The Brand New Fujifilm XF 16-50mm F2.8-4.8 R LM WR - In Depth Review

[@etnes10]

I don't comment that often, but I have to say this was really helpful and really well done technical review! Thank you!

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Thanks!

[@dbean5174]

With a filter on the front, this lens is the perfect travel companion! Nothing in or out and combined with a WR body, you’ll have a blast.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

True

[@hellni79]

This for street and a 56 for portraits. There you go, no more excuses and no more gear for the next 5 years

[@charlesprice3300]

That's exactly the decision I made, and the lie I told myself.😅

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

We all know the 5 year thing is not gonna happen. But good try😜

[@dbean5174]

If I get a prime, it will probably be the XF 35 F2. Yes it is not as sharp or technical as the 35 F1.4 and definitely not the 33 1.4, the size and form factor of it alone would make shooting on the go easy and reliable with the WR of the 35 F2 also.

[@hellni79]

@@dbean5174 sold it twice, IQ was disappointing compared to 35 1.4 and WR not really a deal in real world use. All the way the older one, which is almost as small and light.

[@marcokleinert1827]

Thanks for comparing those lenses! 😊👍🙏

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Thanks to you

[@BjornMoerman]

Great review. Well done! Once I get my hands on it, will be doing image quality test against the XF16-55 f.2.8.

[@guillaumecouet1294]

oh great ! yes please sir :)

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

I was thinking about doing something like that in the future

[@guillaumecouet1294]

@@LucaPetraliaPhotography do it before the others, no comparison to date :) and I need a lens for my architectural work so I have to choose 😁😁

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

@@guillaumecouet1294 I'd love to, but man I'm busy these days

[@kalvino67]

@@LucaPetraliaPhotographyIt would be a great comparison. I’m sure other landscape photographers like me are looking to buy this lens for hiking due to the light weight. I wonder how it compares to the 16-55 f2.8 around F8-f11.

[@JulianPrior]

Great review Luca, thanks. I’ve just ordered an X-T50 and 16-50 and will sell my X-T4 and 16-55 ‘tank’ lens. Optically it’s great but I just find it so heavy paired with the X-T4. For travel and street I’m really looking forward to using the X-T50/16-50 kit bundle. And looking forward to your X-T50 in-depth review!

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Coming soon! As for your order, you'll love this powerful travel package

[@DigiDriftZone]

Nice to have a wider image, but a bit disappointing with the tele aperture and no OIS, feels a bit uninspiring at 24-75mm f4.2 to f7.2 full frame equivalent, not a huge amount of light gathering there.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

The light gathering is still 2.8-4.8. The aperture equivalence may make sense only on the depth of field

[@DigiDriftZone]

@@LucaPetraliaPhotography You're confusing light gathering with exposure. You have to remember you're working with different sized sensors: APS-C: 337.5 mm² vs FF: 864 mm² . So when you are taking an image, you will need your lens to provide 2.56x more light on full frame just to get the same light intensity (exposure) onto the larger sensor. So a 24mm f/2.8 lens on Full Frame will have identical exposure as a 16mm f/2.8 lens on APS-C and a 3.85mm f/2.8 lens on an iPhone4, sure. But to achieve this, each is working with a vastly different amount of light gathered by each lens. For all intents and purposes, if you wanted to match images between systems, an f/2.8 lens on APS-C is equivalent to an f/4.2 on Full Frame. This will not only match the depth of field, but also the signal to noise and total light hitting both sensors. You will get an output image that has similar noise, dynamic range, detail, depth of field, etc, etc, etc - but you will need to match exposures either in post or by multiplying the ISO by the crop factor squared (this will not only match your exposure but also your noise levels).

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

@@DigiDriftZone I'm not confusing anything. Your theory only works at the exact same pixel count on both sensors, and the same technology. Otherwise you're victim of the full frame is always better type of thinking. On top of that what really matters most of the time is what you call exposure, while what you call light gathering is mostly irrelevant, a theory put together to justify the concept that full frame is always better.

[@DigiDriftZone]

​@@LucaPetraliaPhotographyWhat do you believe the advantages are of a smaller sensor? - it used to be size but APS-C bodies are larger than FF ones now. Read out speeds? but these days that's no longer true and you have global shutter options even. Price maybe? - but they are getting close. But also the technology, most R&D goes into full frame and then trickles down to APS-C. So more often than not, similarly aged sensors are better on FF, but even when they are not, having 2.54x more total light on FF more than compensates. The sensors historically improve by about 1-2 stops every 5-8 years, so sensors within a few years are generally comparable and FF has around 1.5-2 stops more dynamic range vs APS-C. As for the pixel count, if you have a 60 megapixel FF sensor or a 24 megapixel FF sensor - while on the pixel level you get more noise the higher the pixel density, but if you were to resize your 60 megapixel image down to 24 megapixels, the noise difference is almost indistinguishable. So there is no real advantage to having a smaller pixel density, except maybe in video (4k120, rolling shutter, etc). Same is true for APS-C, sure on a pixel level a 16 megapixel APS-C will precisely match a 24 megapixel Full Frame in terms of noise, but it's always a disadvantage to go with a smaller sensor if you care about lower noise and more dynamic range as the full frame sensor will have 1.5x the resolution at the same pixel density.
It's just fact. The only question is how much does losing 2.54x of the light going from FF to APS-C matter for your needs, maybe it doesn't and that's fine.

[@jperes889]

Do you think it is worth buying the xt50 with this lens rather then the xc15-45? Knowing that there is a difference of about 200-300 euros in price.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

The 15-45 isn't bad at all, but if you're buying a kit I'd rather choose the 16-50mm without overthinking it. It's better in every possible way

[@jperes889]

@LucaPetraliaPhotography Thanks. I ordered the xt50 with the xf 16-50. It is a great combination, I don't think I will regret it.

[@SquirrelHybrid]

How is the sharpness, chromatic aberration control, and overall feel of the images compared to Sigma's 18-50?

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

It is better in the Fuji, but obviously the sigma has more than a stop of advantage on the telephoto end. That may be helpful depending on what you do

[@quinnwhite2415]

This is really useful-that comparison is what I was most interested in.

[@muttishelfer9122]

The Sigma shows a lot of CAs, esp. at the wider end.

[@dbean5174]

@@muttishelfer9122yeah I’ve heard that that’s one of the drawbacks of the lens is that the wide open shots have a decent loss in image quality. Also the fact that it doesn’t have an aperture ring is a bummer for me

[@Yeenzoo]

How does it compare with Sigma 18-50 F2.8 on 40 MP sensor?

[@Princeton_James]

I'm sure the Sigma is better.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

The Fuji is sharper and overall better optically... However the Sigma has the f2.8 at the telephoto end that may make a lot of a difference depending on the usage

[@tjkrueger2655]

@@Princeton_James faster aperture doesn't necessarily mean the optics are better

[@muttishelfer9122]

@@Princeton_James No, it is not.

[@AmeliaHeldt]

So disappointed with the focus breathing and that it’s not “nearly parfocal”. I say this because my copy of the 18-55 doesn’t have these issues, it’s probably not actually parfocal but it’s bloody close! I just wanted a wider version of the original kit lens with WR and I would have been happy. Focal range on this is perfect but aperture and video capabilities are a disappointment. Thanks so much for covering these in your review!!

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Thanks for your feedback. I try to give as much information as possible

[@VMGIN]

It’s hard to get reviews on things that are newly released. I’m hoping this lens justifies the price they’re asking for (outside of a kit bundle)

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

In my opinion... It does. It is surprisingly good

[@Aeonikst8]

I have an xt5, would you recommend this lens or the 16-80 f4 for travel and hiking. I like the focal range of the 16-80 but intrigued by the lightness and sharper image of the the new 16-50. 16-80 is also cheaper second hand.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

They're both great options. I love the 16-80 too. But the weight and size difference is very noticeable

[@muttishelfer9122]

The 16-50 is sharper and lighter than the 16-80, whereas the 16-80 offfers 30mm more range.

[@ruthandlottieswanton942]

Is this lens better than the sigma lens 18 - 50 f2.8 DC DN lens to put on the X5 camera .. thanks so much

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Optically it is better than the sigma, on the other hand the sigma is f2.8 throughout the zoom range

[@OneOfAKindResort-Bintan]

it okey to fit with fuji xt200 sir ?

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

It would work great

[@RA-gr9lz]

I am very surprised at how unsharp your copy of the XF18-55 is.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Me too, but I repeated the test to make sure it wasn't a user error

[@RA-gr9lz]

@@LucaPetraliaPhotography Still very strange. After all, it was the focal length from the middle of the range, stopped down to F/8 and the center of the image circle. Definitely, you should try another copy of the XF18-55.

[@muttishelfer9122]

I am not surprised. The 18-55 is a soft lens on 40MP sensors, so it was time to update it for the latest generation of cameras.

[@RA-gr9lz]

@@muttishelfer9122 Still weird. My XF18-55 isn't that blurry on a 26MP sensor and the consensus is that all XF lenses only benefit from a 40MP sensor (even if they aren't designed for it).

[@AMore429]

Another Fuji commercial

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Says someone who's tried the lens and had a different opinion? Or someone who doesn't know what he's talking about but feels the need to say something anyway?

[@chaitong6264]

if u cant afford it shut up

[@moneky]

I purchased this lens with an xt5 for my birthday this summer and I am extremely happy. Because I bought it as a kit, the lens was 400 dollars. For a beginner like myself, this kind of value is what helped me take the leap to purchasing and starting my own journey with photography.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

I'm sure you'll love it

[@dbean5174]

Exactly what I did! Bought the small rig grip to make it more comfortable on the hand and it feels awesome! 😎

[@David994]

What other lenses do you have? I am about to get my XT-5 with this lens. But what should be the next lens?

[@dbean5174]

@@David994 that was my first lens too with it. It is a phenomenal travel lens. I recently bought a used Viltrox 27 f/1.2 and it is most definitely excellent. Supersedes even the 16-50 in sharpness wide open and has a very large aperture of f/1.2 perfect for portraits or low light. There is also the 75mm f/1.2 Viltrox has and is nearly the same as the 27mm just that it’s a different focal length. I would recommend a prime as your next option. There are the f/2 WR lenses Fuji has that are quite solid and small in form but the f/1.4 lenses offered by Fuji are definitely much sharper however with sharpness comes weight and size if that is a priority

[@David994]

@@dbean5174 Thanks for a quick answer! Viltrox looks like a good third party option. Often just get the brands own stuff but I will have a deeper look at those. Thanks!

[@highflying19]

Pre ordered this with xt-50 , im excited i also got the fuji 30mm micro lens as my second lens in the bag. I think im going to have a great travel and walk around set up. Great review it made me even more excited about my decision

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

You'll love your new kit

[@frmtheden]

I did the same! Cnat wait to get it!

[@tjkrueger2655]

That 30mm macro is such a good, multi-purpose lens... you picked up a good kit

[@mobysome]

Great review and I love the versatility of this lens! I got this and I’m thinking of getting a prime. Can’t decide between 23 or 33 F1.4. I quite like 23mm as I mostly use it to take landscape (with people in it). But I’m worried it’s an overlap with my 16-50. Do you think 33 is a better complement?

[@dbean5174]

I think it really just matters what you prioritize in your shots. With the 23 you could just crop the photo but if you’re always finding yourself needing to crop then perhaps the 33 is the way to go. You need to just find out if 23mm or 33mm (aps-c) is your preferred focal length. If I were choosing then I’d say the 23 as you can always crop in but if you’re stuck at a closer zoom on the 33, then you will physically have to move to get the same shot as the 23. With the added megapixels of the 5th generation Fuji aps-c sensors, this is what I would do. Best of luck

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

As already answered by @dbean5174 it totally depends on you. I find his logic makes a lot of sense and that's what I would probably do

[@mobysome]

@@LucaPetraliaPhotography thanks! just an update i ended up getting a second hand 23mm F1.4 and 56mm F1.2. Along with the 16-50, i'll try them out and see which one i like best and sell the one i don't really need.

[@LIFeGood808]

The Sigma 18-50, f2.8 seems like a better deal.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Purchased as a stand alone lens it definitely has a lot of value. However those 2 mm on the wide end may make the difference and optically the Fuji is superior

[@stanobert3475]

Excellent review! This looks like my new travel lens for my X-T5 combined with my Fuji 70-300mm. The new 40 megapixel Fujis need the best lenses.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Thanks! That combo is top notch

[@colinhoward2200]

I don't find this - I sold my 70-300 for the 55-200. I am way more happy with that - the 70-300 was terrible with refocusing after zooming. This was bad enough for photography but attrocious for video. The combined with the 18-55, I have no loss of focal length. In general, not many people really need the lenses to resolve at 40MP - the older ones still revolve to > 30MP, and unless you are cropping a lot or printing posters - that is all marketing hype. reviews of the 18-55 vs 16-50 I haver seen have shown no significant difference - and they are the same size, but minus OIS.

[@stanobert3475]

@@colinhoward2200 Point well taken but I prefer having more reach. I don't shoot video anyway.

[@muttishelfer9122]

@@colinhoward2200 I owned 55-200 and own 70-300. The 70-300 is way sharper and also in other aspects optically superior than the old 55-200. The 18-55 is ok for 16-24 Mp sensors but as it struggels with the 40MP sensor a lot it ist just outdated for 2024 standards. XF 16-50+ XF70-300 is the best travel combo for modern Fujifilm cameras.

[@jubilee0418]

Thanks for the video. which lens do you recommend between sigma 18-50 and XF 16-50?

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

I like the image quality from the Fuji lens better, but if this is your only lens, the sigma constant F2.8 can make the difference

[@mahdimanesh4221]

Would you buy it for the full price and not as a "kit"? 🙂Not planning to buy a new camera soon... unless Fuji comes out with an XPro4 soon.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Tough question to answer. Its MSRP is definitely high, and for less you can buy a sigma 18-50mm f2.8. I plan on comparing these two lenses soon, but as of now I'd say you better wait for the X-Pro4 and buy the kit with it (if it comes out as a kit option).

[@LOUDSTREET]

I tried using the Kit lens with lower light settings (Not Night) and I definitely felt it struggled a bit. I came from Sony Full Frame and Always used the 28-75 2.8 and loved it and missed the 2.8 so I picked up the 75MM Viltrox 1.2 for my XT50 and WOW changed Fuji for me. Now I know what everyone was talking about haha. I am going to return my Fuji 16-50mm to B&H Thankfully I purchased separately to get it faster. I went with the Viltrox 75MM (112ish FF Equive) because when I shot with my sony I was finding my self leaning more into the 75MM and when I just needed a little more compression or framing I would put into APSC mode to crop in more. So the Viltrox made me feel right at home and now my XT50 is fully unlocked in my opinion. Just my experience with Fuji as a new Customer and really enjoying the Viltrox may grab the 27mm as well down the road.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Well of course coming from a constant f2.8 zoom lens you feel the difference. The 75mm is a killer lens, it's massive but spectacular

[@muttishelfer9122]

You missed the "75mm f2,8 aperture on fullframe" and therfore you bought an APS-C lens, which is equivalent to 112mm f1,8(!) on fullframe? Come on, Dude...

[@deepanshurai4863]

Thank you for this amazing comparison, do you think this new lens will pair well with Fuji XS-20?

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

I am 100% sure it will pair greatly

[@deepanshurai4863]

@@LucaPetraliaPhotography thank you for your response :D

[@matt88169]

Great review, overall great lens. But I really wish they hadn’t marketed the “internal zoom” so much--clearly an internal pumper! But it’s going to be a steal someday when it drops to $300-$400 and I’ll probably have to own it. That said, I find the close focusing a little imperfect if you have to go to f/8 for best results.

[@jessejayphotography]

Put a UV filter on it and it’s essential internally sealed.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

It's gonna go down in price for sure, and yes, it is not "internal zooming" but just slap a filter on it and the fear is over. As for the macro I get your point, but there's always some compromise when you have a super small and lightweight zoom lens

[@arnautorraros]

great video

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Thanks!

[@Enrique-the-photographer]

LOL, I like how you made sure that people get the “12 Years” message when talking about the price. Good to see you Luca, excellent review as always. I have the XF16-50 on order, according to B&H I should be getting it next week, hopefully it will work good on my “old” X-T4, as long as the image quality is as good as what I get from the XF16-80 I’m going to be a happy camper. Be well and stay safe.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

I would say the image quality in this one may be considered better than that of the 16-80. In a tiny package. Thanks as always!

[@daveboyle5751]

Is it better than the the old 18-55, removed OIS, worse focus breathing and darker at the long end, there's more to an image than just sharpness.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

Did you actually try it? Cause you're right, there's more to an image than sharpness... And this lens is better, in every possible way other than OIS and half a stop at the tele end. There's more to an image than stabilization or half a stop difference

[@npdady]

​@@LucaPetraliaPhotography😂 love that sass.

[@Neeverseen]

Well, ois and half a stop matters if your camera doesn't have a stacked, back illuminated and stabilized sensor.

[@daveboyle5751]

@@Neeverseen It does, reality is Fuji is making cheaper built lenses;, removing functions and wanting a more money for them than there actually worth.

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

@@Neeverseen that's true, and that's what I said. With modern cameras isn't an issue, with older ones it is. But that's also why I think from now on we won't see Fujifilm cameras without stabilization

[@macccu]

I would prefer Sigma 2.8 zoom now when they dropped OIS ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ WR does not matter much with two digit bodies that are not sealed anyway

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

It's a valid argument, however in my opinion the Fuji, despite being kit, is optically better, especially when paired to high resolution cameras. Also, as an all around lens, having the 16mm at the wide end is a huge advantage

[@muttishelfer9122]

WR DOES matter for travel and outdoor photopgraphy and the Fuji is the sharper lens with better CA and distortion control. I dont need f2,8 an APS-C Standardzoom, just because f2,8 on APS-C is no near as fast enough when you really need a big aperture for low light or subject seperation. Therefore a prime is the only seroius option.

[@andreak4280]

Solid! 💪🏼 looks like a nice replacement i have the 18-55 and a good copy! Would like to know what the 15-45mm kit is all about as to image quality I am with the thought if it is being sold as an option for $100 more, has to be good enough to cover a 40 megapixel sensor, right? I’m not expecting a great lens just something that’s a small walk around that gives you a little bit of zoom range if wanting to go out with just 1 lens

[@LucaPetraliaPhotography]

The 15-45 isn't bad at all, but the new kit lens is on a different level