As a Fuji user, I'm glad Chris is finally reviewing more Fuji lenses. 👍

I was looking for this one ! Thank you Christopher!

Brill review as always! Very helpful!

Thanks for reviewing!

Can’t argue with the objective nature of this test, and the usual fair and dispassionate review from Chris, as always. Excellent. But there is still something distinctive, interesting and satisfying about this lens, even on the latest Fuji sensors, perhaps because of the close focusing distance. Some stunning night and black and white photography can be achieved with it, if that’s your thing. It’s maybe not worth the retail price new nowadays, but to my mind definitely worth looking at second hand if you’re already invested in the Fuji X system.

Awesome review once again Christopher! If you are able to get your hands on a Fuji 100-400 lens I would love to see that review in the future as well! Particularly with Fuji's teleconverters.

My favourite Fuji X lens. I don't use it wide-open for the reasons you showed, but shot at 5.6/8 I get great corner to corner sharpness for landscape/fishing photos. I also like the close-up look @f2 where, if handled properly, it can produce a very unique look. That said, I think it's time Fuji updated it like the 18 and 23. Thanks for the review.

Thanks for reviewing this lens Christopher! I’ve heard so much YT hype over this lens that it’s been hard to find actual reviews. With Sigma’s new 16mm 1.4 coming out soon, I’m glad to have this review for comparison.

I have it, and hearing it from Chris I would never buy it, but man would I be fooled, tech is not everything, this lens produces some magical images, I would say it like this when you sum up all the bad parts Chris mentioned you get magic that no one else has. People who do not own it will never know and I understand.

I own this lens. Colours, versatility and overall rendering are really something else. Sharpness wide open is not that great and the focus motor isn't quiet enough for video work imo. Fujifilms new lenses (18,23,33mm 1.4) are much sharper but also look a bit more clinical in rendering. So it remains personal preference. This XF 16 1.4 and the XF 35 stil are my two favourite lenses, despite their flaws. They just produce special images.

The problem is the new 18 1.4 set the bar really high for any fast, wide lenses... the 16 1.4 is a classic in spite of its flaws

Hey thanks for the review! Must say I'm a bit surprised by the results. I bought this lens when the 18mm was already out, but I preferred the results of this lens more. And some of my favorite pictures are taken with this lens. I really like shooting with it.

Hi Chris. Thanks for all your work during the years. I'm wondering if your working distance when testing sharpness in wide angle lenses use a worry, ie to close? Best wishes, Thorbjørn

Fair review. For those of us shooting landscape with it, it's sharper than the 16-55mm red badge when stopped down to f5.6-f8. Shooting wide open for up-close subjects, the out of focus rendering is pleasing enough to accept a little softness. I got back into photography with the X-series cameras because they were fun to use and (at least comparatively speaking) don't break the bank when it comes to lenses. I've since acquired a Canon FF camera and comparable RF lenses. The latter system may yield better overall sharpness and image quality, but it really is prohibitively expensive for some. I just can't bring myself to sell the Fuji system yet. In fact I may still buy the X-H2.

This lens is absolutely amazing to me, especially for landscapes and building shot at F8!

I can’t believe you still haven’t made a review on the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8. I love the lens 👌🏽

My edge to edge with this is so far above any lens I've used..but looking forward to the 18 review. As I understand it, many Fuji users say the 90 is the killer. Then again, I've looked at XY charts of the 16's lens characteristics, and the results are killer.

…one category that is missing here is that this lens is so much fun to shoot with! Thanks for the review though. Good to know it’s technically lacking now in 2022!

Thanks for the review, but why you did not convert f stop, you convert only focal length?

This is so interesting. This lens happens to be one of my favorites out of all my prime lenses. The lens is not perfect by any means but the versatile of it makes it worth it to me. I especially like that you can get really close to your object, almost working it as a micro lens. I'm not a technical person, but the majority of my shots come out super sharp when I take them. Then again, I don't zoom in and pixel peep either. So that could be it?

I’ve been waiting for this review for a long time now! I have this lens and I love it! Out in the real world I don’t notice the softness or flaws but I like hearing what are the shortcomings of this lens just to keep in mind while using it. Thank you for the review!

Hello Christopher. We are really interested in review of 16mm f1.4 on a xt5 or xh2 camera. Some people said that on the 40mpx cameras don't deliver like it used to do on previous cameras. I really hope you can do this review for us. Best regards!

Are you processing Fujifilm RAW files in Lightroom? It looks like your images are getting the classic Fuji wormy artifacts that result from this workflow.

Hello Christopher. Would be really great if you reviewed the new xf 23mm wr and xf 33mm wr.

Umm..why is the thumbnail with the 18mm?

Hello, love your reviews :). In your opinion how will it work on the new XTrans 5 Sensor from Fuji (the 40M resolution one)?

This was one of my favorite Fuji lenses, mostly because of close focus capabilities, but the new Sigma 16mm 1.4 looks like better optics (at least when it comes to sharpness) for less than half the price. However, it's still lacking close focusing capabilities of this lens, which might be a reason enough for many to stretch to Fuji 16mm 1.4 and forgive mediocre sharpness.

when are we going to see the Tamron 35-150?

Thanks😊

I did some amateur testing of this lens (before I sold it) against my Fuji 18mm 1.4 and 23mm 1.4 (original version) and found it sat in between them. The 18mm 1.4 is definitely the best optically, but the 16mm showed less CA and was sharper wide open than the 23mm 1.4. Once I stopped things down things were more even but at f1.4 the three were very different. The 16mm probably was one of their better lenses in 2015 but now it can’t compete as well with the newer lenses.

This is the best lens i have ever used, and only one of the very few it reminds me of fullframe lol. I dont think there are mixed reviews of this there a couple videos claiming it was the best of the best, ( until 18 and 33 new lenses came out )

which one should I get if I want to take some photos of the galaxy

As a fuji shooter, who previously shot on nikon full frame with sigma glass, I get the impression a lot of fuji shooters firmly overrate the lenses. Some of the glass is quite good, but far too many of the supposedly higher end lenses are badly out of date (to the extent that the lower end lenses, e.g. the 35mm f/2.0, actually outperform their higher end equivalents in many ways), and the majority of first party lenses have noticeably soft & dark corners, while the centers are still pretty mediocre when compared to modern offerings from Nikon/sigma/canon at similar price points. That said, I still love every fuji lens I own, because they are more than good enough for the sort of work I do, and a pleasure to use. I'm just not about to pay for their wider-aperture lenses at their current price point. Which is why I'm so excited about Sigma putting out lenses for the system, their first 3 lenses blow fuji's offerings away, and there's likely a lot more coming. I hope Fuji rises to the challenge and comes out with some higher spec glass though, competition is good for all of us, and I like aperture rings on my lenses.

What about a battle with the new Sigma 16mm 1.4 ? I remain the Sigma lens came in intrest at f4 in the center

Dear content creator. I really enjoy your videos, however today i have a suggestion: Usually when you describe vignetting, i really miss some numbers, like how many stops of darkening there is at mid distance from corner to center, and at the corner itself. I think it could be a nice addition to your reviews. Thank you for your work!

It is a fair review. But hey, the pictures I made with it have some magic that lacks on those "Fujicrons". Only the new XF18 seems to generate a sililar magic especially the bokeh. Will I change my XF16 to the XF18? No. I like the focus clutch. Have you ever been out in the dark night trying to focus on something that is barely visible? The pseudo-manual-focus is a great help then.

It IS about time.

I hope you compare this directly to the sigma 16 1.4

Its about time....😊

Yesssss

FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At the current price, the 18 mm 1.4 is a no brainer when compared to the 16 mm. Heck, the 16-55 is better value despite the slower aperture.

Was waiting for this video for the last 5 years

I find the review a little harsh, no? Like... comparing the 16/1.4 directly with the 18/1.4 is almost abuse! The 18/1.4 is not just good... it might be the most perfect optic ever made! So for me (a content 16/1.4 user), I am happy to gain a little more FoV over the (excellent) 18/1.4 and knowing that a lot of issues are cleaned up fairly nicely from shifting down to f2. If some of those issues are not a concern then it is still more than acceptable at f1.4 (I have yet to have a wedding client upset with its softness...). I would love the 18/1.4, but I can't afford both, and I keep thinking to myself the 16/1.4 is the more versatile lens of the two, especially with its close focusing capabilities. If I grabbed the 18 I think I would still need something wider for those entire wedding party group shots, whereas right now I can get away with the 16/1.4. And all the kinda shots I would use the 18/1.4 for I can still use the 16/1.4 (and crop in a tad if I don't need the additional framing, though typically I find it always welcome and add to the shot rather than be surplus).

It looks that I have pretty good copy of this lens.Anyway, tested against Sigma 16 f1.4 on Sony 6500 and Fujinon beat Sigma in IQ department.According to the Sigma Sony owner his Sigma is a good copy.

7years ago this lens set the IQ benchmark in XF mount along with the 80mm macro and 90mm F2. Now bring on the 13mm or 14mm F1.4 and set UWA IQ benchmark again.

I love what this lens tries to do, but the softness & purple fringing are problematic. I was tempted to sell it for an 18mm f/1.4, but I'm holding out for a 16mm f/1.4 mkii. :)

Thats it, i'm buying xf 18 1.4 for the sharpness

omg FINALLY

Somehow my experience with all lenses completely different from Chris. Have the lens and to me sharpness is over the top as well as magical rendering. I’m also have Fuji 56 and 35 and few zooms to compare. But the lens is heavy and 24mm doesn’t serve well for my daily use. Which is street and documentary.

Nice to remember this lens can be had for around 600.

Neat

Great review! Fujifilm has their head in the right place when designing a lenses character, I usually agree with their decisions there. I do wish they had better QC though, some of their more premium (expensive) lenses have crazy sample variation. In the case of the 60mm 2.4 Macro it can ship with a coating defect straight from the factory, truly mind boggling.

Yeah, at new this isn't really worth the price, but you can get them used at around the $600 mark which is what I paid, and I think it's excellent value for money at that price point.

it's a cool and charismatic lens i'd like to own, but the price is outrageous, especially after all these years. too bad most fuji lenses are really expensive despite all their weaknesses and age etc. - annoys me a bit.

I had the XF16 F1.4, but I like the XF14 F2.8 more, the 14mm is lighter and smaller and the picture quality is just as good, if not better. With an open aperture, the 16mm shows a clear coma at the edge, very bad for astrophotography. The XF14mm doesn't have these problems.

This is a really interesting review. My copy is definitely different. Sharpness is about the same - although as others have noted sample variation may be a problem with this lens. But where it is definitely different is my lens is terrible against bright lights, dropping a lot of contrast and washing out. Really I'm thinking about ditching it (and the 23mm) and getting the new 18mm, which is my preferred focal length anyway

My copy of the lens is sharp at 1.4 🙂

Seems like £500 on secondhand may be worth it but the Sigma 16mm 1.4 will almost certainly give better IQ for less.

What! They make Crystal Pepsi still?

Also the wrong lens is used in the thumbnail. You used the 18

Similar to sigma, edge to edge sharpness at f4

What are these APSC sensor cameras and lenses used for? Architectural, archival, or space photography? I am surprised we all tend to lose the objectivity of appraisal. Sharpness charts, fringing, chromatic aberration, sun stars .. all for 1K .. well, is the price the real issue or the lens or still grave.. our need to have a PHASEONE quality result from a purely enthusiastic level performer?

Isn’t this 18mm based on the thumb nail? So 27

sharpness is not everything, it has a certain character about it that makes it great for editorial style work. The lack of resolution won't be noticed in 90% of most applications. It is the right tool for a job kind of situation. maybe not the best choice for astro shooting but a great choice for reportage. That said I am a guy whose favorite lens is a 60 year east german lens that is far from sharp in the corners.

Canon 800 and 1200 mm when

The thing about these older lenses from Fujifilm is although they have an extremely tough exterior, the sample variation is quite large. This lens should perform much better wide open, as it’s regarded as one of the sharpest lenses ever made for x mount. It seems here he got a bad copy. I’ve owned multiples of everything from Fujifilm so I’m extremely familiar with each lens separately and individually. I’ve owned a couple of these 16s as well and I can confirm a good copy is extremely sharp. This lens as shown in these tests does look like it performs poorly. I know from experience a good copy is way better. (I now own the superior 18 1.4) Same with the 23 1.4s, I’ve experienced sample variation all over the place.

Defo a bad copy of the lens you got there Chris sorry…..it’s an amazingly sharp and astoundingly beautiful lens !….many serious reviews say it’s one of the very best lenses Fuji have ever produced…I have to agree, having owned it for 3 years. Are you sure you had your glasses on when you tested it !! 😂

Yeah I’m trying to sell this lens, the new 18mmf1.4 is heaps better wide open and has much faster and more accurate AF.

I will get the new 18mm f1.4 instead.

It's such a trash for a $999 lens. Sigma 16mm is such an awesome lens with lens than half the cost .This is why I like objective review from Chris. The fanboys find everything magical.

As a Fuji shooter, I knew this was the case. I posted about it in the Fuji Forums, and got crucified for offending the die-hard fanboys. In my opinion, I think the lens does render nicely, but it ain’t tack sharp like some may claim.

Wow this review is rather late! My favourite prime lens that I own.

This review is 5 years or so late!!! Did you miss the bus? Great review as always and yes it’s a bit soft compared to my 18mm f.14 but still a great buy used at around £480

this reviews is the opposite of just about everyone elses🤔

So, you need to stop it down 3 stops to get good corner sharpness? And that's a $1000 lens. Thanks, but no thanks.

Love the experience of shooting on fuji but a lot of their native lenses really are overpriced with terrible value, also the cult-like mentality of fuji fanboys is really offputting. thank you sigma for finally coming to fuji, cant wait!

Ahhh that was a bit to soon for the nuclear war comment… keep to lens reviews thank

I can take shelter behind my 16mm in the impending nuclear war

What is a Fuji ?

But still, Fuji users will still buy it.

Why review this lens now? It just got effectively replaced by a lens you already covered

Review in a nutshell: Buy the 18mm F1.4 instead.

I wont pay even 300 usd for this

I returned this defective lens back for a full refund. Why? Lenses focus beyond infinity (1:47). Do no buy lenses that will not stop dead-on at infinity. Many reviews don't even know about today lens flaws

Wow only 7 years after its release...

Considering what just happened in Ukraine, i guess i buy it as a protector in case of a nuclear war 😅

Sigma 16mm is much better. Sharper and cheaper.

First

Oh, I've noticed the colours of Ukrainian flag. Unsubscribing. I don't like when people get into politics.

I have it and a I mostly love it, but you're spot on with it's weaknesses. I basically avoid shooting it wide open unless absolutely necessary. I'd love the 18's performance but it's just a bit too tight for my landscape style, so if anything I'm hoping for an updated 14mm prime. Thanks for the honest review.