Fujifilm XF 16-55mm f/2.8 Review: A Practical Perspective

[@LyndonPatrickSmith]

I love the 16-55, but as a great, reliable tool that gets the job done. When I show up for a paying gigs, it’s usually with the 3 lenses you listed: 10-24, 16-55, 50-140. But for personal work and jobs that need more light, I go for the primes. I took a workshop once from a top photojournalist. He carried a similar setup of three zooms, but on the two bodies he was carrying he had the 10-24 and 50-140 FF equivalents. He told me that he did this to get a more interesting FOV for news articles, something we don’t typically see with our own eyes. For him the 16-55 equivalent was essential, but more of a last resort when the other 2 focal lengths didn’t make sense for the shot.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

An interesting perspective. For unpredictable and fast moving situations, it definitely has its place.

[@pipposwelt]

Exactly my experience. I‘m using the 16-55 when I have to, but going for 23/1.4 und 56/1.2 whenever possible. After years of weddings, shooting primes was a way to keep it more challenging and interesting for me.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

For weddings, families, or anything else where you have a licence to be creative, the primes are the ticket, for sure. This lens doesn't even come with me for anything like that.

[@ruudmaas2480]

I have the primes 16mm F2.8, 23mm F2, 35mm F2 and the 50mm F2 for my XT2 and XT 3. Next to that I have the Viltrox 85m F1.8 and the zoomlens the fujifilm 55-200 (the zoom is now broken, have to replace it with the 70-300mm). The Viltrox lens I hardly use. I mostly do woodland- and streetphotography. Weight is very important for me because I do make a lot of distance walking when I am in the forest or in the city. For streetphotography I only take two lenses with me. The 35mm in combination with the 23mm F2 or 50mm F2. Everything fits in a small bag including an extra battery,my smartphone and some small stuff). Most of the time I only shoot with one focal length in the streets with F stops like F4, F5,6 until F8. My favourite prime for the streets is the 35mm F2. I'am interested in upgrading to the new 33mm pime of Fujifilm (hopefully a good one). This for shooting for with wider F-stops or fully open. In the Forest I normally take in my backpack three primes and the zoomlens with me. Most of the time I only use one or two primes for woodland scenes. In the forest I shoot a lot at F8 and higher and I like the results of the primes, this together with the small form factor for easy handling (no need for big filters etc.). So all in all small from factor and weight are realy important for me. Shallow depth of field is at this moment not so important for me. I do like to print my photographs. I do not see myself printing my photographs bigger then A2 format. The X system has enough resolution. So an upgrade to a GFX system (like a GFX50S in combination with a 45-100mm F4 zoomlens, an one lens setup for everything) now at this moment is not needed but always welcome:))

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Another interesting point on the size of lenses and filters! I also use a smaller filter kit for my primes/X100. This makes the overall package much more portable.

[@stuartcox9290]

I love to shoot primes on two bodies where possible either 14/35 or 23/56. I however need zooms for commercial work and fast paced events such as weddings

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

That's pretty much where I'm at. How do you like that 14mm?

[@stuartcox9290]

@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer mate I haven’t used it a great deal, so far I enjoy the colours and contrast and the challenge of shooting a 21mm equivalent over a super wide zoom. I came from Nikon Z with 14-30, and I don’t miss it.

[@Auhana50]

I own a 16-55 love the lens super sharp many uses that other primes can’t do so this will remain in my bag. Yes 50-140 / 16-55 and my 14mm wide will serve my purpose. Great video and perspective 🙏

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Thanks for watching!

[@eliaspap8708]

Thanks for the review, I think they need an alternative less utilitarian standard zoom, for the more arty professionals, a 17-40mm F2 would be awesome, add linear Af, if it weighs a kilogram or thereabouts, so be it. But at least its an option and something too compete against your full frame 24-70mm f2.8 standard. Im sure it will convert a lot of full frame shooters and provide a really great option for low light event shooters.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

That sounds like a wonderful idea, actually. Limiting the zoom range would likely give them the ability to make a faster lens of about the same size and weight. I'd definitely be interested in something like that.

[@jorgemoro5476]

I own the 16-55 and like it. That’s it. As you said it’s a workhorse. I own about 10 XF lenses in addition to my GFX stuff. My “ pry it from my cold dead hands” would be my first lens I purchased in 2012 - the 35 1.4. My second would be the 16 1.4. I also own two 18-55 copies. I’m currently thinking about selling my 16-55 as I haven’t used it since photographing a new resort in Costa Rica about a year ago. So I may let it go.

[@alanc6416]

I personally like primes. I have the 16mm 1.4, 23mm 1.4, and the56mm 1.2, and I really love the image quality. However, I find myself bringing the X100V out almost exclusively nowadays, and when I need zoom, I leave all the fast primes at home and just use the 16-80. Additionally, the 56 1.2 is pretty difficult to focus on kids and moving objects wide open. So I ended up stopping down to 2.0 or 2.8 anyway. I used to bring the 16mm 1.4 for indoor gatherings, but again, nowadays I almost exclusively bring the X100V, sometimes with the WCL converter if I needed the wide angle. So the primes have become like trophies in the camera box at home. I sometimes wonder if I actually like shooting primes at all! 🤣 This is the reason I might switch to the XT5 + XF16-55 F2.8 given there’s IBIS in that body now. When i needed the zoom, I can probably live with the extra weight. And when I go out and about, the compact X100V is still my first choice. So this might simplify my gear to X100V, and the XT5 + XF16-55, and possibly another tele zoom for the occasional wildlife photography.

[@macobean]

as a casual shooter and some paid work here and there, i secured the trinity zoom lenses first, 10-24mm, 16-55mm, 50-140, covering those has a sense of security that no matter what event either personal or paid shoot, most focal length is already covered. i have the 23mm f1.4 and 35mm, the 16-55mm is just so versatile and indeed a workhorse not gonna lie but my favorite lens is my 35mm f1.4 😂😂😂

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

They do the job, no doubt. That 35mm is a joy, though... so many flaws that make it such a wonderful tool. haha!

[@macobean]

@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer 35mm is just so fun on everything tbh

[@malfunkt]

Definitely can relate. I'm very much a grab one lens and make it work type of of shooter. Except in my case its the XF 16-80 F4 on an X-E3 body w/grip. I also have some great manuals to provide me with brighter aperture (KamLan 50 F1.1 II and 28mm F1.4). The zoom forces you to be creative in a different way. Being able to adjust your field of view /perspective gives you a different way to portray subjects, and creates a different flow when shooting. The 16-80 at the 80mm mark, provides good separation and the bokeh is quite smooth. With the older Fuji bodies w/o OIS, the 16-80 brings incredible stabilization, giving you the ability for slow shutter speed handheld shots day/night which in it's own right is a creative tool. The 16-55mm I passed on just due to the extra bulk/weight, and lack of OIS. Though, I'm sure I would have been happy with it, especially pairing it with an OIS body down the road.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Surely a good way to work. If you can get by with f/4, then that's a versatile liens. Much of my work is done in low light with moving subjects, so f/4 is a no-go. Even f/2.8 is far too slow at times. I've heard good things about that 16-80mm in terms of image quality, but never used it.

[@albertsmith9315]

Good timing! I was about to buy this lens and then I went back and looked at how many of my favorite images from the last year were shot at f/1.4... many, many. I love my 16mm, 23mm and 35mm f/1.4 lenses. Usually, I pick one at random and go out with only that lens and make pictures for me. Luckily, they were having a close out sale on X-T3 bodies this week, priced exactly the same as the zoom. Now I have two X-T3s and all my fast primes.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Always good to reflect back and see what you actually use before making a purchase. No use in GASing for something you won't make good use of.

[@guillandanthony711]

Wow! Finally someone reviewing a lens based on use and creativity, and not an sharpness. ❤ I personally prefer zoom lenses, because a lot of times, a have an idea of how my picture needs to be, and I don‘t like being stuck with only one focal length. My favourite lens is the 50-140mm and I just bought the 16-55mm. These lenses are not inconspicuous and this is why I like the 27mm f2.8 on my trips. Maybe I should give the 35mm a try.

[@shervinsardari]

Dear Dylan, thanks for your insightful video! I shoot photos and videos in similar (governmental) situations, although I still use my 18-55 kit lens (together with the 10-24 and 50-140). A situation I often struggle with are indoor group pictures of 2-6 people with natural light (window, light bulbs, sometimes LED lights) and restricted space (e.g. in front of a photowall or at the negotiation table). I don't really like how the pictures of my 18-55mm look at 23mm (f3.2, not too sharp or contrasty, no background separation, simply 'boring' and almost like a smartphone picture). Therefore I am torn between the XF 23mm f2.0 and the 16-55mm. The 23mm prime is smaller, lighter & faster, but I will need to switch lenses inbetween and I don't enjoy the 23mm focal length for my personal photography, so I won't use this lens too often. The 16-55mm is more versatile and probably better suited for my video work (constant aperture), but I'm not sure if the optical quality is too different from my current 18-55mm and if the f2.8 (compared to the f3.2) differs enough to create the desired background separation & overall look. Do you have any tips or recommendations for this situation? Thanks!

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

When it comes to group shots at photowalls or specific moments like a negotiation, a pop of flash is what I use to really elevate my image above what others in the room are able to capture.

[@ozuidema]

Great review and shots, as always! I use the 16-55 for travel, together with the 10-24; both primarily for outdoor shots. And the 16-55 comes out for sunstars as well 😀. For indoor people shots and parties: 35mm f/1.4 (love that lens) or 50mm f/2.0. For city trips (travelling light): 18mm f/2 and/or 23mm f/1.4. Street photography: 35mm f/1.4 or 50mm f/2.0. For zoos, outdoor gigs and parades: 55-200.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Thanks for sharing!

[@mazdaram226]

16-55mm is a great lenses but I will never sell my 16mm 1.4 as is far my favourite lens of Fujifilm..

[@diogocarvalho6247]

Dylan you keep referring to the Laowa 33, and your thinking is really getting under my skin 😂 I might go for it after all!

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Haha. Don't let me make your decision for you. It's definitely a great lens for what it does.

[@lawrencehorowitz9291]

Excellent video with balanced discussion of real world issues. I use the 18 to 55 kit lens for wood land and travel as I rarely shoot wider than f5.6 for these applications. Using a zoom lens mean less weight and avoids my having to change lenses in less than ideal conditions.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Seems like a small zoom is definitely the ticket for you! That kit lens is a phenomenal piece of glass. Enjoy it!

[@Qantz]

Agree! I always wonder why I sold mine when everyone raves about it and wondered if I made a mistake. Thank you!

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

It's only a mistake if you still need the lens! ;)

[@Qantz]

@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer haha yeah, I only need a zoom when I travel. But the 16-55 is also a heavy lens. So I find the kit lens more travel friendly.

[@raxmendorom]

I had an epiphany on the lenses I use, or to be more precise, need. As an amateur, I really don't need the pro zooms and much prefer to use primes. So I sold my 24-70 and traded it for a used rangefinder lens. But I really can understand why pros go for these zooms.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Right? It's really all in what you need. Personally, I NEED this lens for certain shoots. When I don't need it, I don't use it.

[@satyayodha8585]

Xf 16-55mm is like an all rounder boxer without a signature move, it's great but lack of impact for the spectators.. I somehow always found myself back at using Sigma 18-35mm & 50-100mm f1.8, and Xf 50mm f1 as prime lens for my xt4.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

That's a good analogy!

[@fuelediowa]

Very refreshing and realistic view. This whole discussion is what keeps me from getting the 16-55. I have the 16-80 as well as many primes. Like you when doing the work where I will be shooting f5.6 to f11 or beyond it is hard for me to justify buying the 16-55 because if I need 5ge light or look and I can get away with using a prime I will. Indoor gymnasium sports is where I keep telling myself the 16-55 would be worth it. Lol but the 35 f2 doe not do bad with a bit of for thought and planning .

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Thanks for watching. That's pretty much where I am on the prime/zoom front. They're useful in certain situations, but a fast prime is worth the lens changes whenever possible.

[@ankpako3520]

Fujinon xf 16-55mm f2.8 r lm wr Un obiettivo di notevole qualità in termini ottici e meccanici, ottima luminosità ma un grande grandissimo difetto: la gomma dello zoom (grip anello) si è usurata e scollata utilizzando l'obiettivo in maniera poco intensiva e per brevi periodi. Considerando il costo dell'obiettivo mi aspettavo il massimo in tutto, anche perchè viene venduto come "obiettivo tropicalizzato" cioè resistente alle intemperie, polvere, ecc; per la sostituzione va mandato unicamente al centro assistenza a Milano a vostre spese, costo del cambio gomma tra 100 e 150 euro. Un vecchio obiettivo zoom usato per oltre 20 anni su una reflex analogica le gomme sono praticamente indenni. GRANDISSIMA DELUSIONE (disponibile video)

[@jaapkamstra9343]

Great review! I love this lens for catching moments. When things change too fast to be able to move or change lenses, But if I can move I prefer the primes.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

That's pretty much the role of zooms for me, only when I need the instant flexibility.

[@dprobinson192587]

I’m new to photography outside of my iPhone. I recently bought a used x-t3 and was considering this lenses and part of my starter kit. Would this be a good choice for me?

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Hi! I don't make a habit of recommending what people buy as it's a very personal decision and I have no idea of your wants, needs, or even how you like to shoot. If anything, I'd recommend starting with a simple lens like a kit lens and deciding where to go after you've learned the ins and outs of how you like to work yourself. You can pick up the 18-55 kit lens second hand for next to nothing and you'll get plenty of good experiences from it.

[@dprobinson192587]

@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer thank you for the reply and the advice! Much appreciated!

[@ChacoOutdoorsman]

Love your landscape work, very artistic composition. Also like your videos

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

I'm glad someone likes my landscape photographs! Haha! Really, thank you! Glad you enjoy the videos, too!

[@stevechan5569]

Thanks for the informative & educational presentation. Greatly appreciate your perspective. Have a great day.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Thanks for watching!

[@cward2986]

New subscriber, and really enjoying your videos. I was interested to hear that you shot this video using the 35/1.4. I tried it once for webcam use and the noisy chatter it produced while maintaining focus practically drowned out the meeting conversation. Are you using it in manual focus for your videos, or editing out that background noise somehow? I’m sure a mic distant from the camera would help, but I couldn’t get rid of the chatter even with that.

[@borromine]

Very interesting review. You really give us an inside look at your approach. This red badge lens is why I bought the Fuji in the first place. I was using OLYMPUS Pen F with quite a few of their lenses. A camera and lenses that I loved but having used Pentax 67, 645, and view camera for architecture and landscape on tripods, I missed analog controls and f stops on the lenses. That was a long time ago and I was still relatively new to digital. This lens seemed like the way back to analog style. Now I find this lens too heavy for the XF system. And yes, somehow despite being very high quality it does not encourage one to shoot. I hate the idea of selling this lens and yet it seems redundant given that if I need this kind of quality I just want to use my gfx system. Given the gfx bodies and lenses, I now would like to see Fuji come out with an entire line of MFT. With a 20 or 24mb sensor x 43 format and appetites on lenses with X-T3 analog controls. For prints up to 8x10 and internet MFT is more than adequate. Sorry for this long detour. The weight of the 16-55 makes me miss MFT. Bottom line: great review!! Interesting to hear how you work.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Cheers for weighing in, Joseph. It's a big and heavy lens, no doubt. With a gripped X-T body, it sits nicely. However, at that point, you might as well be holding a full-frame body if weight and size are a concern. On MFT, I don't think you'll ever see Fujifilm working on 3 systems. It's not a big enough team with a huge budget to develop and support that sort of product line in the shrinking camera market. I honestly wonder how much longer any of the smaller players in the camera market will still be around.

[@borromine]

@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer yes. I’m sure you’re right that fuji will never go MFT. Maybe Ricoh/Olympus will go quasi analog style. I doubt it tho. The Pen F was swell but I guess it had a small following. Still, we are so lucky to have so many superb choices!!

[@qdogg290]

For a lens that doesn't inspire you, you've certainly taken many great pictures with it. I'm a landscape photographer, generally shooting at the smaller apertures. I find this to be a requisite lens (or another midrange zoom for that matter). Zooms make so much more sense when afield doing landscape photography. I'm sure you find the 50-140 to be more "interesting" -- something about 140mm @ f/2.8.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Hard to judge something you haven't used extensively. As I said in the video, I use it when I have to and leave it at home whenever possible. That 50-140 is another story... It's my least used lens. Again, a necessary purchase for certain work, but not something I ever take it unless I'm paid to.

[@andreitelenkov5775]

I gave mine away for free. Replaced it with little primes as I call them, 23/2 35/2 50/2. Recently I have Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 glued when walking around. Events for client, that's little primes for speed...

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

A generous deed! Those f/2 primes are tiny, for sure.

[@peteshafie9640]

compact video and very informative Dylan! Cheers

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Thanks for watching, Paul! Glad it was helpful.

[@paulandjess_]

Hey Dylan, amazing review. Thank you! Please help me. I can get the 16-55 at 637USD almost new and 16-80 at 517USD almost new too. I'm using an X-S10, I don't mind the weight and my main goal is quality photos, videos, and lifetime usage for trips, portraits, family, landscape, and street. I am also planning to get the 70-300mm in the future for my safari trips. I'm just planning to stick with just two lenses, a medium, and a telephoto. With a 120USD price difference, is it worth it to invest with the 16-55? And, if you'll only get one lens for the rest of your life, would you choose the 16-80 over the 16-55 due to its versatility? What do you think?

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

If I could have just one lens, it would be a ~50mm equivalent lens. That's my style. For you, I can't say as I don't know what you shoot and how you shoot it. Here's my take after having owned both of those lenses - there's very little difference other than light gathering and the fact that the 16-55mm is slighly sharper at most focal lengths (especially the corners). That's really the only practical difference I found. However, I dislike both of them personally. Take from all that what you will! My real recommendation would be to try both and see what you think might work for you.

[@paulandjess_]

@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer thanks for the help!

[@bak2mb]

got rid of my XT3 last year and about 6 lenses 16/55 included to fund a Q2..then XT5 came and somehow the itch for intercheangble kick in and first lens that came to my mind is the 16/55 and the 27mm pancake😊....the Q2 is a keeper tho!

[@shibuichi]

Excellent review!

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Thank you kindly!

[@felixcat4346]

Very nice 🙂. Thanks

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Most welcome 😊

[@djtruedomination]

I am a prime lens shooter. But depending on the situation, I use zooms. I definitely have more prime lenses than zoom lenses.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

I'm right there with you. The prime collection is very real on this end, as well.

[@djtruedomination]

@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer I love primes.

[@SamiPaju]

I seem to be using zooms only when I am out hiking or otherwise in nature / landscape types of settings. This summer I spent a few days in northeast Finland doing 15km daily hikes, and I only had G9 + 12-40mm f2.8 (m4/3 crop) with me and it worked perfect. However, whenever I just go out with a camera in a city or even when traveling (unless it’s specifically outdoors / nature), I much prefer to only use small primes, with the current setup being X100F + TCL II. Although I am lusting after an X-Pro 3 OR a Leica Q2… Haven’t made up my mind yet… >.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

They have their uses, no doubt. This one for me, as I said, is an "If I really have to" kind of lens that does the job when it's needed. But, I don't ENJOY using it and that's a really big thing when it comes to personal work.

[@SamiPaju]

@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer That is so true. A standard zoom doesn't exactly shout at you to go out with a camera, enjoy the experience, and flex your creative muscles 🙄

[@joshuachubbphotography]

My thoughts exactly. Great workhorse and probably Fuji’s most versatile lens but it’s not inspiring.

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

Indeed. For me, it's a paperweight 95% of the time and then I need it for something and it pays the rent. That's the only reason I have it.

[@Caracalaba]

I find it big and expensive even compared to FF equivalents

[@DylanGoldbyPhotographer]

It's large on the Fujifilm bodies, to be sure. But if you look at Nikon and Canon's f/2.8 zooms, they're far more expensive than this one. You do get quite a bit more for your money with those lenses, however.

[@Caracalaba]

@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer I was comparing it to the f4 mirrorless FF since the background separation would be more similar

[@stefan33uk]

@@Caracalababut the cost to manufacture a f/2.8 zoom lens is the same regardless of whether it’s being attached to a full frame or APS-C camera. So it’s unfair to compare it to a f/4 which is of course much cheaper to make and easier to keep light/add OIS etc. Larger sensor cameras have this shallow depth of field advantage, but they have the disadvantage of less reach on telephoto lenses, for example.

[@paranoidfrandroid]

11:11 make a wish