Jump to content

Lens: XF14mm or XF16mm or XF16-55... hard question...

Wabisabiphotography

By Wabisabiphotography
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

Wabisabiphotography Apprentice

Wabisabiphotography

Posted
Posted

Hello! I'm the happy owner of an X-T1 and XF14mm and I was thinking to buy the XF35mm 1.4 for street photography. 

I use the XF14mm for architecture and landscape photography, but sometimes I use it for street photography but it's to wide...

Maybe XF16mm can be the solution? or is too close for city landscape? 

And what about XF16-55? Is it sharp as the other 2 lens? Can be a good instead of 2 lens?

Thanks fro your opinion! :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
hrk Explorer

hrk

Posted
Posted

Hi, 

The first lens I got for fuji was the 35. My plan was to sell it when the 16-55 came out. After using it for a while there is no way I would part with it.

The 16-55 is incredibly sharp, but it just doesnt seem to have the "magic" of my old canon 24-70 lens, and also feels a bit slow now that I am used to 1.4 and also the 56 1.2.

 

I still always have it with me, but will only use it when I need to quickly change distances, otherwise its 35 of 56 all the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
citral Community Regular

citral

Posted
Posted

Hello! I'm the happy owner of an X-T1 and XF14mm and I was thinking to buy the XF35mm 1.4 for street photography.

I use the XF14mm for architecture and landscape photography, but sometimes I use it for street photography but it's to wide...

Maybe XF16mm can be the solution? or is too close for city landscape?

And what about XF16-55? Is it sharp as the other 2 lens? Can be a good instead of 2 lens?

Thanks fro your opinion! :rolleyes:

Why not the 18? It's small, cheap, unobtrusive, quite fast it's perfect for street imo

Link to post
Share on other sites
citral Community Regular

citral

Posted
Posted

Ok let's put it in another way : you already have a 14mm. 16mm would not be _that_ different to really justify both.

 

On the other hand, 14mm and 18mm are different enough to justify it. One is ultra-wide, the other one only wide, kind of usual wide. Wide enough to zone-focus very easily, not too extremely wide that you must be 30cm off the face of a stranger to shoot it.

 

Now normally I'd say don't bother with the 18 and get the 18-55mm instead, the difference between f/2 and f/2.8 is really not that big when you add OIS to the equation BUT for street photography, if we mean the same thing, that is among other things shooting people fast because you see an interresting pattern / composition / light / behaviour / face / whatever without looking like a voyeur, the form factor of the 18mm helps a lot, plus you can hide your cam in a normal pocket to remain very discrete and just take it out and shoot quick when needed.

 

If by "street photography" you mean something else like shooting, duh, random people randomly walking in random streets without a real reason and converting to B&W to look like it's "street photography" then whatever.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

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

    • 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 !
    • crazyfields
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By crazyfields · Posted

      First post here but long time fuji shorter. I use the XT2 with the 23mm f2 / 35mm 1.4 / 16-80mm f4 I'm considering the 23mm f1.4 r (Non-WR) About me: - I shoot black and white only. - I like macro details to wide open landscapes and everything in-between. - I shoot mostly for art, intrigue and creativity of the image. My question - is the 23mm f1.4 going to offer me any meaningful difference over the f2 for the above scenarios Thanks and sorry for bringing it up again...
×
×
  • Create New...