XF 16-55mmF2.8 WR
USA: BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / EUROPE: wexUK / PCHstore /
A bunch of tests about the XF 16-55mmF2.8 WR has been published over the last few days. I invite you to check out all the reviews listed in this post. But it’s pretty clear: the XF 16-55mmF2.8 WR is another optically outstanding Fujinon lens. Fuji spoiled us with truly amazing glass… so no surprise that X-shooters consider the Fujinon lenses the highlight of the X-system (see the poll at the bottom).
And now, have a good read:
1) Every good read begins with Rico’s First Looks…. and here is the one about the XF 16-55. If you didn’t still check it out, then make sure to click on this link.
2) 16-55mm f2.8 review at cameralabs: “Ultimately the XF 16-55mm is unashamedly aimed at pros, particularly event shooters who’ll want to pair it with the XF 40-150mm and know they’ll have a bright f2.8 aperture throughout a broad range and not need to worry about inclement weather. Suffice it to say wedding and street photographers will love it.”
3) 16-55 review at ephotozine: “Optically, this standard zoom from Fujifilm is up there with the best f/2.8 zooms available for APS-C format cameras. It is capable of delivering excellent sharpness, with low CA and distortion. More importantly, it handles well, and features such as weather sealing and the Nano-GI coatings applied to this lens ensure it is capable of holding its own amongst the best zoom lenses currently available.”
4) Fuji XF 16-55mm f/2.8 zoom — a hands-on review at aboutphotography-tomgrill: “If I were a wedding photographer depending only upon a Fuji equipment kit, I would add this lens to the mix for its high resolution and fast aperture. Same would be true if I only used a Fuji X camera for lifestyle or landscape photography.“
5) Fuji XF 16-55 LM WR Review (Part 2) at adamkingphoto: “The Fuji XF 16-55 F2.8 is hands down the best standard zoom available to demanding Fuji shooters, and I would consider it essential for event shooting, outdoor exploration, and any high-performance work in the standard range.”
6) Review at thephoblographer: “Is this a great lens? Absolutely, but it’s one that we’d keep in our camera bag and relegate to special needs purposes when we really need a zoom lens.”
7) Spanish Field Test at dslrmagazine (translation).
8) 16-55 compared to 23 at soundimageplus and compared to the Sony A7 Mk II 35mm Prime here: “Completely contrary to my expectations, the Fuji / Zoom combination turned in a better looking file than the Sony at f/2.8 and ISO 200, even after the upsizing and the Sony A7 Mk II / prime combination turned in a slightly better performance than the Fuji at f/2.8 and ISO 3200. ?????”
XF 16-55mmF2.8 WR USA: BHphoto / AmazonUS / Adorama / EUROPE: wexUK / PCHstore /
[poll id=”65″]
65 Responses
Second highest vote on the poll is for portability… I do worry that Fuji doesn’t focus enough on compact high end lenses anymore. The 35/1.4 and 18/2 where why I came to the X system in the first place.
18/2 is by no means high end. No corner-to-corner sharpness open (not even stopped down for 18/2), no weather sealing, no stabilization…
Neither really is 35/1.4.
Only price is high end.
Yeah, right We all know that ALL pro lens have OIS and weather sealing – you forgot the pretty gold pr red ring around the lens barrel that screams “Pro” in certain circles.
Frankly, I’d be quite offended if Fuji started putting bright, obnoxious rings on the ends of the lenses. I quite like their design aesthetic. I’m sure I’m not alone.
As far as OIS on small primes… no thanks. I’m sure they’d get even chunkier and lose that lightness. I can hold the 35 1.4 steady enough for sharp photos down to 1/13 sec. I’m sure that’s not that normal, but even for those with shaky hands, the ISO noise is so clean I don’t see a problem bumping it up for higher shutter speeds.
I could not agree more with you; my comment was tongue-in-cheek in case there’s any doubt 🙂
Well, these are camera fondlers your talking to. Most could not shoot their way out of a paper bag if they had razor blades glued to their cam.
In the stone age we had nothing. We had a roll of film and our skill. We had to frame, focus, guess at the exposure and advance to the next exposure. No on the fly ASA, no auto exposure, auto focus, no OS and zooms were a rarity. But we still came home with the goods.
The photogs nowadays are impotent if their auto computer break down.
http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2015/007/0/8/untitled_no_1_1971_daniel_d_teoli_jr_by_ilovemycam-d8cy31h.jpg
http://danielteolijr.tumblr.com/image/41366188294
I agree and do remember the stone age also. I find that the X-T1 is quite liberating in this regard; You set once the level of electronic help you want to have (From 0 to Max) and off you go; And then you just use knobs w/o touching a menu ….
And one more thing – In the stone age – , I would go out with may be to 4-5 rolls of film if we were doing a full day out shooting with the camera club; Hence I am not worried about Fuji’s limited battery capacity – around about 10 36exp rolls is more than plenty to me 🙂
I was raised with “Think before you take that shot” drummed into my ears every time we were out shooting.
But all lenses with gold and red rings HAVE weather sealing. And are made for cameras with sensors 3 times bigger than in your Fuji X, allowing 3 times higher shutter speed at the same quality. Meaning 9 times higher resolution of the final picture in mix-equivalent handheld. And even for them, there are available stabilized alternatives, namely Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC and 24-70/2.8 VC. Not to mention that even Canon’s wide primes have IS.
I thought ff is 1.5 times bigger than apsc.. am I missing something? Do you even shoot fuji? Cause I think your mixing it up with Nikon 1 sensors. If you want a stabilized prime then get the Canon. the whole ppint of Fuji is light weight. What’s the problem? Or are you just trolling.
Only linear dimensions are 1.5 times bigger. Low light performance depends on area, not on linear size.
With those figures you’ve convinced me that you need to dish your Fujis
and buy Canon or Nikon; You should be convinced too. Fuji is a block on
your road to photographic greatness.
BTW
– You forgot 50% heavier; 100% more expensive;
– Note: VC is not ‘V’eather ‘C’ealing 🙂 and as you mention they are third party lenses; If those are weather sealed how come the manufacturer does not advertise them as such ? Marketing blindness ?
If you are interested I have a second hand Fuji S5 (which sports a Nikon mount) gathering dust – You could put on it these magical lens for a fair price;
You do realize that most of the weather resistance (that’s all it is, not sealing) is just tape and a lot of hype: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/12/assumptions-expectations-and-plastic-mounts
“As long as we’re on the subject of catchwords, it’s probably worth tackling ‘Weather Sealed’ or ‘Weather Resistant’ next. Many people seem to believe that means ‘waterproof’. When you take lenses apart all day you find out it usually means ‘we put a strip of foam rubber behind the front and rear elements and scotch tape over the access holes under the rubber rings’.”
See? And with 18/2 and 35/1.4, Fuji did not do even that to protect them from rain and dust. And nice straw man – nobody thinks that “weather sealed” = “waterproof”.
Then why all the YouTube videos of people putting their cameras and lenses under sinks or in showers, etc? Even still, the lack of the sealing doesn’t really mean anything. You’d want to take precautions whether it’s a sealed lens or not. You’re raising silly issues.
They do it because it works – on properly weather-sealed camera and lens combos. A shower is just like a rain, and that is what they are made for – not to be put under water pressure.
Except it doesn’t work as well as people think after time.
Except if it works under a tap, in work in the rain too.
If you need stabilization on a 18mm (or 35mm) lens…..then you got some serious problems….might be time to slow down the coffee drinking..LOL 🙂 😉
If you never want stabilization on 18mm on APS-C, get out of the sun, you’ll get skin cancer! And try this newfangled thing called video. Or at least upgrade from your 1000 lines per picture height (1.5mpix) camera.
If you need ois at 18mm find another profession. Video sounds good, I agree with you on that, but that’s why there’s a thing called red one. Anything below red one is sub par as you mentioned above.
So you need 50MP+ camera but with IBIS in case you cannot control it. Good thinking
Not only price: also portability. ANd it’s true that you cannot get corner to corner sharpness (that’s what the 14mm was made for) but in many applications, from street photography to portait, nobody needs it. It’s still my most used lens.
I don’t worry too much about Fujis focus. They have an excellent range of lenses and a good roadmap.
Yep, and they are all pretty portable to me compared to their equivalent Nikon cousins I used to own.
Me too: 35/1.4 + 18/2 + X-E1 where the reasons I came to Fuji X… but X-E2 with X-trans + bigger and bigger lenses where the reasons I gave up Fuji. Big lenses with Fuji weak AF is very dissapointing experience if you shot anything in move, and in lowish light. If Fuji will bring more compact f/2 primes, will improve AF with -3EV focusing for low light + change unnatural for me X-Trans rendering, than I may be back.
XE1 and XE2 have a very similar xtrans sensor, other than phase detection. Too many people assume the xpro1 and xe1 have non xtrans sensors, just because fuji tweaked the jpg engine. The colours and quality of the original two xtrans cameras are still there in the xtrans II raw files.
You have mentioned several time -3EV focusing. Is this some sort of magic number ?
When AF is having trouble, all fuji lenses have AF+Manual adjustment (which is a premium on Nikon lenses as you need the AFS series) + peeking and/or EVF zoom;
Frankly speaking – by the time you’ve explained your AF where you want to focus – and soon why you want to focus there – even with my aging eyes I’d have manually focused, taken the shot and moved on. It just takes some practice but is entirely feasible; Honestly you should try, like any other “limitation” it is actually quite liberating
You must be kidding of you try to be funny. Manual focusing with Fuji electronic lenses is terrible – it takes ages to focus, it only works with legacy lenses. Honestly? I think you never use Fuji lenses and MF for moving shooting. -3EV focusing gets standard, Nikon mirrorless go to -3EV, Panasonic -4EV, Sony new cams will go -3EV. If you vote for Fuji to stay with 0EV AF, than you really wish Fuji to lose the battle.
At -3EV you cannot see anything. How would you know what to focus?
Think twice: If you absolutely need to shoot a black cat in a coal mine, then AF then -4ev focusing is a must 🙂
Not trying to be funny but I just beg to disagree
– MF with Fuji lenses is in /my/ practice perfectly usable
– Nikon mirrorless (the Nikon 1 series) may be focusing at -3ev but that’s about the only good thing one can find to say about it (and yes I do have a V1)
– I did not vote for Fuji to stay at 0EV, but I do find current AF and MF on Fuji bodies pretty usable. – Note: I have a X-T1
– I do not remember having missed many shots because poor AF or MF; I do have plenty of other reasons to miss a shot.
Fuji lenses with electronic MF “perfectly usable” for moving subjects? Sorry, you must be a big fanboy. No arguments. And Fuji AF is behind many mirrorless (Panasonic, Sony, Olympus, even behind Samsung) in AF field, especially in low light and moving objects, even X-T1. Fuji’s AF is the weakest part of the system and needs to be improved first including low light focusing that needs to go to -3EV, or at least -2EV. You can say repeting “no, no, no, I am satisfied with Fuji’s AF”, but that’s true.
Is it “fanboism” to be calmly satisfied with what I have got ? For the foreseeable future the X-T1 represents the best body I have after about 12 years of Nikon D – including pro bodies. It is, for me at least, an excellent combination of IQ, features, weight, size …
As I am not on the market for a new body I just see that as having found a cure for GAS which is a blessing; I am on the market for lens though and Fuji offers many quality options and I am very happy with that.
Georges, if you ARE on the market for a new body and the competition offers so much better options why on earth are you even arguing here ? I can’t even begin to understand the logic behind this useless “conversation”
I was regarding only to Fuji AF performance, nothing else, You mention Nikon D pro body… I can not beleive to such statements that X-T1 performs better than D3, D4, D750, D810, you probably have never had these cameras in hands, nobody who used them would make such statement unless the fanatic fanboy because AF performance is HUGE between X-T1 and them, and in other aspects too includning DR. Everage AF performance of Fuji X including X-T1 and poor performance in low light is well documented, you can watch many comparison in the net where most mirrorless win with X-T1 in that aspect, aslo many of Fuji users point that AF is the weakest part of X cams. I think such silly statements and reviews as yours about D pro bodies compared to X, ruin the credibility of Fujifilm, and makes so weird ludicrous statements. I think they make much more harm. You cannot build marketing on an ocean of fake testimonials.
1- Who are you to doubt what I said – Yes Nikon PRO bodies D2hs (known for it’s very fast AF) D2x and D3 is that pro enough for you ?
2- I NEVER said that the X-T1 was performing better than the D3 NEVER full stop. I said (quoting myself) “For the foreseeable future the X-T1 represents the best body I have after about 12 years of Nikon D, including pro bodies”.
I am sorry but to me a body cannot be reduced to how fast it’s AF performs. It is a complete package, all the bodies I had were compromises
3- I never said that the Fuji AF could not do with some improvements; you inferred it from my statement I find it pretty usable and I stand by that; which does NOT say that it could/should not be improved.
” many of Fuji users point that AF is the weakest part of X cams ” did I say otherwise ? NO
4- YOU are making ludicrous statement – putting words in my mouth and
openly doubting what I said. Read carefully what was said that might
prevent your unwarranted attacks
5- You cannot even remember what you type :
“I was regarding only to Fuji AF performance, nothing else” Nope you said @ the beginning of this thread:
“but X-E2 with X-trans + bigger and bigger lenses where the reasons I
gave up Fuji. Big lenses with Fuji weak AF is very dissapointing
experience”
Then later you started banging on the MF
So as a whole you gave up Fuji – Fine by me
So why are you still hanging around here ?
Don’t bother to answer btw
Have you actually used Fuji and MF with their lenses? It works pretty well. Sure, I’d like the AF to be better and who wouldn’t? But you’re overstating your case.
Yes, it works pretty well if you have much time – its’ good for landscape, achitecture, macro, but not for people shooting, and it’s useless for any action. I used also Fuji with legacy lenses – Zeiss C/Y – with adapter and if focus 5x faster than with Fuji primes that use electronic for MF. Actually, Fuji focus peaking is not very precise (has quite wide tolerance), I always go better results without focus peaking use. I compared it to Sony’s and Sony’s was much precise but not perfect. Regarding AF – do not make any impression that Fuji’s AF is great, it’s everage (pretty good in good light, poor in low light) and stays behing all important competitiors, because you will see X-Pro2 with same poor AF 0EV sensitivity and that will make this great cam less desirable compared to others that already focus to -3EV – so they can AF in 8 times less light than Fuji! but micro four-thirds like Panasonic GX7, GM1, GM7, GH4 AF with -4EV can focus in 16 times less light than Fuji! Do not be blind, Fuji needs to improve AF with low light focusing to take more interest in customers. You do not support it by saying “it’s great, preaty well”, just the opposite.
Again you’re overstating things. It’s not useless for action. People have shot action with x cameras. I’ve done it. Sure, it’s harder than with my old Nikons but it’s not useless. I can’t agree with portraits being difficult. No, not at all. Fuji’s focus system is quirky and you have to put in time to adjust but it’s adequate for most purposes, great in some, and weak in a few.
There are a lot of things I’d rather have Fuji address before I’d worry about a tech spec like -2, -3, -4 EV autofocus.
Better drag a tripod with you and that 16-55.
Looks pretty darn light to me.
And not stabilized without a tripod.
And obviously no hand-holding technique can help; You can never brace yourself against a wall/pole/bench, control your breathing, use a rice bag, use a monopod.
It is OIS or Tripod – no in between.
I wonder how many shots you’ve missed because you did not have OIS on a lens in this range. Seriously ?
Any handholding teqnique can (or cannot – depending on circumstances) be equally applied to a stabilized setup, which wins 3-5 stops (depending on IS scheme, 2-3 for OIS, 5 for good 5-axis IBIS like Oly E-M5 II has) of sharpness (that is 8-32 times linearly, or 64-1024 times as measured in effective megapixels) every time.
Whaooow I am humbled by such a display of knowledge! “stops of sharpness”, “linearly”, “effective megapixels” after such an avalanche of brilliant arguments only silence remains an option
total bollocks
Wow peevee, you’re so full of sh*t it’s unbelievable.
I’m actually starting to believe that you’re just making this stuff up for the fun of it and not actually meaning it.
So – to make this clear – if a no-OIS Fuji could resolve 1 MP (obviously they resolve way more…), the Oly E-M5 II could resolve at least 64 MP and possibly up to 1024 MP. That’s a pretty large RAW file we’ll have! No need for medium format anymore. Yay!
At 1/FL s handheld it will resolve about 1mp, depending on luck of course.
I still believe that stabilization at that focal range is a nice to have — not a must have. I personally would not want stabilization for that lens. I understand that others might but the benefits are marginal for the typical use case.
For pros, no doubt, this is a great lens with a better size/weight ratio vs SLRs, but for non-pros, many of whom went to mirrorless for smaller, lighter options, Fuji is forcing us to either take the non-sealed, not as wide 18-55, or this massive chunk of glass. They need to offer a sealed version of the 18-55, at least.
I would agree if the 18-55 2.8-4 was a bad lens, like so many competitors so-called “kit lenses”; As it happens it is not the case and Fuji is not forcing you, Fuji is presenting you with a real CHOICE. It’s your to make.
Or, and here’s just a thought, we give them time to add more lenses. They need to serve more than 1 type of user’s needs you know.
No I didn’t know that. I thought Fujifilm existed only to serve my needs. Thank you for pointing that out.
Anytime
I agree a weather sealed 18-55 would be great and I think fuji would sell a lot of them but I’d prefer a weather resistant version of the 10-24 first since it is better at 16mm than the 16-55 not to mention the 10-16mm extra wide range.
Hey guys, Thanks for sharing my review.
I find the poll difficult, because many things on the list appealed to me in buying Fuji. Have to say that lenses is also my top factor. They had the focal lengths I wanted, with lenses that perform brilliantly.
With other manufacturers I felt forced into some more questionable lens choices.
The Fuji colours and X-Trans sensor should be separate, as they don’t necessarily go together – there can be Fuji colours with another colour filter.
Looks like an excellent lens for shooting impromptu family groups of unknown size at unfamiliar location. Last time when I needed such lens was in 2006.
Yea, my family stopped talking to me too around that point in time.
ohhhh, Fuji hipsters get fast zoom…such proness. Still puny sensor 😀
reason for most Fuji users is XTransexual sensor, optimized for feggit portraits
I was glad to see the option of ‘looks’ in the poll. I generally believe that how a camera looks is a bigger influence than most people want to admit. I’ve always love rangefinders and I think I’m honest enough to admit that I like how they look and not pretend it meets some psuedo-rationalization about professional photography needs. WRT lenses, the facts on the ground are that if you want fast and spectacular contemporary optics, you’re going to get a bigger lens – esp. in a zoom. It’d be fun if Fuji fleshed out their line with some smaller gems along the line of what Leica or Contax did/does. I’m really jonesing on the size and portability of the XF27 lately.
Soundimageplus again? With such bold statements coming from him I hope nobody takes his word for it…
Please Patrick, stop promoting this Dude!
Nice lens but too big. Where is the 161/4 that is shown on the lens roadmap as coming out at the 1st quarter of this year? Also cannot wait for the 35mm f2 which is more in line with the portability of the Fuji system That is why I bought into most of their primes.
I was actually waiting for this lens since one year i was sure i’m going to buy it.
So I did add it to my basket and was going to checkout…. but then I cancelled my shopping. Why do I want to buy this lens ? Because I used to use the 28-70mm L on my 5DmkII, I was happy with the 20+ year old lens sure. But since I use primes with my Fuji gear I never looked back for Zoom lens as the primes did so well and nice. The primes did slow me down, made me think more. Yes this process did generate better pictures from my hands.
Not because primes are better in IQ only. It’s the process. I do love the challenge having an fixed lens, It does enhance my creativity thinking/look before pushing the trigger.
With a zoom my impatience will take over control like:
– “ohh object” need an picture.
– take camera with zoom
– frame as used to with zoom (creativity is lost in this process)
– push trigger
– in post process as my self why did I not think now it’s too late.
With prime:
– “ohh Object”
– I have an 23mm lens at which position do I get the best effect for the picture
– Go to position take camera
– verify my idea with O/E VF
– take picture
– in post process wow this primes are fantastic….
Yes sure it’s my brain who is fault not the zoom lens. But this “illness” has spread to so many people I know. All I get from my friends is “He is gone insane using primes pah”.
I consider my talent not very high and I have to develop my unique style. But since I shoot with primes I am so much more happy post process my pictures as there is so much less work and the pictures are better.
For all who do not suffer my described “illness” go get the 16-55 it’s an nice lens though.
Just check your pictures with an previous zoom like an 28-70mm if the pictures are at 80% on 28mm or 70mm then you dont use you zoom correct. You would be better off with primes.