As always your videos are excellent, strait forward and informative. I recently picked this up to replace my 16 1.4 and have no regrets. it's easy to have with me and it gets me out there. Im not a professional so lately my philosophy of "less is more" is working well for me. My present kit is a Fuji Xpro-2, XH-1 and a Richo GR III. Lenses I own Xf 16 2.8, 18 2.0 23 2.0 35 2.0 and 50 2.0 . My 23 1.4 is about to be sold. I can carry all of this with me in my Peak Design 10L Everyday Sling. I mainly shoot street. Thanks for your videos.
Thanks for this review. Your professional perspective tops other Fujifilm reviewers and is among the very few reviewers of Fuji gear and photography that I trust. I bought the 16 f2.8 recently and haven't used it a lot to-date, but it appears very sharp for my needs (travel), with good contrast and color. Like you said, it's greatest strengths are its small size, light weight and portability for travel, without sacrificing very good image quality.
I've come back to this video as I am contemplating eating my words and grabbing this lens. I've been on a bit of a transition of late, trialing out the XF50-140 and Sigma 18-35/1.8 (with the Fringer III adapter), for all of my professional event work. I am just getting a little over carrying a bag o' primes around with me everywhere throughout the day. Currently this is working so well that I am thinking of selling all my Fuji primes and staying with this combo for the foreseeable future. BUT... after the last wedding, the reception dance shots which I used the weighty Sigma 18-35 (mostly at 18mm), my wrists were not happy. This is because I tend to hold an AD200 in one hand and the camera in with the other and deploy that 'dragging the shutter/mix strobe and ambient' combo thing (which folk seem to love), and just getting into those interesting compositions with operating the camera with one hand was just getting tiresome. (Yes I could get a speedlight on camera instead and solve some of this but I like the lighter Xpro trigger and use it for other ocf work during the night). Seeing as most of these particular dance shots are around 1/4 or 1/5th, this then means the apertures are fairly stopped down anyway and the wide angle f2.8 wouldn't be a drawback. I do still have my 16/1.4 but for this case usage I'd happily trade the faster aperture for the lighter lens with better AF. As you say its the kind of lens you can find a place for in your bag or on your person and it wouldn't be annoying to ferry around. The 16/1.4 is quite a lot larger and starts to become bother. Thanks again.
I have a copy. I rarely use it. Some how the 35mm or 50mm both F2 are my favourites. But on the XT3 it is sharp enough when shooting F8. Beautiful photographs.
Your review is quite helpful. As a photo enthusiast, I have learned that “good enough” works day in and day out. I just rented this lens and took it into Yosemite National Park. It was the perfect choice. Your content is always helpful. Regards…Wayne
This is a great fun lens. It feels like the perfect focal length for just having mounted and on a wrist strap when exploring urban environments. Especially if you don't want to draw attention to yourself. I could not say the same about the 16 1.4 which also suffers in the corners and borders. The 18mm 1.4 is spectactular as is the 33 and others. But they tend to be used then put back in the bag until the next shot I visualise would be perfect for that lens. The 16 2.8 keeps me trigger happy. Qs for IQ... well it will be replacing my x100v at a fraction of the cost. Not quite as compact, but it fulfills the brief of a small unobtrusive package better in my book. I can see this coming on an upcoming trip to London, leaving the 18 1.4 behind! Never imagined that would be the case.
Looks like a very handy lens. I like small format, wide(ish) angle lenses and this looks rather attractive to me. I do have a 10-24 and use it at the 10mm end regularly as well as a TTArtisans 27mm f2.8. The 10-24 is a bit bulky and the 27 not as wide as I prefer so this 16mm might be one for me to consider. Nice video, Dylan. Thanks and Happy New Year for 2023.
One of the first lenses I got for X-Pro3. Aside from the size, one of the best parts of it is the close focusing distance. It's a really fun lens for taking nature close-ups as well. And so inconspicuous to carry around.
As always, great review! I've always had a 24mm lens from my film days and into my Nikon DSLR period, so when I got into the Fujifilm system the 16mm was a must have lens. At the time the only option was the f/1.4 version so that is what I bought. It is a terrific lens, worthy of all the praise, but it is large and heavy, especially if you are using it on an X-E series body. So when the 16mm f/2.8 came out I bought it right away. I agree with pretty much everything in your review. This is my choice (I still have the fast lens too) for daylight f/4 to f/11 shooting. I probably use the f/2.8 version 80% of the time unless I know absolutely that I'll need the fast aperture for low light or selective focus. One thing that I use the 16mm f/2.8 lens for is to shoot square photos. When shooting 1:1 images, the 16mm gives a field of view, side to side very close to a 23mm (35mm FF equivalent). The 16mm on a X-E body is just fun to use for this.
Interesting thoughts on shooting square. That would also remove tbe corners from the image. I don't shoot square anywhere near often enough, so I might just give that a go!
It's a cracking little lens. Excellent review, thanks. On my XT5, I triple it with the 23/f2 and 50/f2. I think is is better in the corners than your impression, if, and only if, one is viewing images without resorting to pixel peeping. As photographers, we are prone to pixel peep, but most viewers, such as family members, do not. For me, I use my 16-55/f2.8 for convenience when I do not want to change lenses, such as when hiking with family and friends, but I use my 16/23/50 for fun.
I bought a used copy as I wanted a faster AF lens with weather sealing compared to my 18mm F2, especially after I picked up a X-Pro2, it's also great on my X-E3
Would love it if you would test out the new 27mm 2.8. WR lens. I know some photographers are interested in using this focal length for street photography. The only issue I have with it is the F stop, which I think could’ve been an F2 or even a 1.7. This is a unique perspective versus the 35 or 50 mm that most photographers have on their cameras. I’ve seen some images of a 40 mm and find it a very interesting perspective. 🖖
I love my 27mm f2.8 (newer version with the aparture ring). Have you had any experience with it? I have also the 33mm f1.4. Brilliant couple of lenses that complete each other quite well
Thank you I was waiting for you do this review. I might pick one up, only because it is portable and the xf18mm f2 just hasn't convinced me based on people's reviews. I find it interesting this lens is on the 40mp resolution list with those "soft" edges, but the xf16mm f1.4 isn't.
It's more than likely an overall resolution and IQ thing rather than a specific aspect of the lens that made Fujifilm leave it off the list. Could also just be that they want people to buy specific lenses more frequently.
Other reviews highlight it is the sharper of the two lenses (never been the 16 1.4s strongest suit). Sadly I owned both but 2 years apart, so hard to compare. But it is certainly sharp on the x-t5. The softer corners I find are less noticeable than the mushy corners of the 16 1.4 below f2.8. I actually struggle to replicate the complaints made against the 16 2.8! It can lack a little in contrast if using side by side other more expensive lenses, but most people wouldn't be doing that and it's nothing that can't be tweaked in post, even of the jpeg. Surprise package for me.
Thank you for the review. I was about to pick up the XF18 f2 (even it is outdated for many people) mainly for documentary photos and tourism with my X-E4... but now wondering, this 16 f2.8 is it the one to choose instead? Wondering because you are mainly talking about landscape photography with this lens, is it a bit too wide for documentary in streets compared to 18mm? Thank you.
In terms of optical quality, the 16mm is quite a bit better in my experience. The difference between 16 and 18 is not huge when working at normal distances. You'll only really notice the increase in perspective distortion when working in very close or tilting the camera. Otherwise, I can't see why you wouldn't enjoy working with the 16mm.
Dear Sir, I just loved your Excellent exposure. Very down to earth. Meat & potatoes video!! Your images are beyond beauty. I take that I, will use this is a lens to go out and have FUN!! No persnickety details. I wish, as you, to click images for ME. I won't be exposing at the Guggenheim Museum. Now, a little question: Will this little gem pair fine with my old X-T10? Keep on sharing.
It'll outresolve that sensor by far! Fujifilm considers this one of the lenses that benefits from the new 40MP sensors, so you'll have detail in spades and great autofocus with the stepping motors. If you like this focal length, you won't be disappointed!
I do find it interesting, there was a lot of people ditching the 16/1.4 for the new 18/1.4 and then coming back to getting that 16mm fix. I have the 16/1.4 and am very happy with it, I don't even find the size too off putting and appreciate the 1.4 for event work. I have the 23/2 and 50/2 as well, so I am well aware of the allure of the tiny fujicrons, I guess I feel like the 16/1.4 is one that perhaps just has to make it into the bag regardless. If the 16/2.8 was a f2 then that would really throw a spanner in the works, but for me I feel like I can't afford or really justify the 18/1.4 and 16/2.8 so my compromise is to make do with the 16/1.4. For event work f2.8 is pushing it (I try to keep f2 as the limit), so the 16/2.8 is really cancelled out as being an option even though its size and weight is a strong allure. Nice review. All the best for 2023 Dylan.
No compromise there at all! The 16 1.4 is a fantastic lens. Use what you have, for sure. I am lucky in that I can offset the costs of new gear a little and justify a lot of things for certain jobs that I do. I fully understand that not everyone is willing to do things that way, so I always try to meep my reviews as grounded as possible.
@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer I think the largest issue for me isn't even cost, its space in the event bag. You have to get a little ruthless. So justifying a 16 & 18 in the bag is tough, and if I had to choose I think I'd err more with the 16 for that additional versatility. So it becomes about space, one wide angle, one normal, one tele and for me 18mm is JUST short of being wide enough for those moments where width or space is important. I kinda feel the 16mm can do all the shots the 18mm can achieve but then also some more stuff that it cannot or struggles with. I dunno tho... I am still working out my primes, it's hard to really restrict yourself and you don't want to be constantly lens swapping. I know Kevin Mullins likes the 18 and 56 combo, I feel I prefer the 16 and 90, but that leaves a middle guy that definitely needs to slot in.
Ah! I see what you mean now. Sure, my kit never includes both of them. It's definitely a one or the other type of situation. Personally, my most common kit is bunched right in the middle at 23, 33, and 56.
Nice video, how is the focus breathing for video? Currently I use the 10-24 F/4 for video which has little to no focus breathing but is an F/4 which is somewhat problematic in certain indoor situations All my Primes are 35mm or longer (which is too tight for what i shoot) So really looking at either the 16mm F/2.8, the 23mm F/2 or the sigma 16mm F/1.4 Acceptable photo quality is good enough as this will mainly be used for 4K footage, just not sure if 1 stop is worth the investment in the 16 f/2.8 (all be it a small investment) If money was no object I'd just get the 18mm and new 23mm F/1.4s and call it a day. Most of the shooting is in manual focus, but I want the autofocus to work well enough for video, for the occasions when it is needed (I know the sigma 56 F/1.4 is fine autofocus for video, but the 16mm sigma is an older design and i've had no chance to test it, and i'm more inclined to go Fuji native glass when possible) thanks
I have the 16-80 lens & xT5 Not on Fuji’s list for optimum use for the 40 MP sensor Any advantage for me to add this 16 mm f 2.8 I do love small lenses and sort of wished I hadn’t sold my 35f2 but I did get the 33f1.4 and love it
Hello again Dylan. I just read your Vietnam article at Fujilove. I have the X-T5 with the 16 f2.8, 23 F2, and 35 f1.4 for the same reasons you took these focal lengths to Vietnam (though I haven't been to Vietnam). I was surprised you said the 16 f2.8 missed focus "more than a few times". You didn't mention you saw that in your initial review. I haven't noticed this problem but to be honest I haven't used the 16 that often, having only recently bought it. Do you have any explanation for the missed focus? Does it change your opinion of the lens? So far, from what I have seen with it, my copy seems to perform well. Hopefully I'll have more opportunity to use it in the near future and report back. Thanks for your reviews.
Thanks for watching, Scott. I'm still trying to nail down the focus misses, to be honest. I was a bit disappointed and I haven't been able to figure it out. It seems to be quite random, a lot like the X100 series cameras. Still, happy with the lens overall, but I won't use it for anything critical until I figure this out.
Hi Dylan, You and other reviewers have found this lens not the sharpest, especially in the corners; yet Fujifilm lists it as suitable for optimal results with their 40MP sensor cameras. Do you have any thoughts on this? Thanks very much, GB
I'm not in the habit of recommending lenses to people whose photography and tastes I'm not familiar with. What I will say is that both are good lenses, neither is great. The Fujifilm renders more detail, the Laowa gives you a much wider field of view. It will all come down to what you want to do with the lens.
Well it really depends on the type of scene you’re photographing… If there is an obvious subject, like a cool looking tree for example, you could primarily focus on it. If you want as much sharpness across the frame, a good starting point would be to lower your aperture around f8 or f11 (if you go lower than that, diffraction will start to impact negatively the overall sharpness) and to focus around the first third bottom line. Another way, although more technical, would be to use the focus bracketing function of your camera, which would make several pictures of your scene at different focus distances and then to focus stack the images in an appropriate software. Hope this will help you.
The 16mm f/2.8 is fine. The "list" is just to let pixel peepers know they'll see a lot more detail from certain lenses. Nothing to stop you using this on the X-T5 or X-H2.
If i buy small crop fuji camera (i use GFX as primary) then i buy: SIGMA 16mm F1.4 ;-) and 28/2 ttartisan (AF too half proce, same qulaity) - sigma is better that fuji
That’s a bold statement. I’ve got the Sigma 16 f1.4, the Fuji 16 f2.8 and the Fuji 18 f1.4 and the only one I’d consider getting rid of is the Sigma. Unless price is a major factor, which probably isn’t the case for you if you use the GFX system, I’d recommend going with Fuji anytime. As of TTArtisan, I’ve rarely heard good things about their products and would probably prefer to recommend Laowa or Viltrox when it comes to third party lenses manufacturers fixing gaps in the Fuji lineup.
With your videos it is for me always the case that I come for the gear review and stay for the photos at the end 😂 you are such a gifted photographer
As always your videos are excellent, strait forward and informative. I recently picked this up to replace my 16 1.4 and have no regrets. it's easy to have with me and it gets me out there.
Im not a professional so lately my philosophy of "less is more" is working well for me. My present kit is a Fuji Xpro-2, XH-1 and a Richo GR III. Lenses I own Xf 16 2.8, 18 2.0 23 2.0 35 2.0 and 50 2.0 . My 23 1.4 is about to be sold. I can carry all of this with me in my Peak Design 10L Everyday Sling. I mainly shoot street. Thanks for your videos.
I love this little lens for everyday carry.
Thanks for this review. Your professional perspective tops other Fujifilm reviewers and is among the very few reviewers of Fuji gear and photography that I trust. I bought the 16 f2.8 recently and haven't used it a lot to-date, but it appears very sharp for my needs (travel), with good contrast and color. Like you said, it's greatest strengths are its small size, light weight and portability for travel, without sacrificing very good image quality.
Thanks, Scott! Yep. It's a great little lens as I concluded here. It has its faults, but so many strengths to outweigh them.
I've come back to this video as I am contemplating eating my words and grabbing this lens.
I've been on a bit of a transition of late, trialing out the XF50-140 and Sigma 18-35/1.8 (with the Fringer III adapter), for all of my professional event work. I am just getting a little over carrying a bag o' primes around with me everywhere throughout the day. Currently this is working so well that I am thinking of selling all my Fuji primes and staying with this combo for the foreseeable future.
BUT... after the last wedding, the reception dance shots which I used the weighty Sigma 18-35 (mostly at 18mm), my wrists were not happy. This is because I tend to hold an AD200 in one hand and the camera in with the other and deploy that 'dragging the shutter/mix strobe and ambient' combo thing (which folk seem to love), and just getting into those interesting compositions with operating the camera with one hand was just getting tiresome. (Yes I could get a speedlight on camera instead and solve some of this but I like the lighter Xpro trigger and use it for other ocf work during the night).
Seeing as most of these particular dance shots are around 1/4 or 1/5th, this then means the apertures are fairly stopped down anyway and the wide angle f2.8 wouldn't be a drawback. I do still have my 16/1.4 but for this case usage I'd happily trade the faster aperture for the lighter lens with better AF. As you say its the kind of lens you can find a place for in your bag or on your person and it wouldn't be annoying to ferry around. The 16/1.4 is quite a lot larger and starts to become bother.
Thanks again.
Awesome. I just picked this up for my old X-T20 as a little walk around combo. I was pleasantly surprised.
I have a copy. I rarely use it. Some how the 35mm or 50mm both F2 are my favourites. But on the XT3 it is sharp enough when shooting F8. Beautiful photographs.
Your review is quite helpful. As a photo enthusiast, I have learned that “good enough” works day in and day out. I just rented this lens and took it into Yosemite National Park. It was the perfect choice. Your content is always helpful. Regards…Wayne
always enjoy seeing your images....there's an ethos in your work that's captivating. zen billings canada
This is a great fun lens. It feels like the perfect focal length for just having mounted and on a wrist strap when exploring urban environments. Especially if you don't want to draw attention to yourself. I could not say the same about the 16 1.4 which also suffers in the corners and borders.
The 18mm 1.4 is spectactular as is the 33 and others. But they tend to be used then put back in the bag until the next shot I visualise would be perfect for that lens. The 16 2.8 keeps me trigger happy.
Qs for IQ... well it will be replacing my x100v at a fraction of the cost. Not quite as compact, but it fulfills the brief of a small unobtrusive package better in my book.
I can see this coming on an upcoming trip to London, leaving the 18 1.4 behind! Never imagined that would be the case.
Great video! I use mine on a X-A3. You are right, it is just fun to use. Happy New Year!
Looks like a very handy lens. I like small format, wide(ish) angle lenses and this looks rather attractive to me. I do have a 10-24 and use it at the 10mm end regularly as well as a TTArtisans 27mm f2.8. The 10-24 is a bit bulky and the 27 not as wide as I prefer so this 16mm might be one for me to consider. Nice video, Dylan. Thanks and Happy New Year for 2023.
One of the first lenses I got for X-Pro3. Aside from the size, one of the best parts of it is the close focusing distance. It's a really fun lens for taking nature close-ups as well. And so inconspicuous to carry around.
Thanks for the great video! I was planning on taking the 27 2.8 on my next travel. This looks like a great possible addition’ :)
As always, great review!
I've always had a 24mm lens from my film days and into my Nikon DSLR period, so when I got into the Fujifilm system the 16mm was a must have lens. At the time the only option was the f/1.4 version so that is what I bought. It is a terrific lens, worthy of all the praise, but it is large and heavy, especially if you are using it on an X-E series body.
So when the 16mm f/2.8 came out I bought it right away. I agree with pretty much everything in your review. This is my choice (I still have the fast lens too) for daylight f/4 to f/11 shooting. I probably use the f/2.8 version 80% of the time unless I know absolutely that I'll need the fast aperture for low light or selective focus.
One thing that I use the 16mm f/2.8 lens for is to shoot square photos. When shooting 1:1 images, the 16mm gives a field of view, side to side very close to a 23mm (35mm FF equivalent). The 16mm on a X-E body is just fun to use for this.
Interesting thoughts on shooting square. That would also remove tbe corners from the image. I don't shoot square anywhere near often enough, so I might just give that a go!
I've really enjoyed mine. I used it a lot around the holidays here at home to get photos at parties without crowding people into the frame.
I'm enjoying it more and more, as well. There's something simple about working with it. I'm thinking of how to turn that concept into a video, too.
@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer I'll be looking forward to what you find.
It's a cracking little lens. Excellent review, thanks. On my XT5, I triple it with the 23/f2 and 50/f2. I think is is better in the corners than your impression, if, and only if, one is viewing images without resorting to pixel peeping. As photographers, we are prone to pixel peep, but most viewers, such as family members, do not. For me, I use my 16-55/f2.8 for convenience when I do not want to change lenses, such as when hiking with family and friends, but I use my 16/23/50 for fun.
I bought a used copy as I wanted a faster AF lens with weather sealing compared to my 18mm F2, especially after I picked up a X-Pro2, it's also great on my X-E3
It's definitely a step up in speed an IQ from that 18mm! Enjoying working with it?
Would love it if you would test out the new 27mm 2.8. WR lens. I know some photographers are interested in using this focal length for street photography.
The only issue I have with it is the F stop, which I think could’ve been an F2 or even a 1.7. This is a unique perspective versus the 35 or 50 mm that most photographers have on their cameras. I’ve seen some images of a 40 mm and find it a very interesting perspective. 🖖
I love my 27mm f2.8 (newer version with the aparture ring). Have you had any experience with it? I have also the 33mm f1.4. Brilliant couple of lenses that complete each other quite well
Thank you I was waiting for you do this review. I might pick one up, only because it is portable and the xf18mm f2 just hasn't convinced me based on people's reviews. I find it interesting this lens is on the 40mp resolution list with those "soft" edges, but the xf16mm f1.4 isn't.
It's more than likely an overall resolution and IQ thing rather than a specific aspect of the lens that made Fujifilm leave it off the list. Could also just be that they want people to buy specific lenses more frequently.
Other reviews highlight it is the sharper of the two lenses (never been the 16 1.4s strongest suit). Sadly I owned both but 2 years apart, so hard to compare. But it is certainly sharp on the x-t5. The softer corners I find are less noticeable than the mushy corners of the 16 1.4 below f2.8. I actually struggle to replicate the complaints made against the 16 2.8! It can lack a little in contrast if using side by side other more expensive lenses, but most people wouldn't be doing that and it's nothing that can't be tweaked in post, even of the jpeg. Surprise package for me.
Thank you for the review. I was about to pick up the XF18 f2 (even it is outdated for many people) mainly for documentary photos and tourism with my X-E4... but now wondering, this 16 f2.8 is it the one to choose instead? Wondering because you are mainly talking about landscape photography with this lens, is it a bit too wide for documentary in streets compared to 18mm? Thank you.
In terms of optical quality, the 16mm is quite a bit better in my experience. The difference between 16 and 18 is not huge when working at normal distances. You'll only really notice the increase in perspective distortion when working in very close or tilting the camera. Otherwise, I can't see why you wouldn't enjoy working with the 16mm.
many thanks, will grab the new 16mm then@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer
Dear Sir, I just loved your Excellent exposure. Very down to earth. Meat & potatoes video!! Your images are beyond beauty. I take that I, will use this is a lens to go out and have FUN!! No persnickety details. I wish, as you, to click images for ME. I won't be exposing at the Guggenheim Museum. Now, a little question: Will this little gem pair fine with my old X-T10?
Keep on sharing.
It'll outresolve that sensor by far! Fujifilm considers this one of the lenses that benefits from the new 40MP sensors, so you'll have detail in spades and great autofocus with the stepping motors. If you like this focal length, you won't be disappointed!
Thanks Dylan
I do find it interesting, there was a lot of people ditching the 16/1.4 for the new 18/1.4 and then coming back to getting that 16mm fix. I have the 16/1.4 and am very happy with it, I don't even find the size too off putting and appreciate the 1.4 for event work. I have the 23/2 and 50/2 as well, so I am well aware of the allure of the tiny fujicrons, I guess I feel like the 16/1.4 is one that perhaps just has to make it into the bag regardless. If the 16/2.8 was a f2 then that would really throw a spanner in the works, but for me I feel like I can't afford or really justify the 18/1.4 and 16/2.8 so my compromise is to make do with the 16/1.4. For event work f2.8 is pushing it (I try to keep f2 as the limit), so the 16/2.8 is really cancelled out as being an option even though its size and weight is a strong allure.
Nice review. All the best for 2023 Dylan.
No compromise there at all! The 16 1.4 is a fantastic lens. Use what you have, for sure. I am lucky in that I can offset the costs of new gear a little and justify a lot of things for certain jobs that I do. I fully understand that not everyone is willing to do things that way, so I always try to meep my reviews as grounded as possible.
@@DylanGoldbyPhotographer I think the largest issue for me isn't even cost, its space in the event bag. You have to get a little ruthless. So justifying a 16 & 18 in the bag is tough, and if I had to choose I think I'd err more with the 16 for that additional versatility. So it becomes about space, one wide angle, one normal, one tele and for me 18mm is JUST short of being wide enough for those moments where width or space is important. I kinda feel the 16mm can do all the shots the 18mm can achieve but then also some more stuff that it cannot or struggles with.
I dunno tho... I am still working out my primes, it's hard to really restrict yourself and you don't want to be constantly lens swapping. I know Kevin Mullins likes the 18 and 56 combo, I feel I prefer the 16 and 90, but that leaves a middle guy that definitely needs to slot in.
Ah! I see what you mean now. Sure, my kit never includes both of them. It's definitely a one or the other type of situation. Personally, my most common kit is bunched right in the middle at 23, 33, and 56.
Nice video, how is the focus breathing for video?
Currently I use the 10-24 F/4 for video which has little to no focus breathing but is an F/4 which is somewhat problematic in certain indoor situations
All my Primes are 35mm or longer (which is too tight for what i shoot)
So really looking at either the 16mm F/2.8, the 23mm F/2 or the sigma 16mm F/1.4
Acceptable photo quality is good enough as this will mainly be used for 4K footage, just not sure if 1 stop is worth the investment in the 16 f/2.8 (all be it a small investment)
If money was no object I'd just get the 18mm and new 23mm F/1.4s and call it a day.
Most of the shooting is in manual focus, but I want the autofocus to work well enough for video, for the occasions when it is needed (I know the sigma 56 F/1.4 is fine autofocus for video, but the 16mm sigma is an older design and i've had no chance to test it, and i'm more inclined to go Fuji native glass when possible)
thanks
Thanks
I have the 16-80 lens & xT5
Not on Fuji’s list for optimum use for the 40 MP sensor
Any advantage for me to add this 16 mm f 2.8
I do love small lenses and sort of wished I hadn’t sold my 35f2 but I did get the 33f1.4 and love it
Hello again Dylan. I just read your Vietnam article at Fujilove. I have the X-T5 with the 16 f2.8, 23 F2, and 35 f1.4 for the same reasons you took these focal lengths to Vietnam (though I haven't been to Vietnam). I was surprised you said the 16 f2.8 missed focus "more than a few times". You didn't mention you saw that in your initial review. I haven't noticed this problem but to be honest I haven't used the 16 that often, having only recently bought it. Do you have any explanation for the missed focus? Does it change your opinion of the lens? So far, from what I have seen with it, my copy seems to perform well. Hopefully I'll have more opportunity to use it in the near future and report back. Thanks for your reviews.
Thanks for watching, Scott. I'm still trying to nail down the focus misses, to be honest. I was a bit disappointed and I haven't been able to figure it out. It seems to be quite random, a lot like the X100 series cameras. Still, happy with the lens overall, but I won't use it for anything critical until I figure this out.
Gorgeous images! Difficult to see how it is lacking a bit in IQ with your expertise in
using it Dylan. 👍👍
Hi Dylan, You and other reviewers have found this lens not the sharpest, especially in the corners; yet Fujifilm lists it as suitable for optimal results with their 40MP sensor cameras. Do you have any thoughts on this? Thanks very much, GB
Amazed
Glad to be of service. I do hope it's the good kind of amazement! 🤣
Do you recommend buying the Fujifilm XF 16mm f2.8 or the Laowa 10mm F4 cookie?
I'm not in the habit of recommending lenses to people whose photography and tastes I'm not familiar with. What I will say is that both are good lenses, neither is great. The Fujifilm renders more detail, the Laowa gives you a much wider field of view. It will all come down to what you want to do with the lens.
Maybe more credit is due since Fujifilm themselves listed the 16mm 2.8 as having resolution suitable for the 40MP sensor and not the f1.4.
Im new in photography, just bought xs10.
Can someone share where to focus when take landscape photography?
Well it really depends on the type of scene you’re photographing… If there is an obvious subject, like a cool looking tree for example, you could primarily focus on it. If you want as much sharpness across the frame, a good starting point would be to lower your aperture around f8 or f11 (if you go lower than that, diffraction will start to impact negatively the overall sharpness) and to focus around the first third bottom line. Another way, although more technical, would be to use the focus bracketing function of your camera, which would make several pictures of your scene at different focus distances and then to focus stack the images in an appropriate software. Hope this will help you.
@@luciengrillet thanks a lot..
Any ideas why the 16mm 2.8 is on the 40MP compatibility list and the much more expensive 16mm 1.4 is not?
The 16mm f/2.8 is fine. The "list" is just to let pixel peepers know they'll see a lot more detail from certain lenses. Nothing to stop you using this on the X-T5 or X-H2.
Isn't TTArtisan 17/1.4 more interesting option? I mean.. Who needs AF in wide angle anyway? ;)
If i buy small crop fuji camera (i use GFX as primary) then i buy: SIGMA 16mm F1.4 ;-) and 28/2 ttartisan (AF too half proce, same qulaity) - sigma is better that fuji
That’s a bold statement. I’ve got the Sigma 16 f1.4, the Fuji 16 f2.8 and the Fuji 18 f1.4 and the only one I’d consider getting rid of is the Sigma. Unless price is a major factor, which probably isn’t the case for you if you use the GFX system, I’d recommend going with Fuji anytime. As of TTArtisan, I’ve rarely heard good things about their products and would probably prefer to recommend Laowa or Viltrox when it comes to third party lenses manufacturers fixing gaps in the Fuji lineup.
Did Bret Hart become a photographer?
Corners? If people are looking at the corners of your photos, then your photos was not that good to begin with.