Sep 6, 2012 · The XF 16-55mm F2.8 WR is shortest at around 19mm. In fact, the lens barely moves between 16 and 23mm, resulting in less overall protrusion, which is nice. Both the XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 OIS and XF 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 OIS WR are at their shortest at 18mm, and they just get longer from there. This isn’t much of a problem with the little 18-55mm, but It's heavier and bigger by some margin compared to the 18-55, and also more expensive. I've never shot with the 16-55, but that lens is useless for handheld video on the XT-3, which is one of the use cases I have for the 16-80 with its OIS. (3) I can't compare the 16-80 to the 18-135, either, but the 18-135 is known as a kind of weak performer. Jan 15, 2021 · The main reason for me considering the 16-55 is the bigger aperture. However the 16-80 is more versatile with the longer FL (as well as IS). Currently both lenses are listed with the same price, but there is a cash-back campaign on the 16-55 so it is actually cheaper. Aug 31, 2021 · Fuji 16-80mm f4 vs 18-55mm f2.8-4 lens review! Which one is BETTER? In this video I am going to help you to decide which kit lens to get with your new fuji c Jul 5, 2022 · My vote is for Fuji 16-80 , because I'm addicted to native Fujifilm lenses 😊. As I see it, the Tamron has a little better IQ and is a stop faster at the cost of being notably bigger and lacking an aperture ring. I'm not "upgrading" my 16-80. It is already on the big side for me for travel. The Tamron is too big for me. Nov 19, 2019 · That said the 16-55 obviously is holding more detail. Everyone else have already talked about the pros and cons between the two. If the 16-80 is acceptable to you then keep the weight off, deal with the slower speeds, and upgrade your post processing to something other than LR to get an immediate and significant IQ boost. .

16 55 vs 16 80