The 16-55 because of the constant aperture and sublime sharpness. I was never really impressed with the 18-55's image quality, but it renders beautiful colors and the OIS is really good on it. I think the 16-55 will go well with the X-H1 and the forthcoming X-T4 (assuming that's what it will be called.)

These days, I’m covering this focal range with small primes: 16/2.8, 23/2, 35/2, and 56/1.2. I also just added the Laowa 9/2.8 for ultra wide. I had the 18-55 kit, but lent it to my daughter along with my old X-E1. She won’t give it back. I tried the 18-135mm for a year, but sold it due to the weight and balance and some softness. But soon I might buy the 16-80mm. For me, it seems perfectly situated between the two lenses you reviewed, except it’s f/4 across the range. It can still generate decently shallow DOF when zoomed to 80mm, I’m sure. And when it’s on the camera, I will still carry the 9mm in my pocket. My only reservation about the 16-80mm is that I might neglect my primes too much, and I really love them.

too true - what ever it will be called haha we wait

Prime shooter, love it very detailed and love shooting with primes. makes you slow down and appreciate it

What about comparing the 16-55mm to the 16-80mm F/4 lens?

That's a good point... and AFAIK 16-55 also has no chromatic aberration problems.

I agree, it's a great lens in low light, I shoot in dark scenes with lights glowing in the dark and they're perfect even at 2.8, very defined, bright and not ghosting. Almost invisible CA in sunny days also. The only think I can't stand with is the 16mm distortion and the fact it loss focus during the zoom Action in video mode.

I dont do that sort of photography as I said travel and landscape thats why I made a comparison like this, but good to know that you people will get a lot of info from this :D

@@matthewstorerphotography you made a great video with great info.....

@@nerdMike If you are doing lots of high end video, you should go for the Fujinon Cine T-stop lenses. The FUJINON MK18-55mm T2.9 or the Fujinon MK 50-135mm T2.9. They will cost you 4.000 Euro each,- but boy do they do a great job. I have shot with both on a Sony A7 and this was so awesome.

Love this. You know what suits your needs. Thats why you respect this review because you know what you need and want from a camera. You're a bloody good person I respect you!!

@@matthewstorerphotography merci mon frère. 🙏🏿

Thanks for sharing - I agree with the 16-800 statement however the 18-55 falls off massivly after 35mm also - Zoom lenses have this problem

totally agree, well said it has a spot in the lens line up for everyone

I used a bit better lens that just a kit lens. But yes easy to get amazing results with a crop sensor! Thanks so much :D

Yeah well said and great last point. Super true!

Thanks so much Paula, really glad this helped you, great to see you know exactly what lenses you need also! :D

Yeah KZfaq does compress, but each to there own, i prefer the 16-55mm for my need :D

Great to hear that you are happy with it :D

Yeah super smart idea :)

Lovely setups :D

Glad it was helpful!

Just chuck the 16-55 in ya jacket pocket and carry it on that way. They will never know

Yeah I would say that would be a huge difference. You can download the images for free on my website to compare at 100%

Yeah I 100% agree - I have gone with the 16-80 for video and travel and so glad that I did!

Awesome fred glad it helped. Good to see you know what you want :)

56mm f1.2 @ 69.7mm x 73.2mm 405 grams 16-55mm f2.8 @ 83.3mm x 106.0mm 655 grams One prime doing one focal range. A zoom lens at 1/3 extra size and weight doing a versatile job... should have looked into it more Pete. Btw did you even watch the vid? When did I even mention that I done portrait? Totally understand where you are coming from, but doing landscape and Travel Photography this DOES suit my need. Thanks for the input btw

@@matthewstorerphotography my point is that when I want to be mobile for travel or landscapes, which I photograph most myself too then the smaller, lighter lens is perfect. Any other scenarios then I use a prime which will be sharper and better resolution. For me the 2.8 zoom was too big and cumbersome for the smallish xt-2 body. Of course I'd not hike with a 56 1.2.... I have noticed that my and others 18-55 isn't amazing at 55mm, but back at 50mm it seems a lot better.

@@meme4one fair point and taken. For me I am happy to take the extra weight as its my job. If it wasnt I probably wouldnt bother as much either. Or just go straight to the 16-80mm

@@matthewstorerphotography that 16-80 has had some savage reviews. Focus issues with video. OIS issues. Sharpness issues...mostly in corners but sadly at most apertures and apparently very average at 80mm. BTW I own both 16-55 and 18-55 and love them both but I have to say that 16-55 is one of best zoom lenses I have ever used. Sharpness and contrast are awesome.

Yeah but I dont shoot portrait so wouldn't buy a portrait lens :)

Thanks for your comments

Hey Sean!! We're doing really well thank you :) will for sure give you a shout out sometime :)

@@matthewstorerphotography Please, NOT a shout out - just an email... haha!

Yeah I understand that. The sony G master is 200grams more heavy and just a fraction larger. But its also the price, double to price and little heavier and size. I find for me personally this is the best system for me that fits in the size, weight, price and quaility bracket- remember for me :D Thanks for your input I totally see where youre coming from :)

Disagree. If you’re a pro, you want the best quality glass for your body. Shooting APS-C doesn’t mean you have to get pancake primes. That’s fine if it’s your preference, but there’s advantages over a FF and unless you need the extra stop or so and shallower DOF it ain’t worth it.

16-55 is now under 1000euros, 24-70 f2.8 for Nikon Z is over 2000euros, for instance, so not so easy to just go FF because it's a little bit bulky lens.

Thanks so much - you're 100% correct with your assumptions

Interestign way to look at it Richard :D

Hey thanks will be back in Feb 2021! Super excited for it

Thank you so much 😀

Thanks for the info!

Yeah very interesting - I dont own the 18-55mm anymore as you said a little soft. But good lens for the price, but think the 16-80mm blows it out of the water now days!

Thanks, had an amazing tiem on my Northern Lights workshop, should join? :D

Yeah really cool - I think youd love the X-S10 and the 16-80mm that is a perfect combo

Yeah I get that. Sometimes it does feel awkward but suits my needs. Totally understand that you love thr primes :)

Yeah I totally get that, it is a big lens for this system!

I'm no senior yet but I'm getting close and do a lot of wildlife from a FAR FAR distance because I can't run around anymore. I'm using the 100 - 400 and holy moly it hurts. Cry.

If I only ever could use one it would be 16-80mm. More versatile, and I dont use the F2.8 as much as I should to justify it!

@@matthewstorerphotography True, 18-55 is f2.8 only at 18mm or so, so it's basically f4 and it's got nothing on 16-80, apart from price.

Yeah it was more a video about the photography as that is what most of my audience is, try and stay away from the professional video aspect many other youtubers out there that are better than me at it

Thanks buddy - appreciate it!

Yeah I agree, KZfaq compresses the files so much it becomes hard to do comparisons on here. But over on my website, it's more visible. Totally understand that the 18-55 would suit your needs being smaller lighter OIS etc. great choice

There isn’t that much of a difference in image quality. The 16-55 has constant f/2.8, it’s sharper in the corners and it’s better with flaring. But it doesn’t have OIS. And it’s way heavier. So it’s just a case of knowing what’s a priority to you.

True. Well said!

Totally get that really important to get what suits you :D

Great comment, nice work!

Hahaha thats Montana I wish I was there...

It does help thats for sure, but does feel heavy on the front end

YOu'll be fine - just keep shooting :D

Thank you for the support.

Certainly is

Thanks so much mate. Mhmm hard one I think I will be grabbing a 16-80mm when I have the money. Great travel focal range. Its in Slovenia very similar to those locations but just without the price and as many tourists ;)

Matthew Storer ahhh, Slovenia. You are absolutely right, a beautiful place 😍

@@matthewstorerphotography I too thought it was Austria. Must visit Slovenia one day :)

Fair call

Glad you think so!

Yeah I know bad memory haha had to fix that in post

Sorry for that

Answered below :D

Nice work!

Or the 18-135.... 🤔

This lens is the 16-55 not the 16-80mm thats the difference. I have just done a review comparing the 16-55 VS 16-80mm over on my channel! :D

exactly right, how do you find the 100-400mm? Have thought about it but think I would prefer the 50-140 and x2 teleconverter?

@@matthewstorerphotography Hi buddy.... The 100-400 for me has been great .... but... I'm always trying to shoot something small a long way away and then cropping in on the image and being disappointed.. 😄🤪 Not really how it's supposed to work.. 😄 For the most of it though it really is a great lens at that price point. Long end wont disappoint when used over more moderate distances. Some of my best dog portraits came off the 100-400 when shot in good light and at a reasonable distance.... very sharp images with great blurred out background. I've used it also with the 1.4x extender but wasnt that impressed with images... so instead I just get closer by a few steps and crop a fraction... gives me better image. I think youd do well investing in the 50-140.... I think you would get good use of its range and f2.8 . Heard good things about that lens..... it's on my wish list.... once my lottery numbers come up. 😄 All the best buddy.... regards... Steve

Thanks for the info! mhmm really hard choice, I also looked at the Pana system but was put off by their lens choice and also how expensive they are. I am invested with Fujifilm gear now and really happy with it. Size, weight, price and quaility is superior!

Agreed!

Depend what type of photography you do. Hard fast question to answer.

@@matthewstorerphotography Hybrid shooter. 60 video 40 photo

@@matthewstorerphotography I probably choose xt4 because of stabilization

Yeah I would choose xt4 then also. I use it for everything. The xt3 really only for tripod photo/video

100% my go to professional setup

Yeah great question. I answered that myself with buying the X-H1 to combat this. For me its the perfect combination. A backup camera and video camera. With the image stabilisation i use this as my pro camera for paid clients. With the X-T3 its hard without good lighting.. totally agree

Sorry mate, I do not own this lens :(

Ahh not really sure how much is being introduced but not for me

16-80mm all day long

Would you go with the X-T4 bundle with the 16-55mm for $2,199? Or just buy the body and choose a different lens?

Ahhh I would look between the 16-55 or even the 16-80mm between those two lenses, I own both and am happy as larry with both of them

@@matthewstorerphotography 11qqqqqq1qqqqqqqqqqq11p

Yeah totally understand, amazing that youve found a lens that works :D

Mhmm probably not - the F2.8 definetly helps

@@matthewstorerphotography thank you. So i was planning to buy Xt4 but after long discussion in my mind 😂 i finally ordered Xs10 I'm not professional videographer or photographer. You think i made the right choice or do you think after sometime i will be leaning towards xt4 ? I just want the camera for photography and occasional Videography. Your comments will really help me 😃

Hey, not sure never used Nikon gear

The Nikon 50/1.8D is a solid little lens, but if you have a D3x00 or D5x00 camera, it won't autofocus (so get the YN). If you have a D7x00 or one of the FX cameras, get the Nikon.

Hey, Mhmm I think I would choose the 18-55mm if I needed to choose between these two, but ultimately I would decide with the 16-80mm F/4

@@matthewstorerphotography thank you!

I have not had a chance to muck around with this lens yet. But will soon hopefully need the money

Hi Awy, I recently ordered the 10-24 and the 16-80 from Amazon; the 16-80 to replace my 18-55. I kept the 10-24 ... but I returned the 16-80: I was disappointed with the 16-80 being so bulky; the 18-55 is way more compact (camera hanging over the sholder, carrying it around) and it is less intimidating. My recommendation : 1. compare them yourself (-> handling). 2. ask yourself the question : would the 16-80 make your images so much better to justify price and weight/size difference ?

Its a good lens for the price, I would recommend the primes lenses fo portraits and street photography.

The best portrait lens you can get within the kit lens' budget (if you actually buy it as a kit, or used) is the Samyang 85mm or 135mm (135mm is best but I would tell most people to only use it with an IBIS body like the X-T4 or X-S10) 56mm Fuji is also an alright option.

I've now upgraded to an X-T4 16-55mm combo and it is VASTLY more fun than the X-T30 and 18-55mm. Vastly more reliable on sharpness, and without the hassle of variable aperture.

I own the 16mm 1.4 and love it so much!

Not yet! I will try it out shortly, but I used it for capturing the Northern Lights on my recent workshop, was very impressed with it there! Will do a vlog about this coming up in next couple of months :D

Yep

Sorting, have to read about it over their mate!

Dont find it to bad

@@matthewstorerphotography In my case when using inbuilt mike, I can hear even the 16-55 focusing in quieter environments. So I think external mike is needed.

@@tebitan3780 Ahhh yeah100% need an external mic for sure :D

Still a really good lens!

Hopefully it works out better for you! :D

Very nice, lovely lens you'll enjoy it+

Tried to get the lens to review and have a look at it, but never used it sorry

What I would suggest is to head down to Best Buy and try it out, or jump on Fujifilms website and add the two weights together and get something around the house because I am certain that it's around 1.2kgs

@@matthewstorerphotography thank you!! I will find the time to do this.

Awesome. Think that will be best

fair enough, every point is valid

Think it is when you compare it to every other Fujifilm lense lol, they're in the thousands so a £300 lens that comes with the camera that you can pickup for about £150 on eBay is probably considered budget in this category. For the record I love the 18 to 55, that and the 35 1.4 is nice! I do wish I had the 8 - 16 🤤🤤🤤 buuut I need my kidney right now!

To be fair, fujifilm's budget line is the XC series, which are still amazing for the price. The XF series is what I call pro-sumer and the red badges are the full on professional lenses.

100%

I used my 18-55mm during a hike and it was raining. The lens got wet and I still carried on my shooting as I thought it was WR. I got great result and carried on shooting for the rest of my trip. I later realised it wasn't WR and I was amazed that nothing happened. Even my sensor is clean. So does WR really make a difference?

Fair enough, good to know :D

I did include it? I spoke about it at the end of the video? lol also hard to speak about it when I dont have it... Good to see you worked out that it suits your needs though

Matthew Storer, my bad. You are correct. I was getting tired and didn’t pay close enough attention. You clearly mentioned it. As such, I’ve modified my comment to remove my unfair criticism. Thanks for the good review!

@@swagonman No problem buddy, rest up and get some sleep :P haha

I wanted so much for the 16-80 to be my choice as well. I just couldn't come around to its performance at 16mm. I had the "luxury" of pitting it against the 16-55 (which I already owned) and the 16-55 was demonstrably better at the wide end. You needn't squint to see the differences at 1:1 -- clear as day. Perhaps the fault is my own, I'm an irredeemable pixel peeper. But, I could (many times) see the differences without having to do so. At 35mm and 55mm, the lens are a lot closer. Everything about the 16-80 is perfect except for its performance at 16mm, whih gave me no other choice but to return it, as I shoot at 16mm a lot for my landscapes. By the way, I owned two different copies of the lens and the performance was consistent between the both of them.

Yeah for sure totally agree

I agree, for the price and versatility its an amazing lens