 if your intention is to get it with a zoom as well as sharp/fast prime lens that is either AF or manual for more shallow depth of field and faster shutter night shots. A Lumix GX9 might also be a good choice especially with the 12-60 (either version). Panasonic Lumix cameras are still very good and have their own advantages.
What prime lens could you recommend if i want a sharpness & easy to carry anywhere lens. I bought xt30 with the kit lens 18-55mm. Now i want to add another lens in my next collection in this fuji system.😊
Hi, Regarding prime lenses, it really depends on the type of photography you do. Do you need standard, wide or telephoto? The 23, 35mm lenses in F2 or F1.4 are superb. In fact all the primes are highly rated. Cheers!
There not much point buying a lens with a focal length inside the range you have with the kit lens. For travel you can’t beat the Samyang 12mm. It’s manual focus but at 12mm barely a problem, sharp, contrasty light and small.
16mm f2.8 optically excellent, wonderful focal length, can use it anywhere and video will still look stable. I have xt30, xt3, 18-55, 50-140, samyang 21 F1.4, samyang 35 f1.2 and 16 f2.8, I had 18-135, 16-55.
Please ignore my opening criticism of the 16-80's inability to hold focus whilst filming and zooming! I and other reviewers got it completely wrong, it's a 'Varifocal' lens, so NOT a fault as it was designed for stills, not movie shooting! For constant focus on your subject throughout the zoom range, a 'Parfocal' lens is needed and these cine lenses are very expensive in comparison. Anyway, since it was introduced, the 16-80 has had several firmware updates to cure bugs etc and is now an excellent lens to use!
Exactly. It has to do with the way Fuji designed this lens. It is actually varifocal but Fuji corrects the focus electronically after the focal length it is set.
Thank you
@@renaton1215 Cheers!
CORRECTION! The 16-80 is a Varifocal lens, so there's no fault, it's just way it was designed! If you must zoom whist filming, then you'll need a Parfocal (movie) lens that will hold focus, but they are expensive and cost a helluva lot more. Cheers!
Thanks. It seems like there is a clear advantage that the 16-80 has over the 18-55.
Yes, there is, thanks for watching. cheers!
Nigel, thanks for the test. I owned an 18-55 and was never impressed with it. Sure, the build quality was great but the image quality was dull. Anything shot below f7.1 was not sharp and looked a little smudgy. I purchased the 16-80 and what a world of difference. Much sharper images. Now for grins and giggles. I converted from Nikon which I loved. I still have a Nikon 18-55 DX VR; basically a low end kit lens. I mounted it on an X-T20 and XT3 with a K&F Concept adapter (manual focus). The images I got from that test were sharper than any shots I could get with that Fuji 18-55. Now, I like Fuji cameras for their compactness, overall build quality, and styling. However, I can't honestly say that Fuji lenses are better. They're great but I still think they have a way to go. I used to do weddings with pro Nikon gear. I retired from that and just need some decent lighter weight cameras for leisure. So Fuji fit the bill.
Thanks for your comments! You must have had a bad copy, as I found my 18-55 to be very good. The 16-80 is on my camera most of the time as it's a perfect all round lens. Like you, I ditched Nikon after 20 years shooting with most of their cameras, from D1X on (last pair being D610's) looking at mirrorless I thought the Z6 & 7 were just to expensive (although I prefer full frame) and had heard great things about the Fuji XT3. I wanted to do a lot more filming so it fitted the bill, being affordable and excellent quality! After 30+ years as a wedding photographer, I've now retired the business and having fun shooting for myself! Cheers!
Try the 16 1.4 and 56 1.2.
i kind of regret selling my 18-55 a few years ago. It's a handy and versatile little thing.
Yes, it is a very good compact zoom lens. Cheers!
i just got myself an 16-80 and besides the focus problem while zooming. i am very satisfied so far. thanks for the review, short and sweet!
Thanks Bertee, hope it works well for you. Cheers!
Thanx sir! Buying my Fuji cam tomorrow!
Had to choose between 18-55mm and 16-80mm lens. Like the 16-80mm!
Yes, I'm sure you'll love the 16-80, it's far more versatile! Cheers
I don’t have the 16-80 but it looks a tad sharper than the 18-55.
Well, I no longer have the 18-55, but overall in my tests the 16-80 came out on top! Cheers!
Thanks for the review Nigel,. I thought you would show us the improvement with the version 1.02 update, just to make sure the wobbling issue disapear in video mode. About photo, the 16-80mm looks pretty good :-)
Thanks for your comments Alain. I've just completed a video with the new firmware 1.02 update. Video will be online shortly. Cheers
I guess you had a poor copy of the 18-55. My 18-55 is visibly sharper out of the center.
I don't think my 18-55 was bad at all! It was a good lens and for all the reasons I explained in my video, it was swapped for the 16-80. And, I'm very happy with it. Cheers!
@Olivier La Buse By 1/125'E' I'm assuming you mean in electronic shutter mode? I've done tests and will be publishing soon!
Thanks Nigel for a very helpful review 👍🏻👍🏻💐🙏🏻😊
Thanks for comment and pleased it was helpful! Cheers!
You are a blessing Sir! Thank you for this informative video. 🍻
Thanks for your kind comments!
How's the _rendering_ compared of the 16-80 compared to 18-55? I'm more about loosing the wonderful (prime-like imo!) color/contrast/tonality of the 18-55 than the sharpness.
Thanks for your comment. I was only looking to see how the 18-55 compared to the 16-80 regarding sharpness across the frame. There was not a lot of difference to be honest, with the 16-80 just edging it. For me, colour, contrast etc is not lacking in the 16-80 as far as I can see, as it's been used extensively over a wide range of subjects after selling the 18-55mm. However, the 18-55mm is generally acknowledged to be one of the better kit lens out there! It all depends on what you want from a lens, as there's usually a compromise somewhere down the line. Cheers!
@@NigelHarperPhoto Thanks! In all honesty my main motivation for getting the 16-80 would be the constant f4 and marked aperture dial. I find it annoying with the 18-55 I never quite know here the aperture is and that it could end up changing when I zoom in. The extra reach in both ends sounds nice too, as I only use zooms for landscapes, architecture and that kind of thing.
Again: thanks for the video and info! I really appreciate it!
@@torb-no Yes, that was my motivation for buying the 16-80, and no regrets! Cheers!
Exactly this is what i also like about the 18-55. Image quality wise keep the 18-55. It's way better. I have both and the 16-80 only comes close around 35mm. At the center they are about equal, but out of center the 18-55 is clearly sharper. Imo you can see this only in real world shots with foliage and fine detail.
You failed to mention how soft the 18-55 is at 18 f4. It's really smeary, and I'd only imagine worse at f2.8. Fuji isn't the best when pairing small size, wide-angle, and close subject together. The 16-80 looks beautiful, though.
Yes, looking at the files again the 18-55 is a tad softer than the 16-80. Still my pixel peeping days are now done with . . . I think? Despite all the adverse the reports and reviews, the 16-80 is a better lens overall! Cheers!
@@NigelHarperPhoto It definitely is the better lens, but at the same time it's a lot more expensive. If you want to grab one zoom for versatility and fill the rest of your bag with good quality primes, I'd still say that the 16-80 is the way to go.
@@michaelmao6180 Yes, I'd agree with that. Cheers!
16-80 is far better overall. The 18-55 only at f5.6 decent, below that f number completely useless.
@@Audimann Yes, the 16-80 is far better overall. But the 18-55 is certainly not useless below F5.6, maybe for high quality technical work, (where you would stop well down) but it's not useless for most subjects, particularly portraits at F2.8.
I bought 16-80 but now thinking getting 18-55 as I need it for video mainly. I also cannot see any difference in sharpness.
As I mentioned at the start, it wasn't an exact scientific test, and the differencesI could detect were minimal. The 18-55 is a very good zoom, but I find the 16-80 much more flexible and use it extensively for filming (but Not zooming) and it's fine for me. Cheers!
@@NigelHarperPhoto thanks
@@sjmedia_official You're welcome!
I was about to get my new X-S10 with a zoom lens. After watching your review, I don't think FujiFilm doing any better than my LX100.
I don't know your camera, but Fuji do make great cameras and lenses. Cheers!
Owned an LX100 (first gen) and it is an awesome camera. I moved to a Fuji X-E3 to get similar hands on control and to combine with manual lenses. The 16-80 will be more responsive in its zoom action, focus speed, as well as have better OIS. The LX100 mark II would still be a great choice and very portable.
The newer Fuji X-S10 sensor is truly a step above both LX100 versions in image quality, image stability, performance and flexibility. I'd say get the X-S10 if your intention is to get it with a zoom as well as sharp/fast prime lens that is either AF or manual for more shallow depth of field and faster shutter night shots.
A Lumix GX9 might also be a good choice especially with the 12-60 (either version). Panasonic Lumix cameras are still very good and have their own advantages.
Judging a brand after one youtube video is a bit dull.
@@chromaticvisuelle Yes, agreed!
Brilliant video
Thanks very much! Cheers!
What prime lens could you recommend if i want a sharpness & easy to carry anywhere lens. I bought xt30 with the kit lens 18-55mm. Now i want to add another lens in my next collection in this fuji system.😊
Hi, Regarding prime lenses, it really depends on the type of photography you do. Do you need standard, wide or telephoto? The 23, 35mm lenses in F2 or F1.4 are superb. In fact all the primes are highly rated. Cheers!
There not much point buying a lens with a focal length inside the range you have with the kit lens. For travel you can’t beat the Samyang 12mm. It’s manual focus but at 12mm barely a problem, sharp, contrasty light and small.
My 35mm f2 is a very sharp lens. Also, if you want more reach, the 90mm f2 is so sharp even wide open, it will cut your eyeballs! Hope this helps.
@@agylub Quite right, and Samyang make great manual focus lenses for Fuji XF. I have the 8mm Fisheye and 35mm F1.2 which is razor sharp. Cheers!
16mm f2.8 optically excellent, wonderful focal length, can use it anywhere and video will still look stable. I have xt30, xt3, 18-55, 50-140, samyang 21 F1.4, samyang 35 f1.2 and 16 f2.8, I had 18-135, 16-55.
买了16 80
Hope you take some great pictures with it. Cheers!