Thursday, March 28, 2019


It seems like ages ago, but when I was still shooting the Nikon system pre-2012, my main three go to lenses were the Nikon 14-24 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8. Until recently, Fujifilm had us covered with the "red label" XF 16-50 f2.8 and XF 50-140 f2.8 for their 1.5 crop X-series camera bodies. 

One of the older Ultra wide angle lenses that has been available for a while is the  XF10-24 f4.0; but it wasn't a "red label" lens, which Fujifilm uses to distinguish their high end weather-sealed f2.8 pieces of glass. With the release of the brand-new XF 8-16 f2.8 (12-24mm full frame equivalent), earlier this year, this has now changed!

As an X-Photographer, the people of Fujifilm Middle East were kind enough to lend me a production copy of the new lens to test it in the field during a couple of weeks. 

Typical for all red label lenses this lest is of the highest built standard! Everything from the lens barrel, focus and aperture ring feels top quality with the rings moving smoothly and being very well damped. Gone are the days when some of the older Fujifilm lenses had an aperture ring that was too easy to change; the XF14 f2.8 comes to mind?

Needless to say that a constant aperture lens like this is, is larger than some of the smaller zooms; after all it has 20 glass elements in 13 groups; that is a lot of glass! Compared to the XF10-24 f4, it is about double the weight (805g versus 410g) and substantially larger but still not too bulky.

When mounted on a X-T3/T2/T1, X-Pro2/1 the lens is a little front heavy but is a joy to use.  Using it on smaller cameras like the X-E, X-T10/20/30 I would definitively recommend using one of the metal hand grip accessories for better handholding. 

The lens hood is fixed to the lens in order to protect the front glass element, which typically for a super wide angles is quite bulbous. While I normally never use the lens caps myself, this lens is an exception; even though the front element isn't exposed outside of the lens hood, one could damage it when not being careful. 

First of all I would like to stress that this is not a replacement lens for the above! What is below might help you decide which lens is best suited for you!

Needless to say that the focal length between the two is different; at the wide end the difference between 8mm and 10mm does make a noticeable difference; it might only seem like 2mm but it can make the difference between getting a shot or not. On the other hand, the XF10-24 does zoom all the way to a "normal" focal length which makes it more flexible as a walk-around lens. 

In order to visualize the difference between 8 and 16mm focal length, I've shot the two below images; first one at 8mm, second at 16mm.

The older XF10-24 is not weather-sealed; if one is regularly shooting in rain/snow or other dusty environments, the weather sealing of the XF8-16 could become a major purchase decision factor between the two. I shot the new lens during a dust storm in Dubai and had absolutely not problems with it; even though it was pretty much covered in sand.

When the XF 16-55 came out a couple of years ago, there was a lot of critique that the lens didn't have OIS; yes I was one of the photographers commenting on this as well! Fujifilm stated that for optimal image quality and to save some weight (cost?), OIS was left out. 

The same OIS is missing in the XF 8-16 f2.8, but making it a much wider lens, the lack of image stabilization is obviously less important, although it always comes in handy for video shooters! One can of course use the lens on a camera with IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization) like the X-H1 in order to shoot handheld at slower shutter speeds. I'm kind of hopeful that we will eventually see more X-series equipped with IBIS.

The older XF 10-24 f4.0 lens does however have OIS; not the latest and greatest but practically speaking a few stops and worth having it. The older XF 10-24 is known to be a bit softer when shot wide open; I normally don't shoot it below f5.6 (f8 if possible), which together with its OIS makes it comparable to shooting the XF 8-16 f2.8, wide open when only looks at minimum handheld shutter speeds. When it comes to light gathering (aperture), the XF 8-16 obviously wins.

Like my old Nikor 14-24 f2.8 lens, the lens lacks a filter tread which makes mounting filters more difficult. Third party filter manufactures do have solutions to mount filters, which of course make the set-up more bulky and will set you back at least a few hundred dollars/euros. The XF 10-24 has a 72mm filter tread which makes mounting filters straight forward.

In both lenses the autofocus is smooth and fast. While the XF8-16 has linear motors the XF10-24 has stepping motors. While the first one has a complete silent autofocus, the latter at times makes just a little bit of autofocus noise; nothing really distracting however.

The lack of an easy solution to mount ND (Neutral density) filters on the XF8-16, pretty much rules out this lens as a video lens. The zoom to an "almost" normal focal length (36mm full frame equivalent) on the XF10-24 makes it also more versatile for video.

Like its weight, the new lens is double the price as the XF10-24; the MSRP is 2000,-USD, although there currently seems to be a 500,-USD rebate/discount in some places at the time of publication. Is the new lens, double as good compared to the XF10-24? Of course it isn't, but this is the price we pay for having the best image quality!

I won't be showing you any specific image sharpness comparisons but the little bit of testing I did do, shows that the XF 8-16 is noticeable sharper in the corners especially at the wider focal lengths, especially wide open; when stopping down the XF10-24 a little, the center sharpness becomes a much closer match to the newer lens. If you want the best image quality, the XF 8-16 f2.8 is definitively better, although I've never been disappointed with the XF10-24 neither. 

The XF 8-16 is a rectilinear, which makes for distortion free shooting, even at 8mm, as long as one holds the sensor parallel to the plane of the subject and perpendicular to the vertical lines. Needless to say that depending on the subject distance and placement, the wide-angle will show perspective distortion, but that is merely physics and not a lens flaw.

Lastly I'm particularly impressed by the sunstars the lens creates at smaller apertures. 

Check out the real life images I shot over the two week test period. As always, I'm a photographer and not a pixel peeping, so images are shot in RAW and edited. No distortion editing has been done on the images.

1/250s, f5.6, ISO 200, 13mm

1/600s, f11, ISO 250, 16mm

1/240s, f11, ISO 160, 15mm

1/340s, f16, ISO 160, 12mm

13s, f11, ISO 160, 11mm

1/250s, f16, ISO 320, 8mm

1/140s, f11, ISO 400, 11mm

1s, f2.8, ISO 12800, 16mm

1/1400s, f5.6, ISO 160, 12mm

1/240s, f10, ISO 160, 10mm

1/350s, f11, ISO 160, 16mm

1/350s, f9, ISO 250, 16mm

70min, f2.8, ISO800, 8mm


This is a question I often ask myself when reviewing gear... 

I personally see this lens as a great piece of glass for wedding, concert and other event photographers. 

Architectural photographers will also find good use in this lens for shooting exteriors and interiors. Although many are also waiting for a Fujifilm tilt shift lens to hit the X-series (and or GFX) lens road map. 

One might not think of the XF 8-16 f2.8 as being a "sport lens", but I definitively see a lot of potential where one can shoot close to the atlete/player; things like skateboarding, sailing, mountain biking, motorcross, etc... all come to mind!

Last but not least are of course landscape and astro photographers which often use ultra wide angle lenses! These will appreciate the wide f2.8 aperture of the lens, the good corner sharpness and of course the fact that the lens is weather sealed.

In summary the new XF 8-16 f2.8 lens is somewhat of a specialist list. As long as one knows how to use the wide angle perspective creatively, this lens will allow you to stand out with a unique look. As a red label lens it is not cheap, but worth every penny as long as you have a specific purpose for it!

The above review can be shared on Social media and Blogs without prior approval, as long as credit to Bjorn Moerman PHOTOGRAPHY ( is given.  

No comments: