Jump to content

10-24 or 16mm f/1.4

Vento

By Vento
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

umad? Enthusiast

umad?

Posted
Posted

I own the 12mm Samyang, and owned the 14mm and 10-24. 

 

The 10-24 is good, I'd call it one of the better super wides (probably even the best mirrorless ultra wide zoom). But I preferred the 14mm. By a huge margin. The only reason, why I went for the 12mm Rokinon/Samyang was, that it is faster, and overall better for astro photography.

 

But if astro is not important, I would go for the 14mm without even thinking about it. It's (for me) the best of them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
notnotmaurice Rookie

notnotmaurice

Posted
Posted

I have the 10-24 and i wish it was a 2.8, even without ois. For landscape/astro and concert photography alike ois doesn't help much, i want to use faster shutter speeds, not slower! I'm always considering selling mine for a 12/2.8, 12/2 or 16/1.4. FWIW i still have the 10-24, so it's at least not worth the hassle of switching. If it was a 2.8 we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nero Rising Star

Nero

Posted
Posted

If I had been asked this question a month ago, I would have said buy the 10-24mm for the OIS and versatility. Last week I got the 16mm and my 10-24mm is already on eBay. That's not to say it was a bad lens, but the 16mm is simply that good. And given how low you can get the shutter speed on wider lenses and still get a quality image without the need for OIS, you don't really lose a whole lot by going with the 16mm if you have somewhat steady hands. Will I miss the 10-24mm every now and then while traveling? Yes. However, even if I didn't sell it I would be missing it in those situations because even for travel the 16mm took its place in my bag almost immediately. I was shooting most of my 10-24mm images at 10mm or 24mm, but my favorite images were almost exclusively coming from the 24mm side of that range, followed by the random shots that I would take in the middle from 15-19mm. Considering that I already have the 23mm, the choice to sell the 10-24mm was easy once I got the 16mm. That being said, if you don't have any lenses in the 10-24mm range except maybe the bottom end of one of your zooms and you've discovered that you like to shoot wide, I wouldn't necessarily try to talk you out of the 10-24mm because there is a big difference between the ultra-wide and wide ends of it and the cost of 2 Fuji primes (unless you go with the Samyang/Rokinon for one) to cover that is much larger.

Link to post
Share on other sites
JadePixel Rookie

JadePixel

Posted
Posted

I think it’s a good idea to read the complete Lenstip review instead of only looking at these two MTF plots.

 

There is also another interesting comparison at: http://www.fujivsfuji.com/10-24mm-f4-vs-primes/

 

Have fun!

 

Looking at this review,  and considering what I shoot,  the 10-24 is a no-brainer.  Being able to carry one lens that's a nice overlap with the 18-135,  fits my need.   Yes, some of the primes have better optical performance (as they well should)  but you can't cover the range, and you can't always move a mountain or building to fit your prime WA lens... :D

 

For architecture however..   the best of the primes are probably the better choice, for the corner sharpness. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
Ricca75 Newbie

Ricca75

Posted
Posted

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Anyone have 16 1.4 night shots? It's really hard for me to find some of these. And would be great to see 10-24 shots too, made by users of this forum.  Thank you.

Hi.

Night shot with Fuji 16mm f1.4

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ricca75 Newbie

Ricca75

Posted
Posted

Another night shot with 16mm f1.4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
erk1024 Newbie

erk1024

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm going to agree with TedGamble on this one. The 10-24 is nice because you have more creative options to play with, and it's sharp enough. Once you get away from the super-wides, then I prefer the better IQ of the primes. '-) 

Hope that helps. '-)

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by erk1024
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

    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      How does one make sure that Fuji's image correction is turned on to correct barrel and pin-cushion distortion on a GFX 100 or GFX100S when using the GF20-35? Is it only applied to the jpegs and not to the raw files? (I was surprised to discover the barrel distortion on the GF 35-70mm lens.) I normally shoot in raw with jpeg back-up and use the raw files, which I convert either in Affinity Photo 2 when editing with that program or in Raw File Converter Ex 3.0 by Silkypix if I wish to process the image in Photoshop CS6. (Adobe DNG is also a possibility.) Thank you for the help. Trevor
×
×
  • Create New...