- Messages
- 8,225
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
As far as I know, the 16-80 isn`t on the 40mp list from Fuji. Although a bit odd that they`re selling is as a kit
-
Important: the Server Hamster is in need of a bit of TLC so the site will be off line for a while on Friday morning, the 17th
The Fabulous Fuji X owners thread
- Thread starter mart77
- Start date
Fuji Dave
I'm in Clover
- Messages
- 22,088
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
Sorry to hear this, mate. But your health comes first, and at least you`re a bit used to the Oly kit
Stay strong
Thanks mate, the only lens that I will keep for the X-S10 will be the XF16mm f2.8 and sell off the rest.
- Messages
- 2,470
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You're right it's not, very odd.As far as I know, the 16-80 isn`t on the 40mp list from Fuji. Although a bit odd that they`re selling is as a kit
- Messages
- 338
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
I’d guess it’s all about cost. Would people accept a £3-400 increase to include the 16-55.As far as I know, the 16-80 isn`t on the 40mp list from Fuji. Although a bit odd that they`re selling is as a kit
I wonder can Fuji even make enough 16-55s fast enough? They are often out of stock.
Plus didn’t the list get clarified after publishing to be more these lens give the absolute best performance but all the rest will still perform just fine.
Personally I think Fuji should have said nothing.
I can’t comment on the quality or otherwise of the 16-80 f4 other than it’s seems to create much discussion about it being soft and not as good as the 18-55 to others who swear it’s great.
I can compare the 18-55 to the 16-55 though and for me the 16-55 is a clear winner with the caveat of ‘on a newer IBIS body’ as I have no experience of it on an older none stabilised body and as the 16-55 doesn’t have OIS I can’t say how it behaves handheld on a non IBIS body although I’m sure it’s fine.
The size and weight are a fair bit more than the 18-55 but not to the point of it being too much. I’ve done 20+ mile hikes with the X-T4 + 16-55 on a capture clip on my shoulder with no issue. In a bag I wouldn’t bat an eyelid.
It’s a sharp lens. To the point as it’s too much on portraits to the point of every pore on show!
f5.6 seems to be its sweet spot but I’ve equally gone much higher without any real noticeable penalty to my eyes. I process everything with DXO Photolab 5 and DeepPrime which may help.
The obvious benefit over the 18-55 is WR and the constant 2.8.
vs the 16-80 the WR is a draw and the 2.8 vs 4.0 is a personal thing I guess.
If it was me, I’d go body and put the saving towards the 16-55 but I don’t know your use case and what other lens you will be looking to get.
I certainly don’t regret swapping the 18-55 to the 16-55.
Good luck deciding.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,225
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I know @jknights has actually made a "personal list", through vigorous testing, as he seems to own half the lens line-up, plus others
Maybe he can post his results here, too 
- Messages
- 1,117
- Edit My Images
- Yes
it is fine. I use mine 75% of the time on a X-Pro 3 and don’t have any issues with both how it behaves without OIS and also the weight. Happy to carry it for a few hours just on a Peak Design Slide lite.
My 16-80mm came as part of the X-T4 kit and I must have been lucky, judging by the mixed reviews, as my copy is excellent. I cannot fathom why its not on the FujiFilm recommended lens list for the X-H2 or X-H2S. It is fine on both bodies.
The 16-55mm is a cracker, often quoted as a 'bag of primes' and that description is spot on. I bought it when Amazon had it at a ridiculous price and whilst my wife was at the hairdressers.
Were I in the market again and deciding twixt the two then the 16-55mm would be my choice. The extra reach of the 16-80mm can be matched by cropping on the X-H2. It is heavy(ish), built like the proverbial and that f2.8 is fantastic in low light. It really does live up to its reputation.
FujiFilm Refurb have the X-H2/16-80mm kit at £1899 or the body only at £1499. The 16-55mm is £799. Based on those prices I wouldn't hesitate to stump up the extra for the 16-55mm.
It depends on whether reach/weight/cost is more or less important to you than (truly) superb IQ/ less reach/low light performance and a heavier and superbly made lens.
- Messages
- 286
- Name
- Jonathan (JK)
- Edit My Images
- No
For everyone here as Paul requested....I know @jknights has actually made a "personal list", through vigorous testing, as he seems to own half the lens line-up, plus others
So I did some testing today as I had a bit of spare time.
So the revised list is:
Bearing in mind it is not a sunny California day but a typical wintry UK grey day!!!
From my testing to date the following are OK/sharp on XT5 or XH2:
Fuji 8-16mm f2.8
Fuji 14mm f2.8 - This really is a stellar lens, it may not be absolutely as sharp at the edges as I might like but the center and most of the way out it is crisp.
Fuji 10-24mm f4 (old)
Fuji 16mm f1.4 - This looks fine to me. Dont know why it is not on the Fuji OK list but it may be just a tad less sharp than some of the other lenses.
Fuji 16-55mm f2.8
Fuji 50mm f2
Fuji 70-300mm f5.6
Fuji 35mm f1.4 It may not be absolutely as sharp at the edges as I would like but the center and most of the way out it is crisp. The new 33mm f1.4 is probably the better lens.
Fuji 56mm f1.2
Fuji 80mm f2.8
Fuji 90mm f2.0
Fuji 50-140 f2.8
Fuji 100-400 f5.6
The following are not usable for 'best results', but obviously captures an image but in my opinion it looks soft:
Samyang 8mm f2.8
Laowa 9mm f2.8
Fuji 15-45mm f3.5-5.6
Fuji 18mm f2.0
Fuji 27mm f2.8
Fuji 16-80mm f4
Fuji 60mm f2.8 Macro - I would use this for portraits on the XT5 and XH2 as then I wouldnt have to soften but I need to test this out in a portrait session in the studio!!!
Fuji 18-55 f2.8-4
Fuji 18-135 f3.5-5.6
Fuji 55-200 f3.5-4.8
Still to test:
(+ = expected to be OK, x = expect to limit future use to 26MP cameras), and ?+ or ?x means I have no idea what will be the result.
I will probably retest the lenses on a bright and sunny day as the weather is not great today with periods of rain and general UK greyness!!
- Messages
- 12,774
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
Have you got any examples of the 16-80 being unacceptable by any chance?
D
Deleted member 95430
Guest
Focus help please! Does anyone else find the focus point is not the actual focus point. The camera seems to think its on the eye but if you look even at a screenshot from C1 its clearly the toes behind. The lens is the 16-55 at 5.6 indoors with strobe, body x-t30, cheers!
Attachments
- Messages
- 286
- Name
- Jonathan (JK)
- Edit My Images
- No
Just my comparison with other shots.
It is not a big difference but it isnt sharp at the edges and it just looks less crisp than the 16-55.
I found this on the XT3 as well. It is possible to detect which lens is being used especially if you are shooting very wide or very long. The 80mm end of the 16-80 is definitely less crisp.
All my tests were done with the lenses wide open and so the 16-55 is shot at f2.8 rather than f4 which is max aperture on 16-80. If you shoot them at same aperture then the 16-55 gives better results.
- Messages
- 8,225
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 286
- Name
- Jonathan (JK)
- Edit My Images
- No
The other thing that we all need to consider is that shooting in bright light allows the best to be extractedfrom a lens. Shooting in soft grey UK winter light is not going to give contrasty results which look sharper.
Then there is also the variation between lenses of the same notional specification.
Then there is also the variation between lenses of the same notional specification.
- Messages
- 2,659
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Had the 16-80 for a day! sent it back the next day. Images looked ok but very soft at 100%. Think mine was a bad copy but went for the 16-55 instead which is spectacular!!
- Messages
- 2,470
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I had the 16-55 on loan with the xh2 and it did appear to be very good in the limited use I had for it
- Messages
- 2,470
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Question. I have noticed Fuji state an xh2 comes with an NP-235S battery, but there isn't an 'S' version listed on the website. Is this a newer version of the battery you don't seem to be able to buy separately?
- Messages
- 8,542
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Both mine came with W235. No S
- Messages
- 8,542
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Shout out to owners of Silver X-T5
Smallrig have a handgrip which matches the body colour. Comfortable grip too. Looks great on the camera.
Smallrig have a handgrip which matches the body colour. Comfortable grip too. Looks great on the camera.
- Messages
- 3,839
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have the SmallRig grip for my X-T4 and it's brilliant, transforms the handling of the camera.
D
Deleted member 95430
Guest
Fujifilm X Cameras Focus Inconsistency Issue is Real; Follow up
The Wandering Lensman is a blog about the passion of photography, sharing images as well as thoughts about life, travel, living, etc.
Has this ever been an issue for anyone?
- Messages
- 8,049
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Fujifilm X Cameras Focus Inconsistency Issue is Real; Follow up
The Wandering Lensman is a blog about the passion of photography, sharing images as well as thoughts about life, travel, living, etc.www.thewanderinglensman.com
Has this ever been an issue for anyone?
Only with the X-H1 and XF16-55mm F2.8 when at the wide end, occasionally it would miss focus. This was only at the wide end, and didn't happen with any of my other lenses. I never used the 16-55mm on any other body so can't comment on that.
- Messages
- 2,693
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
With my X-T2s and the particularly 16-55 I found AF very unreliable in the Dartmoor landcsape I would take several shots of the same subject just to get one that was focussed where I want it. I gave up in the ens and just use Manual Focus without assist and I get focus where I want it every time. Meand a fraction of the editing. I should say though that this is only an issue in tha landscape for me amongst the granite Tors and wild grasses, in every other situation AF is fine. Never an issue with AF on my GFXs.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 95430
Guest
Interesting, I had an issue with my 16-55 last night on my x-t30 then realised I'd had it in af-c for abosultely no reason. Was a bit of back focus. Will see how it goes
- Messages
- 286
- Name
- Jonathan (JK)
- Edit My Images
- No
I have seen this with other Fuji cameras especially the XT2, XT3. I have never trusted the digital readout of the distance to subject!
Paul @Topsy has noted this as well with his XT2 cameras and we discussed it during our walks on Dartmoor in 2021 and he had has moved to shooting in manual focus.
Strangely I have never had this problem with my XH1 but I did tend in the past to use the XT3 much more.
I always assumed it was down to either some micro-movement on my part as I seldom use my tripod for my Fuji X cameras, only for GFX.
I haven't noticed it on my XH2, XH2S or XT5. So at this point I will watch for it but not do anything with the cameras other than use them as normal.
I think that if it happens consistently then Fuji should own this as an AF problem they need to fix urgently.
The data from 'thewanderinglensman.com' does look convincing but I would prefer to see it repeated with a 100-400 or 150-600 as these will provide a more accurate determination of where the focus point is located on the subject.
Unfortunately or fortunately it can be something as simple as trying to focus on a glass of a window or a fuzzy edged object and mirrorless AF accuracy goes to pot. I tested this with my Nikon Z7 v Fuji XT3 v Nikon D850. There are ways to trick the AF on all the cameras.
Paul @Topsy has noted this as well with his XT2 cameras and we discussed it during our walks on Dartmoor in 2021 and he had has moved to shooting in manual focus.
Strangely I have never had this problem with my XH1 but I did tend in the past to use the XT3 much more.
I always assumed it was down to either some micro-movement on my part as I seldom use my tripod for my Fuji X cameras, only for GFX.
I haven't noticed it on my XH2, XH2S or XT5. So at this point I will watch for it but not do anything with the cameras other than use them as normal.
I think that if it happens consistently then Fuji should own this as an AF problem they need to fix urgently.
The data from 'thewanderinglensman.com' does look convincing but I would prefer to see it repeated with a 100-400 or 150-600 as these will provide a more accurate determination of where the focus point is located on the subject.
Unfortunately or fortunately it can be something as simple as trying to focus on a glass of a window or a fuzzy edged object and mirrorless AF accuracy goes to pot. I tested this with my Nikon Z7 v Fuji XT3 v Nikon D850. There are ways to trick the AF on all the cameras.
Last edited:
Fuji Dave
I'm in Clover
- Messages
- 22,088
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
Sorry to hear this, mate. But your health comes first, and at least you`re a bit used to the Oly kit
Stay strong
Have been thinking what was said in the Olympus thread to me about weight, it is ONLY 300g difference so after I have been doing my rehab I should be fine with the X-T5 so here to stay
- Messages
- 8,542
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Good news Dave.Have been thinking what was said in the Olympus thread to me about weight, it is ONLY 300g difference so after I have been doing my rehab I should be fine with the X-T5 so here to stay
- Messages
- 9,619
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm considering putting my X-T2 in the classifieds later, along with the L bracket and grip. I'm just not using it, it's sitting in the cupboard as a "back up" but in truth, if anything happened to my X-T3 I'd probably get a T5 now anyway... I've been holding off as the T4 didn't seem that much better (other than IBIS) and I'd have to buy a new set of batteries too.
It's boxed but with a few marks on the paintwork (it was my workhorse for wildlife) so I reckon £450 would be about right for the lot.
It's boxed but with a few marks on the paintwork (it was my workhorse for wildlife) so I reckon £450 would be about right for the lot.
Raymond Lin
I am Groot
- Messages
- 10,054
- Name
- Raymond
- Edit My Images
- No
I think you might struggle for that price. You are competing against a store with warranty for the same price here.
i.e.
London Camera Exchange
The London Camera Exchange supplies second hand cameras, new cameras, digital cameras and other camera equipment and provides a camera part exchange in photographic shops all over England, UK.
www.lcegroup.co.uk
- Messages
- 9,619
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That's fair, I wasn't sure. I'll drop it to £400 for the lot.
- Messages
- 286
- Name
- Jonathan (JK)
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes but the LCE camera has 71K+ shutter count. Depends on the count on Steve's camera.
Raymond Lin
I am Groot
- Messages
- 10,054
- Name
- Raymond
- Edit My Images
- No
There are several others on their site for same or similar money, the grip is also on there for £40.
BTW, that is their item number, like internal code. NOT the shutter count.
"Type: Compact System Cameras
Condition: **** (Good condition)
Shutter Count: *unable to obtain*
Item No: 071033
Branch: Plymouth
Branch Telephone: 01752 664894 "
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,225
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nice one, mateHave been thinking what was said in the Olympus thread to me about weight, it is ONLY 300g difference so after I have been doing my rehab I should be fine with the X-T5 so here to stay
Just take your time.
- Messages
- 286
- Name
- Jonathan (JK)
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 8,542
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks to Rob @Lost_Manc
I changed some AF-C settings yesterday and shot the dog. He's OK !!
Today I deleted All the action frames. combination of poor picture quality and dreadful light.
Had the Tammy 17-70 bolted the the H2S, shooting wide open f2.8
Disappointingly the camera failed to recognise him as an animal most of the time.
Might be a combination of lowish light and trying to pick out a Black Face with him coming straight at me.
More testing required, Seemed to do a bit better when shooting in Landscape not Portrait orientation.
Try again shortly, I'll keep you informed.
So, a static frame. Still at action settings for Shutter and ISO (Auto)
Processed in PureRaw
The Stare-2 by Trevor, on Flickr
I changed some AF-C settings yesterday and shot the dog. He's OK !!
Today I deleted All the action frames. combination of poor picture quality and dreadful light.
Had the Tammy 17-70 bolted the the H2S, shooting wide open f2.8
Disappointingly the camera failed to recognise him as an animal most of the time.
Might be a combination of lowish light and trying to pick out a Black Face with him coming straight at me.
More testing required, Seemed to do a bit better when shooting in Landscape not Portrait orientation.
Try again shortly, I'll keep you informed.
So, a static frame. Still at action settings for Shutter and ISO (Auto)
Processed in PureRaw
The Stare-2 by Trevor, on Flickr
D
Deleted member 95430
Guest
That’s because he isnt an animal, hes the goodest boyThanks to Rob @Lost_Manc
I changed some AF-C settings yesterday and shot the dog. He's OK !!
Today I deleted All the action frames. combination of poor picture quality and dreadful light.
Had the Tammy 17-70 bolted the the H2S, shooting wide open f2.8
Disappointingly the camera failed to recognise him as an animal most of the time.
Might be a combination of lowish light and trying to pick out a Black Face with him coming straight at me.
More testing required, Seemed to do a bit better when shooting in Landscape not Portrait orientation.
Try again shortly, I'll keep you informed.
So, a static frame. Still at action settings for Shutter and ISO (Auto)
Processed in PureRaw
- Messages
- 2,127
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- No
Looks like WEX have a clearance sale on the XT4 battery grip. Price is showing at £150, but if you go though the clearance page they seem to imply another 30% discount with code. Would be great for the one I'm selling
- Messages
- 286
- Name
- Jonathan (JK)
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 286
- Name
- Jonathan (JK)
- Edit My Images
- No
@trevorbray Well you will have some very unhappy people who love him coming after you. Need a tag - No dogs were harmed in the shooting of these images!
- Messages
- 338
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- No
Those settings no good then Trevor?Thanks to Rob @Lost_Manc
I changed some AF-C settings yesterday and shot the dog. He's OK !!
Today I deleted All the action frames. combination of poor picture quality and dreadful light.
Had the Tammy 17-70 bolted the the H2S, shooting wide open f2.8
Disappointingly the camera failed to recognise him as an animal most of the time.
Might be a combination of lowish light and trying to pick out a Black Face with him coming straight at me.
More testing required, Seemed to do a bit better when shooting in Landscape not Portrait orientation.
Try again shortly, I'll keep you informed.
So, a static frame. Still at action settings for Shutter and ISO (Auto)
Processed in PureRaw
One point though. I think of you have one of the subject detection choices on it overrules the custom AF-C settings. I’m not 100% on that just something I think I read.
Was worth a try I guess. Good luck in your continued testing.
- Messages
- 8,542
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Rob. Tried again today. Better light. Jury’s out.
I want to shoot wide open. Hence using animal detection. Gonna swap to the 90mm tomorrow. See how it goes. Mostly the camera is struggling to identify Brody as an animal. It’s more than likely pilot error. I’ve had reasonable results at other times.