Jump to content
acrew09

Next Fuji Lens

Recommended Posts

I've had my XE-1 for about a year now and love the camera - it's really gotten me into photography. I started out with the 18-55 kit lens, then added the 35mm 1.4 a few months later. While the kit lens is great, I LOVE the way pictures turn out from the 35mm. I think partially its the prime forcing me to better compose my shot, but also there's something special about this lens.

 

I'd like to expand my kit, but am having trouble deciding which way to go. My initial thought was to go with the 14mm, because of the small size and the ability to increase my focal length range into wide angle. I like taking architectural and landscape shots on vacations, and have felt limited sometimes by the 18mm on the kit. I also really like shooting at night though, and the extra stops on the 35mm have been helpful for a non-stabilized lens - so enter the 16mm.

 

The more reviews I read about the 16mm, it seems like a really amazing lens. I'd get the extra focal length, but could potentially use it for more situations. Both to shoot street at night and to shoot people indoors, without the fear of distortion that I might get with the 14mm.

 

On the other hand, when I look at what I use generally walking around when not on vacation, I tend to shoot at either 23mm or 35mm on the zoom. Which leads me to wonder if getting the 23mm or a used X100s might make most sense. It would provide more enjoyment when I'm not traveling, but wouldn't necessarily expand my range of available focal lengths.

 

Sorry for the rambling post -  at the end of the day, I think the ranking of characteristics are 1) lens I love using - the 35mm has a really special quality and 2) expand my focal length range. Appreciate everyone's thoughts and experiences!

 

Here's a link to give an idea of what I like to shoot: 500px.com/wdshuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some, really nice photos there.

 

tbh every lens has a purpose.

 

I normally use either the 35 F/1.4 or the 18 F/2 (I must have a good copy, as have no issues)

My shooting style is different to yours and have never used the wider lenses,

 

My next lens will be the 56F/1.2

 

If you want to compare lenses I'd point you to Fuji comparison tool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I skipped the 14mm and 16mm and bought the 10-24mm. It covers the wide range and is an excellent lens. I didn't see myself needing the large aperture so the F/4 is fine. I own both the 23mm and the X100T. Both are fantastic. The 23mm is better than the built in 23mm of the X100T. I like the X100T and have used it a lot, but you may be better off with the lens. I think the 23mm is a good option if you find you shoot that focal length. The lens is a bit bigger and heavier than the 35mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the 10-24 because for me there is no wide angle that is too much! It has OIS and is only 1 stop slower than the 14 so in basically every situation, I'd rather have the 10-24 than the 14

 

The 16 1.4 on the other hand, is significantly faster and it also has very close focusing so it would win for me over the 14 as well.

 

That is why I have the 10-24 and the 16 and the 23... 

 

I thought about getting a X100T, but cameras change so much and sensors improve so fast still... I'd rather invest the money into good glass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I love the 23mm, I'd skip it if I were in your position. It's an amazing lens, but if you already have the 18-55 and 35, I'd go for something different. Right now I have the 18, 23, 35, and 50-230. I like all three primes, and they're different enough that they all have a use and are sufficient for most jobs I take, but I definitely wish I had more range. The 23 has a slightly different look to it (because of the perspective the background falls off a bit more dramatically) but it's subtle. 

 

Based on what you said, I think you're on the right track with the 16mm. It's that extra bit wider than your 18-55, and the fast aperture makes it useful indoors. However, for that price, check out the 10-24mm if you like doing landscapes. Landscapes and people photos are two very different shooting styles, and since you already have an 18mm 2.8 to shoot people indoors, I think you may be better off getting something more specialized that will really give you something extra over your 18-55.

 

And in regards to your 23mm/X100S question, I'd 100% recommend the X100S. Like I said, I love my 23mm, but in hindsight, I wish I'd bought the 56mm instead, and was looking at getting an X100 right now instead of having the 23mm/56mm combo for my X-T1. The 23mm is slightly sharper and a stop faster, but the X100 gets you a second body, a leaf shutter and built-in ND filter, and the perfect tiny travel setup. I would much rather take an X100 when I'm going out with my wife and friends, because it's so much smaller and more discrete - but on the flip side, it's also enough camera to use for paid work. 

 

You could get the 23mm for your X-E1, and then you'd either be bringing a handful of lenses around to swap, or you'd have to choose one and stick with it. If you get an X100, you can fit that and your X-E1 with a lens in about the same amount of space as you would the X-E1 with two lenses. That gets you a second/backup camera, saves you needing to change lenses all the time, and gets you all the benefits of an X100. Personally, I'd either bring just the X100 out with me, or keep it out as my go-to camera and keep the X-E1 handy with a more specialized lens, like the 35mm for portraits and super low light, or the 18-55 when you need the range.

 

Sorry for the long rant. Like I said, since you're concentrating on landscapes and people photos, it really depends where your priorities lie, because those are two very different styles.

 

• I think the 14mm or 10-24mm would work better in tandem with your 18-55. They both add more range, and will give you a drastically different look from your 18-55. They're both decently useable for people and low light, but I think your best approach would be to use them more as landscape and architecture specialists, and plan on your 18-55/35 being the people lenses.

 

• The 16mm is a great choice, but I think that would be more of a lens to replace your 18-55, and would work beautifully with your 35mm. That gives you more or less the same kind of range that your 18-55 has, but with improved low light and depth of field capabilities. The 18-55 probably makes up for the slower aperture with IS, but that doesn't help you when you're shooting people. I don't literally mean the 16mm would totally replace your 18-55, but personally I'd find it a bit redundant to bring the 16 and 35 along with the 18-55, unless you really want to have the zoom available as an option. So I'd see that more as changing your kit, rather than adding range to it.

 

• If you like 23mm, get the X100S. If you're keeping a pretty bare bones rig and want versatility, the 23mm and 35mm are too similar IMHO; however, adding the X100S as your 23mm opens up a lot more options. You have a second/backup body, the most compact travel kit, the option to run two lenses at once, and the benefits of the X100 series. This one wouldn't really be adding range, either, so much as giving you more immediate versatility, and giving you the option of a different shooting style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shot the XF23 exclusively today and I believe I know now why I don't like that focal length: I find it plain boring. It's too wide for the people shots I'd like to take and too long to be a fun wide angle. I love the XF14 and XF35 btw. 

 

It was a good idea that I sold the X100T, it's just not my thing. 

 

Therefore, I agree with the point made above: if you really want another lens, I'd add something wider or longer. Not a focal length you already have. I'm eyeing the 16 now as I know that I loved shooting the 14mm in Chicago. It took me forever to get used to that lens, but after two days I started "getting it". That really never happened with the XF23. I can use it as much as I want, I still find using it and the results from it just boring. Total mainstream. Great if that's your job (documentary style) but if I like to have fun shooting, the XF23 will stay off the camera for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shot the XF23 exclusively today and I believe I know now why I don't like that focal length: I find it plain boring. It's too wide for the people shots I'd like to take and too long to be a fun wide angle. I love the XF14 and XF35 btw. 

 

That's how I see the 35mm personally. I use it a lot for jobs because it's versatile and my longest prime lens, but as soon as I get the 56mm I don't think the 35 will see much use. I like shooting friends and everyday stuff for personal work and I love the 23mm, because I see in 23mm so framing is really easy for me. I also find it wide enough to be useful indoors, but not so wide that it has that wide angle look. And compared to the 35mm, the 23's just wide enough to get a more dramatic background falloff while still having that shallow depth of field look. 

 

It'll be interesting to see how I deal with the 56. Like most people, I learned on a 50mm on an APS-C DSLR, and haven't shot anything like that since I switched to Fuji. In the summer I second shot my friends' wedding and was using the main photographer's Nikon gear. Using the 85 1.4 felt like coming home - I took to it right away and had so much fun shooting with it. So I'm thinking I'll have a blast with the 56.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just bought my first Fujinon XF series lens. I went with the XF 23 f/1.4 R, as I plan to start doing some street photography. I have been very happy with this lens, but I want something wider, so I can do landscape work. I have just placed an order for the XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR lens, and believe it will be a great addition.

 

I am trying to keep my system compact, and easy to carry. My third lens choice will be an XF 35 mm f/2 WR lens, and I will order one as soon as it shows up in my area. I will be travelling a lot this summer, and the 16-23-35 mm lens set will work for 90% of what I am currently doing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The samyang 12mm is well worth considering for a wide lens. Compact, and for me its price is exactly relative to how often I use it. I personally don't see a lot of point in spending more on a wide than a normal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for all of the great thoughts, I really appreciate everyone's experiences and advice

 

I ended up going with the 16mm. It's a fantastic lens from my first day with it - great feel, really like the clutch mechanism for manual focusing, and I think the weight issue is a little overblown. The close focusing has already been useful taking candid photos of my wife indoors. Will post further thoughts as I get used to it, but here's a picture from the Met today. I feel like it's extremely sharp and gives great contrast - even better than the 35mm!

 

Temple of Dendur

Share this post


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...

  • Similar Content

    • By sean73
      Thought you all may be interested in seeing some super low light photos. I was using the 23 F2 but wish I had the 1.4 in this situation. (I used the 16mm 1.4 on the wide shots of the stages). I still think the camera managed the noise well. ...noise reduction in PS.  
       
      Low Light Festival Portraits
      Majority of the photos were shot at 6400 and above. 1/3 of them were at 12800  - all handheld with no flash  
      Obviously  they wouldn’t be good for printing but I think good enough for the web. 
      note: if you want to pixel peep first select the photo so it goes into the light box slideshow. Photos were exported from LR at 2000px long edge (not full resolution). 
      Note note: some of you may know how to describe this better than me but an F2 on a crop sensor is equivalent to approx 3.2 on a full frame camera  .. as well as lenses you also have to do the crop calculation on the F-stop  is that correct? 
       
       
    • By JKR
      Hi everyone,
      This is my first post here. I'm in doubt about selecting the right lens, so I calling for your help. This is my situation:
      What I usually shoot:
      - Travel
      - Family (two children)
      - Street and daily life 
      - Portrait (not often)
      - No video
      Most of the time I shoot with hand held and no flash, so I think OIS is a big benefit. I also prefer fast AF, so manual focus lens is out of sort list. Of course f/1.4 is ideal for hand held but I can live with f/2, no big deal. The most important factor is fast and lightweight.
      I only print pictures in small size, so image quality and sharpness is not critical. However I don’t use Photoshop so I prefer no retouching, just use the JPG images right out of camera, maybe just crop/rotate if need. I also can live with noise of high ISO.
      Currently I use a XE3 with 23mm f/2 and super happy with this combo. Thinking about add one or two lenses because sometime I see 23mm is not wide enough (small room, group picture, or on a mountain that I can't step back), sometime it is too wide (family portrait, children playing around). So I see two options:
      Option 1 - zoom lens, buy one of these
      - 18-55 f/2.8-4: A lot of recommendation on this lens. It's cheap and has OIS. I just wonder if 18 is wide enough? 
      - Waiting for 16-80 f/4: has OIS, fast AF (hopefully), 80mm for portrait is better than 55mm. Internal zoom and WR also very nice for long term investment. 
      - 16-55 f/2.8: this one is expensive and way too big to go with XE3, and no OIS.
      - 18-135 f/3.5-5.6: Slow aperture, and 135mm is too long for me. I'd rather have 16mm. Also many negative review about this lens.
      Option 2 - buy two prime lens 
      - 16 f/2.8 and 50 f/2: Fast AF, fast aperture, lightweight, optical excellence and WR. Super match with 23 f/2. But no OIS and cost a bit more money.
      Would you please share your experience? What do you recommend? 
      Thank you very much!
      JK.
    • By yukosteel
      I have this lens (XF mount version) for about 4 month, and like how it performs on Fuji X-E2s.
      The only thing I was missing - is click-stop aperture. Today I've finally made that mod : )
      It's quite simple if you have proper tools and repair skills, so including related article to use:

      Click-stop aperture for 7artisans 35mm F1.2 lens


    • By tractorboyx
      I would like to start the campaign for a new XF23mm f1.4 WR lens.
       
      The original 23mm is my most used lens, by a mile. But I seem to have managed to damage it with rain and snow, while shooting on the south coast this last week. It now has a watermark across one of the internal elements.
       
      While I understand there is the f2.0 WR version, in my opinion it is not as good as the f1.4.
       
      So Fuji, please could you update this excellent lens to include weather resistance
       
       
×
×
  • Create New...