I am considering purchasing the XF16-55 f2.8 but I am hoping to hear from others who have used this lens whether it is generally too large and conspicuous for travel photography and candid travel portraits (I usually ask consent to keep the image afterward and delete it if the subject wants me to). The weight is also a consideration but I am less concerned about this overall.

I also have concerns that it is a lot more visible when traveling through countries that have a higher risk of theft. A bigger lens stands out a lot more and looks more expensive.

Thank you for any insight you can provide.

I have mainly used the xf18-55 and never had issues or concerns.

I don't think so, but I don't typically go sticking my camera right in peoples’ faces either. I carry it around in the little Peak Design 3L sling bag and just pop it in and out as needed when wandering about. The camera/lens combo doesn't look especially huge and threatening without the big hood and no strap, nor is it especially burdensome (IMO). This guy didn't seem to have have a problem with it...

I took it on my last trip to the Basque Country, purely because I knew I needed it for a specific shot at a specific location I would want. During the day however I stuck to carrying a couple of the f2 primes around.

in all honesty I kinda wished I could have used the 18-55 as a single lens over both of them options, but it’s my partners now so was stuck with the 3 lens solution.

I love the 16-55 but I’m seriously considering purchasing a cheap zoom lens like the old 16-50 or even a larger focal range zoom for our next foreign holiday.

--
Stu-C
https://flickr.com/photos/138087015@N02/

I think it'll come down to that old adage - "it depends". I took my old Canon 6Dii and 24-70 f4 lens on our honeymoon which I'm sure my wife was thrilled about! But we were travelling to once in a lifetime locations so she knew what she was getting herself into 

The aforementioned lens is very similar in size and weight to the 16-55 and I honestly didn't have any issues taking it out shooting - including around crowded markets.

That said, if we were going on such a holiday again, I do think I'd likely take the 15-45 along with a prime, such as the 27 f2.8 or 35 f2. I wouldn't have any reservations about that as this was one of the reasons I moved to (and stuck with) Fujifilm, in that, their smaller budget gear is minimally compromised in terms of IQ (IMO) - I cannot say the same about the Canon DSLR system.

Why not get the cheaper, smaller, lighter Sigma 18-55 f2.8? The difference is size and weight is huge to the old Fuji brick… personally I also love the 16-80 for traveling and especially for portraits.

--
Yannis
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127079204@N06/
https://www.instagram.com/yannistzevhotmail/?hl=en
https://www.viewbug.com/member/Yannis76

The smaller and lighter sigma 18-50 2.8 is appealing to me, however, I can get the 16-55 used for close to the same price as the sigma lens new (there aren't any used version where I am located). So that is a consideration in my mind. If the lens is too big and doesn't work out with my shooting I am hoping that there is decent resell value if I decide to downsize at a later date.

I almost always agree with Erik and he is right, it is much more how you conduct yourself than the stuff you carry.

I've used the 16-55 on my X-E3 and it is a nice manageable arrangement.

At the moment I'd wait to see what the rumoured 18-55 replacement brings.

--
Andrew Skinner