Does the XF 16-80 feel out of place on the X-E5?

michaeladawson · Oct 14, 2025

Loving my X-E5 so far. My only "real" issue so far is not the X-E5 itself but my lack of a lens like the XF 16-80 f/4. My most used lens on full frame Nikon is the Z 24-120 f/4. It is almost the only lens I use when I travel. I also take along the 14-30 for those ultra wide occasions, but the 24-120 is the workhorse.

I currently use the X-E5 with the Fuji f/2 prime lenses from 18mm to 50mm. I also use the older 18-55 f/2.8-4 zoom. But I really like the 16-80 range (24-120 FF equiv). The 18-55 would be a decent travel lens for many. But for me it is not wide enough, and definitely not long enough.

I'm seriously wanting to get the 16-80 f/4. It is very close to the size and weight of my Nikon 14-30 lens. It seems a bit large looking next to the X-E5, but obviously I can't mount it to see how it handles.

Who has tried or uses the 16-80 Fujifilm on the X-E5 (or I suppose X-E4 for that matter)? What are your opinions of the size of the lens. Is it unwieldy? A bit unwieldy, but nothing that should prevent me from getting it?

I know the 16-80 gets mixed reviews for IQ. Some hate it. Others say it's not so bad or even pretty good. I'm assuming it's at least as good as the 18-55. That is not the question here though. I'm interested solely in the size and weight when mounted on the X-E5.

I will say that I have gone out with the X-E5 and 55-200. The 55-200 isn't quite as fat as the 16-80. but it is longer and weighs more. I didn't find this combo to be uncomfortable. But I would use a 16-80 much more often than the 55-200.

Opinions to share?

--
Mike Dawson

britcam · Oct 16, 2025

michaeladawson said:
Gaber said:

Don't be a sissy Michael. For the last 7 years my go to lens was the 16-80 on the XE3 and before that for several years I used the wonderful 16-80 Nikon lens, with Nikon cam, as my favorite. I think the Nikon was better but I went all over the world with the 16-80 on the XE3 and it is not a problem to use. Any lens on an XE works for me, as it is my only camera, basically.

On the other hand, since I bought the XE5 I sold the 16-80 and bought the 16-50 which I intend to use on vacations from now on. My reasoning is that the newer lens is smaller, sharper and I can use the teleconverter for very usable 70mm (20MP) range if needed.

Honestly, if Fuji upgraded the 16-80 as a more compact model I would love to have it, but I'm pleased so far with the 16-50. I also love the new 23 and I carry a 12mm as well.

Click to expand...

Not being a sissy. I’m perfectly happy carrying my larger and heavier Nikon Z7 with 24-120. I just have this nice X-E5 that I like using, whose aesthetics and ergos I hate to ruin with an overly large lens.

I think my decision is going to come down lens IQ. And in that case the Fuji 16-80 is likely to lose out to the Nikon 24-120.

michaeladawson · Oct 16, 2025

britcam said:
I used the 18-135, 55-200 and more recently the 16-80 ever since I bought my X-E2 in 2014 …

There’s nothing at all difficult about supporting a larger lens on any of the X-E series cameras - just use the left hand for support.
Even on the little X-M1 I frequently go out with any of these bigger lenses .. why should it present any difficulty ?

Is the aesthetics the problem ?

On my XS-10 it’s even easier with that big grip - fingers curled round and the strap twisted over the arm …

What you write is what I suspected would be the case. I just wanted feedback from those that had used larger lenses on the X-E series to make sure.

There are examples of lens and body combos that people complain about from a physical perspective. For example, I have heard complaints about the Sony 6xxx series bodies and large lenses. The large grip on those bodies makes for an uncomfortable hand placement when a large lens (fat lens) is mounted. At least that is the complaint from people with larger hands.

I suspect that the X-E5 does not run into that issue since there is next to no hand grip.

I could also imagine a combo where people complained that a small camera with large lens just felt like you were carrying a rock around. I just wanted to make sure that the general view was not that the combo felt uncomfortable in the hand.

There is the visual aesthetic part. But that wouldn't really stop me from buying a lens unless you're talking about "really ugly". I will not buy a lens that is just truly ugly in my eyes even if it is the finest lens on the planet. For example, if a lens was produced in only orange paint finish, I wouldn't touch it. There are some lenses that look like they came from the year 1900.

michaeladawson · Oct 16, 2025

britcam said:
michaeladawson said:

Gaber said:

Don't be a sissy Michael. For the last 7 years my go to lens was the 16-80 on the XE3 and before that for several years I used the wonderful 16-80 Nikon lens, with Nikon cam, as my favorite. I think the Nikon was better but I went all over the world with the 16-80 on the XE3 and it is not a problem to use. Any lens on an XE works for me, as it is my only camera, basically.

On the other hand, since I bought the XE5 I sold the 16-80 and bought the 16-50 which I intend to use on vacations from now on. My reasoning is that the newer lens is smaller, sharper and I can use the teleconverter for very usable 70mm (20MP) range if needed.

Honestly, if Fuji upgraded the 16-80 as a more compact model I would love to have it, but I'm pleased so far with the 16-50. I also love the new 23 and I carry a 12mm as well.

Click to expand...

Not being a sissy. I’m perfectly happy carrying my larger and heavier Nikon Z7 with 24-120. I just have this nice X-E5 that I like using, whose aesthetics and ergos I hate to ruin with an overly large lens.

I think my decision is going to come down lens IQ. And in that case the Fuji 16-80 is likely to lose out to the Nikon 24-120.

Click to expand...

So on your X-E5 it’s all about aesthetics then …

No. More about ergos. Is the lens/camera combo unwieldy or uncomfortable. True, I did include the word aesthetics. I am interested in what people think of the aesthetics. But that wouldn't stop me from buying the lens if it was the right lens for what I want.

At the moment I'm looking at my X-E5 with the original XF 16-55/2.8 attached. It looks fine. It even feels fine, although a bit on the heavy side for a lightweight travel combo. But if was to carry that complaint to the extreme I would end up with a small "pocketable" camera. And that is out of the question.

Alan Sh · Oct 16, 2025

Here's a picture of my X-E5 with a 16-50 on it. I don't find that uncomfortable.

Alan

--
Try www.the-photo.org for a community-run creative photography resource
where we focus on images. Now with portfolios. Part of the dprevived.com community.

michaeladawson · Oct 16, 2025

MarcosV said:
When I finally got IBIS with the X-H1, "the brick" was the standard lens I used, along with XF 10-24/4 Mk I, and XF 70-300.

Then I discovered the Sigma 10-18/2.8 and 18-50/2.8.

I still use the Sigma 10-18/2.8 as my wide angle zoom (it is so small and light that I forgive its lesser optical qualities over my XF 10-24 and Tamron 11-20/2.8.

My new favorite standard zoom is the XF 16-55/2.8 Mk II. This lens is about the same size as the XF 16-80/4 and about an oz heavier.

An ounce heavier? The spec page at B&H lists it as 30g lighter than XF 16-80/4. Either way, your point is taken.

MarcosV said:
XF 55-200 is fine for travel given its size and weight. I switched it for XF 70-300 because that lens takes teleconverters.

Yeah. I already have the 55-200. I have rarely ever wished I had a 450mm FF equivalent lens with me when I travel. Let alone want to put a TC on it. If I need that long a focal length it's a trip on which I'm taking my Nikon gear.

MarcosV said:
MarcosV said:

I will have to think about what to do for an ultra-wide. At the moment the widest I have is the XF 14mm. With my Nikon Z7 I always have need of a few shots taken with the 14-30 f/4 zoom.

Click to expand...

Since I'm dedicating so much weight/volume in my camera bag for the XF 16-55/2.8 Mk II, I love the tiny Sigma 10-18/2.8. Sure this lens has no WR; but, this lens really works well for me.

I'm intrigued with that Sigma lens. Too bad it doesn't have an aperture ring. But it is amazingly small. But then you say it is optically inferior to the XF 10-24. The Tamron looks like a reasonable compromise on size vs. IQ. Hmm...

MarcosV · Oct 16, 2025

michaeladawson said:
michaeladawson said:

XF 55-200 is fine for travel given its size and weight. I switched it for XF 70-300 because that lens takes teleconverters.

Click to expand...

Yeah. I already have the 55-200. I have rarely ever wished I had a 450mm FF equivalent lens with me when I travel. Let alone want to put a TC on it. If I need that long a focal length it's a trip on which I'm taking my Nikon gear.

I totally agree, the 55-200 is fine for travel. Since I ended up sticking with Fuji-X instead of flirting with other mirrorless systems like Sony FF, M43 (again), or Canon R series, I put the $2k to $3k I set aside every year for camera G.A.S. on lenses and so pre-ordered the 70-300 when it was first announced. I wouldn't bother with given how hard it is to find and its pricing. I bought the TCs many years earlier when used Fujifilm gear were still reasonably priced.

michaeladawson said:
michaeladawson said:

michaeladawson said:

I will have to think about what to do for an ultra-wide. At the moment the widest I have is the XF 14mm. With my Nikon Z7 I always have need of a few shots taken with the 14-30 f/4 zoom.

Click to expand...

Since I'm dedicating so much weight/volume in my camera bag for the XF 16-55/2.8 Mk II, I love the tiny Sigma 10-18/2.8. Sure this lens has no WR; but, this lens really works well for me.

Click to expand...

I'm intrigued with that Sigma lens. Too bad it doesn't have an aperture ring. But it is amazingly small. But then you say it is optically inferior to the XF 10-24. The Tamron looks like a reasonable compromise on size vs. IQ. Hmm...

When I say it was optically inferior, I'm saying I believe my copy at least might be a little softer in the corners. However, Andy Mumford on Youtube replaced his 10-24 for the Sigma 10-18 for the work he likes to shoot, so I bought it. It does look like cheap plastic; but, it got dropped at least twice from a height of 2 feet onto pavement without any damage --- so far.

I totally understand how much lack of aperture ring on the lens sucks. So many many times I accidentally press the command dials in and accidentally toggle away from aperture control to something else. I got to write down all of the configuration steps I need to do with all of my Fujifilm bodies so that this doesn't keep happening... It doesn't help going back to my X-H2/X-H2S and telling myself this is just like my old DSLRs that also didn't have apreture rings --- front/rear command dials are your friends... Still mess up.

Antone · Oct 16, 2025

MarcosV said:
MarcosV said:

I'm intrigued with that Sigma lens. Too bad it doesn't have an aperture ring. But it is amazingly small. But then you say it is optically inferior to the XF 10-24. The Tamron looks like a reasonable compromise on size vs. IQ. Hmm...

Click to expand...

When I say it was optically inferior, I'm saying I believe my copy at least might be a little softer in the corners. However, Andy Mumford on Youtube replaced his 10-24 for the Sigma 10-18 for the work he likes to shoot, so I bought it. It does look like cheap plastic; but, it got dropped at least twice from a height of 2 feet onto pavement without any damage --- so far.

The polymers ("plastics") used today are far superior to those of decades past. I remember when Canon introduced their New FD lenses and people at my camera club complained about the use of plastic in the bodies of these lenses. Yet, here I am, 50 years later still using those same lenses on my Sony and Fuji mirrorless (and Canon film) cameras!

MarcosV said:
I totally understand how much lack of aperture ring on the lens sucks. So many many times I accidentally press the command dials in and accidentally toggle away from aperture control to something else. I got to write down all of the configuration steps I need to do with all of my Fujifilm bodies so that this doesn't keep happening... It doesn't help going back to my X-H2/X-H2S and telling myself this is just like my old DSLRs that also didn't have apreture rings --- front/rear command dials are your friends... Still mess up.

The lack of an aperture ring never bothered me when I shot with Canon EOS EF systems (both film and digital) because Canon made fantastic command dials. Fuji's command dials are terrible - too soft and too easy to rotate. The front command dial on my X-M5 is so awful I had to disable it. Hard to believe that Fuji's engineers haven't fixed this perpetual problem.

Granted, the dials on my X-T4 are better but the still are not as good as my Canon's were.

Antone · Oct 16, 2025

michaeladawson said:
I'm seriously wanting to get the 16-80 f/4. It is very close to the size and weight of my Nikon 14-30 lens. It seems a bit large looking next to the X-E5, but obviously I can't mount it to see how it handles.

Who has tried or uses the 16-80 Fujifilm on the X-E5 (or I suppose X-E4 for that matter)? What are your opinions of the size of the lens. Is it unwieldy? A bit unwieldy, but nothing that should prevent me from getting it?

Here's a couple shots of it on the X-E5. It's front-heavy, but any similar lens will be, too. I'd have no problem carrying it around.

--
Antone

WikiCaique · Oct 17, 2025

Front heavy, but great combo. With smallrig grip, of course.

michaeladawson · Oct 17, 2025

Thank you for the photo. From your photo and those posted by others, as well as comments, I have come to the conclusion that the 16-80 is not going to be out of place on the X-E5 for my liking.

I have pulled my 16-55/2.8 MkI out of storage and put that on the X-E5 and I don't even mind the size of that lens. All the potential lenses I am looking at are smaller than this lens.

I also don't need an accessory grip. For me, the grip adds little functional value for the way I hold a camera and simply adds weight and bulk.

I have decided the choice will probably come down to the 16-80/4 or the 16-55/2.8 MkII. The 16-80 clearly wins out on zoom range, but loses on IQ and copy variability. I was going to get a used copy, but now I'm not sure I want to deal with the potential hassle of getting a bad one. The 16-55 is the IQ winner and has f/2.8 to help in lower light. Both are about the same size and weight with the 16-55 being just a few millimeters large in width and length.

The XF 16-50 was a possibility. While it does provide 16mm on the short end, it does nothing for the long end and loses a half a stop to the 18-55 lens I already have.

MarcosV · Oct 17, 2025

Antone said:
Antone said:

M

Click to expand...

The lack of an aperture ring never bothered me when I shot with Canon EOS EF systems (both film and digital) because Canon made fantastic command dials. Fuji's command dials are terrible - too soft and too easy to rotate. The front command dial on my X-M5 is so awful I had to disable it. Hard to believe that Fuji's engineers haven't fixed this perpetual problem.

Granted, the dials on my X-T4 are better but the still are not as good as my Canon's were.

I tried the Canon R5 Mk II back when I was strongly considering buying it insterad of a X-H2S/XF 500mm or go GFX. Really love the front and rear command dials on it. The X-H2's more pronounced finger grip makes accessing its front/rear command dials a bit easier than the smaller X-T5, X-E5, etc.; but, still not as good.

Definitely not worth switching back to Canon, where I *know* I'll be reconstructing my favorite set of zooms/primes within a year or so. G.A.S. --- especially when going to a new interchangeable lens system --- is a hard thing to combat.

WikiCaique · Oct 18, 2025

I like the grip because I can rest my index finger on it, so my pinky finger doesn't fall under the camera. And with my index finger resting on it, I can operate the front controls more easily.

The thumb grip also helps.

But everyone is different.

And this is with viltrox 560gr. lens.

aagirlz · Oct 18, 2025

michaeladawson said:
Thank you for the photo. From your photo and those posted by others, as well as comments, I have come to the conclusion that the 16-80 is not going to be out of place on the X-E5 for my liking.

I have pulled my 16-55/2.8 MkI out of storage and put that on the X-E5 and I don't even mind the size of that lens. All the potential lenses I am looking at are smaller than this lens.

I also don't need an accessory grip. For me, the grip adds little functional value for the way I hold a camera and simply adds weight and bulk.

I have decided the choice will probably come down to the 16-80/4 or the 16-55/2.8 MkII. The 16-80 clearly wins out on zoom range, but loses on IQ and copy variability. I was going to get a used copy, but now I'm not sure I want to deal with the potential hassle of getting a bad one. The 16-55 is the IQ winner and has f/2.8 to help in lower light. Both are about the same size and weight with the 16-55 being just a few millimeters large in width and length.

The XF 16-50 was a possibility. While it does provide 16mm on the short end, it does nothing for the long end and loses a half a stop to the 18-55 lens I already have.

My copy of the 16-80 is good

unceunce · Oct 20, 2025

the 16-80 is fine. it may be a little front heavy, but using a thumbgrip will help. i have the 16-55 and feels great.

michaeladawson · Oct 20, 2025

unceunce said:
the 16-80 is fine. it may be a little front heavy, but using a thumbgrip will help. i have the 16-55 and feels great.

I took the X-E5 out to a "No Kings" rally on Saturday mounted with the 16-55/2.8 Mk I. It was just fine. Wouldn't mind a little lighter. But really, no big deal.

And YMMV, but for me I have no need of an add-on grip.

I'm leaning towards selling the 16-55 Mk I and picking up the newer Mk II version. The second gen is basically the same size and weight as the 16-80. My luck would be to buy the 16-55 and have Fujifilm release a 16-80 Mk II that fixes some of the IQ complaints.

If anyone is interested... photos from my afternoon at the rally with the X-E5 and 16-55/2.8 can be seen here: https://michaeldawsonphotography.com/p61342241

Yannis1976 · Oct 20, 2025

michaeladawson said:
The XF 16-50 was a possibility. While it does provide 16mm on the short end, it does nothing for the long end and loses a half a stop to the 18-55 lens I already have.

I currently have the 16-80 and despite its shortfalls, I believe its still the best compromise in Fuji zoom lenses. However I do find the new 16-50 a very interesting lens becasue its super light for a zoom and it doesn't extend being internal zoom. Its size is very similar to the new 23mm and 33mm f1.4 lenses but 100g lighter...

I feel it can be a nice street zoom alternative.

unceunce · Oct 20, 2025

michaeladawson said:
unceunce said:

the 16-80 is fine. it may be a little front heavy, but using a thumbgrip will help. i have the 16-55 and feels great.

Click to expand...

I took the X-E5 out to a "No Kings" rally on Saturday mounted with the 16-55/2.8 Mk I. It was just fine. Wouldn't mind a little lighter. But really, no big deal.

And YMMV, but for me I have no need of an add-on grip.

I'm leaning towards selling the 16-55 Mk I and picking up the newer Mk II version. The second gen is basically the same size and weight as the 16-80. My luck would be to buy the 16-55 and have Fujifilm release a 16-80 Mk II that fixes some of the IQ complaints.

If anyone is interested... photos from my afternoon at the rally with the X-E5 and 16-55/2.8 can be seen here: https://michaeldawsonphotography.com/p61342241

oh wow, that mk 1 is a beast, I used to own it. Had to sell it because it was too much to lug around. I have the mk 2 and it is amazing. It is similar in size to the 16-80. Before I bought it, I tried using the 16-80 for a day (borrowed my gf's) and I found it to be fine. I need the grip though, makes it way more comfortable to hold in one hand.

Search

Does the XF 16-80 feel out of place on the X-E5?

michaeladawson

Forum Pro

britcam

Senior Member

michaeladawson

Forum Pro

michaeladawson

Forum Pro

Alan Sh

Senior Member

michaeladawson

Forum Pro

MarcosV

Veteran Member

Antone

Senior Member

Antone

Senior Member

WikiCaique

Member

michaeladawson

Forum Pro

MarcosV

Veteran Member

WikiCaique

Member

aagirlz

Leading Member

unceunce

Well-known member

michaeladawson

Forum Pro

Yannis1976

Veteran Member

unceunce

Well-known member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts