Moving from Nikon FF to Fuji

[steviewonder]

If the XT-2 has the features I expect (2 SD slots, 5 or more bracket shots, better AF and 24 MP) I will be purchasing it. I have seen and read the numerous “advice needed” threads, but still am not sure about my best options.

 

We travel a lot, and I don’t like to check my luggage. As a result, my camera gear has to fit in my Retrospective 10, although my tripod goes in my carry on suitcase. Our last trip (Oaxaca, Mexico), I had my Nikon D800 with a 24-120 mm f/4 lens. At night I just carried a Sony RX100 IV, which goes from 20-70 mm, but is fast (f/1.8), small and light. When I look at my travel shooting range, many shots are at 24 and 120, as well as in the 45-65 mm range.  While traveling, I am usually shooting street scenes rather than wildlife or landscapes; two of my Oaxaca shots are posted below as examples of what I like to do.

 

If I’m taking a road trip to the US Southwest, I’ll still bring my D800 and a wide angle lens. However, I’m planning trips to Portugal, Spain and Italy and want to travel lighter as I feel the weight of the D800 by the end of the day. I hate changing lenses as I’m tired of sensor dust, no matter how careful I try to be.

 

In terms of Fuji lenses, I am already planning to buy the 10-24 and the 35 f/2 but may not travel with them. The travel lens choices, and my concerns, are:  

 

18-55 and/or 55-200 (pretty good for kit lenses, but would have to change lenses often to cover my usual 24-120 range)

 

50-140 (amazing reviews, but big, heavy, and nothing wide or normal)

 

16-55 (again, amazing quality but heavy and no OIS)

 

18-135 (the jack-of-all-trades lens, but apparently soft at the long end and fairly slow with no constant aperture; had considered this and a 35 f/2 as my best option)

 

So, given my needs, and desire to have one (or maybe 2 lenses, like a small light one for evenings), what suggestions do you folks have? Thanks in advance.

 

 

 

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!

[yukosteel]

Nice shots. I'd recommend to stay "light" for your travels.

I'd personally choose 18-55mm and make all the shots with it. My spare lens would be 35mm f1.4 or 35mm f2 (it's good to have backup jus tin case primary lens got broken).

 

I moved from Nikon D600 plus a lot of heavy and fast AF glass, as I mostly use primes. With Fuji-X system everything become so small and versatile, that I carry camera every day with me, no matter where I go.

[deva]

you could get 3 Fuji primes... 16/1.4, 35/2 and 90/2 all weather sealed, all fast, all great optics and they cover your range

 

an X-T1 (assuming about the same weight as X-T2) plus those 3 lenses weighs slightly less than your D800 plus the one lens 24-120/4

 

I know that does not address your wish to not switch lenses... but it is such a pleasure to shoot the X-T1 with Fuji primes!

[Stealthy Ninja]

you could get 3 Fuji primes... 16/1.4, 35/2 and 90/2 all weather sealed, all fast, all great optics and they cover your range

 

an X-T1 (assuming about the same weight as X-T2) plus those 3 lenses weighs slightly less than your D800 plus the one lens 24-120/4

 

I know that does not address your wish to not switch lenses... but it is such a pleasure to shoot the X-T1 with Fuji primes!

 

 

Similarly you could go 14, 23, 56.  I own the 23, 56 and 90 and personally while the 90mm is a great lens in many ways, I like the light gathering abilites of the 56 for many uses.  The 90 on the other hand can almost be used as a macro lens because you can focus pretty closely.

 

Personally if I were going primes I'd got 23, 56, 90 and a 10-24 or Samyang 12mm for ultra wide.    The 23mm and 56mm are great in low light and the 90mm could be used when things are a bit far away.

Edited April 5, 2016 by Stealthy Ninja

[darknj]

I am going to advocate for the 18-135, it's really the jack-of-all-trade, it does have some IQ issues when compared to the other Fuji lenses, but not having to care too much about the weather and not having to change the lens with a focal view of 27-205mm (35mm equiv) is just way to handy to have.

 

My light travel kit lens is the 10-24, the 18-135 and the 35mm F1.4 for low light situation, with these 3 lenses, I am covered for pretty much 95% of all situations.

 

Now that's only if you really loathe changing lenses during your trip, if you do not mind that part, others above have all posted very good options that will have less IQ compromise than my kit.

[Nero]

It's tough for me to get down to just 2 lenses for a travel kit without using the 18-135, which I own, but I'm not a big fan of when it can be avoided. My 3 lens travel kit is the 10-24mm, 35mm f/1.4, and 55-200mm. I find that many things from 25-54mm I can zoom with my feet using the 35. I use the wide and normal lenses on my Pro2 and the 55-200 on the X-T1 to minimize lens changes. I realize that changes if you're only using one Fuji body though. My 4 lens travel kit is the 16mm, 23mm, 35mm, and 55-200mm, again with the primes on the Pro2 and the 55-200mm on the T1. I rarely crop images, but if I need to be quick, the Pro2 gives me a little extra resolution to work with, while the 55-200 on the T1 I compose a little more carefully in the camera. For a 2 lens solution, the 18-135mm and either the 10-24mm or 35mm f/1.4 depending on what kind of trip I'm going on.

[steviewonder]

I am going to advocate for the 18-135, it's really the jack-of-all-trade, it does have some IQ issues when compared to the other Fuji lenses, but not having to care too much about the weather and not having to change the lens with a focal view of 27-205mm (35mm equiv) is just way to handy to have.

 

My light travel kit lens is the 10-24, the 18-135 and the 35mm F1.4 for low light situation, with these 3 lenses, I am covered for pretty much 95% of all situations.

 

Now that's only if you really loathe changing lenses during your trip, if you do not mind that part, others above have all posted very good options that will have less IQ compromise than my kit.

 

Your travel kit is the one I originally planned to use. My history with big focal length ranges includes the 28-300 FX and the 18-200 DX Nikon lenses, neither of which impressed me at the long end. I do like the convenience of zooms, such as the 70-200 and my current 'walk around' 24-120 which is pretty sharp if I stop down from f/4 to 5.6 or more. After reading reviews of the 18-135 I got spooked that it would be like the Nikon lenses all over again. I guess I want my cake (good IQ) and eat it too (zoom convenience). If there was a constant f/4 aperture Fuji 16- 85 that would probably do the trick for travel (with no wildlife or landscape).

[Tom H.]

I travel daily with an X-T1, 56 1.2 and an X100T. For travel, less is more. I own the 50-140, forget about that one. Way too big for travel.

[darknj]

In all honesty the sharpness issue isn't really that relevant to me, this is a shot taken at 135 with the 18-135, focus was put on the small fly:

 

 

As far as I am concerned, the lens is sharp enough where I need it.

Edited April 5, 2016 by darknj

[deva]

Similarly you could go 14, 23, 56.  I own the 23, 56 and 90 and personally while the 90mm is a great lens in many ways, I like the light gathering abilites of the 56 for many uses.  The 90 on the other hand can almost be used as a macro lens because you can focus pretty closely.

 

Personally if I were going primes I'd got 23, 56, 90 and a 10-24 or Samyang 12mm for ultra wide.    The 23mm and 56mm are great in low light and the 90mm could be used when things are a bit far away.

 

 

 

I love the 16... very fast and it is also almost a macro lens... it focuses so close!

[Pouncer]

While traveling, how often do you shoot 24mm to 28mm, and 80mm to 120mm, full frame?  That's about what you'll miss using the 18-55 instead of your 24-120? 

 

I have a 14, 18-55, 23, and 90.  Together these more than cover my needs while traveling.

 

If you want to select two lenses at most, small and light, I'd take the 18-55 and select the second lens based on destination and anticipated subjects.

 

I have a D800 and had a 24-120/4.  It was my full frame travel lens, before I sold it.  After I picked up the 18-55 (first on my X-E1 and now on my X-T1), the 24-120/4 just sat on the shelf gathering dust.

Edited April 5, 2016 by Pouncer

[Santosh]

Since you plan to have your Nikon D800 with the wide angle lens. I'd recommend the following : 16 1,4 , 35 1,4 and 90 f/2.

 

I also use Nikon D750 along with the Fuji XT1, and pretty happy with the primes 16 and 35. Will be getting the 90 mm soon.

[steviewonder]

Since you plan to have your Nikon D800 with the wide angle lens. I'd recommend the following : 16 1,4 , 35 1,4 and 90 f/2.

 

I also use Nikon D750 along with the Fuji XT1, and pretty happy with the primes 16 and 35. Will be getting the 90 mm soon.

The D800 would be for road trips. For flying travel, like a month in Portugal next year, I would physically suffer from carrying that weight all day long and prefer to have just the XT-2.

[steviewonder]

Thanks for all the feedback. Fuji reps are in town next week for a photography show and I'll check with them as well. My present thinking for really light travel, is to use the 55-200 and keep it on the camera. Since I don't have a second Fuji body, I can use my Sony RX100 IV which is a very light and fast (f/1.8) and covers 24-70 mm. I might also bring (but then have to change lenses) the 10-24 for landscapes. The 16-55 f/2.8 weighs almost the same (655 g) as my current 24-120 Nikon lens (710 g).

Edited April 7, 2016 by steviewonder

[darknj]

[...] The 16-55 f/2.8 weighs almost the same (655 g) as my current 24-120 Nikon lens (710 g).

 

Technically, you shouldn't really compare those 2 lenses like that, they were made for different ideas. While both lenses weight the same, you are shaving quite a bit of weight away from the camera body. Also the 16-55 acts the same way as the Nikkor 24-70 F2.8 does, the 24-120 F4 sadly doesn't exist (yet?) on the XF series, which I find a shame, I would have loved a triumvirate of WR F4 zoom lenses, as the sensor technology gets better, that extra stop of light lost wouldn't be that impacting. 

 

Well who knows, maybe in the next 3-4 years when the X-T3/4 gets released maybe ?

[addicted2light]

 

We travel a lot, and I don’t like to check my luggage. [...] At night I just carried a Sony RX100 IV, which goes from 20-70 mm, but is fast (f/1.8), small and light. When I look at my travel shooting range, many shots are at 24 and 120, as well as in the 45-65 mm range.  While traveling, I am usually shooting street scenes rather than wildlife or landscapes [...]

 

I hate changing lenses as I’m tired of sensor dust, no matter how careful I try to be.

 

 

 

Given what you said above, why not bringing an X100T (35mm equivalent, fast f/2 for night shooting, theoretically not even the chance of dust on the sensor being a fixed lens camera), the 18/2 (fits in a pocket, for the times you really need wide, and the difference between 24 and 28mm is just a step back) and the 55-200 with the X-T2?

 

This way you would have a night/street/backup camera (X100T) plus a "general" camera (XT2) for when you need longer-shorter focal lengths.

 

Alternatively, if you're comfortable not using a viewfinder even the X70 with its 28mm it might be interesting instead of the X100T.

[patrikkatona]

Your travel kit is the one I originally planned to use. My history with big focal length ranges includes the 28-300 FX and the 18-200 DX Nikon lenses, neither of which impressed me at the long end. I do like the convenience of zooms, such as the 70-200 and my current 'walk around' 24-120 which is pretty sharp if I stop down from f/4 to 5.6 or more. After reading reviews of the 18-135 I got spooked that it would be like the Nikon lenses all over again. I guess I want my cake (good IQ) and eat it too (zoom convenience). If there was a constant f/4 aperture Fuji 16- 85 that would probably do the trick for travel (with no wildlife or landscape).

I'm on your side in this! We really need a smaller but faster travel lens solution lets say a Fuji 16-85 f/4 OIS!

[francisf]

My last travel was in the Seychelles,  really remote from anywhere, hot and humid but a lovely location. Walking some distance with a camera + 3 lenses + a few light accessories seemed somehow tough, as well as dangerous for the equipment when switching lenses with perspiration soaked hands. Many nice locations are that hot.

 

My camera is a X-E2, maybe the lightest EVF  camera together with the x-T10, at 350gm. The lenses were the fujinon 18f2, 35f2 and 60f2.4, all around 200gm. The total weight of the camera + lens was a mere 1Kg. Quite light as compared to DSLR. Nevertheless, still to heavy for me and I do want to limit lens switching. 

 

Then I re-read some reviews on Fuji lenses I own, and especially the 16-50 f3.5-5.6. Despite beeing a basic kit lens, its optical quality is consistenly reported  almost as good as the 18-55, while beeing wider, much cheaper, much lighter at 220gm and much less bulky. At 16mm, it looks really good even wide open, OK at 35mm and good on the long end. The only real concern would be its build quality: all plastic, including the mount. As it is very cheap, this is less a problem than with a better build, but heavier and more bulky x lens. 

 

Thus my next long travel kit will be the x-E2 + 35 f2 +  16-50 zoom, all in a think tank mirrorless mover 20 (300gm) I ave just ordered on Amazon.  I own the mirrorless mover 30, but it is too large for this small set.

 

The 35 f2 will not be a spare lens. I like it much more than the 35 1.4 I owned before and  IQ-wise, to my opinion,  it is easily as good.  

I will use it as my primary lens for about anything. The zoom will be wellcome when  wider or larger angle of view would be required, but

I will switch lenses only in safe conditions.

 

Currently, this represents the best compromise for me, with a slight trade-off on IQ, but a sound level of versatility and the lightest travel kit I can think off to get the X-trans picture quality and a viewfinder camera. The range-finder type X-E2  can be swapped with the DSLR-shaped X-T10 for those who prefer that camera type. With the last firmware update, both cameras  have almost identical features.

 

I join a image shot with the 16-50 zoom

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!

[bhu]

The 18-135 is the least bulky way of getting a longer focal length. With decent lighting, it seems fine, to me.

The 14 is my wide angle lens and is also the least bulky lens wider than the 18 mm pancake.

For low-light, the 23, either 35, or 56 primes are useful but if you do not shoot with the largest apertures, the 18-55 or a pancake could make more sense. The 18 or 27 pancakes also make an unobtrusive spare lens.

[Stealthy Ninja]

I love the 16... very fast and it is also almost a macro lens... it focuses so close!

Gosh... Another temptation. LOL I bet I will end up with that lens one day. I keep hearing great things about it.

[greenj98]

I was also long time Nikon user in 2009 I wanted a lighter kit and moved to the just released FF Leica m9. It worked great. But, when Fuji offered a quality system at a much-reduced price point I tested it with the X100T and after a year, I added the XT1. I do landscape, travel, urban and people.

My kit included three primes 14 f2.8, 35 f2 and the 56 f1.2 and two zooms 18-55 and 55-200. For travel, my 3-lens kit is 14, 18-55 and 55-200 plus my X100T, which has a great 23 f2 lens.

I agree about the faster zooms, they are great but don't fit into the lighter kit objective. The 90 lacks OIS. Otherwise, it is an interesting option.

 

The other lens I have considering is the 60 Macro, it gets good marks, except for speed. 

Good luck

Bob

[dclivejazz]

I also use Nikon FF and Fuji. I recently travelled to Arizona with my usual D810 camera bag (Think Tank Retrospective 20), the 24-70 and a 85 1.8. My X-T1, 35 1.4 and 16 fit in no problem after I removed the 70-200. Along with this as the carry on, I also had a x100S in another small "personal" bag. While there, I mostly used the x100S while walking around and the D810 for the Grand Canyon. It just worked out that way on this short trip. 

 

For most purposes closer to home, I mostly use the X-T1 with the 16 1.4, the 35 1.4 and recently acquired 56 1.2, along with the x100S. Although I often use zooms on my Nikon, I value the more compactness of the Fuji primes and don't find it an issue to change the lenses when necessary. The quality of shots on the Fuji with primes compare very favorably with those from the D810 with the 24-70. 

[Johan]

I went the other way around.  I think the Fuji gear is great but it couldn't replace my Nikon D810.  I sold all my Fuji gear and travel with a D810 35mm 1.4 and 58mm 1.4

[Maurice]

 

 

I think the 18-135mm would be your best best since you don't feel like changing lenses other than for special purpose. You say 18-135mm is soft at the long end ? but that is in comparison to the other Fuji lenses, i think that in comparison to the 24-120mm you have now it might not even be a downgrade at all. And remember it's already at 120mm equivalent at 80mm! So you get a whole lot of bonus range.

 

If weight is the primary reason then what you get per gram with the 18-135mm on a X series camera, not just range but also quality, it probably doesn't get any better.

That includes adding any optional special purpose prime of your choosing. Not to mention WR, and OIS.

[LarsAC]

Hello,

 

I am thinking in a similar direction. I re-started doing film almost three years ago. Shooting digital is now just for family events , kids at home etc. - more reporter style. I got used to rangefinders with my Leica film M.

 

I decided to try an X-Pro1 with 27mm to see if I like it. If so, I might upgrade to an X-Pro2 and 16/35 or so. Eventually, the D800 has to go. I never liked it as much as the D700 I owned before, anyway.

 

Lars