In 2024 I did a fresh review of the nearly ten year old Fujinon XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR lens, and I concluded that it was due an update. It was clear that it hadn’t been engineered with future high resolution bodies in mind, and the current 40MP sensor in a camera like my X-H2 was fairly punishing to it. Fuji was clearly in the same headspace, and at the end of the 2024 they announced and released a Mark II version of the lens, and it is a great update. It’s both smaller and lighter and yet sharper at the same time, moves into some new territory in terms of at least one feature, and comes to market at the same MSRP as the original ($1199 USD). Is this a home run for Fuji? Find out in either the thorough video review or by reading on in the text review!
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review copy of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own. I’m doing this review on a 40MP Fujifilm X-H2 camera.You can visit the product page for the 16-55mm II here.
The very first thing that I noticed is how much smaller the new lens is. I’ve never owned the original lens, but I have used it for extended periods on multiple occasions, including on several trips, so I was very familiar with the size and weight of the previous lens. The new version is slimmer, shorter, and much lighter (37% according to Fuji), making for a lens that is more natural fit on a wider variety of Fuji’s cameras. I not only used it on my X-H2, but also on the new X-M5, which is one of the smallest of Fuji’s bodies. The lens felt a little big there, but that’s mostly because the camera has almost no grip. On most of the bodies, the new 16-55 II will be a comfortable fit due to the reduced size and weight. You can see just how much smaller the new lens looks when placed side by side with the original.
This is extremely important, as lenses like the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DN coming to the platform had really highlighted just how unnecessarily large the older lens was. The new 16-55 II is still substantially larger than either the Sigma or the new Fuji 16-50mm F2.8-4.8, but that is perhaps to be expected considering that it has the largest zoom range, the constant F2.8 aperture, and is more feature rich than either of the other lenses.
But look how much the older lens towered over the competition:
But all of that would be in vain if this new lens wasn’t up to the task of handling Fuji’s high resolution 40MP sensors. Fortunately that isn’t a problem, and the new lens is capable of providing excellent sharpness and contrast on my X-H2.
My conclusion was that I was unsure the old lens was worth the price premium relative to the compact little Sigma (which I added to my own Fuji kit). Has that conclusion changed with the new lens? We’ll find out in today’s review…
Build and Handling
I’ll start this section by highlighting the fact that Fuji has FINALLY updated their lens feature formula a little bit here. Fuji’s main lens feature has always been the inclusion of an aperture ring, which is why most of their lenses have an “R” in the name, which stands for Ring. Despite their cameras becoming increasingly video focused (my X-H2 can shoot up to 8K video!), Fuji had never updated their lenses to the modern standard where the ability to declick the aperture is essentially for video work. A declicked aperture can be smoothly “racked” through the aperture options during video shots, allowing more or less to come into focus due to the aperture change. That has changed, and the 16-55 II becomes the first XF lens from Fuji to receive an option to declick the aperture.
The aperture otherwise works as before, with light clicks at one third stop apertures but markings only at full stops. When declicked, those clicks disappear and allow you to move smoothly through the aperture options. There is a locking mechanism that you need to depress if you want to move out of the manual range and into automatic (camera) control. Fuji has increased the amount of aperture blades from 9 to 11, allowing for more consistently circular specular highlights when the lens is stopped down.
Fuji’s standard is for AF | MF to be controlled from the camera, typically in the form of a camera-mounted lever, so there are no other buttons or switches on the lens. So far the idea of custom buttons seems to be reserved for telephoto lenses and not other lenses like this, which is a shame considering that those custom buttons can be a handy way to have additional control while shooting.
The front of the lens is occupied with first the zoom ring, and then the manual focus ring. The zoom ring isn’t as nicely damped as what I would expect for a premium lens, and I found it difficult to smoothly zoom during video capture.
The manual focus experience is only so-so as well, feeling like focus takes place in steps or chunks rather than a smooth linear movement.
The 16-55 II is a WR lens, meaning that it has weather resistance. That weather sealing takes the form of a gasket at the lens mount along with internal seals plus a fluorine coating on the front element to resist oil and moisture). This is very handy as you can continue to use the lens with confidence even when the weather turns a bit sour (providing you are shooting on a weather sealed camera).
It’s worth looking at a comparison of specs across some competitors, including the older lens (which remains on the market at the moment at a slightly discounted price).
The new lens has shrunk in basically all dimensions. It is 78.3mm in diameter (3.1″), whereas the older lens was 83.3mm (3.28″). It is only 95mm in length (3.7″) relative to the 106mm (4.17″) of the older lens. But it is the weight which is the most surprising, dropping from 655g (23oz) to just 410g (14.5oz). The difference between the 16-55 II and the Sigma 18-55mm is just 135g, while the difference with the older lens was a whopping 370g! This allows even the front filter size to shrink from 77mm to 72mm.
The inner barrel will extend an additional 27mm when zoomed to 55mm.
Fuji’s design language hasn’t really changed much over the years, so the look of this lens isn’t radically different, though the shape is a little more sculpted. It’s a nice looking lens, however, with just a little more gloss that speaks of it being a newer design.
A petal shaped lens hood is included. It’s plastic and ribbed on the inside to prevent stray light from bouncing around in there. It doesn’t have a lock, but it does bayonet firmly into place with a definite click.
It is always worth noting the zoom range here, which is incredibly useful. It goes wide (16mm), which is the equivalent of 24mm on full frame.
It zooms into 55mm, which is the equivalent of 84mm on full frame.
That gets you all the way into prime territory for portraits, which certainly adds to the value of the lens. There’s a lot of framing options even in a casual setting.
Another key area of improvement by Fuji is the amount of magnification. What’s interesting is that both lenses tout the same minimum focus distance of 30cm, but the new lens has a much higher 0.21x magnification relative to the 0.16x of the older lens. That can probably be attributed to some focus breathing by the older lens, whereas the new lens performs better up close.
I saw good results at close focus distance, like a close up of this tiny crystal piano’s keyboard.
It’s hard to complain about a lens that has managed to shed so much weight and still be effective.
Stills Autofocus
I’ll preface this section by saying that A) the 16-55 II is perhaps the best focusing XF lens that I’ve used to date and B) that the autofocus on Fuji cameras remains frustratingly behind what I find on other platforms. The most recent 5.x firmware updates for my X-H2 have made some improvements to stills autofocus, and I see less of a gap with the 16-55 II attached. Video autofocus remains a bit frustrating, however. With a first party lens like this, it becomes impossible to parse out what behavior is camera-specific and which is lens specific. I’ll elaborate on individual performance in the section below, but I do want to add the caveat that (for Fuji) this is a really fantastic autofocusing lens.
The 16-55 II is equipped with LM, or a linear motor. This is the superior motor that Fuji uses, and it shows in quieter and faster performance than lenses equipped with a micro motor. This is a more reactive motor, making the 16-55 II an excellent choice if you need to keep up with moving children or other active subjects.
I found the 16-55 II to be a nice lens to use for capturing family moments over the holiday. The flexible zoom range made it easy to quickly grab shots, and the quick autofocus delivered accurately focused results.
Zooming deep into the image shows that focus is just where I want it.
Besides my own personal X-H2, I did use the 16-55 II extensively during my review of the Fujifilm X-M5, and it also focused well there even if the lens is perhaps a little big for that tiny body.
I can hear a very light whirring if I put my ear next to the lens barrel during autofocus, but it is otherwise pretty silent.
Video AF
I find video AF pretty frustrating on Fuji There tend to be more obvious steps in video pulls, the touchscreen is often unresponsive in trying to force autofocus changes, and tracking isn’t as sophisticated. I did note both some good and bad here. Video focus pulls were somewhat better than average, as the linear motor manages to avoid the obvious steps that I typically see with lenses equipped with either micromotors or STM motors. What isn’t avoided, however, is the microadjustments that inevitably take place when focus gets to the subject. There will be small adjustments where focus goes in and out, and it can be distracting.
On a positive note, focus breathing is fairly low, making focus changes feel more cinematic and less abrupt.
In the past I have avoided filming my static “talking head” portions of my YouTube video with any Fuji gear because of having focus jump around. I saw enough positive here to venture a fresh test, and was happy to find that focus stayed stable during the roughly one minute long test that I filmed.
I also tested a reactiveness sequence where I walked towards the camera and moved in and out of frame to see how the camera/lens reacted. This did not go well on X-M5, with the camera losing tracking early on and leaving me completely out of focus as I approached the camera. The X-H2 did better with the 16-55 II, tracking me fairly consistently (if not perfectly) as I moved consistently towards the camera. There’s a bit of a lag before focus is picked up if I step out of frame and then back in, but it did pick me back up. For Fuji, this is a pretty good performance.
Likewise, with my hand test (where I alternately block and then unblock the camera’s view of my face with my hand) went relatively well. Transitions from my hand to my face went fairly well, though sometimes with a bit of lag where it was as if the camera was deciding whether or not to transition focus. But when the reaction happened, there’s enough speed there to execute fairly quickly.
Bottom line is that while Fuji has work to do on the autofocus front (upgraded hardware rather than just software, I think), the Fujinon XF 16-55mm is making more of the existing hardware than any lens I can remember testing outside of the killer XF 200mm F2.
Image Quality Breakdown
I could immediately tell that, unlike the older 16-55mm lens, the new 16-55 II is designed with the ultra high resolution 40MP X-Trans sensor (similar pixel density to over 90MP on a full frame sensor) in mind. It does not get embarrassed by the high resolution sensor.
Not only does this image look great when viewed full (good color, good general contrast), but it also looks great in the details even though I’ve had to recover some of the shadowed information on Nala’s face due to the extreme backlighting.
The optical formula is 16 elements in 11 groups, with a majority of those being exotic elements, including 4 aspherical, 3 ED elements, and 1 super ED element. two of those being aspherical elements and one being an extra low dispersion element. If you look at the MTF charts, you’ll see a lens that would have been flawless on the lower resolution cameras of the past but manages to still be strong on very high resolution cameras today.
The MTF chart for the 16mm end shows very impressive center and mid-frame results, but a pretty step drop (particularly on the meridional access) near the corners. The telephoto end is equally impressive in the center and midframe and has a more linear drop to the corners.
The bottom line is that this is easily now the strongest standard zoom performer, topping my previous winner (the Sigma 18-50mm) with noticeably more contrast and significantly less fringing.
There is of course more to lens performance than pure sharpness and contrast, but it’s reassuring that the most expensive standard zoom on the platform is back to being the strongest performing lens.
So let’s jump into some of the details.
First of all, how about vignette and distortion? The lens has been downsized significantly – did that come at a price? This is one of the primary areas where I would expect that to show up.
We’ll start on the wide (16mm) end:
There’s a lot of barrel distortion here, but no more than before. I had to use a +22 to correct the barrel distortion, but, unlike the competing lenses, there isn’t any mustache pattern and the correction is very linear. What has increased (by a significant amount) is the amount of vignette. I needed a +48 to correct vignette on the first generation lens, but that amount has nearly doubled to a +91 to correct it here. It would appear that vignette is the thing that engineers had to compromise on to get the smaller size.
On the telephoto (55mm) the distortion has inverted to a pincushion distortion. It is significant, requiring a -13 to correct. Vignette is only slightly less, requiring a still very heavy +84 to correct for it. Fuji’s corrections are good, so in most situations the corrected image will look fine, but just know that when shooting in low light conditions (higher ISOs), there will be additional noise in the corners because of so much correction.
Longitudinal chromatic aberrations are extremely well controlled on either my test chart or in real world images.
There’s a huge advantage here for the Fuji lens over the Sigma 18-50mm, as that lens suffers quite badly from fringing.
Lateral chromatic aberrations show up near the edge of the frame in transitions from dark to light areas. You can see from the edge of my test chart Fuji has also nailed this metric, and there is next to no fringing in the transitions from black to white.
The vignette and resolution performance isn’t great, but the control of chromatic aberrations is.
So how about resolution? The 40MP Fuji X-Trans sensor tends to make all but the very sharpest of lenses look a little soft when viewed at high magnification levels, and it just so happens that my review standard is to examine results at a 200% magnification. That is a lot to ask of any lens, and the previous generation lens just didn’t really hold up under this level of scrutiny. Can the second generation lens pass the test? Here’s a look at the test chart that crops throughout the review come from:
And here is a look at the F2.8 crops at 16mm from the center, then mid-frame, and then extreme lower right corner:
That’s a nice strong performance, with consistently good results at all points. I also saw very good centering, with consistently good performance in all four corners.
This is about the only point where the XF 16-50mm can compare (at least in the center), as it has the same focal length and aperture, and can deliver similar levels of sharpness.
If we jump up into the upper left corner, however, we can see the superior performance of the 16-55 II.
Likewise the Sigma holds up pretty well in the center, but the corner performance is night and day.
Stopping down to F4 shows an uptick in detail and contrast. The midframe results, in particular, highlight that improvement.
I don’t see much of a change from F4-F8, with results being uniformly pretty excellent. Landscape images look great.
Because minimum aperture is F22, diffraction on a high resolution body like this is going to be more obvious. The results through F11 aren’t bad, but at F16 and F22, the softness from diffraction gets very obvious.
Moving on to 23mm (the next marked spot on the zoom ring) shows even stronger sharpness and contrast all across the frame…right into the corners.
Real world images in this range look fantastic.
Moving on to 35mm I found some give and take at F2.8. Some spots in the frame favored the 23mm test, and other spots favored the 35mm capture.
Real world images at 35mm look very good.
Finally the all important telephoto end. Comparing 55mm to 35mm shows a slight improvement at 55mm in the center.
Corners show a bit more of a drop-off (as the MTF suggested), and the 35mm result is definitely stronger looking.
I shot roughly equally at 16mm and 55mm, and I was happy with the results at both ends of the zoom range. Real world 55mm shots showed good contrast and detail.
I feel pretty comfortable in saying that this is the most consistently excellent APS-C standard zoom that I’ve tested. Sharpness is good all through that zoom range with no real weak point.
Fuji also always delivers good color in their glass, so I like the overall look of images, too. Colors are rich.
I feel like photos have more of a prime-like rendering.
The bokeh quality is fairly good for a standard zoom, though will be somewhat situational. Shots with a favorable ratio between the distance to the subject and the distance to the background look pretty good.
Geometry is pretty good. Specular highlights are rounder than some competing lenses.
If we dive a little deeper into those specular highlights, though, we can see a little more inner outlining than what I would prefer.
That means that some situations will look a little busier when that ratio isn’t as favorable.
Overall, however, I would say the bokeh is pretty decent considering A) how sharp the lens is and B) the fact that it is a zoom.
Flare resistance is also quite good. The lens is able to hold up to the bright sun through the window here, for example:
Shooting right into the sun for a landscape style shot is also no problem.
Stopping down will show a tiny bit more ghosting artifacts, but nothing concerning at all.
In general, image quality is pretty great. Fuji has delivered in producing a standard zoom that is an optical match for their high resolution cameras. You can check out the image gallery if you’d like to see more.
Conclusion
I have to confess that I was initially concerned after Fuji released their first cameras with the 40MP sensors. It seemed like most of the lenses that I put on the camera looked pretty soft…including a few new releases. But lenses like the 23mm F1.4 WR, 33mm F1.4 WR, 56mm F1.2 WR, and now this 16-55mm F2.8 II have started to set my mind at ease. These are all lenses that are clearly designed with this higher resolution sensor in mind, and they are able to shine even on this most demanding of platforms.
The 16-55 II feels like the premium lens in the class now, as it should. I still like the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8, but there’s no question that the 16-55 II outclasses it optically. It’s more consistently sharp, has better autofocus, more features, and just produces richer images.
Despite the weight loss regimen, the Fujinon XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II is still the bigger and heavier than competing lenses, and its unquestionably more expensive. But it’s also unequivocally the best, and if you are going to use one of Fuji’s high resolution sensors, it is probably worth investing in. I’m certainly considering one.
Keywords: Fuji 16-55mm II, Fujinon 16-55 II, Fuji, Fujinon, XF, AF, Autofocus, 16-55mm, F2.8, R, WR, LM Weathersealing, Fuji 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II Review, f/2.8, Fuji X, Fujifilm, X-mount, APS-C, Review, Telephoto, Action, Tracking, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Fujifilm X-T5, Fujifilm X-H2, let the light in, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Fujifilm scored a huge hit with their X-100VI and its retro-cool design and fixed lens. But there are plenty of people who like the vibe but want the ability to use more than one lens. Enter the new Fujifilm X-M5, which has a similar cool vibe but uses Fuji’s ubiquitous X-mount that can host probably more than a hundred different lenses from a variety of brands at this point. It utilizes Fuji’s 26MP X-Trans sensors, has their most recent focus algorithms, and also boasts a deeper video component than many competitors. So is this new Fujifilm X-M5 worth considering over the competition? Find out by watching my video review below…or keep reading.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review loaner of this camera. As always, this is a completely independent review, and the thoughts and opinions expressed here are my own.
So what are the major competitors to this camera? The closest competitor that springs to mind is the similarly vlog-focused Sony ZV-E10II that I reviewed in 2024. That camera costs more (+ $200), has slightly lower video specs, but also has a more robust autofocus system.
There’s also the Canon EOS R10, Nikon Z50II, and even the long in the tooth Sony a6400 might be worth considering, as while it is five years old now, its AF system still beats what Fuji can deliver. Autofocus is improved on the X-M5 over previous models, but unfortunately this does remain the Achilles heel for Fuji products. But Fuji brings its own strengths, including more stylish design, its famous film simulations, and up to 6K30 video recording specs.
If you are looking for a stylish vlogging camera, want to travel light, or generally want to keep things as compact as possible without compromising on imaging, the X-M5 might just be the camera for you. And, at $799 USD for the camera alone or just $899 for a kit including the XC 15-45mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens, the Fujifilm X-M5 offers a very compelling value.
I’ve got a few complaints that I’ll detail as well, but there’s a lot to praise here…so let’s dive in.
Spec List
26.1MP APS-C X-Trans 4 CMOS Sensor
Latest AI-Assisted Processing Algorithms
6.2K/29.97 fps Video, 10-Bit Internal
425-Point AF, AI-Based Subject Detection
Up to 30 fps JPEG Shooting w/ 1.25x Crop
Compatible with X-Series Lenses
3.0″ 1.04m-Dot Tilting Touchscreen LCD
SD/SDHC/SDXC Card Slot
Wi-Fi and Bluetooth Wireless Connections
*XC 15-45mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS PZ Lens (if purchased in kit)
Some of the biggest omissions to the feature list include a viewfinder of any kind along with having no camera-based stabilization.
Build and Features
The X-M5 does have some visual connections to the X100VI, particularly in the silver edition that I’ve reviewed here (a standard black finish is also available). It shares a similar topline, the tiny bulge of the grip, and a somewhat similar top control scheme.
Fuji has forged a reputation for retaining a more analog control scheme that relies more on dials that touchscreens (a good thing, as Fuji’s touchscreens remain unimproved in the more than six years I’ve been reviewing their products). That’s less true here, however, and the main concession to that aesthetic is the film simulation dial on the left side of the topline of the camera.
This allows you quick access to Fuji’s film simulations, though, frankly, this is going to appeal more to people who shoot JPEGs than those who shoot RAWs, as shooting with a preselected film simulation doesn’t affect a RAW image on import. Case in point is that I turned the dial to PROVIA for the shot on the left and then VELVIA for the shot on the right. The JPEGs will look different, with much more saturation on the VELVIA image, but the two RAW files arrived in Lightroom looking identical:
If you are a JPEG shooter and love Fuji’s film simulation, this quick access dial is going to be great. For me (a RAW shooter), it is a waste, as I would strongly prefer an extra control dial, and thus far I haven’t found a way to assign a different function to that Film simulation dial. Also somewhat odd is the fact that the front command dial has to serve multiple functions, which are accessed by clicking the dial in (each click will cycle through the default 3 options in sequence unless customized otherwise). One of those default functions is film simulations, but this feels very redundant when there is a large dedicated dial for this function already on the top of the camera.
The X-M5 is a very slim and stylish camera, but that stylish exterior does come at the cost of ergonomic practicality. You’ll note from the comparison above that out of the competing cameras the X-M5 is by far the slimmest. It’s just 38mm (1.5″) deep, which means that the grip is nearly nonexistent. There is a very slight bulge on the right side of the camera that serves as the grip, but there’s nowhere near enough depth there to actually wrap your fingers around. This is more a camera that you pinch rather than one that settles into your grip. The minimal height of the camera also means that my pinky has no place to go and has to float underneath the camera. This is a camera that is better suited to smaller, lighter lenses, and you probably won’t want to often use the larger, heavier telephoto lenses with the camera. Even the new XF 16-55mm F2.8 II, which is considerably smaller than the first generation lens, feels a little awkward in balance.
You can see from this shot of the battery compartment that the grip above is a just a little bump. There’s very little to hang onto. I personally don’t find this camera very easy to hang onto, though your mileage may vary. The flipside of this design is that it takes the portability way up. Pair this with a pancake style lens (an X-mount version of Viltrox’s 28mm F4.5 VCM would be perfect!) and you would truly have a pocketable camera. The camera is 111.9 (W) x 66.6 (H) x 38mm (D) or 4.4 x 2.6 x 1.5″. The weight is just 355g (12.5oz) without a battery or memory card. That’s a little heavier than the Sony ZV-E10 II, and a little lighter than the Canon EOS R10.
You might also note from above that there is no room in that grip for a battery, so the battery sits laterally in the camera. The NP-W126S is a relatively small 1260mAh unit that is rated for as much as 440 frames in “Economy mode” but drops to 330 frames in normal mode. Economy mode reduces performance of both the LCD screen and the autofocus system, so that probably isn’t going to work for most people most of the time, particularly considering the LCD is the only way to compose with the X-M5. That battery charge is also only good for about 45 minutes of 6.2K or 4K60 recording. You probably want to pick up a spare battery or two.
The second disappointment is that the memory card is housed there. I hate this position as it makes it far more likely that you’ll walk away without a memory card inserted because you have to close the battery door to set the camera down (happened to me!) If you have a tripod QR plate attached you also won’t be able to open the door to get at the card without removing it first. I also couldn’t figure out a way to just attach a USB-C cable and directly transfer images to my computer. That meant that I either had to do without my Peak Design capture plate that I put on all my cameras to make them easy to attach to either straps or tripods, or I had to use a hex key to remove the plate every time I needed to access the memory card. I really, really dislike this card position, and it is made worse here because the card is located on the far right of the bay, closer to the center of the camera and the 1/4″ tripod socket.
The card slot is only UHS-1 compatible, but that seems to be enough for steady data flow for the 6K30 footage. Buffer depth (as we’ll explore later) is pretty decent as well thanks to the more reasonable 26MP (rather than 40MP) resolution of the sensor.
While the X-M5 has some of the retro aesthetic that Fuji does so well, the control scheme (outside of the film simulation dial) is pretty routine. As a personal preference, I actually like even my compact cameras to be big enough to have decent ergonomics. Controls are not bad here, but there’s a few questionable decisions in with the good. You can see from the top plate (where most of the controls are) that there is a mode dial and a rear control dial in addition to the film simulation dial. The rear control dial is a little stiff, but works well enough. What I really don’t like is the tiny, tiny Q menu button between those two dials. It is hard to access with a bare fingertip, and impossible when wearing gloves (I’m doing a winter review).
The rear buttons above the LCD screen are also very small, and those wearing gloves will also find them a little difficult.
The drive/garbage button is harder still to access due to the prominent port for the mic input. Mic ports are usually on the side. I don’t mind this position in a small camera, as it has good proximity to the hot shoe where the mic will likely be mounted, but it does make the adjacent button a little difficult to access.
This includes a headphone monitoring jack, which is important on a video-centric camera like this. A second port has a USB-C port that can be used for either data or charging the battery in camera, and a micro-HDMI port. I don’t love micro-HDMI (it feels more fragile), but obviously there isn’t room in a camera this size for a full size HDMI port.
On the positive note, there is a little navigational joystick that helps with menu navigation. On the negative side, however, there is no full menu navigation by touch, which isn’t true of most of the competing (non-Fuji) cameras. There are two other buttons below this for further control.
The limited touch capacity makes navigating Fuji’s menus a little clunkier than other cameras where you can use whatever combination of touch and/or physical control that you like. I’m mostly frustrated here because I haven’t seen any progress on this front in all the time I’ve been using Fuji. The reactiveness of what touch is there (touch to focus, navigating the Q-menu, etc…) feels imprecise and with a lower reactiveness than competing cameras.
Another disappoint regarding the screen is a fairly low resolution. This is a 3″ fully articulating screen (which I personally like!), but the resolution is just 1.04 million dots. That’s not great when the screen is your only compositional tool. There is no viewfinder. While the screen has reasonable brightness, it is definitely very hard to see in bright, sunny conditions. There were many times in those situations where I instinctively began to bring the camera up to my eye only to remember that there was no viewfinder.
Also missing is one of Fuji’s useful control points – an easy to use switch that controls the focus mode (Manual, Continuous, and Single Shot). This is more missed on Fuji than other cameras because most Fuji lenses do not have an AF | MF switch because this is usually handled by a camera-based switch.
All we have on front is the aforementioned control dial and a lens release button located on the right side of the lens mount.
The shutter is threaded in a typical Fuji fashion, and surrounding it is the ON/OFF toggle. You can choose either a mechanical style shutter with a 1/4000th shutter speed limit, or an electronic shutter that can reach a much higher 1/32,000th shutter speed. Fuji has a nice hybrid option where you can choose to use the mechanical shutter for slower shutter speeds (with all of the advantages that come with a mechanical shutter) and then automatically switch to the electronic shutter when faster shutter speeds are needed.
The X-M5 is compatible with Fuji’s FAN-001 cooling fan accessory. It seems like most of their recent cameras with a fully articulating screen can use this. It’s an interesting (if somewhat clunky) interesting concept, as it plugs into the body in the port pictured above with the screen rotated out and actively cools the camera chassis to extend video recording time. You aren’t going to be able to close the screen with the FAN-001 attached (for obvious reasons), but it seems like a fairly intelligent solution to a common problem for those focused on long format video capture at higher bitrates and resolution levels. I didn’t have the FAN-001 on hand, but here’s what it looked like attached to the X-S20.
The X-M5 is a very cool looking compact camera that definitely wins style points, though, as per usual, the compact nature of the camera comes with some serious ergonomic challenges.
To me, going back to my X-H2 was a treat, but I’m more of a fan of more conventional controls and chunkier camera bodies. If you want small, and compact, the X-M5 may be perfect for you.
Kit Lens
I’ll take a moment to give you a look at the potential kit lens, which is the XC 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 OIS PZ. Bought in kit, it will only set you back an additional $100, but bought separately it will cost three times as much! You’ll obviously want to make that decision before purchasing the camera!
This is a useful focal length, and I will give some credit for having a slightly brighter aperture than some competing lenses (F6.3 is pretty common on the telephoto end). The lens also provides OIS (Optical Image Stabilization), which could be important since the camera body itself has no stabilization.
I also appreciate the fact that while the lens is a retractable zoom design (the inner barrel emerges when the lens is powered on), it doesn’t require a manual twist to make the lens usable like Canon’s RF kit lenses do (a feature I hate!!)
The lens is a PZ, or Powerzoom lens, which means that the zooming mechanism is motorized. When you twist the larger of the two rings the lens will zoom either in or out depending on the direction. This allows for smoother zooming than you can accomplish with a typical twisting zoom, making it useful if you want zooming shots. In the VLOG mode you will also get on-screen zoom controls that will allow you another option for zooming.
A kit lens can be useful in a few scenarios: 1) if you are new to photography or to Fuji and don’t have any lenses. Buying a kit lens means that you can immediately start taking pictures, and at $100, the XC 15-45mm offers a low cost point of entry. 2) If you want a general purpose video zoom. The lens is lightweight, has a useful focal range, and gives you some stabilization.
But there’s a good chance you’ll quickly want an optical upgrade, particularly for stills. Kit lenses tend to be cheap for a reason, and that’s true here right down to the plastic lens mount. Sometimes video is a little less demanding for optical performance, but for stills I sometimes find the image quality rather soft.
Fortunately there are a lot of great, inexpensive options for sharper image quality (particularly if you are willing to use prime lenses, or those with a single focal length). Zoom lenses are fewer and more expensive, but I’m very fond of the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DN, which I reviewed here. You can see the Sigma’s sharpness advantage in the center:
…and along the edges of the frame, where it has noticeably stronger contrast.
It’s also considerably more expensive, however, so if you’re on a tight budget, the kit lens at least gives you a functional lens, and I’ve definitely seen worse kit lenses.
Vlogging Mode
One of the key features of the X-M5 that positions it to directly compete with a camera like the Sony ZV-E10 II is the dedicated vlogging mode and associated features. We’ve already noted that when you turn the mode dial to “VLOG”, completely different screen controls appear. New options include zoom control (if a powerzoom is present). When I attached the non-PZ XF 16-50mm F2.8-4.8, that option disappeared. Other new controls include record (to begin or end video record), playback, and then a menu button.
If you touch the menu option, a number of other options will arrive displayed around the edges of the screen.
It’s a little frustrating in one sense, as while the touchscreen still isn’t amazingly responsive, it does show that Fuji is capable of doing more with their touch capabilities. There are a decent amount of menu options here, and that gives you more direct access to some of these controls. It’s also worth noting that these controls can be easily accessed if you have the touchscreen facing you in “selfie mode”, which could save a bit of frustration of going back and forth.
But it isn’t just software, as the X-M5 also has hardware upgrades to the audio recording. According to Fuji, “(the) FUJIFILM X-M5 is the first X Series model to feature three built-in microphones for the highest-quality audio. Four different audio modes are available: Surround, Front Priority, Back Priority, or Front & Back Priority, giving the flexibility to get crystal-clear sound from any direction.”
If you touch the Mic option on the touchscreen, you’ll get a nicely illustrative menu that gives you the four different options for sound recording.
Because there are actually multiple mics, these options will in fact really change the way that sound is recorded by the camera. There’s a bit less of an obvious difference between the “surround sound” and “front/rear” (1st and 4th options) if there isn’t a lot of sound to the sides, but there is a very obvious difference in the sound if you are selecting either front or back modes. I tested in vlogging mode, with the camera faced towards me, and when I had the rear only mode engaged my voice was recorded at a much lower level and a different sound quality than when the front microphones were activated.
The best sound in many cases will come from using separate mics, but you definitely have more creative options here than are typical with most cameras using the built in mics.
There are a few other design elements that reflect modern content creation. There is a “Shorts” mode that allows you to record short clips (up to 60 seconds) in vertical mode…but without having to rotate the camera.
Also, in addition to being able to record high bitrates and high quality footage, you can also record at very low bitrates (as low as 8Mbps) to allow for quick sharing or transfer.
You’ll have a few other options regarding focus and the look of videos. Background defocus mode will simply choose the largest maximum aperture available on the lens you have attached so the background is blurred more, but that’s going to be limited to by your lens selection (don’t expect a strong background blur with the kit lens, for example). Portrait Enhancer will do some skin smoothing, with three levels of intensity that is user selectable. Product priority mode will set the autofocus to focus on anything that is moved towards the camera rather than staying locked on the presenter. It allows you to highlight a product or item you want the camera to focus on.
In many ways I was reminded of the ZV-E10 II, as a lot of these same features are making priority lists for these type of cameras.
Autofocus Performance
Ahhh, my least favorite section when reviewing Fuji cameras. Over the years that I’ve been reviewing Fuji I’ve seen a variety of improvements, but somehow the end result is always just falling further and further behind the competition. When I first reviewed the X-T3, I though the autofocus was fairly good (at least for stills) relative to, say, the Sony a6500 I owned at the time. But since that point Sony, Canon, and Nikon have all made great strides and have nearly perfected autofocus for stills and video, but Fuji’s AF has only made very incremental improvements. I’ve become convinced that what is needed is not the continual focus algorithm updates, or even the AI chip and tracking, but rather a more fundamental hardware improvement.
Fuji says, “FUJIFILM X-M5 features the same built-in AI-driven subject detection autofocus as FUJIFILM X100VI and X-T50 mirrorless digital cameras. Along with Fujifilm’s latest-generation image processor, this delivers incredible focus accuracy in nearly all lighting conditions, even if your subject is moving. X-Processor 5 features subject detection autofocus that is built withdeep-learning AI technology. In addition to providing incredible AF tracking and detection for human faces and eyes, FUJIFILM X-M5 can also automatically detect and track a broad range of subjects, including animals, birds, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, airplanes, trains, insects, and drones.
FUJIFILM X-M5 is equipped with Fujifilm’slatest predictive algorithm, recording subjects with highly accurate AF even in scenes requiring tracking of moving objects or in low-contrast environments. It tracks a wide range of subjects, including sports and animals, and subjects in motion.“
So yes, the X-M5 receives all of Fuji’s most recent autofocus improvements, but they are almost all software rather than hardware based. The underlying hybrid Contrast/Phase Detect autofocus system that has undergirded Fuji’s cameras for the past few generations is still in place (and in need of an upgrade!), but it has been augmented in the most recent generation of cameras with Fuji’s X-Processor 5.
This adds AI based deep learning for subject detection AF to accurately track a range of subjects. The system detects animals, birds, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, airplanes, trains, insects, and drones (though you choose “bird” to track insects and “airplane” to track drones). My experience with Fuji’s most recent autofocus in a variety of cameras is that the AF system definitely works best when there is a trackable subject in frame.
The most recent firmware updates to cameras like my X-H2 and what’s present in the X-M5 do feel like a more significant improvement in terms of stills autofocus. I found that things don’t feel too far behind my other cameras for shooting stills.
Obviously focus is going to depend somewhat on the lens you have attached, but using the most recent generation of Fuji lenses produces good results (the new 16-55mm F2.8 II was used for the shot above). I did notice in my “around the house” shots that I’ve gotten very accustomed to having IBIS in my cameras, and I wasn’t quite as attentive to shutter speed as I should be, resulting in some unexpected motion blur in some of my shots captured with the X-M5.
I’m not sure I would treat this as an action camera. Fuji’s tracking capabilities vary quite bit according to what lens is attached, but even at its best it doesn’t quite match what other brands can do. More relevant here, however, is that tracking action (particularly in varying lighting conditions) without a viewfinder is TOUGH.
The burst speeds here vary according to what shutter is being used. The mechanical shutter has an upper limit of 8FPS, which does place it behind some of the competing cameras. You have the option to switch into electronic shutter mode, however, and get up to 20FPS with the full sensor and then up to 30FPS with a sports crop of 1.25x. These electronic shutter burst rates are faster than what competing cameras offer. As per usual, however, there will be some limitations with the electronic shutter in a camera that doesn’t have a particularly fast readout speed. Here’s a breakdown of some of the primary burst rates along with the buffer depth per file size and compression.
The lower resolution point of 26MP (relative to their 40MP sensor) helps considerably with buffer depth, as the JPEG buffer rates aren’t too bad, with as much as 173 frames (mechanical at 8FPS) or as little as 127 frames (electronic at 20FPS). If you try to get it all (Uncompressed RAW + JPEG), that buffer will fill really fast (in about a second)! The lossless compressed RAW (my preferred format) buffers are relatively shallow, but compressed RAW isn’t too bad. If this is your only camera, then by all means use it to capture action, but don’t buy this camera particularly for that purpose. Cameras without viewfinders are rarely top choices for capturing high speed action.
Fuji’s eye detection has definitely improved, with better recognition of the eye and better stickiness once the eye is acquired. One questionable ergonomic decision persists, however, in that Fuji separates human eye detection from AI detection of any other subject. This means that you have to separately access these two features, so if you want to assign eye detection to a button, for example, you can’t put both types of eye or subject detection on one button. I have to have two separate shortcuts set up on my X-H2, for example, which just means that you have one less thing you could map to your camera.
Some brands have started to add a smart auto subject detection mode, a move I applaud as it allows photographers to be more reactive to changing subjects and conditions. Fuji is improving in overall detection performance, but it does still lag somewhat behind competitors.
Video Autofocus
Video focus has been the area where I feel like Fuji has fallen the most behind. I have been able to rely on face detection to provide stable footage for my review videos when I’m in front of the camera for years on my Sony and Canon cameras. I don’t hesitate to set up a tripod with a wide variety of lenses and get in front of it, knowing that focus will be rock solid during the video clip. I used to shoot at least a portion of my review videos with the lens or camera that I was testing, but I stopped doing that early on with Fuji reviews because often there would be so much hunting and focus slippage that my audience would complain about how distracting it was.
This area, at least with good lenses, has improved on the X-M5. I shot some test segments using the XF 16-55mm F2.8 II and got reliable focus results when I was sitting in front of the camera. I didn’t notice any focus pulsing or slippage, and focus remained solid during the clip of roughly one minute in length. That’s progress, and it shows that the AI detection is certainly helping.
I also had good results while moving along in selfie mode while walking through the forest and talking to the camera. Focus changes are minimal in that scenario (the subject is mostly a constant distance from the camera), but I did have to periodically duck under branches and focus stayed consistent. I could see in the articulated screen that the tracking box was staying locked on an eye, though it it would occasionally swap eyes.
Where things really fell apart is during persistent movement, however. I ran multiple tests where I stepped into frame, pause for a moment to give the camera a chance to detect me, and then walked towards the camera. While the camera initially picked me up, focus was quickly lost as I started to move, as you can see above. This is a relatively simple test that most cameras from other brands handle just fine, so that’s an area for concern if your video capture includes action.
Video Performance
Outside of the video autofocus performance, video performance is actually a relative strength relative to the competition. Most competing cameras will top out at 4K60 recording (some even at 4K30 like the Canon alternatives), but the X-M5 will allow for open gate 6K recording. What is open gate? It is essentially allow for the whole sensor to be recorded…in its native ratio. We are accustomed to seeing video in 16:9 ratio, which would look like this:
There are plenty of 16:9 crops (and even 17:9) crops available here, but the open gate 6K is using all of the pixels of the sensor for recording video just as it would for recording stills. That results in a 3:2 aspect ratio, which looks like this:
There’s obviously a whole lot more on frame that would have been cropped out in a 16:9 crop. It gives more flexibility to the videographer in post, as with those extra pixels they could more easily produce a vertical crop for a reel:
This is what enables the camera to do the short clips in 9:16 (vertical) while in vlogging mode. It is taking the crop from the open gate image rather than requiring the photographer to rotate the camera vertically.
So, just know that you won’t get 6K 16:9 footage. If you want to do the typical widescreen look, you will have to do a 16:9 crop in post. The good news is that you’ll have more flexibility on how you choose to frame those shots, as you can crop closer to the top or bottom than would normally be allowed.
4K60 recording is also available, though that does come with a mild 1.18x crop (though that is more than the ZV-E10 II and its 1.10x crop). 4K30 or 4K24 is shot without any crop.
Bitrates range from 8Mbps to 200Mbps, and footage will come in either the MOV or MP4 wrapper depending on your choices. Here’s a list of some of the bitrates and framerates available.
There are high speed full HD modes available in either 17:9 or 16:9 aspect ratios with framerates as high as 240FPS. These will be shot in the higher 200Mbps bitrates.
Both FLog 2 and HLG recording are available, and of course all of Fuji’s film simulations and your custom tweaks can be made. There is a digital stabilization available when shooting movies, though that does come with a pretty significant crop attached to it (as much as 1.44x, depending on shooting mode).
Footage generally looks good. It has nice detail and color. My computer doesn’t recognize the codecs on the open gate footage, however, so that might be something to watch for.
Image Quality
The X-M5 used Fuji’s familiar 26.1Mpx X-Trans sensor. I’ve reviewed at least half a dozen cameras with this same sensor. The sensor was originally developed for the X-T3, where Fuji said of the X-T3’s sensor, “[with] a newly developed sensor, the X-T3 features an APS-C-format 26.1MP X-Trans CMOS 4 sensor, which has a back-illuminated design to afford smooth tonal rendering, improved low-light performance, and a low native ISO 160 setting. As an X-Trans sensor, it still utilizes the randomized pixel array, too, which provides a high degree of image quality and sharpness due to the omission of an optical low-pass filter. Versus conventional pixel patterns, the X-Trans design more closely mimics the organic nature of film in order to produce nuanced colors and tonal transitions, while also reducing moiré and aliasing.”
It used to be that this was the higher resolution point of the Fuji X lineup, with a more standard Bayer 24MP sensor used on some lower models, but now a number of cameras utilize the higher resolution 40MP sensor. This 26MP sensor is a good but not exceptional one. I’ve spent time with and reviewed most all of the competition, so, my quick conclusion is that this sensor is a competitive but not a clear winner in any category. Sony’s 26MP sensor sports a little more dynamic range (about a half stop) but slightly inferior high ISO performance.
After reviewing at least ten cameras with Fuji’s X-Trans sensors, I can safely say I personally think that the disadvantages of the X-Trans sensors outweigh the advantages over traditional Bayer sensers being used by competitors. Fuji says that the X-Trans sensor produces a more film-grain-like noise pattern, I don’t really see it, and it is rare that I run into the real world moiré issues that X-Trans supposedly reduces.
Here’s a look at the various file sizes and framing options:
If you don’t want the technicalities, here’s a brief summation of the sensor performance. This sensor has a smaller native ISO range than cameras with the 40MP sensor, with an ISO range of 160-12,800 (those cameras have a base ISO of 125). Most competing camera from Sony or Canon have a larger ISO range that starts even lower at ISO 100. I like to charitably call this Fuji being conservative and avoiding the marketing extremes. I have found that Fuji competes well with, say, Sony, across most of its ISO range (things even out around ISO 12,800).
Likewise, Fuji’s sensors don’t quite have the same amount of dynamic range as competing Sony sensors (close to a stop less DR at base ISO), though the Fuji sensors are more competitive at higher ISO values. I found that shadow recovery is clean, but I start to see highlight clipping earlier on. Fuji does have a feature called DR200/DR400 that open up at higher ISO values (320/640) that will sample the highlight information from the base ISO while taking the midtone and shadow information from the selected ISO value. This does help the dynamic range to be more competitive.
I also find Fuji images a little more complex to sharpen, as the X-Trans sensors have a unique way of handling information.
But what the sensor does have is Fuji’s excellent color science. Many people love Fuji colors (myself included), and they include a number of their film simulations that can give a unique “feel” to images and/or video footage. I’m currently loving the REALA ACE profile for a great look that works well on a wide variety of images. Fuji also has a fantastic JPEG engine, so if you just want to take photos and not spend a lot of time editing them to get the look you want, you may really enjoy the Fuji approach. Fuji also does a great job with in camera correction profiles, and so often the JPEG output looks even better than what the RAW images might suggest is possible. Note: as there are no changes to the sensor itself, the following are results given from earlier reviews of this sensor (in this case from X-S20).
ISO Performance
The native ISO range of Fuji’s 26Mpx X-Trans sensor is more limited than alternatives from Sony or Canon, running from ISO 160 to 12,800, with an expanded range going down to ISO 80 and moving up to 51,200 on the high end. I personally don’t ever use expanded ISO ranges and consider them more marketing than actually useful.. The native range is usable throughout, and even images ISO 12,800 are perfectly usable in many situations. Here’s a look at an image and crop of a guitar taken at ISO 12,800:
There’s some obvious noise at a pixel level, but the basic image is perfectly useful. Here’s another image at ISO 12,800 where I’ve used the Fuji ACROS + G monochrome simulation, and I would argue that the noise in this image is quite film-like and pleasing.
So how about at lower extremes? At ISO 800 there is a tiny addition of noise only detectable in the shadows. There isn’t a lot of difference from base ISO, however, and moving on to ISO 1600 shows little difference. At ISO 3200 there is slightly less contrast and slightly more noise, but still at a very acceptable level:
That pattern continues at ISO 6400 and 12,800, where the noise becomes rougher and more visible in shadow areas, with 6400 being cleaner than ISO 12,800.
You can go up into an “extended” range that gives you the 25,600 and 51,200 options. The first might be usable in non-critical situations, but few people will be happy with what ISO 51,200 is going to give you for any kind of application.
I will say that ISO 25,600 in particular does do a good job of “color fastness”. If we step back and look at the images on a global level, we can see that the sensor has done a good job of keeping a consistent color balance without color shift or color banding.
This is a solid ISO performance, and this is at least one area where the older 26MP sensor found in the X-S20 is going to deliver better results than the larger resolution 40MP sensor of the X-H2 or X-T5.
Dynamic Range Performance
I value dynamic range within a camera in two specific areas: the ability to cleanly lift shadows without introducing noise or color banding and the ability to recover highlights without introducing “hot spots” where information has been permanently lost. The value of good dynamic range is in the margins of photography, as eliminating shadows or recovering blown out highlights doesn’t always produce the better image. Having good dynamic range (particularly if you shoot RAW), allows you a lot more creative vision over how the final image will turn out (particularly with Adobe’s new AI tech for getting more information out of the sky). This shot, for example, has all of the rich detail in the shadows and colors of the trunk of the fallen tree and the moss on it, but also allowed me to recover the sky rather than just a blown out mess. This shot was taken with the new Fujinon XF 8mm F3.5, which is a very sweet little lens, by the way.
Fuji has an extra trick up its sleeve to help you maximize dynamic range performance in such scenes, which we’ll get to in just a moment.
In my tests, I found that the X-S20 (or X-M5) did an excellent job of recovering shadows very cleanly. Here we have an image that I purposefully underexposed by four stops. As you can see in the original RAW image, there is very little information left there. In post I added those four stops back into the recovered image. What we find is an image that has been recovered with very little penalty. Contrast looks good and the image is nice and bright.
Here’s a look at that same image at a pixel level. We see little additional noise, no banding or discoloration, and a nice restoration of contrast to the image.
As is often the case, however, highlight recovery lags behind shadow recovery. While a 2 stop highlight recovery is nice and clean, by 3 stops the recovered image is not natural looking at all:
Moving beyond that is obviously a fools errand. But Fuji does have a nice workaround if you want more dynamic range. If you move beyond the base ISO to either ISO 320 or 640 (and beyond), two new options open up in the menu. These are DR200 and DR400. What these do is essentially split the sensor readout so that the shadow information is gathered from the current ISO setting while the highlight information comes from base ISO. At ISO 320 that gives you one additional stop in the highlights, while at ISO 640 you gain two. This allows you to overexpose the image slightly so that you have plenty of information in the shadows, but since there is one or two stops less exposure in the highlights, you have plenty of ability to recover blown out areas in post. A three stop highlight recovery using DR200 looks just fine:
I can go even further using DR400. Here’s a four stop overexposure (look how blown out the image is on the left), and how cleanly it recovers using DR400:
I certainly will often utilize this for landscape images when I’m shooting Fuji. My priority was exposing for the interesting textures of the little barn in this shot, but rather than a white, blown out sky, I was able to recover something interesting in the sky to add to the image.
I personally enable DR400 in camera, and then it is ready if I have to raise the ISO level (either intentionally or not). Dynamic range naturally diminishes as the ISO raises anyway, so it can be a way of getting better results when the ISO is up. That’s not to say that you should shoot this way all the time, as often retaining contrast and either crushed shadows or blown out highlights makes for a better photograph, but having this technique available to improve dynamic range certainly has its uses…just don’t go too crazy on those sliders!!
X-M5 Color
Color science is the one area where there is a fair amount of consensus on Fuji. It’s definitely something that Fuji does well, and I think it’s true both on the camera sensor side and in their optical glass. Fuji color tends to be really nice, with good saturation levels and a pleasing transition of color tones. I shot this image of a still lake with the 8mm F3.5 and the X-S20, and I think the colors look lovely.
Likewise a standard shot of the woods, where the greens look really rich but without feeling garish:
Fuji has long been famous for their excellent film simulations. Fuji is pretty much a JPEG shooter’s dream, as you can tweak your recipes to get images you love right out of camera. RAW images with film simulations will arrive (as usual) flat in Lightroom, as you can easily apply any of 20 film simulations in post.
Here’s an example from the X-T4 shown first with Adobe’s Landscape profile.
Now Astia (Soft)
Now Classic Chrome
Provia
Velvia
Eterna (Cinema)
Classic Chrome is little less saturated but often has a tasteful look to it. I find Velvia (which is Vivid) is often too intense for me, but can be great for landscapes. Provia is the Standard, and it is fairly neutral. Astia is “Soft”, and it’s another one I like. A more recent addition to Fuji’s portfolio (REALA ACE) is one of my favorites for general purpose use.
I also enjoy the monochrome film simulations and also the ability to go into the menus and tweak the look in several ways. For example, if I select Acros, I’ve got the added ability to select whether to apply a Yellow Filter (more contrast, darker skies), Red (slightly more extreme of yellow), or Green (for better skin tones). There is also an option to warm or cool the monochrome image in camera. You can move to near-sepia on the warm side and near-selenium on the cool side. This shot of a coiled rope looks great in Acros + R (red filter):
You can also control grain (if that’s your thing) in camera as well. Bottom line is that color science and the ability to manipulate color in camera remains a great strength for Fuji cameras…and you can utilize that same color science in video as well.
Conclusion
The Fujifilm X-M5 is a camera designed to appeal to a certain segment of the camera landscape. It will be Fuji’s lowest price current model at $799 USD (undercutting the X-T30 II by $100), but Fuji’s pivot to marketing it as a Vlog/creator’s camera is a potentially wise one. It does have a bit of the desirability factor of the X100VI, though as an interchangeable lens model.
It’s easy to define this camera by its shortcomings, but the truth of the matter is that the true competitors for this camera don’t have IBIS or even a viewfinder. Critiquing this model in particular for these lacks doesn’t seem just. I am more apt to critique the autofocus system which still lags noticeably behind competing cameras.
But Fuji also offers up a few more video features than competing cameras along with a great looking physical design. I don’t personally love the ergonomics here, but I could learn to live with them. Fuji’s rapidly growing library of first party and third party lenses is also a calling card, as no other brand is devoting as much attention to the APS-C space. If you can live with the shortcomings I’ve detailed here, the X-M5 is a solid option at its reasonable price tag of $800 USD.
Pros:
Cool retro style (particularly in silver!)
Interesting vlogging specific features
Microphones give options
More video features than competitors
AI Tracking upgrade
Huge video spec upgrade
Cheaper than competitors
More robust library of APS-C specific lenses on Fuji
Cons:
Limited grip means that I’m “pinching” the camera
Autofocus experience only so-so
Lack of viewfinder makes composing in bright light tough
Keywords: Fujifilm, X-M5, Fuji X-M5, Fujifilm X-M5, Fuji X-M5 Review, Fujinon, Dustin Abbott, Review, Sensor, Tracking, IBIS, Stabilization, Eye AF, XF, 40MP, 40 MP, Review, Hands On, Video Test, Sharpness, High ISO, Autofocus, Dynamic Range, 26MP, 26 MP, Lens, Comparison, Test, Dustinabbott.net, APS-C, X-Trans, letthelightin, DA #letthelightin, #DA, #Fujifilm
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
It’s been nearly 5 years since I’ve done my review of the Fujinon XF 56mm F1.2 R lens, which was regarded as one of the classic portrait options due to its large maximum aperture (F1.2) and classic 85mm equivalent angle of view (56mm x Fuji’s 1.5x crop factor = 84mm). My conclusion was that while the lens had some nice optics (more in the overall rendering rather than great sharpness at large apertures), the clunky focus motor, lack of weather sealing, and high price ($999 USD) left me somewhat underwhelmed. My conclusion was that this lens was only competitive on Fuji only because (at the time) Fuji was a closed platform, and Fuji XF shooters didn’t really have options. Thankfully, that is no longer true, as since that time Fuji has opened up their platform to alternatives, and at this point you can get half a dozen 56mm autofocusing third party lenses in X-mount, including two from Viltrox (56mm F1.4 reviewed here and newer 56mm F1.7 reviewed here), TTArtisan (AF 56mm F1.8, reviewed here), Sigma (56mm F1.4, reviewed here on Sony), Sirui, (Sniper 56mm F1.2, reviewed here), and one from Tokina (56mm F1.4) that I haven’t reviewed. Add the two Fuji options, and you’ve definitely got options. Fuji now has to compete on merit, and the new Fujinon XF 56mm F1.2 R WR has a lot of merits…but also still have a few flaws.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review copy of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own. I’m doing this review on a 40MP Fujifilm X-H2 camera.
The plethora of new 56mm options show how important this focal length is as a portrait lens and short telephoto general purpose lens. 85-100mm is my favorite portrait range, and having that massive F1.2 aperture really allows for beautiful background separation even when shooting fuller length portraits. As we’ll see in this review, the Fuji 56mm WR remains the premium priced lens in the comparison. It’s full retail is $999 USD (as before), though the lens is currently on sale for $899 (at the time of this review) on a sale price. That’s more than double the price of any of competing lenses on the platform. But in some ways the price tag, while high, feels a little more justified this time around, as this is genuinely the premium option among the many alternatives that I’ve reviewed. It still has some flaws, but its ability to really perform at F1.2 for portrait work makes it special.
There have been some really competitive lenses recently release with smaller maximum apertures (the TTArtisan AF 56mm F1.8 and the Viltrox AF 56mm F1.7 are the standouts due to being both strong performers AND costing less than $160 USD!), but neither one of them can provide the kind of subject separation that the Fuji and its F1.2 aperture can.
Here’s an example: with both lenses stopped down to F2, I felt the Viltrox F1.7 lens did a shockingly good job of providing similar sharpness and contrast for portrait work.
But where the 56mm WR showed the clear advantage is if you look at the backgrounds. Look at how much creamier the background is from the Fuji (on the right).
The difference would be even more pronounced if the subject was closer to the background.
There are two ways to view this:
“A lens like the Sigma 56mm F1.4 is close enough at half the price. The Fuji isn’t worth the premium.”
“Like a performance car, you pay for that last little extra bit of performance, but that can be the different between winning and losing.”
I think both perspectives are valid. Where I have an issue is when something has both a premium price and a less than premium performance (which is what I felt about the previous 56mm F1.2 from Fuji), but in this case I do think this is a premium lens in the class on X-mount. Let me put another way: in 2019 I sent the XF 56mm F1.2 R back after my loaner period without a moment’s regret; with the XF 56mm F1.2 WR I’m scheming of a way to add one to my own kit.
Sound interesting? Let’s break things down in detail…
Build and Handling
One of the key areas that needed improvement has been addressed…and it shows up right there in the name. This is Fujinon XF 56mm F1.2 R WR has both R (Aperture Ring) and WR (Weather Resistance) in the name. The weather resistance was definitely needed on a premium lens, and it does provide an area where this lens is set apart from most of of the other available lens. Fuji has chosen to not give their new lenses a MK II designation, which in my mind is a mistake as it makes it less apparent that Fuji has a new and improved 56mm F1.2 on the market. I’ll refer to this one as the 56mm WR throughout the review to distinguish it from the older, non WR lens.
That weather sealing takes the form of a gasket at the lens mount along with internal seals (Fuji cites 9 seal points plus a fluorine coating on the front element to resist oil and moisture). This is very handy as you can continue to use the lens with confidence even when the weather turns a bit sour (providing you are shooting on a weather sealed camera).
As noted, the XF 56mm WR has the largest maximum aperture of the competitors save the Sirui Sniper AF 56mm F1.2. As such, it is larger and heavier than most of the competitors, though the Sirui is actually slightly larger (72mm x 92.2mm, since this comparison chart doesn’t show its dimensions).
The Sirui lens is longer and slimmer, while the Fuji has that squat prime look that frankly looks pretty sweet mounted on a camera.
If you compare it to the recent Viltrox F1.7 and TTArtisan F1.8 lenses, the Fuji looks a bit hulking.
But compare it to the X-mount version of the Viltrox Pro AF 75mm F1.2 (the most worthy competitor even if the focal lengths aren’t identical), and the Fuji looks positively svelte.
Fuji’s design language hasn’t really changed much over the years, so the look of this lens isn’t radically different, though the shape is a little more sculpted. It’s a nice looking lens, however, with just a little more gloss that speaks of it being a newer design. Unfortunately Fuji’s feature list hasn’t really really expanded since the release of the original lens in 2014. We have an aperture ring on the barrel…and not much else.
That’s a little disappointing, as while Fuji’s cameras have developed a lot of additional video specs during that period, there is absolutely no video related progress in their lens design. The aperture ring is clicked (one-third stop detents), but there is no option to declick the aperture to allow for aperture racking. No custom button that could be used for various functions, or even to program an A-B focus pull that some lenses allow.
There are no switches on the lens barrel. Fuji chose long ago to have switching between auto and manual focus through the camera (typically via a dedicated lever or button), so that means no AF/MF switch on the barrel. The lens feels nice, but for the prices that Fuji charges for these premium lenses, some updated features feel warranted.
The included lens hood is pretty huge…about 2/3rds the length of the lens.
This is the first Fuji X-mount lens to have a higher-than-blades aperture, and they have given this aperture iris eleven blades, which does a great job of keeping a circular shape even when the lens is stopped down (here at F5.6, nearly four stops closed).
That’s fantastic, as while there is some geometric deformation of specular highlights near the corners (lemon shape) at F1.2, in this series at F2 and F2.8 you can see that the specular highlights of the raindrops are nicely circular.
The filter threads have slightly grown to 67mm rather than 62mm, which is a bummer if you own the previous lens and are upgrading, but is a positive for everyone else, as 67mm filters are FAR more common than 62mm filters.
The manual focus ring is nice and wide and feels good in terms of damping, though manual focus emulation here isn’t great. Mirrorless lenses utilize a focus-by-wire system where input on the focus ring is routed through the focus motor. Because this lens does not have the smoothest focus motor, you can really feel the pulses of the focus motor with every little adjustment you make. The slightly noise and rough pulses of the focus motor really pull you out of the manual focus experience…which takes away from the otherwise quality feel of the manual focus ring. The active focus area will be automatically magnified when you start to focus.
It’s a bit sad, but the budget TTArtisan AF 56mm F1.8 actually provides a much more sophisticated feeling manual focus experience.
Another key area of improvement by Fuji over the original 56mm F1.2 is when it comes to minimum focus distance. The original lens had the kind of minimum focus distance typically reserved for a much longer focal length, only able to focus as closely as 70cm and provided a very low 0.9x magnification. The newer 56mm WR can focus closer (50cm) despite having a longer focal length, which adds up to a much improved magnification of 0.14x, which is vastly more useful for up close work for both photos and video.
Not only that, but the up close performance is very strong even at F1.2, with great sharpness and contrast even on my very high resolution X-H2. Here is a shot at MFD and F1.2, and notice how clean the details are when deeply cropped.
Other than a less than desirable manual focus experience and a lack of evolution on the feature set, this is another nicely built Fuji lens, and at least we got the important upgrades of weather sealing and a much more usable up close experience.
Autofocus and Video
Uggg. This is rarely a very enjoyable section for me when reviewing anything on Fuji. With every new Fuji camera we hear about how improved autofocus is (and it is, to some degree), but it just never seems to actually get to the level of the competition. Even cheap lenses on Sony tend to autofocus better than the best lenses on Fuji, but unfortunately I can’t divorce lens performance from the camera’s autofocus…and I’m testing using one of Fuji’s very best cameras.
Furthermore, Fuji can’t seem to find a way to put their superior linear motors in their larger aperture lenses. That means we are saddled with a DC style motor here as in the 50mm F1.0. And while I have read some reviews that brag that this motor is just fine…these people are either being disingenuous or aren’t aware of what is available on other platforms. Autofocus performance is adequate at best, and rather crude in the process. This is not a refined focus motor, making all kinds of whirs and clunks as it goes about its business. I often have to put my ear right up next to the lens to try to hear any focus noise when doing autofocus tests, but that was definitely not necessary here. I could hear them every time I shot, even when using the lens at waist height and viewing in a field monitor.
Focus precision was generally good, but the focus process is slowed because there will often be a double clutch where the focus motor will first move to the approximate focus point and then do a secondary adjustment to refine focus. That slows focus speed down, and the fact that the focus motor makes noise during both steps draws your attention to it.
At the same, I found that focus was very reliable for work during portrait sessions. Focus is nailed even at F1.2:
I loved this lens as a portrait lens, as while I may not love the smoothness of the autofocus system, it did deliver well focused results in a variety of settings…and the optics are lovely!
I even took a few portraits of this gator, which did not impress my wife, as it was just sunning itself along a pond and I got rather close to take my series of photos.
I eventually scared him, and fortunately he chose to jump into the water rather than jumping the photographer!
While I wouldn’t recommend this lens as a sports lens, I did find that once I grabbed hold of a group of gulls nearby me on the beach, I was able to stay pretty sticky on them even shooting at F1.4:
Here’s another example of pinpoint focus of a static object at F1.2:
Point being that while the focus is not very sophisticated in feel, this is an improved AF system over the previous generation in speed, and, more obviously, accuracy.
Video AF is even sorer spot with me on Fuji. There tends to be more obvious steps in video pulls, the touchscreen is often unresponsive in trying to force autofocus changes, and tracking isn’t as sophisticated. Fuji has clearly tried to detune focus speed a bit here to quiet the focus motor and smooth the process when the microphone will be recording, but the results are pretty mixed. There’s less focus noise due to the slowed focus speed, though the on board microphone did still pick up a bit of focus sound. Focus transitions are on the slow side, and there is a very obvious step where focus travels 3/4ths of the way, pauses for a split second, and then makes a secondary focus pull to the final destination. There will often be some final microadjustments as focus attempts to settle on accurate focus lock.
This impacted the results of my hand test (where I alternately block and then unblock the camera’s view of my face with my hand) as well. I tried to give the camera extra time to make the transitions from my hand to my eye, but because of that double clutch of focus, the camera/lens would often complete the first of the two major focus pulls, but would pause…and by the time my hand was added or removed, it wouldn’t have quite made the transition. It would eventually get to my hand or my eye, but I had to be very patient.
On the plus side, focus breathing isn’t terrible, and, unlike the older lenses, at least focus would stay stable when I used the lens for static shots. There wasn’t the pulsing I saw on the 16-55mm and 18-55mm lenses I used side by side with it.
I’m not sure that I could recommend this lens for video work if you need autofocus…but I don’t really know a lens that I would strongly recommend over it. This is just an area where Fuji needs to improve, period. It’s frustrating because this lens is so good in so many other ways!
To offset the negativity, let me end with another positive. I found that autofocus continued to be precise even in very low light conditions. This shot of my son is at ISO 1600, F1.2, and with just a 1/90th second shutter speed. If I had been shooting with an F2.8 lens, that would have been a 1/10th second shutter speed. In other words, very dim lighting, and focus didn’t slow down much and remained accurate on his eye.
I would have loved to see a more refined focus motor here, but at least focus precision was good in my tests even if the focus process left somewhat to be desired…much like my feelings on the XF 50mm F1.0.
Image Quality Breakdown
Expect this section to go much more smoothly! There will be as many raves in this section as there were rants in the last. I traveled with the XF 56mm F1.2 WR alongside two of the venerable zooms (16-55mm F2.8 and 18-55mm F2.8-4 OIS), and the images from the newer lens just sparkled in comparison to those older lenses. This is one of those rare lenses that just sings on the new ultra high resolution 40MP X-Trans sensor (similar pixel density to over 90MP on a full frame sensor).
The optical formula is 13 elements in 8 groups, with two of those being aspherical elements and one being an extra low dispersion element. You can see just how impressively sharp the lens is across the rule of thirds portion of the frame in the MTF chart, with some drop-off to the corners. For perspective, I’ve added the MTF for the recent TTArtisans AF 56mm F1.8…and that MTF is 30lpmm rather than the much higher 45lpmm results shown in the Fuji chart.
When the original 56mm F1.2 R was released, the Fuji standard resolution was 16MP, so I already saw the cracks when I tested it on 26MP. It just wasn’t very sharp before F2. The new lens is clearly designed with 40MP in mind; it is beautifully sharp even at F1.2 and has flawless contrast.
We’ll break down the details together. First of all, let’s look at vignette and distortion. There’s not much to see on either front.
I used a -1 to correct the tiniest amount of distortion and a +40 (just a little over a stop) to correct the vignette. That’s impressive for an F1.2 lens, and it shows how the slightly growth of the diameter of the lens had paid optical dividends.
Longitudinal chromatic aberrations were definitely an issue at times with the first generation lens, but Fuji has utterly slain LoCA here. I found lens markings to be an extreme torture test for LoCA, but I just don’t see fringing here.
I’ve got a fallen pine in the forest behind my house that lichen is growing on, and I find this lichen to be just miserable for many lenses for fringing. The 56mm WR just nails it, though, delivering instead gorgeous microcontrast on all of the various textures there.
Lateral chromatic aberrations show up near the edge of the frame in transitions from dark to light areas. You can see from the edge of my test chart Fuji has also nailed this metric, and there is next to no fringing in the transitions from black to white.
All of this is a huge improvement over the previous generation lens…and this is while reviewing the new lens on the much higher resolution sensor.
So how about resolution? The 40MP Fuji X-Trans sensor tends to make all but the very sharpest of lenses look a little soft when viewed at high magnification levels, and it just so happens that my review standard is to examine results at a 200% magnification. That is a lot to ask of any lens, but this is one that’s definitely up to the task. Here’s a look at the test chart that crops throughout the review come from:
And here is a look at F1.2 crops from the center, then mid-frame, and then extreme lower right corner:
Lovely. That’s great sharpness for an F1.2 lens. If you need to know what this sensor does to a lessor lens, check out how that performance compares to the Sirui Sniper 56mm F1.2 that I reviewed five months ago!
Ouch.
I typically don’t compare lenses to the Viltrox Pro AF 75mm F1.2 as it feels almost punitive; the Viltrox is just so much sharper than just about any lens I compare to it on Fuji. The 56mm WR is up to the challenge, though providing near identical levels of sharpness and contrast in the center of the frame.
If we move off to the corners, I actually prefer the Fuji save the last tiny bit on the edge where the Viltrox stages a comeback.
Yup. This is a very, very good lens optically.
And it is no paper tiger, either. I found sharpness held up even at greater distances and in harsher lighting conditions. Here’s an F1.2 shot at distance, and you can see from the crop that though the mid-day sun is bright on my wife, the lens has still delivered lovely contrast.
And look at how gorgeous the defocused region is. I shot this at Middleton Place in Charleston, South Carolina (a truly gorgeous place). Impressive.
It was great at night, too, delivering high detail even at F1.2 (ISO 1600 here) and with a lot of bright contrast transitions in this shot.
It was a lens that I didn’t hesitate to use even at F1.2 for portrait work. There’s plenty of detail and contrast, and it allows me to get great separation of my subject from the background.
Stopping down to F1.4 provides a slight boost to contrast, and by F2 the improvement is more pronounced. You can see that even the corners look pretty great by F2:
And remember, that’s on a 40MP body and showing the results at 200%. That’s impressively good.
The lens that I tested also showed good centering with a consistent performance in all four corners.
F2.8 is largely the same as F2, with just a slight bit more contrast at F4 and F5.6.
As you might expect, landscape results are just stunning, with great detail all across the frame along with Fuji’s excellent color in their optical glass.
Diffraction comes early on a high resolution body like this, so expect some softening by F11 and much more obvious softening by F16, which is minimum aperture here.
This is one of Fuji’s strongest performers optically. It really is a treat, as lenses like this make the 40MP sensor make sense. It just punishes the weaker glass.
I love walking around with a lens like this, as the large maximum aperture makes it easy to create storytelling images by isolating subjects.
The lovely bokeh augmented by great contrast makes it easy to shoot images like this where the eye is drawn through the layers of defocus towards the subject.
Shooting ordinary objects with a lens like this allows them to really stand out from otherwise distracting backgrounds, even when those backgrounds are close.
Get close to a subject and you can really blur out a background into a nice creamy mass of colors.
None of the competing 56mm lenses are going to be able to do this in quite the same way.
I was also able to get results even when shooting into the sun or other bright lights. Some of the cheaper lenses at this focal length I’ve tested really fall apart with bright lights in the frame, but that’s not the case here.
In short, there is basically nothing that I have to complain about here optically. This is a wonderful example of how to do lens design, with optics that deliver both high contrast and resolution while also giving lovely bokeh. Kudos to Fuji! You can check out the image gallery if you’d like to see more.
Conclusion
Lenses like the Fujinon XF 56mm F1.2 R WR give me hope that Fuji can make this 40MP sensor work. It is pretty tough on even good lenses, so it takes exceptional lenses like this to really sparkle on this sensor. But this lens does, and I could SEE the difference in the images from the new lens even when I was looking at a group of images without the lens designation showing. They just sparkled in a way that images from some of the older Fuji lenses I was shooting with did not.
I’m underwhelmed by the autofocus performance here (particularly for video), as it feels like Fuji has saddled these amazing optics with a decade old focus system. But even the somewhat clunky autofocus motor is incapable of souring me on this lens. The optics are too nice, and the size is still reasonable enough that I could happily haul it around all day. The improved minimum focus distance is also greatly appreciated, as it opens up new subject opportunites.
This is a lens that definitely goes onto my short list of lenses fully capable of handling the 40MP sensor of cameras like the X-T5 or X-H2. So if you own the older 56mm F1.2 R lens and are considering upgrading your camera, I do think this is a worthy upgrade for a lot of reasons. If you’ve recently upgraded to one of the 40MP Fuji bodies, this lens should definitely be on your short list of lenses worth buying. At $900 USD (at the moment), this lens isn’t cheap, but it is also pretty special. And sometimes special is worth paying for.
Pros:
Nicely built lens
Nice looking lens
Full weather sealing and fluorine coating
Focus accuracy good
No distortion
Well controlled vignette
Low chromatic aberrations
Awesome sharpness across the frame even at F1.2
One of the sharpest lenses on Fuji when stopped down
Much improved minimum focus distance and up close performance
Handles high contrast scenes great
Lovely bokeh
Better flare resistance
Cons:
Focus experience feels dated already
Manual focus experience flawed by the focus motor sounds and vibrations
Keywords: Fuji, Fujinon, XF, AF, Autofocus, 56mm, F1.2, R, WR, Weathersealing, Fuji 56mm F1.2 WR Review, f/1.2, Fuji X, Fujifilm, X-mount, APS-C, Review, Telephoto, Action, Tracking, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Fujifilm X-T5, Fujifilm X-H2, let the light in, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
It’s been nearly 5 years since I’ve done my review of the Fujinon XF 56mm F1.2 R lens, which was regarded as one of the classic portrait options due to its large maximum aperture (F1.2) and classic 85mm equivalent angle of view (56mm x Fuji’s 1.5x crop factor = 84mm). My conclusion was that while the lens had some nice optics (more in the overall rendering rather than great sharpness at large apertures), the clunky focus motor, lack of weather sealing, and high price ($999 USD) left me somewhat underwhelmed. My conclusion was that this lens was only competitive on Fuji only because (at the time) Fuji was a closed platform, and Fuji XF shooters didn’t really have options. Thankfully, that is no longer true, as since that time Fuji has opened up their platform to alternatives, and at this point you can get half a dozen 56mm autofocusing third party lenses in X-mount, including two from Viltrox (56mm F1.4 reviewed here and newer 56mm F1.7 reviewed here), TTArtisan (AF 56mm F1.8, reviewed here), Sigma (56mm F1.4, reviewed here on Sony), Sirui, (Sniper 56mm F1.2, reviewed here), and one from Tokina (56mm F1.4) that I haven’t reviewed. Add the two Fuji options, and you’ve definitely got options. Fuji now has to compete on merit, and the new Fujinon XF 56mm F1.2 R WR has a lot of merits…but also still have a few flaws. Find out my full thoughts in my video review or by reading my text review here.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review copy of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own. I’m doing this review on a 40MP Fujifilm X-H2 camera.
The plethora of new 56mm options show how important this focal length is as a portrait lens and short telephoto general purpose lens. 85-100mm is my favorite portrait range, and having that massive F1.2 aperture really allows for beautiful background separation even when shooting fuller length portraits. As we’ll see in this review, the Fuji 56mm WR remains the premium priced lens in the comparison. It’s full retail is $999 USD (as before), though the lens is currently on sale for $899 (at the time of this review) on a sale price. That’s more than double the price of any of competing lenses on the platform. But in some ways the price tag, while high, feels a little more justified this time around, as this is genuinely the premium option among the many alternatives that I’ve reviewed. It still has some flaws, but its ability to really perform at F1.2 for portrait work makes it special.
There have been some really competitive lenses recently release with smaller maximum apertures (the TTArtisan AF 56mm F1.8 and the Viltrox AF 56mm F1.7 are the standouts due to being both strong performers AND costing less than $160 USD!), but neither one of them can provide the kind of subject separation that the Fuji and its F1.2 aperture can.
Here’s an example: with both lenses stopped down to F2, I felt the Viltrox F1.7 lens did a shockingly good job of providing similar sharpness and contrast for portrait work.
But where the 56mm WR showed the clear advantage is if you look at the backgrounds. Look at how much creamier the background is from the Fuji (on the right).
The difference would be even more pronounced if the subject was closer to the background.
There are two ways to view this:
“A lens like the Sigma 56mm F1.4 is close enough at half the price. The Fuji isn’t worth the premium.”
“Like a performance car, you pay for that last little extra bit of performance, but that can be the different between winning and losing.”
I think both perspectives are valid. Where I have an issue is when something has both a premium price and a less than premium performance (which is what I felt about the previous 56mm F1.2 from Fuji), but in this case I do think this is a premium lens in the class on X-mount. Let me put another way: in 2019 I sent the XF 56mm F1.2 R back after my loaner period without a moment’s regret; with the XF 56mm F1.2 WR I’m scheming of a way to add one to my own kit.
Sound interesting? Let’s break things down in detail…
Keywords: Fuji, Fujinon, XF, AF, Autofocus, 56mm, F1.2, R, WR, Weathersealing, Fuji 56mm F1.2 WR Review, f/1.2, Fuji X, Fujifilm, X-mount, APS-C, Review, Telephoto, Action, Tracking, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Fujifilm X-T5, Fujifilm X-H2, let the light in, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The Fujifilm X100VI is the one that broke the internet.
We are living in an era where the proliferation of cameras in phones has meant that year over year sales of major camera brands is typically declining each year…until the X100VI. Excitement over this new camera has trigger scalping, hoarding, the necessity of lottery systems to determine who can buy one ahead of launch, and the general mayhem that comes with a “must have” item. So is this new Fujifilm X100VI worth the hype? Find out by watching my video review below…or keep reading.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review loaner of this camera. As always, this is a completely independent review, and the thoughts and opinions expressed here are my own.
So what is the X100 lineup? The X100VI is the latest iteration in a retro-inspired series that Fuji calls “premium compacts”. They are dial-based, analog style digital cameras with a fixed lens (a 23mm F2 lens that gives a roughly 35mm full frame equivalent angle of view). I’ve had to play a little personal catch-up, as while I have been reviewing Fuji products for about six years now, I’ve not actually used any of the previous iterations of the X100. On paper, I’m personally less interested in a camera with a fixed lens. It was the whole idea of interchangeable lenses that made me switch from a superzoom point and shoot to buying my first DSLR.
But there are also many, many photographers who crave the purity and simplicity of a camera with a fixed lens. These purists are more about the craft, the art of photography, and less about variety of gear. They like the idea of always having the same tool on hand and learning to use that tool exquisitely well. And frankly, I was pretty inspired by the work of someone like Jonas Rask and his take on the X100 series. The guy is an amazing photographer, and he helped me really appreciate the appeal of the X100VI. The Fujifilm X100 series is a purist’s camera, with a very vintage aesthetic that looks and handles more like some of my vintage SLRs than like many modern cameras.
I shared the camera around with some of my team, as while we were all aware of the hype surrounding the camera, none of us had ever used one. We all agreed that there was a bit of a learning curve. That’s not just coming from other camera brands, but even when coming from Fuji. I’ve reviewed 12 previous Fujifilm cameras, so I have a lot of familiarity with their menus (which is similar here) and their typical physical control scheme. But the X100VI has some things in different places than other Fuji cameras, so figuring out the control scheme took a bit for me (i.e. the shutter speed control ring has an outer ring that needs to be lifted up to control ISO, for example…which is NOT obvious!)
But Craig from my sister channel Let the Light in TV put it well: the longer he used the camera, the more he liked it. This is more than a bit of nostalgia; this is a highly capable imaging machine.
Spec List
Primary updates to the X100 formula:
40MP BSI CMOS Sensor
6 Stop IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization)
X Processor V – AI machine learning and trackable subjects
New film simulations (Reala ACE, Nostalgic Neg and Eterna Bleach Bypass) = 14 total
Ability to upload photos directly to cloud from camera
Up to 6.2K Video
AF Tracking in video mode
HEIF capture
Skin smoothing effect
White priority and Ambience Priority Auto WB modes
Custom AF zone areas
Option to limit available AF area types for AF-S or AF-C shooting
Pre-shot bursts (E-shutter + Cont H)
Self timer lamp on/off
Interval shooting with external timer
Interval priority mode (prioritizes chosen interval, irrespective of exposure time)
A big part of the excitement over the X100VI is over several huge feature upgrades. The two most significant is the transition from the 26MP X-Trans sensor found in the X-T4 to the 40MP X-Trans sensor found in the X-T5 and the inclusion of a new, miniaturized IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization) system that is rated for up to 6 stops of stabilization. This makes the camera more useful (in particular) for video capture, which has become increasingly important in this day of hybrid stills/video imaging. So let’s break down the camera down in greater detail.
Build and Features
The X100VI shares a lot of visual similarities to Leica’s M rangefinder bodies. They both have a squared, retro design that oozes hipster coolness. I would argue that a large part of the “gotta have it” desirability factor has to do with the fact that the X100 series is essentially a poor man’s Leica. There’s a lot of similar qualities, save that the X100VI retails for $1600 while the Leica M cameras typically cost more like $9000!
Look no further than Fuji’s own marketing:
“See. Frame. Create.
Enjoy photography in its purest form with Fujifilm’s X100 Series digital cameras. Using a timeless dial-based design, passed down from model to model, the stunning 6th-generation X100VI offers an indulgent, tactile image-making experience that delivers unforgettable content in every creative moment.”
It’s not often that I see the word “indulgent” used in camera marketing!
Yet it is true. There’s nothing here in terms of technology that isn’t available in other arguably more practical Fuji models, but like many other trendy items, it is the aesthetics and packaging here that make the X100 series so desirable. What’s ironic is that the throwback design with so many film-era cues isn’t really marketed to grizzled film-era photographers…all of the marketing has chiseled 20 something hipsters look stylish while taking photos with the X100VI.
Kudos to Fuji for crafting a beautiful bit of photography art. The machined aluminum frame looks great, with a grain that does remind me of my classic SLRs. This is set off by the vintage leather texture of the lower half of the camera.
The camera is also available in black, but I do love the look of Fuji’s silver finishes more, personally.
Unfortunately that stylish exterior does come at the cost of ergonomic practicality. There is a very slight bulge on the right side of the camera that serves as the grip, but there’s nowhere near enough depth there to actually wrap your fingers around. This is more a camera that you pinch rather than one that settles into your grip. The minimal height of the camera also means that my pinky has no place to go and has to float underneath the camera.
The tradeoff is that this is a very slim profile (aided by the pancake style lens) that will be very easy to bring along. The camera is 128.0mm in width (5″), 74.8mm in height (2.9″), and just 55.3mm in depth (2.2″). The weight is a little more substantial at 521g (1.1lb), though that is with the battery and memory card…and remember that this figure includes the weight of a lens because of the fixed lens.
The X100VI is an interesting mix of modern and retro. The retro portions have to do with the control schemes. We have a profusion of dial-based controls, though there are actually fewer actual dials than on a camera like the X-T5. On the front of the camera there is a standard wheel that is the typical control point for aperture or shutter speed.
But next to it is a an interesting control point that differs from any of the other Fuji cameras I’ve tested. There is a lever that surrounds a button (most resembling what you might typically see around a shutter button). That button can be depressed to open up a sub-menu of optional controls for the lever. By default it will switch between the optical viewfinder and the EVF (when rocked to the right), and, if in optical viewfinder mode, rocking it to the left will toggle between having a small EV-F overlay in the bottom right of the viewfinder. This has a magnified view of the focus area, which can be very useful for manual focus.
Yes, the X100VI does have a very rare optical viewfinder in a digital camera. This is a hybrid viewfinder system with three modes: fully electronic, fully optical and optical with an inset electronic display. There are a few complications with an optical viewfinder that is offset from the lens and sensor, but for the most part it is pretty nice to look through an optical viewfinder again, particularly when you layer in the electronic display. The EVF itself is mid-level – a 0.5″ display with 3.69 million dots of resolution and approximately 100% coverage. There is an easy to use diopter to the left of the viewfinder opening.
While I personally prefer a center viewfinder position, this is a nicer implementation than on, say, Sony’s cameras.
There are also a few controls on the lens itself. There are two protrusions close to the camera body that control aperture. The tight confines of that space might dictate that it is easier to control aperture from within the camera. You can set the aperture ring to “A” to enable camera control, though I had to fiddle around in the menus to get aperture control the way that I wanted. The settings didn’t quite function in the way I typically expect them to.
The aperture ring itself is clicked at one-third stop detents, and there is no declick option.
The manual focus ring of the lens also serves as a command ring when in autofocus modes. One option, for example, is to use it to utilize the “digital teleconverter” settings. The standard focal length is 35mm full frame equivalent, and the two digital teleconverter settings allow for a 50 and 70mm “zoom”, though what is really happening is just a digital cropping of the image. These crops will only show up in JPEGs, by the way, as I found that RAW images came into Lightroom uncropped even when I had used the digital teleconverter. Here’s how those crops affect the resolution.
35mm (23mm APSC) – 7728 x 5152 px – 40mp
50mm (35mm APSC) – 5472 x 3648 px – 20mp
70mm (50mm APSC) – 3888 x 2592 px – 10mp
Clearly this is a feature that only really works due to the higher resolution of the new sensor, as the crops from a 26MP sensor would end up being too low of resolution to work in a lot of applications. It would have been nice to get those RAW images with some of that crop information embedded in them, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.
The ring itself moves very nicely, with a good level of damping. I found that manual focus had a fairly analog feel to it.
There is no lens release button on the front of the camera for obvious reasons.
What is present, oddly enough, is a little flash. It’s just a rectangular grid in the front of the camera (nothing pops up), which they can get away with because Fuji’s engineers could design around a fixed lens and its dimensions (though adding on one of the converter lenses will surely interfere with the flash dispersion pattern). This is not a powerful flash (unsurprisingly), rated at 24.3′ / 7.4 m at ISO 1600! I’m not a fan on on-board flashes because of the look of images taken with an on-board flash.
While playing with the flash settings in the Q menu, however, I did discover that the flash can be used as a commander for slave flash units, which could be useful.
On the left side of the camera is one of Fuji’s useful control points – an easy to use switch that controls the focus mode (Manual, Continuous, and Single Shot).
The top of the camera has a great looking retro aesthetic that also suffers from some retro ergonomic shortcomings.
Fuji’s shutter speed dials have always struck me as rather strange. It is hard to imagine a scenario where a modern photographer would prefer the imprecision of being able to choose only full stops of exposure rather (that’s what’s controllable here) rather than the much greater precision of the one third stops available through the typical command dials. That’s a lot of potentially under or overexposed images! It’s ironic that the largest dial on the camera is arguably the most useless.
Also strange is the implementation of the very clunky ISO controls visible through the little cutout on this wheel. It took me a bit to figure out how to access them, but I eventually discovered that I could pop up dial and twist it to control the ISO settings rather than the shutter speed settings. You then have to pop the dial back down, as there are no defined clicks or detents for ISO settings and it would be very easy to bump the dial and change the settings.
Weird.
It was actually quite frustrating during that process, as Fuji doesn’t really have much in terms of secondary ways to change those settings. On Canon cameras one has the option of just touching ISO on the touchscreen and making a quick change. On Sony you can assign it to a wheel or change it in the Q (Function) menu. You can’t do either of those things here, as ISO isn’t even an option in the Q menu and Fuji’s screens continue to have very limited touch control (and poor responsiveness). The workaround involved putting the ISO control dial setting to C (Command) and then setting up one of the dials to control ISO.
That section of the camera’s controls I would gladly replace. A typical mode dial would be much more useful to me.
Other controls here are more conventional and better for it. The Exposure Compensation dial is very welcome. There is a small programable button to the right of the shutter. The shutter is threaded in a typical Fuji fashion, and surrounding it is the ON/OFF toggle. You can choose either a mechanical style shutter with a 1/4000th shutter speed limit, or an electronic shutter that can reach a much higher 1/18,000th shutter speed. Fuji has a nice hybrid option where you can choose to use the mechanical shutter for slower shutter speeds (with all of the advantages that come with a mechanical shutter) and then automatically switch to the electronic shutter when faster shutter speeds are needed.
The back of the camera is a mix of normal and unexpected. The unexpected comes in the form of the drive button. It has the expected settings like the normal drive options (burst options, etc…), but really it functions more like a mode dial, including a wide variety of bracket options, HDR modes, panorama modes, and even access to movie mode.
It’s a different design than I’m accustomed to from Fuji. One interesting bracket mode I like is the ability to bracket film simulations. It seems to happen instantly, so only one shot feels like it is taken, but you’ve got three different film simulations recorded (for JPEG). You can obviously select which three film simulations you want bracketed. The RAW images arrive in Lightroom unchanged from each other, but JPEGs have the film simulations applied. In this case they are subtle because of the three simulations I chose, which include Provia, Astia, and Reala Ace (a new simulation I quite like).
It unfortunately does not appear that you can add customized presets to the bracketing options.
Other controls are more conventional, with a rear control wheel (which can be clicked for an additional function), a mini joystick, and a variety of buttons.
I’m less crazy about the position of the Q button, which is a very flush button right on the grip. It feels like there was a lot of room to place that button near the other buttons where it would be more easily accessible (and would allow for one hand operation).
Rounding out the back is a fairly large 3″ LCD with 1.62 million dots of resolution. It is a tilting (not articulating) screen that allows for a slightly bigger range of motion than before to allow for better tilting when shooting in a higher position. As noted earlier, there is some limited touch capacity, but little in terms of menu navigation (some touch in Q menu but not main menu) and lower reactiveness than competing models from other brands.
The right side of the camera holds the connection ports, including a combo mic input/remote shutter release port (3.5mm), a USB-C port for communications and charging, and a micro-HDMI port. I’m not a fan of micro-HDMI, but I understand that space is limited in a smaller camera like this so I’m more accepting of it.
The bottom of the camera shows the battery compartment, and there we find a few disappointing aspects of this design. The first is that the battery spec has not improved despite a more power hungry sensor and AF system. The NP-W126S is a relatively small 1260mAh unit that is rated for as much as 450 frames when using the OVF but drops to 310 frames in normal mode when using the EVF. That’s only about 45 minutes of 6.2K or 4K60 recording. You probably want to pick up a spare battery or two.
The second disappointment is that the memory card is housed there. I hate this position as it makes it far more likely that you’ll walk away without a memory card inserted because you have to close the battery door to set the camera down (happened to me!) If you have a tripod QR plate attached you also won’t be able to open the door to get at the card without removing it first. Even more surprising is the fact that the card slot is only UHS-1 compatible, which is really surprising to me when I consider that this is a camera with a 40MP sensor capable of shooting up to 20FPS and recording 6.2K video. That’s a lot of data that needs to pass through a fairly small pipeline (UHS-I is only capable of one third of the speed of UHS-II). I would have thought that at the least Fuji would have upgraded to the UHS-II standard to accommodate the larger data this camera needs to move.
As noted, this is the first of the X100 lineup to include IBIS. The miniaturized IBIS unit that Fuji has incorporated here is rated for up to 6 stops of stabilization. That’s a great addition to the formula here. In theory that should allow for handholding shutter speeds down to one second, though practically you will have limited success getting much of a keeper rate at one second. The greater value will be in the ability to get stable handheld video footage, and I did find IBIS effective for that. On the stills side, I was able to hit a roughly 25% keeper rate handholding shots at 0.5th of a second (five stops).
Accessories
Fujifilm is pretty specific that weather sealing for the camera requires using an adapter ring that adds filter threads and then using a filter to complete the seal.
This first involves unscrewing the metal flange at the end of the lens and exposing outer threads that allow accessories to be threaded on. I have a few objections to this process, however. First of all, clearly adding this filter ring and the filter itself completes the sealing for the lens (that’s the only place where protection is being added), which begs the question, “Why not just have a weather sealed lens?” Fuji has many lenses that come with a WR (weather resistant) designation, and none of them require a filter to complete the process. I’m personally not a big fan of using protection filters for the simple reason that you are adding another glass element, which never improves on the optical formula. It can create more flare issues, a slight softening effect, and if a person doesn’t invest in a very good filter, a more serious degradation of image quality.
The process is also a little clunky, requiring one to bring additional accessories along to complete the process. You can keep it all installed, obviously, but that does add more thickness to a camera that you’ve purchased in part for a slim profile. There is the risk of losing the metal flange that otherwise completes the look of the system. And if you don’t keep it installed, what happens when the weather turns unexpectedly sour (as it often does in spring when I’m doing this review). Doesn’t just having a weather sealed lens make more sense?
There’s also the reality of cost. The adapter ring and filter are not included. The AR-X100 adapter ring costs an additional $46, and their 49mm protection filter is an additional $49. Now, to be fair, you could use another brand of filter, but Fuji’s filter is available in the silver color that is the aesthetic match of the silver edition of the camera. I’m guessing that if you spent the money to get this stylish camera, you’re going to want a filter that matches. So that’s another $100 added to your bill if you want to have a weather sealed camera. Again, I have to ask: doesn’t just having a weather sealed lens make more sense?
There’s one final complication to this arrangement, though it will only affect those interested in using the converter lenses to give either a wider (28mm equivalent) or normal (50mm equivalent) angle of view. Both of these converter lenses need to thread onto the same threads as the filter adapter, so once again you will have the somewhat clunky process of threading off one attachment and threading another on.
I appreciate the fact that these accessories to do add some versatility to the camera, though, frankly, if you are going to this trouble and expense, you might as well invest in an X-T5 (my review here) and have access to a wide variety of lenses. If you’ve already invested in these converter lenses in the past, however, they continue to be compatible to this most recent X100 body.
Another accessory that remains compatible with the X100VI is the LC-X100V leather case (lower half shown above to highlight the throwback ethos). The case costs $80 USD, and offers both retro style and a good amount of protection when full employed.
No to harp on the weather sealing issue, but here we run into the flaw in the design. If you have the filter adapter and filter attached (to weatherseal the camera), the camera doesn’t quite fit. You can force it and make it work, but it was clearly designed with the bare camera in mind. This is one of the top user complaints, though a close second is that the design is in two pieces (top and bottom halves), and the two pieces don’t connect. This means that when you go to shoot, you essentially have to remove the top half, leaving a rather large and clunky piece in your hand(??) while you shoot one handed.
And this sums up the paradox of the physical design of the Fujifilm X100VI. What makes it so cool is its retro design, but almost all the design and ergonomic flaws can also be traced back to the retro design elements as well. I get a sense from X100 aficionados that the quirks are all part of the charm for them.
Autofocus Performance
The X100VI receives Fuji’s most recent autofocus improvements, which are almost all software rather than hardware based. The underlying hybrid Contrast/Phase Detect autofocus system that has undergirded Fuji’s cameras for the past few generations is still in place (and in need of an upgrade!), but it has been augmented in the most recent generation of cameras with Fuji’s X-Processor 5. This adds AI based deep learning for subject detection AF to accurately track a range of subjects. The system detects animals, birds, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, airplanes, trains, insects, and drones (though you choose “bird” to track insects and “airplane” to track drones). My experience with Fuji’s most recent autofocus in a variety of cameras is that the AF system definitely works best when there is a trackable subject in frame.
There are definite improvements here, though it should also be noted that Fuji’s AF systems continue to feel more primitive than those on the other platforms I test.
What’s unique here is that the AF system is designed around use with one lens, so the lens performance is central to the autofocus performance as a whole. That leads to a bit of a mixed bag. Fuji does not specify the type of focus motor in the 23mm F2 fixed lens mounted here, but the fact that they don’t tells me that it isn’t their higher end linear motor. Focus speed is reasonably good (not brilliantly fast, but not slow, either), but the quality of focus isn’t impressive. The focus motor has a bit of a “scratchy” feel and isn’t as quiet as better lenses. Focus precision is good, however, and I had no problem nailing narrow depth of field photos.
Focus was fine for street photography, which is almost certainly going to be primary application for the X100VI.
I did feel like there was somewhat of a “double-clutch” action to focus lock, where focus did a few micro-pulses before final lock. I read a lot of people gush over autofocus, but that tends to be in comparison to previous iterations of the X100. If you are upgrading from another X100 model, I’m sure you will find autofocus improved. But if you are viewing the autofocus performance in comparison to what market competition is at the moment, it is acceptably good but far from top tier.
I’m not sure this is the camera I would reach for for tracking action. The burst speeds are fine, with up to 11 FPS with the mechanical shutter or up to 20 FPS with the electronic shutter, though with a 1.29x crop). If you don’t want the crop, the max burst rate is 13 FPS with the electronic shutter. The problem is with the buffer depth. UHS-1 SD cards just can’t keep up with much of that kind of data, so if you are shooting uncompressed RAW, you can expect a maximum of about 17 shots before the buffer fills. Switching to lossless compressed RAWs gets you up into the mid twenties, fully compressed RAWs the mid 30s, and JPEGs will range from 80-146 shots depending on your speed. Here’s a breakdown of all the options.
This is fine for shooting off a quick burst to capture the key moment for street or concert photography, but the duration before the buffer fills won’t be sufficient for most sports situations. This isn’t really that kind of camera, so buy accordingly.
Video focus is also a mixed bag. Focus pulls are relatively smooth, but focus confidence isn’t high. There’s a bit of settling before focus lock, and the initial focus point isn’t always accurate until it does a minor readjustment. There is some moderate focus breathing.
When I did my hand test (where I alternately block the view of my face with my hand and then remove it), I found that sometimes focus wasn’t quite reactive enough to make those transitions in a timely fashion.
Expect focus to be best when there is a trackable subject in frame. Focus stays fairly sticky on the eye as I moved the camera around, and I didn’t see pulsing in static shots where focus needs to lock and stay still.
In general my autofocus experience was fairly standard for a Fuji review. It got the job done, but without as much sophistication as I often see on Canon or Sony. It was enough to capture the key moments in a wedding, like the groom giving a fist bump coming down the aisle.
Video Performance
Video is one of the key areas of improvement for the X100VI over the X100V. Video capture is now available up 6.2K internally at 30p in 4:2:2 10-bit color. 4K can be shot at 4K60 (allowing for smooth slowed footage). True slow motion can be achieved at up to 240FPS at full HD (1080P).
Here’s a list of all the various video modes available:
You will encounter various crop factors depending on your choice. 6.2K footage will have a 1.23x crop, while 4K60 will have a mild 1.14x crop. 4K30 will have the full sensor width.
Both FLog 2 and HLG recording are available, and of course all of Fuji’s film simulations and your custom tweaks can be made. I found that the IBIS system worked well for static shots, slow movements, but wasn’t enough to compensate for the choppy footage that comes from walking while filming. If you want that silky smooth moving footage, put the camera on a gimbal.
Footage generally looks good. I typically quite like the footage from Fuji cameras, and while the video options here aren’t as robust as my own personal X-H2 camera, the X100VI is now largely on par with the video options on the X-T5.
Image Quality
The X100 series has been upgraded to the “…high-resolution 40.2MP X-Trans CMOS 5 HR sensor has an enhanced image-processing algorithm that boosts resolution without compromising the signal-to-noise ratio“, delivering astonishing image quality.” (Fuji’s language as quoted in my X-T5 review). I’m very familiar with this sensor as it is the same sensor found in my X-H2. My general feelings on this sensor are positive, though I’ve found that it is absolute murder on lenses that are less than perfect. Fortunately Fuji doesn’t have to worry about multiple lenses standing up to this sensor…just one.
Fuji clearly felt that the existing 23mm F2 II lens was up to the task, and it largely is. This lens has an optical design of 8 elements in 6 groups, including two aspherical lenses. The sensor and lens are capable of producing detailed images.
I’ll give a brief breakdown of the lens performance as well as giving you the basic sensor performance (courtesy of my X-T5 review). There’s nothing new here in terms of the sensor itself; what’s new is its inclusion in this lineup of cameras.
Lens Performance
Fuji’s correction profiles are typically top notch, and that’s obviously going to be extra true of a camera where only one lens will be deployed. With corrections turned on, my text chart for Vignette and Distortion looks solid:
Pull back the electronic curtain and you’ll find a mild amount of pincushion distortion (-3) and a moderate amount of vignette (+57 to correct).
If you leave corrections on, you won’t see it. This is about an average performance.
I did see a bit of fringing around some window frames in a few of my video clips, but I would say in general longitudinal chromatic aberrations are pretty well controlled. You can see a bit of fringing on the edges of the various cameras here, but nothing that breaks the image.
I saw minor amounts of lateral chromatic aberrations near the edge of the frame, but those will be taken care of via corrections.
The big test here is whether or not this lens can handle the rigors of such a high resolution sensor. The new 40.2MP sensor is a whopping 53% higher in pixel count than the 26.16MP sensor on the previous generation X100V.
The 23mm F2 lens mounted on the X100VI isn’t a top tier lens, but it does quite well. I examine my test chart results at 200%, and I found that contrast was good in the center, with a dip to the midframe and more to the corners (pretty traditional sharpness profile). The ability to render fine details isn’t top tier, but not bad, either. Here’s my test chart that the crops will come from.
And here are F2 crops from across the frame:
This is a lens that really benefits from some stopping down. Contrast and detail is immensely boosted by stopping down from F2 to F2.8:
You can really see it in this real world shot (100% crop). The F2 frame looks a little low contrast, but the F3.6 shot really pops with contrast and detail:
In less demanding settings, however, I found that I was happy with the detail I saw at F2 even if contrast wasn’t off the charts.
On this high resolution sensor sharpness peaks at F5.6, though corners never really get really sharp. There’s a pretty marked difference between contrast/detail in the center vs the corners.
Starting at F8 there will be some mild regression due to the effects of diffraction (which arrives very early on such a high resolution APS-C sensor). That softening effect will magnify at F11 and be very obvious by F16 (minimum aperture).
Bokeh is okay…not great. Get up close and you can blur out backgrounds fairly well.
Back up just a little and the background can get a little busier.
The lens handles up close shots with a bit of sun coming into the frame pretty well, delivering fairly artful images.
If you want optical perfection, however, you probably are going to be looking elsewhere. This isn’t a $2000 lens, but rather a good enough lens that allows the camera to do its thing and help you create images you’ll love.
Converter Lenses
There are two options – a wide converter (WCL-X100II) and a telephoto converter lens (TCL-X100II) – both retailing for about $350 USD. We’ll start by taking a quick look at how they impact framing. The wide converter lens changes the effective focal length to 19mm, or roughly 28mm full frame equivalence:
Here’s the normal 23mm (35mm equivalent) framing from a tripod of the same scene.
And finally here is the 33mm (50mm equivalent) framing by adding the tele converter lens.
By utilizing the digital teleconverter you can get a variety of other framing options at varying resolutions.
WCL-X100II crop mode resolutions:
28mm (18mm APSC) – 7728 x 5152 px – 40mp
41mm (27mm APSC) – 5472 x 3648 px – 20mp
58mm (38mm APSC) – 3888 x 2592 px – 10mp
TCL-X100II crop mode resolutions:
50mm (35mm APSC) – 7728 x 5152 px – 40mp
72mm (48mm APSC) – 5472 x 3648 px – 20mp
100mm (66mm APSC) – 3888 x 2592 px – 10mp
Using either converter lens does come with some optical costs. Using the wide angle converter (19mm) results in some significant barrel distortion (+17) and much heavier vignette (+92 – nearly maxed out) to recover it.
The telephoto converter increases the pincushion distortion (-13) and has nearly as big of an impact on vignette (+90 to correct).
What’s more, there is a serious impact to contrast by adding the lens converters. Here’s a comparison of the bare lens vs with the wide converter attached at F2:
That’s true when stopped down, too. Here’s a mid-frame comparison at F4:
The impact isn’t as pronounced with the TCL-X100II, though the image is a bit softer.
Surprisingly, though, that’s not true when stopped down. At F4 I actually preferred the results with the TCL-X100II attached:
The TCL definitely beats the WCL for sharpness! Using these converter lenses definitely adds to your framing options here, but if you want a variety of framing options, wouldn’t you be better just buying a camera that would allow you to use different lenses? But if you just love the X100 concept, by all means, go crazy and accessorize!
Film Simulations and Color Science
Fuji has long been famous for their excellent film simulations. The most interesting thing here is the ability to really tweak each of these presets (or create your own recipes) and deliver very cool looking images right in camera. Fuji is pretty much a JPEG shooter’s dream, as you can tweak your recipes to get images you love right out of camera. RAW images with film simulations will arrive (as usual) flat in Lightroom, as you can easily apply any of 20 film simulations in post.
But the X100VI is unique in my experience in that if you create custom looks in camera, those will actually arrive intact in Lightroom even in RAW form, ensuring that you don’t lose the look you have created.
I absolutely love Fuji’s ACROS monochrome variations. They deliver sparkling B&W images.
Give me a nice moody scene and I’m in heaven.
I’m also very partial to one of the new simulations called “REALA ACE”. It has a really nice look that feels very usable and flexible for a variety of images.
Fuji’s color science remains a treat, and, used well, this is a camera that do very special things.
Dynamic Range
I value dynamic range within a camera in two specific areas: the ability to cleanly lift shadows without introducing noise or color banding and the ability to recover highlights without introducing “hot spots” where information has been permanently lost.
Having good dynamic range (particularly if you shoot RAW), allows you a lot more creative vision over how the final image will turn out, though it is always worth mentioning that just because you can raise shadows or reduce highlights it doesn’t always mean you should. Sometimes a photo with crushed shadows or blown out highlights is the better one.
Fuji has an extra trick up its sleeve to help you maximize dynamic range performance in such scenes, which we’ll get to in just a moment.
In my tests, I found that this sensor did an excellent job of recovering shadows very cleanly. Here we have an image that I purposefully underexposed by four stops. As you can see in the original RAW image, there is very little information left there. In post I added those four stops back into the recovered image. What we find is an image that has been recovered with very little penalty, whether viewed globally:
…or at a pixel level:
I could even recover shadows fairly cleanly at five stops, though you can see some additional noise has been introduced in the checkerboard pattern of the tabletop.
As is often the case, however, highlight recovery lags behind shadow recovery. Even at 3 stops of recovered highlights there is damage done to the image with both “hotspots” (information that cannot be recovered) and the loss of some colors in our swatches.
Sony is about a half-stop better in this regard, but Fuji has one other trick that I previously mentioned. If you move beyond the base ISO to either ISO 250 or 500 (and beyond), two new options open up in the menu. These are DR200 (available at ISO 250) and DR400 (available at ISO 400). What these do is essentially split the sensor readout so that the shadow information is gathered from the current ISO setting while the highlight information comes from base ISO. At ISO 250 that gives you one additional stop in the highlights (DR200), while at ISO 500 you gain two (DR400). This allows you to overexpose the image slightly so that you have plenty of information in the shadows, but since there is one or two stops less exposure in the highlights, you have plenty of ability to recover blown out areas in post. I also find that you retain better contrast even if you underexpose and recover using this method (here’s the DR400 recovered result at three stops of overexposure compared to the base ISO three-stop recovery):
Note how much more detailed and bright the right (DR400) recovery result looks. The shadow information looks the same on the two images (ISO 500 isn’t high enough to really introduce any additional noise), but the highlights are brighter and have much great fidelity. You’ll also note how much richer the colors are in the swatches by comparison. The better retention of highlights has vastly improved the overall contrast. I would pick the image on the right every time. It looks like a natural photograph despite the fairly radical recovery of highlights.
This is a technique well worth utilizing where needed, though I found that for the most part I did have enough dynamic range to edit as desired even at the base ISO.
Take this shot of a bridge. There is a bright sky and then deep shadow under the bridge. I have plenty of latitude for recovering the shadows over the bridge and even darkening the sky (not that there is a lot there!).
That’s a very useful amount of dynamic range, and if you need more, just use the DR200 or DR400 modes. It’s worth noting that due to the increased sensitivity in the ISO (base ISO of 125 vs 160) both of those are available earlier than they were previously, meaning that you can keep the noise down even more than on previous Fuji bodies.
On the video front we find that the X-T5 has Fuji’s F-LOG2 which boasts over 13 stops of dynamic range, meaning that you have more video dynamic range available than on previous models that only had the original F-LOG profile.
ISO Performance
Fuji tends to be a little more conservative with their native ISO range than other companies and resort to less marketing hype, though I frankly find the ISO performance to be ever bit as good as the best from Canon and Sony (the other brands I test). In this case the native range is expanded slightly, but on the bottom end, as the base ISO is now 125 rather than 160. The native limit is still 12,800, though expanded options at 25,600 and 51,200 are available. I didn’t really feel like there was much of a step back relative to the 26MP sensor despite the increased resolution, with images at ISO 6400 looking usable in real world situations.
At ISO 800 there is a mild addition of noise only detectable in the shadows. There isn’t a lot of difference from base ISO, however, and moving on to ISO 1600 shows little difference. At ISO 3200 there is slightly less contrast and slightly more noise, and that pattern continues at ISO 6400 and 12,800, where the noise becomes rougher and more visible in shadow areas. The first stop in the expanded range (25,600) looks about the same as what you would find on a Sony or Canon camera (where it is included in the native ISO range), with more visible noise and black levels that aren’t as deep due to “hot” pixels. ISO 51,200 should be be avoided, as image quality is several stops worse even though that is only one stop more. There’s a fair difference between ISO 3200 and 12,800:
Fuji says that the X-Trans sensor produces a more film-grain-like noise pattern, but it mostly looks like the pattern noise I see with most cameras. What is a strength, however, is color fidelity. I never really see a shift to greens or magenta as the ISO raises, nor do I see obvious banding in the shadow areas. Overall I’m impressed with the performance.
This real world image at ISO 12,800 looks perfectly useful to me.
Switch it to a monochrome where a bit of grain is desirable (Acros +R here) and you’ve got a great looking shot.
Resolution
The new 40.2MP sensor is a whopping 53% higher in pixel count than the 26.16MP sensor on the last few X100 bodies. That additional resolution has a lot of potential value, particularly when, as we’ve seen above, it doesn’t come with a lot of extra baggage in terms of reduced ISO performance. For portrait photographers, that high resolution means that you can take one portrait and get multiple different crops out of just one image.
The ability to deeply crop for street shots is very useful, as the original shot here seems to focus on the architecture:
While the cropped shot allows the walker to show up more prominently in the scene.
I’m having a hard time finding a downside to the resolution here, particularly when there is a Lossless Compressed RAW file option that keeps the file size down to a reasonable 40MB(ish) size, JPEGs are around 18MB, and if you want even smaller file sizes, you now can choose the HEIF image format which delivers 10-bit image quality in files up to 30% smaller than standard JPEGs. The fact that Fuji has managed to control keep ISO performance fairly similar to the 26MP level of the X100V helps eliminate a lot of the downside of the higher resolution. That resolution is going to be super helpful on a camera with a fixed lens.
Image Quality Summary
As I said in my intro, the allure of the X100VI is in its packaging and overall aesthetic. The focus system and sensor are essentially identical to what you’ll find in an X-T5. Fuji’s 40MP sensor is top dog in terms of raw resolution, their color science is excellent, but the true magic lies in the endless customization of their film simulations and the looks you can create in camera. Done right and you can create images that look almost as cool as the camera.
The actual lens is no better than average, but it gets the job done and doesn’t get in the way.
Conclusion
Almost certainly you will read more effusive reviews of the Fujifilm X100VI than this one, as I have tried to separate the hardware realities from the hipster “gotta-have-it” cool factor of the camera package. Having spent some time with the X100VI, I can understand the attraction, and I’m personally all in favor of anything that drives attention to the shrinking camera market.
The true magic of the X100VI is in the packaging. It is more than the sum of its parts, as when I break down the hardware, autofocus, and optical performance, there is nothing really exceptional here. But yet there’s also an undeniable pleasurable feeling of carrying this little camera around making magic with it.
Who knows how long it will be until the Fujifilm X100VI is readily available, but there’s no question that Fuji has managed to get the photography world’s attention with this upgraded premium compact camera. I hope you manage to get one…and hopefully you will feel the “indulgent” vibe that Fuji wants you to feel.
Pros:
Top of the heap for desirability
Very cool aesthetic
Serious improvements to the series in the X100VI
40MP sensor upgrade allows for more framing/cropping versatility
Inclusion of IBIS is fantastic
New film simulations are useful
AI Tracking upgrade
Huge video spec upgrade
Remains compatible with accessories from previous generation
Keywords: Fujifilm, X100VI, X100, VI, Fuji X100VI Review, Fujinon, Dustin Abbott, Review, Sensor, Tracking, IBIS, Stabilization, Eye AF, XF, 40MP, 40 MP, Review, Hands On, Video Test, Sharpness, High ISO, Autofocus, Dynamic Range, 26MP, 26 MP, Lens, Comparison, Test, Dustinabbott.net, APS-C, X-Trans, letthelightin, DA #letthelightin, #DA, #Fujifilm
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Fuji’s XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS lens has been the standard bearer for a premium kit lens since its release in 2013. I’ve heard many, many Fuji shooters brag that the quality of this lens makes other lenses unnecessary. I was a little surprised by being a bit underwhelmed by the lens when I finally reviewed it in 2019. The resolution of Fuji X-mount cameras in 2013 was 16MP, and in 2016 that jumped to 24MP on some models. In 2018 the first 26MP camera (X-T3) was released, and I reviewed it at that resolution level, which is vastly more demanding on lens performance than 16MP. That may explain why I didn’t find the lens as sharp as many people claimed. But in late 2022, Fuji took their biggest jump to what remains at this time the highest resolution of any APS-C sensor – the 40MP X-Trans sensor found in camera like my X-H2. This sensor has been somewhat of a wrecking ball to older lenses, and I’ve been revisiting some of them to see how they they are holding up (and compare to newer models). I recently revisited the venerable XF 18-55mm to see how it held up. The results are very much a mixed bag. Find out the full details in my video review below.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review copy of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own. I’m doing this review on a 40MP Fujifilm X-H2 camera.
The XF 18-55mm is still capable of producing beautiful photos, but they don’t hold up under the level of scrutiny that 40MP affords.
My main findings are in the video review, but if you are more of a text person, I’ll share my review notes along with a more detailed conclusion at the end.
Build and Handling
The Fujinon XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 was always priced higher than most kit lenses due to have a more premium build and performance. Here’s how it fits into the 2024 landscape of pricing for standard zoom lenses on X-mount.
Sigma = $549
Fuji 18-55 = $699* (as little as $400 in kit)
Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 VC ($799)
Fuji 16-55mm = $1199
Few people are paying full retail MSRP for this lens, as most will either get it in a kit (for a whopping $300 discount!) or on the used market where it is often available for $300 or less, which obviously helps its value in relation to the other lenses on the list.
Here’s a breakdown of what the R | LM | OIS mean in the lens’ name:
R = Ring | LM = Linear Motor | OIS = Optical Image Stabilization
Here are some my build observations.
Shortest lens (6mm shorter than Sigma, 36mm shorter than 16-55)
65 x 70.4mm (D x L) | (2.56 x 2.77”) | 310g (11 oz)
Has variable aperture (aperture closes fast!)
F3.2 by 20mm
F3.6 by 30mm
F4 by 42mm
Has OIS.
Has aperture ring, but due to being variable aperture, there are no markings or hard stops
No weather sealing
Poorest manual focus ring (easy to accidentally grab because it is close to zoom lens, manual focus moves in very obvious steps rather than smoothly.
Lowest magnification of four options – 0.15x @ 30cm
Holds up well – finish and rings hold up over long haul.
Fuji’s design language has changed little over the years, so the lens doesn’t really look or feel dated. It feels as premium as most of their other nicer lenses.
Autofocus
The XF 18-55mm has Fuji’s premium LM (Linear Focus Motor) technology, but clearly the technology has improved over time, as the focus system feels dated here in relation to the other three options.
I ranked the lens last in a comparison for stills and gave these reasons:
least focus confidence and speed
some pulsing before final lock at times
hampered by dimmer maximum aperture in lower light
Manual focus very “stepped”
Most of the time the autofocus was fine, but I definitely felt like it didn’t hold up as well as newer lenses.
Video Tests:
The XF 18-55mm faired a little better in my video tests, but mostly because none of the four options do great with the state of video autofocus as it stands on Fuji in 2024 (which lags behind other major brands).
Focus pulls had fairly good speed and confidence
hand test not quite as responsive as other lenses
– NEGATIVE – will do both pulsing (on fixed shots) and warping (when zooming)
Image Quality Breakdown
MAJOR DISADVANTAGE – 18-55mm Variable aperture – Sigma, Tamron, and Fuji 16-55mm all have constant F2.8 aperture.
Vignette and distortion:
TIE 16-55mm +22 and +48 – mild mustache
18-55mm +19 and +59 – mild mustache
Sigma +24 and +92 – mild mustache
Chromatic aberrations
16-55mm (very good)
18-55mm* (bigger DOF)
Sigma – most fringing before and after
Resolution
Sigma (most consistent on wide end and on telephoto)
True for chart tests and real world results
Even when stopped down sharper than 16-55 on telephoto
16-55mm – better contrast than 18-55, better detail
18-55mm – visibly lower contrast throughout zoom range – aperture disadvantage starting at 20mm (F3.2)
The XF 18-55mm peaks at 23mm and fades as you progress towards the telephoto end of the zoom.
Color remains a strength for Fuji lenses, producing images that look great when viewed as a whole.
The bokeh looks fine (actually a little smoother than the 16-55mm F2.8, but there is less opportunity to create bokeh due to a mediocre minimum focus distance and a maximum aperture of F4 on the telephoto end.
Flare resistance isn’t perfect, but remains competitive.
Optically the XF 18-55mm has been eclipsed by newer lenses, with the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DN being my recommended alternative if you want a similarly compact lens that’s a little stronger optically.
Conclusion
The 40MP X-Trans sensor remains a very challenging one for Fuji’s catalog lenses for the simple reason that they weren’t engineered for such incredibly optical demands. Modern expectations are higher, and it is pretty clear that Fuji has plans to replace this lens soon. So should you still consider it in 2024 (or later)? There are few reasons to say a qualified yes. The first is that you can still make beautiful images with the lens:
More specifically, however, here the reasons I would consider this lens:
Price: if you are buying this lens on the used market, there’s a very solid chance you can get it considerably cheaper than alternative zooms.
OIS – this lens and the much larger Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 VC (my review here) are the only ones with in lens stabilization, and if you have a camera without in-camera stabilization, this could be a big factor.
Obviously if you are using one of Fuji’s older cameras, this lens will hold up better optically.
Keywords: Fujinon, Fuji XF, Fuji 18-55, Fujinon 18-55, XF, Fujinon XF 18-55mm, F2.8-4, F/2.8-4, Fuji, Fuji 18-55mm review, Fujinon 18-55 Review, Fujinon 16-55mm F2.8 Review, Dustin Abbott, Fujifilm, 40MP, X-H2, Fuji X-H2, Fujinon, Review, Hands On, Video Test, Sharpness, Autofocus, CA, Video AF, XF 16-55mm F2.8, Lens, Comparison, Test, Dustinabbott.net, Sample Images, Sample Video, Normal, Portrait, Travel, Canada, Myrtle Beach, let the light in, weathersealing, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Fuji’s move to the 40MP resolution point on some of their higher end cameras has been pretty punishing on many of their existing lenses, but it also really makes it clear which lenses are exceptional. I reviewed one such lens earlier this year in the form of the XF 33mm F1.4 R LM WR, and immediately people began to tell me that I needed to try out the Fujinon XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR as well, as it was even better. Well, they were right; this lens is awesome! It’s a clear and easy choice for those looking for a premium prime lens covering the classic 35mm angle of view (23mm is 34.5mm in full frame equivalence due to Fuji’s 1.5x crop factor). The XF 23mm has been out for roughly a year and a half now, but it feels like it was made for these new high resolution bodies. This is an easy lens to produce lovely photos with.
Fuji has opened up their platform to third party lenses, and there are a number of lenses that look pretty much identical on paper, but aren’t in practice. This includes a Tokina ATX-M 23mm F1.4 ($299 USD), Viltrox 23mm F1.4 ($299 USD, and the Sigma 23mm F1.4 DN that is rumored to soon be coming in Fuji X-mount ($549 USD). The Sigma, in many ways, will prove the most competitive (based on my findings with the Sony E-mount version), but I think there are still a number of ways where the Fuji XF 23mm F1.4 is operating on its own level. It’s got solid features, great autofocus, and gorgeous optics.
But that does come at a cost. The Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR retails for $899, which means that you are going to pay for that goodness. If we were all made of money, we would all choose the absolute best gear regardless of cost, but in the real world the reality of a lens costing hundreds of dollars more than the competition is going to be a factor. My review will remember that tension that you, as the consumer, have to deal with as a part of my assessment.
So should you add one to your kit? We’ll try to answer that question in this review. If you would prefer to watch your reviews, you can choose watch my definitive video review below…or just keep reading.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for loaning me the 23mm F1.4. I’ll be doing this review on my X-H2, which I reviewed here. As always, this is a completely independent review and my conclusions are my own.
Fuji XF 23mm Build and Handling
Fuji likes to essentially build the feature list of their lenses right into the name, so if you learn to “speak Fuji” you can quickly get a sense of what a lens does and does not have right from the name. In this case, the name includes R, LM, and WR, which is a robust feature set.
R = Ring, or specifically an aperture ring.
LM = Linear Motor, Fuji’s premium focus system
WR = Weather Resistance
That adds up to a fairly premium lens despite the compact size of the lens. This lens is slightly larger and heavier than the previous generation 23mm F1.4, but the tradeoff is that it is better at everything. The Fuji XF 23mm F1.4 is pretty much identical to the 33mm F1.4, having very pleasing proportions that look very nice when mounted on the camera.
Now, to be fair, I tested both of these lenses on one of Fuji’s largest APS-C bodies – the X-H2, so if you are using one the very small bodies and want to travel as light as possible, there are smaller/lighter alternatives (the XF 23mm F2, for example). To me, however, this is a great size lens on the X-H2.
The dimensions of the XF 23mm F1.4 are 2.6 (D) x 3.1″ (L) / 67 x 77.8mm with a 58mm front filter thread size. The weight is a very moderate 13.2 oz or 375g. That makes the 23mm very slightly larger and heavier than the 33mm, but barely; it is just a few millimeters longer and about 5 grams heavier. As with the 33mm options, the two competing lenses from Viltrox and Tokina are identical in their own proportions and specifications. Both are 2.6 x 2.8″ (65 x 72mm) though the Viltrox weighs in at 260g while the Tokina is slightly heavier at 276g. But there’s more – they both have the same optical design (11 elements in 10 groups) and the same MFD (30cm) and maximum magnification (0.10x). Same filter thread size (52mm) and same number of aperture blades (9). That’s weirdly similar. The Sigma (in Sony form) is more unique at 65.8 x 79.2mm and 330g in weight, making it the most similar to the Fuji. Here’s a look at a comparison chart between the for lenses:
Bottom line is that while the Fuji is the heaviest of this group, it is also the best made, has full weather sealing, and has a slightly larger/more robust linear focus motor. The weight is still very light and I found the camera and lens effortless to carry around even without a strap for hours while exploring the Notre Dame campus in South Bend, Indiana.
The aperture ring is the Fuji standard. It moves nicely with defined detents at the one third stop marks and with markings at the full stops (F1.4. F2, F2.8, etc…). Rotate the lens all the way to the right and click the little button on the ring if you want to move into A (automatic) mode and control aperture from within the camera.
The manual focus ring works fairly well. I could focus with fairly good precision and didn’t notice visible stepping despite being a focus by wire system.
The Fuji XF 23mm is a very nicely made lens despite its light weight. It feels very “metal” and dense. The lens has a classic semi-glass black finish to it and is completed with thorough weather sealing (as already noted) that has a rear gasket and internal seals.
The included lens hood is is made of plastic but feels more substantial than the one on the 33mm that I tested.
There are no switches on the barrel, as AF/MF is handled via a lever/button on Fuji camera bodies. But many other lensmakers are including things like a focus hold button and/or declick option in lenses in this price zone, and it feels like the standard has been raised and Fuji isn’t quite meeting it. There is also no lens based optical stabilization. I used the X-H2 for this review, which has good in-camera-image-stabilization, so I didn’t actually miss it, but if you are shooting with an older camera, you might.
There are nine rounded aperture blades and I felt like the aperture did quite a good job of retaining a circular shape when stopped down. Here’s a look at the geometry at F1.4, F2, and F2.8:
There is significant lag in the aperture when trying to do aperture racking for video (already difficult because of the clicks) along with visible “steps”. There will be no smooth opening and closing of aperture for an aperture rack.
The minimum focus distance is 19cm, which allows for a reasonably high 0.20x, which is the best amongst these competing lenses (Viltrox and Tokina have 0.10x and the Sigma has about 0.14x). Here’s a look at MFD:
Up close performance is good, and this real world shot shows both the magnification level and the detail available.
Contrast certainly isn’t at macro level, but there’s enough detail there to make up close shots with strongly blurred backgrounds a definite strength.
Overall, the build and features of the lens are very nice, and, as noted in the intro, the compact nature of the lens makes it easy to bring along.
Fujinon XF 23mm Autofocus Performance
The Fujinon XF 23mm F1.4 Macro is equipped with a linear focus motor, and that motor does the job of moving focus quickly and smoothly. It was also very accurate on my X-H2, which gave me more confidence using it than I typically feel when using Fuji. I really felt like I could rely on getting accurate autofocus in a wide variety of situations. I was a guest at a wedding, and when the bride and groom came through the door I only had a quick moment to turn and take a shot. They were backlit, there were about 10 rows of people between me and them, and I shot at F1.4. Autofocus was accurate despite all these factors.
General portrait work was very good, with consistently accurate focus.
Autofocus up close was good as well, allowing for lovely close shots:
Focus was quiet and quick, allowing me to grab shots even during action, like on the golf course.
As odd as it may seem, I was also relieved to see good focus at smaller apertures, like for landscapes or architecture. Sometimes lenses focus fine at wide apertures, but not at smaller apertures.
The XF 23mm F1.4 was also quite good for video work, though I continue to see a few Fuji quirks. Focus pulls were good, with no visible steps. Focus breathing is extremely low, which helps focus transitions look very smooth. But on the negative side, touching a new focus area on the screen doesn’t always produce a reaction, or sometimes the move to focus to a new area is delayed. I think that is largely on Fuji’s focus system and touchscreens, which just aren’t as responsive as some competing brands, but there is clearly the potential in the lens for strong performance for video.
When doing my hand test (blocking focus on my face with my hand and then removing it to allow focus to return to the eye), I saw mixed results. The problem was never focus on my face, but rather sometimes the focus system didn’t move to my hand. It would focus on the background beyond me instead. Bottom line: there’s still room for improvement on the video AF front for Fuji, but I actually don’t think that the lens is the problem.
Autofocus was definitely better than average, however, so I’m satisfied. Most of the time focus very – ahem – sweet:
This is the kind of lens I would want to have on my Fuji camera in critical focus situations.
Fuji XF 23mm Image Quality Breakdown
The Fuji XF 23mm has a complex optical formula of 15 elements in 10 groups, which includes 2 aspherical and 3 ED elements – essentially an identical optical design to the 33mm. The MTF chart shows very sharp center performance, a dip in the midframe, and then a minor correction where the edges of the frame are slightly sharper.
It’s worth noting that Fuji displays their MTF charts at higher values than usual. Most MTF charts use 10 and 30 lines/mm, but Fuji shows their MTF charts at 15 and 45 lines/mm. That’s actually useful since the release of their 40MP sensors, as the more demanding MTF chart (at 45 l/mm) is a more accurate representation of how lenses will perform on a high resolution body. As noted in the intro, I feel like the XF 23mm F1.4 has joined a very short list of lenses that I feel really thrive on the 40MP cameras.
Fuji’s correction profiles are typically quite good, but I’ll turn them off to take a look at the actual lens performance when it comes to vignette and distortion.
We can see that there is some barrel distortion and fairly heavy vignette present. If I do a manual correction I find that the distortion pattern is quite linear and is corrected with a value +13. The vignette is heavy, requiring a +81 to clear it up (about 3 stops). The correction profile does all of this easily either in camera for JPEG/Video or in software for RAW files.
Nothing too troubling here. How about chromatic aberrations? First of all, nothing jumped out at me in real world testing. When I went looking for longitudinal chromatic aberrations, I really could not find much of anything. Bokeh highlights were neutral, and there was little fringing to be seen. In this shot I don’t see any fringing either in the crystals or in the bokeh highlights beyond.
I saw next to no lateral chromatic aberrations near the edge of the frame either on my chart in on bare branches in real world shots, so nothing to worry about on that front.
Here’s a look at my test chart that the crops came from (40MP images from the X-H2):
Here’s a look at F1.4 crops (about 175% magnification) from the center, mid-frame, and corner:
The XF 23mm F1.4 has more consistent sharpness, contrast, and detail across the frame than the 33mm did, making it one the sharpest Fuji prime lenses that I’ve yet tested. The results look very much like a good lens on one of the full frame platforms that I test, which is, frankly, very unusual on APS-C. I was very pleased to get high contrast, detailed results even at F1.4:
That’s very big deal when you are talking about this level of resolution. A full frame camera would have to be roughly 91MP to have a similar level of pixel density, so the XF 23mm F1.4 is being held to a higher standard in these tests than on any other platforms, and the fact that a compact lens is succeeding so well under these demands is very impressive. Don’t expect anywhere near this level of performance from the Viltrox or Tokina 23mm F1.4 lenses. I don’t have either of them on hand to compare to, but when I looked back on my review of the Viltrox, it didn’t deliver as good of results on Sony even though I tested it on just an 18MP resolution point. The Sigma will likely be the strongest competitor based on my Sony E-mount test, and I’ll revisit this comparison when I do a review on X-mount.
Even a mild stop down to F1.8 produces improved contrast across the frame and brighter corners.
Stopping the lens down to F2 adds a bit more contrast in the mid-frame and corner, with the center mostly staying the same. Stopping on down to F2.8 improves contrast and clarity to fantastic levels across the frame.
Real world images in this range are crisp and detailed all across the frame (this shot at F2.8):
The importance of this cannot be overstated, particularly if you are looking for lenses that are a good match for a high resolution body. Diffraction comes early on high resolution cameras, so being able to get your best results at wider apertures is really important. High resolution bodies also tend to be noisier at high ISO values, so the ability to get crisp results at large apertures allows one to keep the ISO down in lower light situations and get clean results. The XF 23mm F1.4 is one of the best pairings for Fuji’s 40MP sensors that I’ve yet reviewed.
At landscape apertures there is plenty of detail across the frame. Couple that with Fuji’s excellent color rendition, and you have a lens very well suited for landscape work:
Diffraction sets in pretty early on my X-H2, so by F8 images are starting to soften slightly, and by F16 the effect is very pronounced. On the new higher resolution bodies with the 40MP sensor, I would try to stay at F8 or larger as much as possible.
The 23mm is clearly sharper than the 33mm, but I would give the edge to the 33mm for the quality of the bokeh. It’s not unusual for the lens with wider focal lengths to be less “creamy” in the bokeh region than longer focal lengths. This shot of the morning dew shows what I would consider the biggest “bokeh issue” for the lens – it has more outlining than what I would like to see.
When you arrived at strongly defocused backgrounds (look at the upper portion of the image below), the bokeh looks quite good. But in the early transition to defocus there are still some harder edges.
You can see it here in this shot of votive candles: the defocused region is only okay, certainly not exceptional.
One final image to illustrate the point – this shot of an ornate stair rail shows a lot of outlined circles in the defocused regions; you certainly couldn’t classify it as “soft”.
This is often the Achille’s heel for very sharp, high contrast lenses. It’s hard to turn that contrast off in the defocused area. It’s a rare lens that can combine both intense contrast and sharpness with very soft and creamy defocused areas, so often lens designers have to look for some compromise between the two. The XF 23mm F1.4 is biased towards the sharpness side of the equation.
This isn’t to say the bokeh is bad (it’s not), but it’s just a little busier than I personally would like. When at its best the XF 23mm F1.4 delivers images that have great detail on the subject and fairly nice rendering in the background.
This image is a good segway into a discussion of flare resistance. You can see from the upper right portion of the image above that there was bright sunlight coming into the frame, and yet contrast has held up. There’s a hint of an artistic veiling effect that shows up a little more strongly in this image here:
I’m actually very partial to this effect, as it can add an artistic effect to images. In fact, one of my favorite images from the wedding I (casually) shot with this lens was this “getaway” image of the bride and groom where I intentionally got low to get some flare effectives in the image. Contrast is strong in the image, but there is a very nice sunstar effect. There is a moderate ghosting artifact near the bottom of the frame, but nothing too heinous.
I was very pleased with the look of the sunbursts from the lens. They are nicely defined with blades that end in points.
Color rendition is typically a strength for Fuji glass, and I think that’s true here. Color are rich, nicely saturated, and images have a pleasing “pop” to them.
Here’s another shot of an interior space that shows nice color rendition.
Skin tones were also very nice. I would consider this a great option for wedding photographers for a lot of the reasons I’ve already mentioned.
Fuji’s transition to the very high resolution point on some of their recent cameras has prompted my own move to the X-H2 as my Fuji camera and test body. I’ve quickly discovered that a 40MP APS-C sensor really changes the calculus of what lenses are going to be acceptable to someone who looks critically at lenses for a living. I’ve been left disappointed by a number of lenses that just don’t seem to ever get quite sharp enough to resolve this sensor, so a lens like the Fujinon XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR is a breath of fresh air. It makes my X-H2 essentially the equivalent of a full frame camera, with great detail and autofocus, but with a smaller, lighter form factor than what most full frame lenses can compare to. I love my Sony FE 35mm F1.4 G Master lens, and have marveled at how compact it is (for what it is), but there’s no arguing the fact that it is 50% bigger and heavier than this XF 23mm F1.4. That is the (potential) advantage of APS-C, and it is nice to see it realized here.
A lens like this is a great option in lower light or at night, as you can shoot with confidence at large apertures and still get crisp, detailed results.
Autofocus performance was also a clear cut above older Fuji lenses, and, while Fuji still has a ways to go to quite match what Sony and Canon are doing, the gap seems to be closing a bit. If you have purchased or are considering purchasing an X-H2 or X-T5 (or some future body with the 40MP sensor), then I can recommend the XF 23mm F1.4 to the short list of lenses that have high enough performance to thrive on that platform. At the same time, the price tag of $899 USD is not cheap, so a lens like the Sigma 23mm F1.4 DN might become the next best thing if you can’t afford the Fuji. I can also say, with confidence, that the Fujinon XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR is the best lens you can get at this focal length in X-mount.
Pros:
Well made lens in a compact package
Good build and weather sealing
Linear motor is quiet and fast
Good stickiness on eyes during focus
Focus pulls are smoothly damped
Very low focus breathing
Good sharpness across the frame from F1.4 on
Low levels of chromatic aberrations
Beautiful color rendition
Cons:
No declick option or physical controls other than aperture ring
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Fuji’s move to the 40MP resolution point on some of their higher end cameras has been pretty punishing on many of their existing lenses, but it also really makes it clear which lenses are exceptional. I reviewed one such lens earlier this year in the form of the XF 33mm F1.4 R LM WR, and immediately people began to tell me that I needed to try out the Fujinon XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR as well, as it was even better. Well, they were right; this lens is awesome! It’s a clear and easy choice for those looking for a premium prime lens covering the classic 35mm angle of view (23mm is 34.5mm in full frame equivalence due to Fuji’s 1.5x crop factor). The XF 23mm has been out for roughly a year and a half now, but it feels like it was made for these new high resolution bodies. This is an easy lens to produce lovely photos with.
Fuji has opened up their platform to third party lenses, and there are a number of lenses that look pretty much identical on paper, but aren’t in practice. This includes a Tokina ATX-M 23mm F1.4 ($299 USD), Viltrox 23mm F1.4 ($299 USD, and the Sigma 23mm F1.4 DN that is rumored to soon be coming in Fuji X-mount ($549 USD). The Sigma, in many ways, will prove the most competitive (based on my findings with the Sony E-mount version), but I think there are still a number of ways where the Fuji XF 23mm F1.4 is operating on its own level. It’s got solid features, great autofocus, and gorgeous optics.
But that does come at a cost. The Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR retails for $899, which means that you are going to pay for that goodness. If we were all made of money, we would all choose the absolute best gear regardless of cost, but in the real world the reality of a lens costing hundreds of dollars more than the competition is going to be a factor. My review will remember that tension that you, as the consumer, have to deal with as a part of my assessment.
So should you add one to your kit? We’ll try to answer that question in this review. If you want more information, you can choose to watch my definitive video review or read the text review…or just enjoy the photos below.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for loaning me the 23mm F1.4. I’ll be doing this review on my X-H2, which I reviewed here. As always, this is a completely independent review and my conclusions are my own.
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Tamron 16-30mm F2.8 Di III VXD G2 Review 
GOOVIS ART Head Mounted Display Review 
Laowa AF 12mm F2.8 Zero D Review (Z-Mount) 
Nikkor Z 35mm F1.2 S Review 
