lorenzolessi

Same thing happens to me... really annoying.

Thanks Luke… indeed the 18 wasn't conceived with absolute quality in mind, even if there are worst lenses… for landscape and architecture the 14 and the 10-24 (or even the 16-55) are hard to beat. The 18 is a classic focal length, fast and portable, suited for reportage or street photography. The 16 is oriented towards these two kind of photography, too… if you have to stop it down a lot, then the 1.4 makes not much sense. It's larger than the 23 but the quality is definitely there. Unfortunately absolute quality and portability do not correlate very well, hence the title of my post. If you do not care too much size and weight i believe that an x-t1 with 16/23/35 is an excellent package for a lot of photographic situations ... and, in this case, if I had to pick only one wide angle I would choose 16mm... but this is true for me. If you want a good compromise between quality and portability and 14 and is not too wide for you, I would definitely recommend it.

Yes, you're right... The 35 is much better than the zoom, and I like very much the lens, but not the focal length. It will be part of my "dream triplet" with two ipotetical 16 f/2.8 (even bigger than the 18) and 23 f/2 (maybe similar to the one you find on the x100 series). For this reason (and since i can't see these lenses coming in the next future) i thought at the option to take an x100s and a 35 selling 23 an 18-55. At the wide end the 14 would be just fine, but maybe even the 18. Of course we're discussing opinions here and I thank you for the answer, citral.

Thanks citral... i've used sometimes the 35 and shoot even some decent pictures in my opinion (like this: https://flic.kr/p/q7i7XX or this: https://flic.kr/p/pa7JZw) but since i own the two primes for canon i know how many times i'm going to use it over the 23, so it's my third choice. for the size, you're right. At the time the zoom is a very good substitute of 35 and 18 for me, but i was thinking if i can trade off some versatility for fast and compact lenses... preferring the wide angles.

Thanks Rod... as i wrote 27 is very interesting. I don't think can substitute the 23 as focal length, but indeed it's a great combination of compactness and quality. 56 is a magical lens, but it's not in my chords (nor in my wallet...) ;-) the 35 f/2 is potentially very good, the 1,4 it is for sure.

Thanks Michael... I think the 16-55 can match primes, but not the size. I know obviously that I can't have the versatility of the zoom with the primes, but with them you have already an idea of what are you going to have in the frame when you bring the camera to the eye, so you can concentrate on composition and moment. It's an intriguing challenge, like dealing with the poor battery life... ;-) Thanks Sluw... Even for me portability is very important, but not at all costs. I find more interesting the 18mm as focal length and the size and weight are more or less comparable. I'm from Italy and there are rebates at the time... it's not such a deal if you buy only one or two lenses, anyway. I really like the 14mm, but the 90% of the latest shots seemed to me too wide... it's a very very good lens and it's light. I think it's more suitable for landscape work, and i'm not interested in doing it with the x-e2; with people in the frame things are getting different if you put'em too far from the center. The 18-55... it's a miracle lens for the cost. I used it most of the times at 23mm, than i found a used 23mm, and the difference is visible. Sometimes 18mm served me very well, but if most of my shots are with these 2 focal lengths on the zoom i can have more quality with the primes. Thanks bhu... i agree, x100 series are appealing cameras to me... i use the phone, but only jpeg output (and a small sensor) limits image quality for some uses. You're right, 16 has a lot of glass that i don't need. i think i'll wait for something like 16 f/2.8 or f/2, if ever there will be. The 10-24 seems great, but not for hand shooting or small cameras. I find (but i'm not so original) that with the 23mm i have one of the most natural field of view for my eye and i really enjoy the prime... apart from the size. Most of my photos are taken in good light, but low light sometimes is fascinating and f/2 ora f/2.8 is something i look for (even considering the damn good high iso), the focal length over 55-56 probably not.

16 / 23 / 35mm for me.

Hi everyone, I use Fuji x-e2 with 3 lenses: 14mm / 23mm / 18-55mm, mainly for street / travel / urban landscape shooting. My ideal setup would be with three primes: 16mm / 23mm / 35mm, or in 35mm: 24 / 35 / 50, the triplet I was using with Olympus OM about ten years ago, when I tried black and white on film. I'm a "total" digital photographer (i also use Canon for work and landscape) now but I liked the combo I used back in those days. Now: I've bought nearly all used equipment and I'm very satisfied with quality. The 23mm is a really stellar lens, like everyone says. It's not so well balanced anyway with the x-e2, but the images makes the compromise acceptable. For the wide angle part I bought the 14mm keeping in mind that with a bit of crop I ended up with a 16mm fov. I tried 18mm prime and it's very good and compact (and f/2) but it's not always my preferred focal length, I find i wanna go wider or narrower, but I have it on the zoom and sometimes it suites for certain scenes. I tried, at a Fuji event, even the 16mm and it seems on par with the 23mm, but even bulkier. As for the 35mm: I use this focal length for some portraiture, details and for "blur shots ", but I like the wide angles so much more this will be my last lens to have. I found AF is not its strength but quality is definitely there. I shoot not very often in low light, nor wide open, so f/1,4 is not an absolute need. Here are the options i'm considering: Sell 14 and 18-55 when I will find a 16mm at a proper price, and then looking for a 35. I will gain quality, but the compactness is almost gone (for Fuji standards) Sell 14 and 18-55 for 18 and 35 and gain compactness except for the 23, but I sacrifice the 16mm. Sell 14, 23mm and 18-55 for 18, 35 and a X100s. I used it one day and even if Af is not on par with the x-e2 and OVF is not a thing I need (but it's nice), the camera is a valid one. I will gain another body (so maybe not the lightest setup, but flexible) and compactness, with more than acceptable quality, no 16mm, though. Sell everything and buy an X100T with the adapters, I will gain compactness, lightness and constant f/2, even with the loss of 16mm, a bit of af speed and a little optical quality. Have your say!

Hi everybody, i'm Lorenzo from Cecina, Livorno. I discover fuji x system in 2013 and i liked it... ☺, i'm a fine art printer and passionate photographer. You can see something about me here: www.lorenzolessi.com (only in italian for now, sorry) L