Jump to content

10-24mm WR + 16-55mm vs 10-24mm WR + 50-140mm?


Recommended Posts

A bit on the fence about my plans to clean house and switch up my lens configuration. Recently purchased the 16-55mm while it was on sale. I've used the lens in the past on travel shoots and if I was forced to own a single lens, this would probably be it.

But I would really like to add the new 10-24mm WR to my setup, as I'm now focusing more on travel and landscape photography. To that end, I'm feeling a bit torn. I know for sure I'll go with the 10-24, but it makes the 16-55 seem somewhat redundant with much of the range covered by the 10-24.

I'm considering whether I'd be better off selling the 16-55 and getting the 50-140mm, which I've used and know to be excellent for longer range, abstract photos when it comes to landscapes and travel. 

Right now, I'm not sure I'm in a position to own all three, just can't decide between keeping the 16-55mm or just going for the more extreme ends of the spectrum with the 10-24 + 50-140. Thoughts? Thanks!

Edited by deepsun
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, binfch said:

Why (replacing the 16-55) not buy a prime 35 or 50 or 60 and then add the new to be released 70-300?

Thanks for the suggestion. I should have mentioned, but I’m actually getting rid of a few primes in favor of the zooms. I use two bodies so I plan to have the 10-24 and either the 16-55 or 50-140. Ideally, I’d keep the 16-55 because just walking around it’s a great lens.

I also thought of the 55-200 as an alternative to the 50-140, but I see lots of conflicting opinions on sharpness and IQ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Posts

    • X100S https://fujistreetphotography.wordpress.com/
    • Which manual settings did you use? Don‘t depend just on the viewfinder in dark environents or with large aperture values since it will brighten up the picture with standard viewfinder settings. Look at the exposure indicator, should be around 0.
    • When I shoot "street" with adapted lenses I use f8 - f11, if I want utilize max aperture (1.2 - 1.8) I try to focus without focus peaking as it might cheat you.
    • Finally picked up an XF 100-400mm after looking for a good deal for a while and took it out for a spin this weekend. Fired off a few tests shots and they seemed fine but then everything after that was heavily under exposed to the point I could barely make out the image. Nothing was changed in any major way in terms of manual settings and if I switched to a different lens the issue was gone and all images appeared in view mode as they appeared through the viewfinder when taken. Back to the 100-400 and switched to auto mode and then all the photos were fine but everything I shot with manual settings was under exposed again. Am I missing something? It seems like it's purely a lens issue and nothing to do with the settings as I tried 3 other lenses and didn't have any issues with any of them. I'm at a loss here and would love some help. I'm hoping it's just something really easy I've overlooked.. (Shooting with an X-Pro 2)
    • I like buying local. But I also like to check internet prices. and I also dont like getting bent over on pricing but once again I like to support our local stores. I called a local camera shop and the price was close to double what ebays new pricing is. Is there a difference in actual Fuji lenses like where they are made or quality differences? In the same lens  Thanks for any help Rick
×
×
  • Create New...