Jump to content

10-24mm (15-35mm equivalent ??)

esoteric2000

By esoteric2000
in Fuji GFX Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

esoteric2000 Newbie

esoteric2000

Posted
Posted

Hello, 

I don't know much about cameras/lenses and photography but I get by doing some amatuer snapping here and there. 

However, I need to do some real estate photography and I was told I needed a 10-24mm lens to avoid wild barreling and the chore of using software. 

But I am confused by the 15-35mm equivalence thingy. 

WIll the Fuji 10-24mm do the job (especially in small rooms) ?

Thanks in anticipation of your kind (and simple) answers, 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
Herco Rising Star

Herco

Posted
Posted (edited)

Focal length equivalency depends on the size of the sensor. You've posted this message in the GFX-lenses section (which is for Fuji's medium format sensor cameras) but I guess you use an X-system camera from Fuji with the smaller APS-C sensor. Right between APS-C and medium format are the so-called Full Frame (FF) sensor cameras. This was in the days of film the most used size of film for amateur photographers. That is why focal lengths of lenses are often recalculated to the FF equivalency. From APS-C to FF the 'crop-factor' is 1.5x

The 10-24 f4 Fuji lens therefore has a full frame equivalency of approx. 15-35mm meaning it gives you that same angle of view. It ranges from an super wide-angle to a standard wide-angle view. That makes it perfect for architecture, indoor architecture and landscape.

The 10-24 has two main advantages for your intended use: first it doesn't have a lot of distortion in the super wide-angle mode, so you don't need software to correct the image all the time (keystone correction). Precondition is that you keep the camera and lens level at shooting (and not tilted backwards). Secondly, it has an optical image stabilizer. So, shooting indoor with longer shutter speeds isn't too much of a problem, since the lens corrects motion blur in some degree. That compensates for the fact it has not a really fast aperture (f4) so your low-light/indoor shutter speeds can be a bit longer (I would say up to 1/8s).

Edited by Herco
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      The backslashes you are referring are just symbols denoting path.  Once you import into these LUTS into Davinci Resolve those backslashes are removed by default and you only see is the true file name which has no backslashes.  Convince yourself of this by opening the LUT folder from the Davinci Resolve Project Settings.  Do you see any backslashes in those LUT names? Of course not.  The only name you see is the one that has the underscores and the periods. These LUTS work as designed without having to change any path names.  However, they need to be set up properly set up through CSTs and by what is supported in Davinci Resolve.  Hence, the FLog2C LUTS cannot be used because Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut color space and the FLog2C gamut. Alternatively, Davinci Resolve does support Flog2 because the color space for FLog2 is Rec 2020 and there is an FLog2 gamut. If all you are doing is changing the path names then most likely you are not getting the correct results.
    • PoorAlchemist
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By PoorAlchemist · Posted

      I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • crazyfields
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By crazyfields · Posted

      Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • George_P
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By George_P · Posted

      I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
×
×
  • Create New...