What's Fuji's Best Mid Range Zoom? Tamron 17-70mm V Fujifilm 16-55mm V Fujifilm 16-80mm

Рет қаралды 28,779

Жыл бұрын

Today I am answering one of the most often questions I am getting asked lately, is the Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 my main mid-range zoom for my Fujifilm Gear? In this video, we look at all the mid-range zooms for Fujifilm, the new Tamron 17-70mm F2.8, Fujifilm XF 16-55mm F2.8 and Fujifilm XF 18-80mm F4 and find out which lens is best for you!
Download The RAWs Here: bit.ly/3Oc6bxE
If you enjoyed this video, please give it a thumbs up 👍 feel free to leave a comment below, and I will get back to you! Thanks for watching - your support means the world to me! 🌏🦘
Online Photography Membership: bit.ly/3zHpxTM - NETFLIX For Photographers
💰WEBSITE SALES:
My Photography Merch: bit.ly/3rDrHRD
Photography Workshops: bit.ly/3kXoz1P
Limited Edition Prints: bit.ly/3zIc8v0
My Editing Presets: bit.ly/3kWath8
My Online Photography Store: bit.ly/2OVWXwv
Gear used to create these videos. These are Amazon affiliate links!
📷Photography Gear:
Camera: geni.us/qAgBd
Wide-Angle Lens: geni.us/4J2Bdz
Mid-Range Zoom: geni.us/sPxoc
Tele Zoom: geni.us/l6LZfd
Magnetic Polariser's: geni.us/PpPe
Game-Changing Filters: geni.us/s5Xs
My Tripods: geni.us/1RtWO6
BEST Travel Backpack: bit.ly/3BMxatV
🎥Video Gear:
Camera: geni.us/HJTeT0w
Wide-Angle Lens: geni.us/o3bGJ
Mid-Range Zoom: geni.us/K0Ti
Telephoto Lens: geni.us/ZI6XpUx
Magnetic VND Filters: geni.us/qirXu
Microphone: geni.us/UeZG
Lav Mic: geni.us/r4qPSB
Drone: geni.us/mTFbEvV
🌟Astrophotography Gear:
Astro Camera: geni.us/vOKyTA7
#1 Night Sky Lens: geni.us/9Olu
#2 Night Sky Lens: geni.us/WGUNak
#3 Night Sky Lens: geni.us/cnCYd
#4 Night Sky Lens: geni.us/wdj2
Light Pollution Filter: geni.us/s5Xs
Timelapse +: bit.ly/3i6J0r5
My Complete Gear: bit.ly/2Wls6MZ
💻SOFTWARE:
Music: geni.us/AZBb
Website Hosting: bit.ly/3rDotO1
GAME-CHANGING Software: bit.ly/2Uw1Tuy
Remove Noise: bit.ly/3d1cq6l
Editing Tablets: geni.us/GcK8U
📲SOCIAL MEDIA'S:
Website: www.matthewstorerphotography....
Social Media: www.matthewstorerphotography....
✅ SUBSCRIBE: bit.ly/36DVXSb
#travelphotography #landscapephotography #australiaphotography

Пікірлер: 46

@bunmeng007 Жыл бұрын

As a hobbyist, 16-80 for me: decent size and weight + aperture mark. I carry another 1.4 normal prime if I want to do portrait and low light. Cheers

@anthonystonehouse Жыл бұрын

This is exactly what I settled on too, after trying lots of different Fuji lenses.

@bunmeng007 Жыл бұрын

@@anthonystonehouse yeah same too. After many trial n error for me. Buy & sell 😅😅

@gunterkiphard887 Ай бұрын

Thanks for thisk very good Review. Today Tamron is coming, tomorrow 16-18 mm. I am excited about the results on my xhs2

@YanFries Жыл бұрын

Sigma needs to release a mirrorless version of their 18-35 1.8!

@BrendanEvan Жыл бұрын

Seriously. Until there’s an X-mount zoom that’s at least F2 or faster, I won’t consider them.

@kamilpotato3764 Жыл бұрын

@@BrendanEvan Is there an physical/technical limit on fast standard zoom on apsc when it comes to f stops?

@amadei2 Жыл бұрын

@@kamilpotato3764 probably not, there is a F0.95, but for a zoom, a 1.8 zoom will be quite big, hence why it's only 18-35. A 16-55 f1.8 would be ridiculously big .

@jonathanlogan6953 Жыл бұрын

I recently upgraded to a 16-55 but haven't sold my 18-55 or 16-80 yet. The 16-80 is the most versatile combination of focal lengths and OIS, but it's also the most boring lens. I'm planning to keep the 16-55 for its faster aperture and "bag of primes" image quality (16, 23, 35--it doesn't really compare to the 56). I'm also planning to keep the 18-55 for hiking since it's very compact and has pretty good image quality. The only thing the 16-80 has that doesn't overlap with the other two lenses is a bit of telephoto range (which I found unnecessary since I have a 50-140) and very close focusing, which I can live without.

@JungleCatImages Жыл бұрын

For me me you summed it all up at 2:08 ish.. I keep thinking about the Tamron, because you can get a new one for $649 right now.. And I've even considered the Sigma 18-50, even though I know I don't want it, the 16-80 isn't really a consideration, I'd rather keep my 18-55.... I'm mostly a prime shooter, I don't shoot zooms often, but when I do it's in a professional setting..so I need to have the best image quality no matter the price.. I know this means the 16-55, I've known for months, if not years. Just wait. Don't settle. You won't be happy. .. Sorry, just talkin to myself at this point

@robari2410 4 ай бұрын

I sold my Fuji 16-55 mm 2.8 Red B. Too balky, heavy, and felt awkward on my XT5. Got the Sigma 18-50 2.8 and I am VERY happy with it. I am also getting the TAMRON 17-70 2.8 Quality on the first two is very similar, the Tamron running right behind hem. All good quality lenses, can't go wrong with either one.

@giandeguzman6402 2 ай бұрын

hey man. wouldnt the sigma and tamron be redundant lenses for you?

@robari2410 2 ай бұрын

Yes! indeed. I wanted the extra mm on both ends. Changed my mind for now, but may sell the Sigma to get the Tamron and just stick with it for a while. Thanks!!

@bhaveshmandan9377 Жыл бұрын

@Matthew Storer hi my shelf bhavesh from India iam planning to zoom lens for paid work n travelling which should i buy from this 3 and currently i have 23 f2

@tetroretrislvl4 Жыл бұрын

Thank you for your explanation, I found it helpful. I'm currently deciding between the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 and the fuji 16-55 f2.8. but I stand with you 100% on your reasons for selecting the Tamron; the versatility and the practicality. And it's just not practical enough for me to drop the kind of money on the red badge when I'm NOT making money from my photography. The Tamron is still a little too large for my liking, which is why I bring up the new Sigma, but for the reach it gives, it may be worth a serious reconsider! 🤔 Things to ponder. Anyway, thank you again, so much! Appreciate your content!

@technodronesogxl9783 Жыл бұрын

I have the Fujinon 18 55 kit lens it doesn't have the reach that you may need....at least it didn't for me. I recently got a ZH2 with the 16 80mm and it doesn't have the reach that I need I am looking at the Fuji 70 300mm lens

@zenstoodi Жыл бұрын

Tamron 17-70 2.8 for fuji is great with X-H2S just missing aperture ring ;(

@NDakota79 6 ай бұрын

My 16-80 is razor sharp @35mm and good enough @18 and 55mm. The rest is bonus. Very happy with it and personally I can’t relate to the complaints about it, at least not my specific 16-80. At 35mm f4 it is as sharp as my XT35 f2 @f4 and this includes the corners. Just a little less contrast.

@MichaelZi Жыл бұрын

16-55 f 2.8 imho offers best quality from trinity,its heavy its big but its also solid and WR and as i said quality quality qality,my personal and one and only con of this lens is bokeh it is not so cute :)

@Ben_Lichtfaenger 21 күн бұрын

The tamron in combination with the xf70-300 + 1.4 converter and the viltrox 13mm is my favourite setup. But it’s really hard to find the tamron and the 70-300 used. Maybe they are to good 😂

@muttishelfer9122 Жыл бұрын

The 16-55mm is imo still the best standard zoom for Fuji.

@nicolasyang7457 Жыл бұрын

big fax, it's goated

@janjamesramos247 Жыл бұрын

ok, without stabilization. bad for low light.

@muttishelfer9122 Жыл бұрын

@@janjamesramos247 There is no real need for stabilisation in this focal length range as the latest Fuji cameras all have a very effective 7 stop IBIS.☝

@janjamesramos247 Жыл бұрын

@@muttishelfer9122 unfortunately I don't have yet the money to buy IBIS cameras. And the extra reach is significant for me, I don't think the solution is just to crop.

@patrick.771 Жыл бұрын

Good to see That Tamron is now into X-mount. I was quite disappointed with the Fuji zoom lenses, that's why I moved to Nikon Z. Difference like day and night. The new 18-120 is also not really good according to Christopher Frost. But I loved my X-H1 and it was SO good for video. And the Fuji prime lenses are really good.

@muttishelfer9122 Жыл бұрын

The 18-120mm is a video-centric lens and for 4K Video u only need 8MP resolution. The 18-120 is more than good enough for that kind of work.

@Razertw 10 ай бұрын

It's really not because it's not parfocal and has exposure jump while zooming, which defeats the whole purpose of that lens. Otherwise it would be amazing. @@muttishelfer9122

@nelsontanchingleng9563 Жыл бұрын

I am interested in the Tamron 17-70mm but looking at the compatibility list on their website, the X-T1 is not listed. I wonder if it works ok on it.

@JoanArabia 8 ай бұрын

Among other cameras I have the X-T1 and the Tamron 17-70 works very well...

@KW124 Жыл бұрын

Does the Tamron 17-70mm support the old camera X-T1? Thanks!

@Eyeofkamau Жыл бұрын

Yes, all x mount cameras

@xyzct Жыл бұрын

Fuji is almost certainly going to update its two zooms discussed here. I'm going to wait a few months.

@Kayzox Жыл бұрын

There is no right answer to this. Depends on your bag and style. I mostly use the 50-140 f2.8 and I would like the 15-55 f2.8 to complete my focal range, but I have the 16-80 f4 as kit lens and I use it when I want to shoot wider. But if I want to shoot wide, it's to show the background or take family pictures so I don't need f2.8 (f6+) thus currently I can't convince me to spend money for aperture I won't use. ? For low light performance but I have a flash for those situation or longer exposure. ? For better overall image quality but the 16-80 is already fine ? For more bokeh but then I use 50-140 f2.8 I think for me it would be smarter to add like a 23 1.4 to my bag for when I really need more light and keep the 16-80 for compacity and versatility in focal length.

@RM.TokyoPhotographer 9 ай бұрын

I realized if you look at Tamrons 17-50 F4 for full frame its an inner zoom (nothing zooms out of the lense barrel) I have to say this but...Fujifilm really should invest their money into a zoom lense that have that functionality or something that the lense barrel does not protrude that much.... and companies that keep on innovating in that lense field like how Sony made the 16-35mm GM II version much smaller...that is probably the answer to alot of photographers down the road the camera companies/lense manufacturers that can make the next generation smaller much more efficient in rendition will probably do bettter down the road. like how Tamron made the 70-180mnm F2.8 smaller at a fraction of less focal distance... if Fujifilm needs to innovate they need to make the 16-55mm Gen 2 smaller and less bulky with OIS or make it longer 16-60/70mm but smaller in footprint to tell the ppl that they are innovating

@CRaul87 Жыл бұрын

So the AF in the 16-80mm is better than in the 17-70mm Tamron?

@leolioh Жыл бұрын

I also have the same question

@martzallmedia Жыл бұрын

Can someone answer this?

@matthewstorerphotography Жыл бұрын

I wouldn't say yes by much, especially in the photography side. But more so in the video side. Yes the native 16-80mm is faster and more accurate just by the slightest margin. (For me, not worth buying one over the other)

@JoanArabia 8 ай бұрын

In the photo it is very similar, in the video they are both bad.

@vigotres 9 ай бұрын

bro why don't you give us any footage :/

@Vinterloft 6 ай бұрын

I'm prime only until Tamron gets their thumbs out their asses and releases the 35-150 to Fuji X, that's my only desired Tamron lens and I'm not switching systems so they better pony up.

@Audimann 9 ай бұрын

Have both the Fuji's. Had the Tamron for one day but returned it. Severe back focus. And when focussing manually still no real sharpness and contrast. Maybe a lemon but what a piece of junk.

@Audimann 9 ай бұрын

Have both the Fuji's. Had the Tamron for one day but returned it. Severe back focus. And when focussing manually still no real sharpness and contrast. Maybe a lemon but what a piece of junk.

@JoanArabia 8 ай бұрын

I have also returned the Fuji 16-80 because the video focus did not have any precision on an X-T5, just like the Tamron 17-70.

@Audimann 8 ай бұрын

@@JoanArabia I do mainly stills so that works for me. But frustrating that some lenses just don't work. When I returned the Tamron the camerashop guy suggested that it had to with my camera settings. Yeah right. As if I don't know how a camera works.