NEW Fujifilm XF 16-50mm REVIEW: kit-zoom upgraded!

[@cameralabs]

My Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 review: a new kit-zoom standard! Order the Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 from B&H: bhpho.to/3QMi3Kr or WEX UK: tidd.ly/3Kowwst Sell your used gear to MPB at: bit.ly/3ULU9yL Buy used gear from MPB at: prf.hn/l/YLqwRAP Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop Gordon’s retro gear channel: kzbin.info Equipment used for producing my videos DJI Osmo Pocket 3: click.dji.com/AIOhqT-LWUFDq-bGk8hD4Q?pm=link Panasonic Lumix S5 II: amzn.to/3Hf5IcI Sony A6400: prf.hn/l/pRO0wp5 Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF MacBook Pro 14in (16GB / 1TB): amzn.to/3PrKbPV 00:00 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 intro and rivals 01:07 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 design and controls 02:56 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 range 03:14 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 aperture 04:20 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 autofocus 05:08 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 focus breathing 06:00 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 landscape quality 07:48 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 portrait quality 08:48 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 vlogging quality 09:34 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 bokeh quality 10:34 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 macro quality 11:35 - Fujifilm XF 16-50mm f2.8-4.8 verdict and sample images Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

[@emgee44]

The internal zoom mechanism is impressive for a lens of this size but at the loss of OIS. The addition of weather sealing however is welcome.

[@slon74]

Makes sense they removed OIS since Fuji now is implementing IBIS even in smaller bodies. For me, owning X-T2 and X-T10, no reason to upgrade my beloved 18-55.

[@Kdkjdjewerdnxa]

It’s probably more for the future and the current generation of xtrans bodies, older cameras would be better served with the older OIS kit lens. The IBIS has gotten good enough to largely replace the need for OIS, OIS is still nice to have for longer lenses because it can work in conjunction with IBIS to provide even more stability but for a kit lens like this which doesn’t zoom super far, I think IBIS is good enough. I think the internal zooming is a pretty substantial benefit and this lens seems a lot better for video than the older kit lens as well. The additional sharpness will help when future bodies likely will be 40mp by default.

[@nieo777]

An OIS test with previous vs none with IBIS would be a good comparison for vloggers. Thanks

[@cameralabs]

Yes, I'll try to do that. As I recall, the old one wasn't really great for vlogging with IS, plus it's not really wide enough.

[@jordanshipley448]

Great video Gordon! One note on the aperture ring: they don’t do the labeled ring with hard stops on lenses like this lens because it’s a variable aperture, so it would need to mechanically change somehow as you zoom and the aperture shifts.

[@cameralabs]

True, although they did do it on some old lenses in the film era

[@jordanshipley448]

@@cameralabs ohhh interesting. I did not know that. I’ll have to check that out and learn how that works. Thx.

[@dan.allen.digital]

​@@cameralabsmy Canon FD 35-70 is variable aperture with a fixed marking aperture ring.

[@jan-martinulvag1953]

the 18-55 is sharpest at f10 always , so I keep it right there if I do landscapes

[@paulyeung6608]

The transition of the 18-55mm to the 16-50mm is very reminiscent of the fixed lens on the ZV-1 changing to the ZV-1 II. There must be some technical lens engineering reason. It just makes the Tamron 17-50mm and the Olympus 8-25mm a little more special for their fixed aperture and focal range.

[@stephanjurgens3766]

Great review as always Gordon :) For me there is nothing like the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 on my X-H2, stabilized , gorgeous image quality, sharper than my 16-55mm (which I sold).

[@JasonVong]

Very detailed Gordon! On the fence to get the XT-50 with this new kit lens or the Sigma, but this confirms that I will pull the trigger on the Sigma!

[@cameralabs]

Or... buy the kit and sell the Fujifilm lens?

[@maheshg212]

I'm in the same boat. That sigma has 2.8 but misses slightly on the wider start. Between £699 retail price of this lens and about £350 when bought as a kit, I will think about if selling on ebay etc is worth the time :-) but that's a good idea.

[@dominiclester3232]

Excellent, thanks! Your ruler test shots show edge performance so clearly.

[@quikee9195]

Well.. that's only at the min. focusing distance, where many lenses show such performance due to field curvature, but when focusing further away in typical conditions, this becomes a non-issue. This is why you need to check the lens at multiple focusing distances.

[@grumpyrocker]

Looks like a great lens. I can't see me updating from my old 18-55. But if I was just joining the Fuji mount I'd definitely get a kit with one of these in. Another great video, thanks Gordon.

[@cameralabs]

Thankyou!

[@Apachers]

Rather difficult to put a labeled aperture ring on a lens which doesn't offer a constant aperture value acros all focal lengths.

[@cameralabs]

Old lenses managed

[@fotografalexandernikolis]

Apachers The Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED (The old version with red VR emblem and aperture ring). When the aperture ring is set to 4.5 there is a small dot at 5.6.

[@neglectedloves]

Great and profound review of the new Fuji kit lens, thanks a lot! This is how it should be done 👏🏻

[@cameralabs]

Thanks!

[@Kliffot]

That one won't be legendary like the 18-55 that I'm pretty sure !

[@paulyeung6608]

I wish Fujifilm made something similar in equivalent focal range to something like the Tamron 20-40mm, 17-50mm, or Olympus 8-25mm. I’d even be happy if it was a constant F/4 or F.3.5-5.6. Something like an XF 11-33mm R LM WR or a 14-33mm R LM OIS WR would be a killer kit lens.

[@swonghobby]

Great Review Gorden. Thx. Question. Between the New Fuji XF16-50 and Sigma 18-50 f2.8. The Sigma at 18mm seem to have a bit of distoration. I want to get a XT5 and a lens. Just not sure if I should wait for the XF16-50 or just buy the Sigma 18-50 now. Thank you

[@muratbasc8302]

Sharpness improvement erases some of the downsides for me. I mostly shoot stopped down as much as I can to get the maximum sharpness of the lens I use. So wide open shooting without sharpness loss would be a big bonus. Internal zoom and weather sealing in a kit lens are appealing too. It probably has horrible distortion characteristics in raw but if Fujifilm corrected them w/o sharpness loss and hold the promise of resolving 40 mp, it becomes the new king of kit lenses. A very attractive piece

[@EamonnMcGonigle]

My X-T3 came with a fantastic 16-80mm constant f/4 which seems better in almost every way: faster throughout most of its range, better zoom range, has OIS. It is pretty compact for its capabilities. I still love that lens as my "walking around" lens.

[@ozuidema]

Due to the ridiculous stand-alone price, I cannot see many people buying this other than within a kit. If you want to upgrade from the 18-55, there is the Sigma 18-50 f2.8, which is 2,5 stops faster at the tight end, which is the difference between shooting at 1600 ISO (still good) and shooting above 6400 ISO (unusable). The Sigma, which is only 50 grams heavier at 290 grams, also has a much shorter close focussing distance (12 cm instead of 24) and it comes at 2/3 of the price of the new Fuji. The Fuji by comparison has weather sealing, internal zooming and an aperture ring; all nice, but to me, the Sigma seems much more attractive. I had expected more from the new kit lens.

[@jamesstanley7263]

They should have just updated the aesthetics of the old 18-55 and given it a square lens hood. Fuji lovers would have gone crazy for it!

[@OttosTheName]

Square hood looks great on a prime... on an extending zoom though?

[@gamingsoups]

yeah idk ab that... A square lens hood for a zoom lens is a little unorthodox...

[@jangarcia1338]

He obviously was being sarcastic...

[@fotografalexandernikolis]

@@OttosTheName Nikon 28-400. Doesn't look bad at all.

[@balboa0621]

You can actually get one made by haogue

[@simonxt5]

I prefer a lens with a fixed click-stop aperture ring. Also be aware that Fuji have not yet fixed the XT5 manual focus peaking bug, so two of the three control rings are far from pleasing when used on an XT5

[@msandersen]

I’d love to see a 3-way comparison between the 18-55mm, the new 16-50mm, and Sigma’s 18-50mm in terms of resolution and sharpness across the frame at wide, intermediate, and zoomed. So far, I haven’t seen anything to make me invest in a replacement for my venerable 18-55mm on an X-T3. Size and weight is an issue for walkabout photography, so Fuji’s old 16-50mm wasn’t worth it for me when most of my photos are in the f/5.6-8 range, but getting nice background blur zoomed in and close to a subject. For portraiture, I bought the 33mm f/1.4, which is a fantastic little lens, I haven’t used my 23mm and 56mm as much since I got it. In studio when using f/8 with flash, the 18-55mm does very well. Only if I was to upgrade my old camera (would love an X-T5, but price) would I consider upgrading the 18-55mm, in which case I’d love to know if the Sigma has the resolving power needed on 40Mp.

[@cameralabs]

I'd like to see that too - it'd take about two weeks to make properly though and I don't think there's the views to support that amount of time.

[@NotAnotherChannel_Channel]

Blown away that this internally zooms. Build looks great.

[@mrmaxwell2176]

It’s not actually a genuine internal zoom

[@NotAnotherChannel_Channel]

@@mrmaxwell2176 “but actually” lol “Fujinon XF16-50mm f/2.8-4.8 with Internal Zoom (Will Not Extend when Zooming)”

[@majky358]

I switched from XF 18-55 (still keeping it) to XC 16-50 for size / weight reason and it's great, but outer zoom / speed is slow, a bit annoying for landscape photo, fine for travel.

[@stanobert3475]

This sucker is sharp! I just obtained this lens.

[@RyanH0809]

Some strange trade-offs. To me, not a huge upgrade over the original. Perhaps the most important updates for my use is the 16mm wide end, and the excellent close-focusing at the tele end, although 4.8 max aperture is a bit painful. Seems like a great lens nonetheless.

[@andreabeccarisi1126]

I was thinking the same. Before watching this video, I was leaning towards buying the new 16-50 in exchange for my current 18-55, since the latter one is not as wide and it's probably some busted elements that affect image quality at 55mm. But the new lens has no IS and the aperture scales down too quickly as you increase the focal length

[@opalyankaBG]

Half a stop of light is painful?

[@Apachers]

@@opalyankaBG I agree with your point. Half a stop of light - especially at those values - is practically irrelevant. And if this was tha price to be paid for making this lens so compact and non-extendable while zooming (that would be my guess), I'd say it was worth it.

[@JungleCatImages]

The Sigma is 2.8. Tamron 2.8, 16-55 2.8 so people deciding on the 18-55 are already making a compromise either to save some money or because they need OIS or an aperture ring.. so now that it's 4.8 and gets to f4 at 27mm it's even more of a compromise, which I think is gonna push people to Sigma/Tamron or stick with what they have

[@Apachers]

@@JungleCatImages You seem to forget that this is a KIT lens. Majority of people will get it in a kit with a camera (for approximately $300). People who buy a camera with a kit lens are usually rather inexperienced photographers (who wanted to switch from their mobile to proper camera for one reason or another). This kit lens will usually be their first (and, in many cases, the only) lens. The difference between them and you or me (as well as almost all people watching reviews like this on YT or reading Fujirumors, etc.) is that they don't have such specialized knowledge about different lenses available for Fuji X mount, including third-party lenses. They don't make their purchasing decisions in a manner which you suggested in your comment (actually, they are often advised/manipulated by a seller in the store). So no - they don't make any compromises you mentioned since they are usually unaware of the alternative. Now, for those (semi)advanced photographers who are consciously looking for a universal, "holiday" zoom lens, I personally believe that Sigma 18-50 is a better alternative. But comparing this kit lens to either Fujinon 16-55 or Tamron 17-70 doesn't make much sense, in my opinion. Both of these latter lenses are much bigger/heavier and way more expensive. People who decide to buy one of them will usually not even consider buying this new kit lens (especially at its "standalone", rather ridiculous, price).

[@kaneclements7761]

I have the 18-55 which I use on my X-E4. On my X-T5 I use a Tamron 17-70 f2.8. It is stabilised. It matches the venerable 16-55 for quality. If one can run to the extra cash it is a great option. Add a Fuji 70-300 and that is a great combo.

[@perigee1275]

Hmmm...less throw, no IOS, the samples lack 3 D pop. I'll stick with the old kit lens. Fuji is a little lost I think.

[@craigwilson1604]

i only have the 16-55 but i could be tempted with this been so small.

[@PSYCHIC_PSYCHO]

You're better off with the original 16-55 f2.8 as it has a constant f2.8 Aperture, unlike this new crap.

[@heliogenesi]

@@PSYCHIC_PSYCHO This is not a replacement for 16-55 on the line-up and the constant f2.8 is the reason it is so large and heavy which was OP's reason of considering this lens.

[@xmeda]

I would like to see some 16-135/4 lens for APS-C systems .) Like Oly 12-100/4 equivallent. With similar corner to corner image quality and same build quality of course. :) Preferably for my Pentax, but it will be useful for all APS-C.

[@samson40a]

Exactly that. The Olympus lens is great. Fuji needs an equivalent

[@balboa0621]

They have an 18-120 f4, but it's a power zoom and generally poorly regarded optically

[@mrmaxwell2176]

Somehow I think the launch of this 16-50 will increase the price for used 18-55 and the Red Badge 16-55 f2.8. So I am keeping my two; both of which do a great job. By the way, the new 16-50 is not an internal zoom. Take a look at the 50 -140 to appreciate that technological marvel.

[@albertobelfast]

isn't it better to have both in-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS) on the camera body and Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) on the lens? Why would this lens be better than the XF 18-55? The new one is wider and lighter; the old one is faster and has OIS. I would go for the old one all the time. If then I want to go wider, I'd use the XC 15-45, even though it's slow.

[@gabewebyt]

The 18-55 can't fully resolve the new 40MB sensors, while the 16-50 can.

[@ArteUltra1195]

Just to give you some perspective on these „fast“ aps-c lenses, this one lets in less light and gives less blurry backgrounds and has a smaller zoom range than the Canon 24-105 f4-7.1

[@traffbros]

How about sigma? Does canon 24-105 f4 weights the same? How about the price? How about overall system use fuji/canon? I owned both systems and I prefer fuji

[@Hikebike365]

Fuji seems to be going sideways or backwards. No OIS? Seems like this lens is a cost saving measure. Nothing more. Combined with the dopey dedicated FS dial on the xt50 and I'm VERY undecided on what I'll buy to replace my 2 older bodies that now have failing internal batteries

[@OttosTheName]

I take it they are only going to release IBIS bodies from now on... So this will be the new standard for new bodies. Resolving more resolution, weather sealing but ditching OIS because they want to sell new bodies. I get it, but personally I wouldn't get this kit lens because I won't be needing any body upgrades for a decade to come if my X-T3 keeps going. Bodies have been good enough for ages.

[@Apachers]

All latest Fujifilm cameras have IBIS, therefore the lack of OIS in this lens is quite understandable and probably results from a strategic decision that has been made by the company. My guess is all Fujifilm cameras from now on will have IBIS and no new lenses will have it. It makes a lot of sense, since most people only own 1-2 bodie(s) but many lenses. It's more economic to pay a little bit more once (for a body) than paying more multiple times for lenses equipped in OIS. Having IBIS is also convenient for users of third-party lenses (including some old, manual ones).

[@Hikebike365]

@@OttosTheName like my xt20 and xt2 your body will fail due to the internal battery and need service or replacement. Then you'll have to face the decision I'm looking at. I was interested in buying new but with all the focusing issues (I had an xh2 for 2 weeks), I'm thinking about Sony. Never thought I'd look elsewhere but the lack of progress is glaring.

[@OttosTheName]

@@Hikebike365 Oof I hope it's not a very common issue. I do see other people mention that problem. That would suck because I have like a thousand settings saved. I'd probably also shop elsewhere or fall back on my A6000 if it'd happen to me. Since I shoot BnW 95% of the time I don't mind the old Sony colors. (Also better ergonomics and light metering). I'd miss my 18-55 though... and I like the prime offering Fuji has, but that whole 'fuji cares' vibe has faded a little bit over recent years.

[@Hikebike365]

@@OttosTheName unfortunately it's not an if, but when..... Would have been better if they used a capacitor instead of a battery. My bodies are 7 years old. That's about when you can expect the camera to crap out. I thought I could live with it but it's a big PIA when it starts happening. Don't let that battery drain out. Meaning always keep a fully charged main battery inserted in the camera. Even during storage. And check it from time to time to keep it from going flat. That'll prolong the internal battery lifespan

[@sclogse1]

No OIS or macro? The center sharpness of the old V2 16-50 3.5 is outstanding. Whenever I need quick and accurate, like selling an item.on Craigslist, I always use that lens.

[@AZ-vt4zz]

Color fringing is very low, on par with some of the latest lenses from fuji. Not sure about diffraction stars, should try to test for that. I mean, if you can't get shallow DoF, you can go the opposite.

[@cameralabs]

I normally include a daytime diffraction spike test when the weather co-operates!

[@larrywhite8590]

Very well done as usual!

[@cameralabs]

Thankyou!

[@fincrattanaka4633]

So this is why Fujifilm’s APSC prices surpass other full-frame models?

[@zahifar3936]

Firstly, I’m impressed by the bokeh of this lens. Much smoother than that of the 16-80. I also welcome the wider focal length. To me, that was an important feature missing from the 18-55. I also like the rubberised zoom ring. Ok, to keep the lens light and compact with its new design and wider start, and without adding too much optical compromises, it had to be made shorter and darker at the long end, and lose the OIS. Fine. A great option when bought as a kit.

[@richardturner81]

Hi Gordon, thanks for the video, I may have missed it but is the lens constructed of mostly metal or plastic?

[@remektekmedia6641]

Lack of OIS is a show stopper for me.

[@cameralabs]

It's meant for newer bodies with ibis

[@kjltube]

A lot of sensible upgrades over the previous model and a sensible choice, but I’m not sure it has the emotional pull the old model had.

[@jeremytheoneofdestiny8691]

Nostalgia is a hell of a drug!

[@dan.allen.digital]

Great video! By chance did you compare the image quality of the XF 16-50 to the XF 16-55 2.8?

[@cameralabs]

I couldn't get one in time! But I'll try for a future video

@@cameralabs please also include 16-80.

[@dan.allen.digital]

​@@cameralabsI'm thinking of selling my 16-55 2.8 and 16-80 for the new 16-50 or sigma 18-50 2.8. A video comparing the four zooms would be very helpful.

[@henrikhelmers1412]

Based on the shots of the pie image quality is good-when stopped down. You could probably achieve additional corner resolution by disabling distortion correction in your RAW converter.

[@sclogse1]

Just think of the combo of the old V2 16-50 3.5 with OIS and this T50 IBIS body...

[@Motiman]

Should have made it 16-55/2.8-4 with OIS instead

[@AdamJRichardson]

Which would have been larger, heavier and more expensive. Since IBIS is getting built into all Fuji bodies by the look of it, going forward it makes sense to have the lens be smaller and less expensive.

[@Motiman]

@@AdamJRichardson i agree with you on that. They are giving IBIS in almost every new camera now but from what I have seen, IBIS is not as good as the OIS when it comes to shooting videos. Surely, if fuji improves IBIS and makes it comparable to panasonic, then it would make sense

[@Motiman]

@@AdamJRichardson as a travel cinematographer and filmmaker, I was hoping they would update the 16-80 lens and fix the focus wobble issue. That lens covers the perfect focal range along with top notch OIS

[@jamesmynes1953]

Sick video dude.

[@cameralabs]

Thanks!

[@tjkrueger2655]

mtf charts looking impressive

[@hilalielhilali8287]

Good job. However Does the 16-50 lose focus while zooming in a video?!

[@cameralabs]

I need to do more testing about that

[@Adi-hj3nd]

I want 23-70mm

[@matt88169]

Instead of an external pump zoom, it’s an internal! Pretty strange. It seems like an OK lens but frankly I think the 18-55 will live on. The Sigma lens is terrible.

[@just_eirik]

I mean, it doesn't make sense to have a marked aperture ring when the lens has a variable aperture. What would a ring like that look like?

[@quikee9195]

well look at a manual vintage zoom lens with a variable aperture how it looks like :)

[@just_eirik]

@@quikee9195 Didn’t know that existed. Marked rings on variable aperture lenses that is. Do you have an example?

[@fotografalexandernikolis]

@@just_eirik The Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED (The old version with red VR emblem and aperture ring). When the aperture ring is set to 4.5 there is a small dot at 5.6.

[@just_eirik]

@@fotografalexandernikolis That's very cool! I haven't had a lens like that.

[@jaspervos4345]

Excellent and honest review!

[@cameralabs]

thanks!

[@mobysome]

nice review! I've gotten one of this and thinking of getting a prime lens. Do you recommend 18 or 23mm?

[@cameralabs]

My favourite is the 23 1.4 lm

[@mobysome]

@@cameralabs thanks!

[@mobysome]

@@cameralabs i went to a store today to try out 16-50 F2.8 and 23 F1.4 and they seem pretty similar for portrait. I can’t think of a reason for having another 23mm (I have the 16-50) other than very low light shots?

[@RM.TokyoPhotographer]

I wondering when the 16-55mm F2.8 is gonna be replaced if they dont stick in OIS its gonna shock alot of people....since they removed OIS on the kit lense...the flagship better have it...

[@cameralabs]

I think all new Fujifilm cameras will have IBIS

[@el_fucko]

The current 16-55 f2.8 already doesn't have OIS, brainiac...

[@TroupeGoal]

does the floating aperture still mean the exposure changes when zooming while recording video?

[@cameralabs]

It shouldn't if you were to lock it at a value that's smaller than the max at either end, say, f8. But in the past I've still seen some variable aperture lenses flicker as you adjust their zooms. I actually demo this early in the video where you can see some change in brightness even though the aperture was at around f8 as I recall.

[@smoothgilla3203]

It seems odd to prioritize adding weather sealing to a lens that will most often be paired with their non-weather sealed camera bodies.

[@andrewcrossley2448]

Good review

[@cameralabs]

Thanks!

[@danfarmer_photo]

Great it’s a little wider, but that f4.8…. I’ll stick with my sigma.

[@karinjohnstone6690]

Help!! I have only just bought the Sigma 18-50 BUT now got the XT50 with the 16-50 kits lens. Should I send the Sigma back - is it mad to have both? Should I get rid of the kit lens? Help…

[@cameralabs]

Why not try them both and keep the one you prefer?

[@StewartBairdPhoto]

Still waiting for Gordon to not to a quality post 🤓 always good.

[@cameralabs]

Thanks, glad you like them!

[@mixeddrinks8100]

Am I the only one who wants to know how this compares to the 16-80 F4 instead? Similar in price and range.

[@cameralabs]

Good question, I'll try to do a comparison in the future

[@frankartale1026]

Why would Fujifilm handicap "the kit lens" to f4.8 with no OIS. I'll take the 18-55 all day

[@cameralabs]

because it's designed for the newer bodies with IBIS.

[@frankartale1026]

@@cameralabs i understand that but the apertures are too small

[@alanjcravophotography4149]

No way I will sell my sigma 18-50 for this… sigma is a little beast, way cheaper…maybe I will sell it for the 16-55 2.8 MKii

[@mrb888]

Does this experience exposure stepping when zooming in and out?

[@cameralabs]

I show it in the video

[@jonesnax]

Really don't see it as an upgrade. Slower + less range...

[@luxdalet]

Fantastic review Gordon! But now I am undecided... When Fujifilm had teased the lens in their previous event, I was sure to sell my Fujifilm 16-80mm f/4 to get this one, sacrificing the reach for more aperture and a more portable travel kit lens. Given the need of weather sealing, portability, and range, would you recommend selling the 16-80mm to get this new one? Or the Sigma? Or just keep it? XD

[@pokpokishification]

Is it worth getting this new kit lens with an xt50 if i still have the old xf18-55? Some of the reviews say this keeps up with the 40megapixel cams but I don't know if that's just bs and the 18-55 is still decent enough

[@cameralabs]

Sometimes zooms are sold cheaper in bundles, in which case it can be wroth getting one even just for resale. But if it's near to full price and you have the 18-55 2.8-4, i'd probably stick with it.

[@pokpokishification]

@@cameralabs thanks. i did end up getting only the xt50 body and plan to use the old 18-55 with it. i might go for it someday if it ever becomes cheaper. the additional price for that right now is too much even when bundled with the xt50. i can just imagine how much it would cost if they sold it by itself. i also just remembered i still have the old xc 16-50 (apparently it came with OIS too) that came with the xa1, my first fuji mirrorless that i've forgotten about

[@snsokstan1]

@pokpokishification I traded my 18-55 for the new 16-50 for my X-T5. For most of what I shoot (outdoor, landscape), the 18-55 was a great lens. The one benefit to the 16-50 that's meaningful to me is that I can crop down on an image and still get decent resolution. That makes up for the loss of 5mm on the long end. The gain of 2mm on the near end has been a significant benefit. I also like that it's a tad lighter.

[@d.k.1394]

Lovely

[@budthecyborg4575]

3:38 So if you want to use the new lens like a 2.8-4.0 aperture it's got a range of 16mm to 42mm.

[@cameralabs]

Yes

[@f.iph7291]

"updated"

[@chouandsherrie]

Sigma f2.8 or this .. which would you opt for ?

[@cameralabs]

Did you watch the video?

[@JungleCatImages]

Depends on what you shoot.. personally I'd go for the Sigma because I want a lens that is versatile.. 2.8-4.8 might be ok if you only shoot in the day or in good light.. but 4.8 is not gonna work in a lot of low light situations

[@DarkPa1adin]

if you buy it as a kit lens, this if you buy it separately sigma 2.8

[@franciskikomanliclic]

I have tested this lens with my xs20 and the focus breathing is unbearable. I tried every settings whereas my 18-55 is far better with AF. Maybe this lens is not calibrated with previous cameras? but xs20 is pretty recent. Not sure what am I missing but hopefully they'll be able to fix with new firmware.

[@cameralabs]

Are you sure it's this exact one? I didn't think it was out yet. Do you mean the old XC version or this new XF version?

[@franciskikomanliclic]

@@cameralabs yes, have you tried this lens with other body other than xt50?

[@cameralabs]

@@franciskikomanliclic I haven't yet, but I'll give it a go and see. Are you a tester or a reviewer? Fujifilm tells me it isn't in the shops yet. Where did you get yours?

[@NathanHassani-kr4bh]

Is the image quality as good as the XF 16-55 2.8 LM WR? I want to sell the 16-55 for this, it's too heavy.

[@cameralabs]

Unlikely. You have one of the best quality lenses, whereas this is a lighter, cheaper option

[@NathanHassani-kr4bh]

@@cameralabs I don't understand, why is it so expensive for a kit lens if if the quality isn't as good as the red flag fuji lenses like the 16-55mm, £700 isn't cheap

[@cameralabs]

@@NathanHassani-kr4bh I agree, £700 isn't cheap, but as I explained, it's meant more for buying in a bundle with a new body, at which point it's priced at almost half that. AND it's still brand new, so not discounted either. The 16-55 2.8 is about £900 now, discounted, and a much higher-end lens.

[@d.k.1394]

1 word Over priced

[@ACD54]

Er - that's two

[@d.k.1394]

@@ACD54 lol

[@f.iph7291]

6 words I'm happy with my XT30ll

[@d.k.1394]

@@f.iph7291 lol

[@SpencerLupul]

does it still refocus when you zoom it in/out during video? This was the video dealbreaker on the 18-55 😢

[@atselykovskiy]

Do you mean this was dealbreaker on Sigma 18-50?

[@SpencerLupul]

@@atselykovskiy Both of them, in fact. they change focus and exposure during zooming which looks mega crap on videos

[@atselykovskiy]

@@SpencerLupul 18-55 is effectively parfocal and shows steps in exposure only if its aperture is not wide open

[@SpencerLupul]

@@atselykovskiy if that’s the case I would buy it again! But I always had an issue with the focus shifting during zoom. Not because of parfocal-ness or not, but because it was re-autofocussing during zoom

[@atselykovskiy]

@@SpencerLupul I did some tests, 18-55 is effectively parfocal, as well as 16-50/3.5-5.6, 15-45 and 18-120.

[@dangir1783]

If you use films, you must stop making zooms that exceed 3x. I would like the same quality of the gfx lenses to find them also on APSC but it seems that they do everything they can to avoid doing so. Fujifilm isn't capable of making zoom lenses without making a lot of compromises

[@jaegerschtulmann]

Truly disappointing that Fuji can't make their new lenses focus better for video on their latest cameras. =(

[@cameralabs]

I think its the body's fault, not the lens

[@jaegerschtulmann]

@@cameralabs I concur, it might very well be a camera body problem. Sigh

[@Nearest_Neighbor]

Fuji should be ashamed for themselves bringing this as successor to the 18-55.

[@ArteUltra1195]

Lets in less light than the canon rf 25-105 f4-7.1

[@天下為公1911]

A decent upgrade, but bullshit price.

[@balboa0621]

Wow, the way that the aperture closes as you zoom is really, really bad.

[@cameralabs]

Most variable aperture lenses are similar

[@balboa0621]

@@cameralabs no, not this bad. The 18-55 didn't close down nearly that quickly. And the Tamron 28-200 doesn't go past f4 until somewhere after 70mm

[@H99x2]

Why isn't it a constant 2.8 like the Sigma or Tamron.. what a joke

[@gamerw1zz]

It's a kit lens 🤦🏽‍♂️

[@itsbeaker6571]

If it was with internal zooming it would be incredibly huge and would make multiple lenses in their lineup irrelevant and they're not gonna do that to themselves

[@jylphoto]

Is it just me or does this lens feel like more of a downgrade? I'm curious how it'd be in the real world, but no OIS and losing half a stop of light zoomed in seems like too much to give up. I guess this lens would be nice for gimbal users because of the internal zoom and because they wouldn't need OIS anyways. WR is a nice addition, but my 18-55 has been holding up fine in light rain.

[@cameralabs]

It's designed for current and future bodies which all have IBIS.

[@robincphoto]

Just got mine today, and disappointed. The body is mainly plastic, quite overpriced since it is priced quite close to the amazingly well built 23mm r lm wr

[@cameralabs]

Most new lenses are made with plastic these days,

[@TungstenOvergaard]

Fuji is working for Sigma. If not, this is is not understandable.

[@jeffreywjpn]

This new lens makes no sense at all. Compared to the 18-55 it’s worse in almost every way and for what reasons? To get weather sealing? It’s a kit lens and will primarily be used on the x-t50 which is not weather sealed. The other bodies people are using better lenses than this. Unnecessary weather sealing at the expense of ois and slower aperture with less depth of field. Why did they waste their time on launching this? They could have put the effort towards something else that people actually want.

[@RandumbTech]

That massive exposure stepping at 3:00. Classic Fooj 🤣🤣 This is not an internal zoom - you can clearly see the lens elements moving while exposed to elements. An internal zoom has a sealed body with everything contained inside.

[@RandumbTech]

@@djstuc 👮🚨Alert, Alert! Fuji fanboy police inbound 😀

[@el_fucko]

@@RandumbTech Christ, your channel is depressing. Two years worth of shameless clickbaiting and still a subscriber count in the triple digits...

[@ourtvchannel]

Shocked how bad Fujifilm autofocus in video still is.

[@drs-Rigo-Reus]

What’s the edge frustration Sigma doing here? Also this supposed to be a review but no info on corner sharpness. The rest is brochure fluff we can read ourselves.

[@cameralabs]

Are you blind? I covered corner sharpness in detail in my landscape section!

[@alexbenstead5922]

Like the XT50 the new 16-50 makes absolutely no sense. Fuji are becoming greedy and obviously are now basing themselves on all the bad bits of the Sony model. I was considering rebuying a Fuji but based on recent announcements and rumours, forget it.

[@kermitage]

Nice downgrade by Fujifilm 😂

[@kaplangoz]

Xf16-50mm is a garbage lens, fuji has to offer better lenses to kill sigma 18-50 f2.8 and sigma 10-18 f2.8 lenses. The Xf16-50mm has a bad AF, its length is not enough for vlogging and videe, its aperture is not wide enough. I have xs10 and happy with it, I still prefer xf18-55. Poor Fuji!