Jump to content

Which 3 primes combo is your ideal setup?


xherion

Recommended Posts

23 F1.4 / 35 F2 WR / 56 F1.2

 

I already have the 23 and 56, just waiting for the new 35 to come out this fall. The 35mm focal length to me is less preferred most of the time to the 23mm, but would give me a weather resistant compact "normal" prime which I am very much in need of. If a 23mm f2 WR were to come out I may move to 16 F1.4, 23mm F2 WR, 56mm 1.2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

18, 27, 35 would be my pick.

 

If I traded the 18-55 for 18 and 27 which I'm still debating with myself.

 

27 to pack it in a simple pouch everyday in my bag, for hiking and for street candids.

 

35 if I'm going out for more serious "work" but still want it very light.

 

All three for travel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

16, 23 and 56. It's the perfect to-go choice for me.

 

Agreed. 16mm is wide enough to be different but still tight enough to work as an environmental portrait lens. 23mm is my favourite overall, and it's what I'd choose if I had to pick one lens. And 56mm is tight enough for headshots but still wide enough to be versatile.

 

Right now I have the 18, 23, and 35. Sort of the poor man's version of that setup. I got the 18 over the 14 for the size and speed, but the 16 would negate either of those for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the 14 and 56 now. I'd like to add the 23 next (I think).

 

If cost were no object I'd trade the 14 for the 16 for the extra couple of stops and toss a 10-24 in the bag for those times I'm digging the super wide vibe.

 

Speaking of the 23, the guy I bought my 56 from has (or perhaps had) one that he'd sell me for $600USD - am I likely to see one cheaper somewhere (I haven't yet but I don't check too often either)? I ask because I paid $550 for an 18-135 then a week later Fuji put it on sale for $599.

 

Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now I use the 14, 35 and 56 and that does me fine, other than the 14 being 1-1.5 stops too slow indoors sometimes.
 

The 14 will be sold once my 16 arrives, though. The 35 could easily be switched for the 23, or ditched completely, as I hardly ever go for a middle length. The 56 could be switched for the 60 if only the 60 was just a hair faster; the 56 doesn't offer enough compresson and I'll sell it straight away if a 70mm f/2 is ever released.

Assuming the 16mm does work out well, I'm confident I could use just the 16mm and 56mm and be fine. No need for a third lens, other than a desire to replace the 56 with something a tiny bit longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfect for portrait shoots: 35 56 90

Perfect for my traveling: 16 35 90

Perfect for events: 16 23 56

 

Those are of course my perfect combos. It all depends on what you're doing. There's probably no 3 prime combo to fit them all. If there was one, it would probably be 16 23 56/90 for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now I use the 14, 35 and 56 and that does me fine, other than the 14 being 1-1.5 stops too slow indoors sometimes.

 

The 14 will be sold once my 16 arrives, though. The 35 could easily be switched for the 23, or ditched completely, as I hardly ever go for a middle length. The 56 could be switched for the 60 if only the 60 was just a hair faster; the 56 doesn't offer enough compresson and I'll sell it straight away if a 70mm f/2 is ever released.

 

Assuming the 16mm does work out well, I'm confident I could use just the 16mm and 56mm and be fine. No need for a third lens, other than a desire to replace the 56 with something a tiny bit longer.

So in short, you're never happy with what you have.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm torn. I have 16, 23, 35 and 56.

Taking more than 2-3 lenses out with me is overkill, I find.

It means I have to carry a bigger bag and I start looking like 'the photographer' rather than just enjoying what I'm doing and having a camera with me.

I take what I can fit in my Billingham Hadley Digital - a camera with a lens on and 1-2 extra lenses

The 16 and 23 are definitely part of my kit

But I can't decide between 35 and 56

I like natural photography, close to what the human eye sees, but I'm torn between which of those 2 lenses are most useful

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

So in short, you're never happy with what you have.

Ha, true. I'm hoping the 16mm will solve that, though. On 35mm and 6x7 I typically either go wide or go narrow, rarely in the middle. So the 16mm and 56mm should have me sorted, finally. 

 

but yeah, then if Fuji put out a 70mm... well then I'd have to trade up again!  :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

On  the wide end I am in a quandry between the 14 and 16. I already have the 27 and 56.  I love the 27 for its small size yet good quality, and there is nothing not to like about the 56. If going for smallest lightest kit, 18,27 and 35f2 would make sense. For high quality and fastest 16,23,56 would be my choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On  the wide end I am in a quandry between the 14 and 16. I already have the 27 and 56.  I love the 27 for its small size yet good quality, and there is nothing not to like about the 56. If going for smallest lightest kit, 18,27 and 35f2 would make sense. For high quality and fastest 16,23,56 would be my choice.

I am actually in the same boat with regards to wide end.

Currently on 14 / 35 / 56, but may replace the 14 with 16mm.

Samples online look really good!

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.


  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • 92•F is 33•C and that is pretty damn hot where I come from. If the camera was on the whole time, maybe it could have reached the warning limit without actually having a fault. I don’t know. You did not say which country you are in, I presume USA. The number would be 1-800-800-3854.  https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/repair-and-product-support/
    • I received my X-T50 two days ago.  I did not have time to take it out until this afternoon.  It is hot today, but not excessively so.  My car thermometer indicated 93 deg F, and the weather app on my phone said 92. I took 30 photos in a span of about 45 minutes.  The camera started feeling very warm and a warning appeared saying I was approaching the high temperature limit.  This would make sense if I were taking videos, but these were just still photos.  Does it seem strange to anyone else that the camera would reach such a high temp at 92-93 degrees ambient temperature?  I have another question. I was looking for a support phone number or email on the Fujifilm website but could not find one.  Does anyone know how to contact Fujifilm support to inquire about this high temperature condition?
    • Something does not seem right. Uncompressed raw files for the X-T5 are supposed to be around 80MB, call it 85MB just to be safe in that assumption. 183 x 85MB = 15555MB, which is about 15.6GB. Even if you are using full sized, fine jpg along with the uncompressed raw files, you would not come close to filling a newly formatted 64GB card with 183 shots. Maybe try a new card?
    • Sometimes, issues like these can be complex and difficult to diagnose, especially if they're intermittent.
    • Agree with Jerryy..........I use the 70-300 A LOT and love it.  I have the 1.4 TC and I rarely use it, I find the lack of light to be limiting.  I recently bought the 150-600 Fuji lens and it is wonderful, super reach and super sharp.  A bit heavy to carry around so I still carry the 70-300 most of the time.  When I do take the 150-600 with me, I've been amazed with the results.
×
×
  • Create New...