Fuji Fuji XF16-80mm f/4 OIS lens leaked

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Jul 13, 2011
124
Lexington, Virginia
Steve
I found the Fuji X10/20 fun to work with and it had a 28-112e 1.8-2.8. This lens is slower but the range is a bit longer and wider. 120 is a decent tele. Not for animals but for everyday shooting and getting a bit of compression in a shot.
 
Last edited:

gordo

Veteran
Jul 6, 2017
104
Arizona
Gordon
I shot the Nikon 180mm f/2.8 for a while, it was a nice light alternative to the 70-200mm f/2.8. But it wouldn't answer the 200-300mm wish for me. Before I could really consider switch completely from m4/3 to Fuji I'd need that whole filled. Fuji has the 10-24mm f/4, they're releasing the 16-80mm f/4, but then ??? The 100-400mm is just to big and $$$$. And while I like the idea of 600mm eq, it takes more care and patience then I tend to have.
Not sure if you have or would consider the X-H1, but the 100-400 + X-H1 combo shoots well at 400mm IMHO. The IBIS + OIS works wonders for someone like myself that is less steady these days. That being said, I'd love a 200 eq prime to go with the 90mm. (edit - I understand the issue of size, weight, cost and was just commenting a bit on the ability of the combo to work well at 400mm. A lighter-weight, less spendy, but still optically good alternative would be nice.)

I thought this came out well enough for a handheld 1/70s f/8 @ 400mm shot. And it's cropped.
original.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:

gordo

Veteran
Jul 6, 2017
104
Arizona
Gordon
As for the "standard" zooms. I'm a bit of an odd duck, and I really don't like the 24-70, 24-105, 24-120, 28-whatevers and their equivalents. My most used FOVs are 35 and 85, followed by 135, 24 and 200. 24-70 causes me to change lenses often enough it's like using primes. The 24-105 and 24-120 don't go long enough when I want longer, and the 28-whatevers aren't wide enough when I want wide, so again a lot of lens changes. (I rarely used 50mm until my current location - it's a great FOV for certain spots to grab specific mountain images.)

I'd be more interested in an XF 16-90/4 or 16-135/4. For me, a 24-85 FOV zoom works for most of my shooting, so I'll be keeping the 16-55.

For those that are interested in the 16-80, I hope it turns out to be a great choice.
 

davidzvi

Top Veteran
Apr 18, 2014
104
Boston Burbs
David
Not sure if you have or would consider the X-H1, but the 100-400 + X-H1 combo shoots well at 400mm IMHO. The IBIS + OIS works wonders for someone like myself that is less steady these days. That being said, I'd love a 200 eq prime to go with the 90mm. (edit - I understand the issue of size, weight, cost and was just commenting a bit on the ability of the combo to work well at 400mm. A lighter-weight, less spendy, but still optically good alternative would be nice.)

I thought this came out well enough for a handheld 1/70s f/8 @ 400mm shot. And it's cropped.
View attachment 204034
It is wonderful, no doubt. But I've used several zooms to 300mm, 400mm, and even 500mm on APS-C bodies over the years; for me 300mm (450mm eq) works the best.
As for the "standard" zooms. I'm a bit of an odd duck, and I really don't like the 24-70, 24-105, 24-120, 28-whatevers and their equivalents. My most used FOVs are 35 and 85, followed by 135, 24 and 200. 24-70 causes me to change lenses often enough it's like using primes. The 24-105 and 24-120 don't go long enough when I want longer, and the 28-whatevers aren't wide enough when I want wide, so again a lot of lens changes. (I rarely used 50mm until my current location - it's a great FOV for certain spots to grab specific mountain images.)

I'd be more interested in an XF 16-90/4 or 16-135/4. For me, a 24-85 FOV zoom works for most of my shooting, so I'll be keeping the 16-55.

For those that are interested in the 16-80, I hope it turns out to be a great choice.
Ever consider m4/3 and the Olympus Pro 12-100 f/4?
 

gordo

Veteran
Jul 6, 2017
104
Arizona
Gordon
It is wonderful, no doubt. But I've used several zooms to 300mm, 400mm, and even 500mm on APS-C bodies over the years; for me 300mm (450mm eq) works the best.

Ever consider m4/3 and the Olympus Pro 12-100 f/4?
I'd enjoy something smaller as well. Unfortunately the 100-400 is it for now.

I tried m4/3. The size of the cameras was too small for me.

Most Fuji are also too small - the X-H1 is barely usable for me. For reference, the Pentax K-1 and 645D & Z cameras are about perfect with regards to grip size, and size and placement of controls.

It's been the major issue for me trying to downsize gear. I cannot seem to find cameras that work well with my hands and eyes that also have affordable lenses I tend to use.

The Nikon Z cameras might be promising - about the size of the X-H1 but the grip and controls work with my hand a lot better. Will have to see future improvements with tracking AF, EVF when tracking and shooting fast action stuff, and lens lineup.

I'll probably end up with two brands, each set up for several tasks.
 

davidzvi

Top Veteran
Apr 18, 2014
104
Boston Burbs
David
I'd enjoy something smaller as well. Unfortunately the 100-400 is it for now.

I tried m4/3. The size of the cameras was too small for me.

Most Fuji are also too small - the X-H1 is barely usable for me. For reference, the Pentax K-1 and 645D & Z cameras are about perfect with regards to grip size, and size and placement of controls.

It's been the major issue for me trying to downsize gear. I cannot seem to find cameras that work well with my hands and eyes that also have affordable lenses I tend to use.

The Nikon Z cameras might be promising - about the size of the X-H1 but the grip and controls work with my hand a lot better. Will have to see future improvements with tracking AF, EVF when tracking and shooting fast action stuff, and lens lineup.

I'll probably end up with two brands, each set up for several tasks.
I really hate to be the one to tell you this..... But the Panasonic G9 and X-H1 are REALLY close (one of the reason I opted for the smaller E-M1.2). And if you add the Really Right Stuff plate, the E-M1.2 is the same size as the Z6(actually the E-M1.2 becomes taller by 4-5mm I believe.



Size and configuration of controls is another matter, the E-M1.2, G9, and Z6 are all a bit cramped compared to the X-H1.

Interesting side note. Pan and Oly lenses zoom in opposite directions. Oly like Canon and Pan like Nikon. But the button / dial configuration on the G9 is similar to Canon's setup? I wonder if it was intentional to offer potential converter something they might be familiar with, the new FF Pan is the same.

 

gordo

Veteran
Jul 6, 2017
104
Arizona
Gordon
They have made changes with regard to size and some are a bit bigger today, and a handful across the brands are close in size. Ergos are another matter, and are highly subjective, especially if one has issues associated with aging or disabilities. The X-H1 controls may be more spaced out, but they are physically small and some are too close to the level of the camera body and therefore difficult to locate by feel. After handling multiple bodies, of the mirrorless options, the Nikon fits me best. I can easily find and operate all needed Nikon controls without taking the camera from my eye or making a major shift of my grip.

Over the last 5 years or so, I have had increasing issues with finger and hand pain, loss of dexterity, and issues with lower spec viewfinders. I doubt it will cease to progress as I continue to age. The way a camera feels in my hand, how easy it is for me to find and operate necessary controls, and whether or not a viewfinder cause double vision and headaches is increasingly a driving factor in my gear selection. I like the Fuji gear, they have a solid lens lineup 135mm FOV and below IMHO. But at some point, my body's interaction with the ergos might force the shift. Not sure it's enough of a difference right now to make the switch. It'll take a lot of money. It might be necessary to have a physically large camera with large controls. One additional reason I don't want to let my Pentax gear go. It just fits me, my hands, my eyeballs.
 

tonyturley

Hall of Famer
Nov 24, 2014
124
Scott Depot, WV, USA
Tony
Sorry to hear of your troubles, gordo. I've been fortunate to not have any aging issues beyond metatarsalgia in my right foot. I love hiking, and the rougher the trails the better, but any more than 3 or 4 miles and my foot is in agony for days. Strange thing is it doesn't bother me on the hike, but I'll start to feel the discomfort on the drive home. Even stranger is that the inflammation doesn't affect me at all when I'm biking, so my woodland outings these days are mostly focused on bike riding. I always carry a camera on my handlebars, and I've struggled with finding the right combination that will give me the best IQ in the smallest size. I've gone back and forth between Fuji and mu4/3; there are things I like a lot about each. I also liked the Fuji X30 a lot, and in good light, its images were brilliant; low light, not so much. I have been tempted by the idea of a Pentax KP, but I think it would be too big for my handlebar bag. I did briefly own a K-30 a while back, and I rented a DA 20-40 for some of my woodland adventures. That lens is simply stunning.
 

davidzvi

Top Veteran
Apr 18, 2014
104
Boston Burbs
David
They have made changes with regard to size and some are a bit bigger today, and a handful across the brands are close in size. Ergos are another matter, and are highly subjective, especially if one has issues associated with aging or disabilities. The X-H1 controls may be more spaced out, but they are physically small and some are too close to the level of the camera body and therefore difficult to locate by feel. After handling multiple bodies, of the mirrorless options, the Nikon fits me best. I can easily find and operate all needed Nikon controls without taking the camera from my eye or making a major shift of my grip.

Over the last 5 years or so, I have had increasing issues with finger and hand pain, loss of dexterity, and issues with lower spec viewfinders. I doubt it will cease to progress as I continue to age. The way a camera feels in my hand, how easy it is for me to find and operate necessary controls, and whether or not a viewfinder cause double vision and headaches is increasingly a driving factor in my gear selection. I like the Fuji gear, they have a solid lens lineup 135mm FOV and below IMHO. But at some point, my body's interaction with the ergos might force the shift. Not sure it's enough of a difference right now to make the switch. It'll take a lot of money. It might be necessary to have a physically large camera with large controls. One additional reason I don't want to let my Pentax gear go. It just fits me, my hands, my eyeballs.
I understand both points. I shot events for more than a dozen years and decided I'd had enough, little pains started to be bigger especially after 6-10 hours on your feet. I also get the control and feel. I shot Nikon for years and the Z does fell pretty good, I just have no need for FX anymore. For me the OMDs feel similar to Nikons, but I'd love one with half the buttons.
 

gordo

Veteran
Jul 6, 2017
104
Arizona
Gordon
Sorry to hear of your troubles, gordo. I've been fortunate to not have any aging issues beyond metatarsalgia in my right foot. I love hiking, and the rougher the trails the better, but any more than 3 or 4 miles and my foot is in agony for days. Strange thing is it doesn't bother me on the hike, but I'll start to feel the discomfort on the drive home. Even stranger is that the inflammation doesn't affect me at all when I'm biking, so my woodland outings these days are mostly focused on bike riding. I always carry a camera on my handlebars, and I've struggled with finding the right combination that will give me the best IQ in the smallest size. I've gone back and forth between Fuji and mu4/3; there are things I like a lot about each. I also liked the Fuji X30 a lot, and in good light, its images were brilliant; low light, not so much. I have been tempted by the idea of a Pentax KP, but I think it would be too big for my handlebar bag. I did briefly own a K-30 a while back, and I rented a DA 20-40 for some of my woodland adventures. That lens is simply stunning.
Thanks Tony. It was my only real limiting issuse until this last fall, and my body decided to kick me to the curb. Now I'm slowly trying to get back to where I can get out and roam. Keep active as long as you can, it helps. The Pentax FA and DA Limiteds are real gems.

I understand both points. I shot events for more than a dozen years and decided I'd had enough, little pains started to be bigger especially after 6-10 hours on your feet. I also get the control and feel. I shot Nikon for years and the Z does fell pretty good, I just have no need for FX anymore. For me the OMDs feel similar to Nikons, but I'd love one with half the buttons.
One of the wonderful things about photography today - so many choices. Not a bad thing, but I think we've collectively gotten spoiled by the selections.
 

gordo

Veteran
Jul 6, 2017
104
Arizona
Gordon
Since I've caused a bit of thread disruption, apologies to all. And back to the original subject...

The 16-80 does have some cool tech/ features. The 6 stop OIS that can detect tripod use. The constant MFD. Jonas Rask did a preview with a prototype last month. His impression was that it performs better at the long end than the short, opposite of the impression he got with the 18-135.

That 6 stop OIS is going to be killer combined with the X-H1 IBIS. If I didn't already have the 16-55, I'd be a lot more interested in the lens than I am.
 

mike3996

Top Veteran
Apr 2, 2018
104
One of the wonderful things about photography today - so many choices. Not a bad thing, but I think we've collectively gotten spoiled by the selections.
Absolutely. I'm sure there's an English phrase for this but in Finnish, "runsaudenpula" (which coincidentally Google Translate offers your "spoiled for choice" here) is apt: literally "shortage of riches" but idiomatically means that as if you're having a shortage because of the abundant selection: shortage [because] of riches.
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Jul 13, 2011
124
Lexington, Virginia
Steve
I used Pentax for 30 years. It was Olympus mu43 that finally pulled me away. The EM5 especially felt like my old MX. I will admit that despite my attraction to small cameras the XH1 with the grip feels really good in my (on the small side) hands and is often the cameras I take for a pure photographic expedition.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom