Jump to content

What is your ideal two prime combo?


Cado406

Recommended Posts

I’ve always been a big fan of just carrying two lenses with for practically everything and like many users I adore primes for their sharpness and fast aperture. What would be your ideal two prime lens kit? I’ve been considering two combos: the 23mm 1.4 R LM WR paired with the 56mm 1.2 R WR, or the 18mm 1.4 R LM WR paired with the 33mm 1.4 R LM WR. What would be your choice of combo?

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, man-overboard said:

16/33/56

Hi,

Could I ask what body you run with the 16/33/56. I'm currently looking at the 16 and 18 for my 2nd 1.4 prime but a lot of people say I'm better off buying the 18 1.4 especially since the price of the 16 1.4 and 18 1.4 in my country is basically the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use primes only. 18mm 1.4 R LM WR and the 33mm 1.4 R LM WR. are the two I use most and what I would consider my 'ideal' kit. I mainly shoot flowers and architecture. I also have the 56mm 1.2 R WR (used only occasionally) and 80mm 2.8 macro (used often for my in-studio flower photography. I rarely carry it out in the field due to its size and weight.) The newer Fujinon primes are hard to beat IMHO.🙂

Using all the above on an X-T4.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like all these lenses mentioned but if I didn't have the 10-24 and replaced that with a prime, I would want the 13mm Viltrox or 14mm Fuji.  Or maybe even the new 8mm Fuji.  But not everyone loves ultra wides like I do.  If you don't shoot landscapes, the 16mm is probably wide enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 6/17/2023 at 7:44 PM, Cado406 said:

I’ve always been a big fan of just carrying two lenses with for practically everything and like many users I adore primes for their sharpness and fast aperture. What would be your ideal two prime lens kit? I’ve been considering two combos: the 23mm 1.4 R LM WR paired with the 56mm 1.2 R WR, or the 18mm 1.4 R LM WR paired with the 33mm 1.4 R LM WR. What would be your choice of combo?

18/33, both because those are my two fav focal lengths and I also think the 18 is the best lens of the bunch

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I think I'd vote for the 18 mm f/1.4 plus the 80 mm f/2.8 Macro.

I want to be able to shoot pretty wide, which I can always crop, and I should be able to shoot fairly fast. Thus the 18.

Given that, the 80 has much better reach, and can shoot quite small too.

These are both lenses I own and like.

If you let me have 3, I'd put the 35 f/1.4 in the middle, and pick maybe 14 mm for the wide. Or maybe even 8 mm.

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

    • As @Greybeard wrote, there is more going on than just saving a changed setting. Even if it were only that, it would still be tricky. Different settings take up different size spaces in the file. Trying to overwrite that can easily wreck the file. Early computer based EXIF editors would not do more than report settings for the raw files they would allow users to read. Your Velvia image file may take 2MB more storage than the Provia one, but changing from one to the other seamlessly would be difficult to pull off without a massive amount of processing. All while doing other camera stuff. RAF is vastly different in what it does than JPEG or TIFF or ...
    • I didn't know about that JPG. But for me it would be handy if the "RAW including that JPG" could be updated. I don't want to bother about editing photos on a computer. I just use the computer for archiving them and I "use" the photos on the tablet where I have my viewing archive. Just ideas. Digital photography could be so "easy" or "convenient" if all those things were possible. I want the pictures, good pictures. I don't want to bother with software. Sometimes it is a little detail which can make your experience so great, or which can spoil everything.
    • Yes I used that software years ago with an X100F, but  then it stopped working, because the new software no longer worked on my computer (32 vs 64 bit). At the moment I am a Linux user on a 10 year old machine. My most modern "computer" are my phone and tablet.
    • Its a little more than just the metadata - there is also a 13MP jpg stored in the RAF file - if the RAF file was to be updated I'd probably prefer another copy.
    • Have you tried using the Fujifilm X Raw Studio software on a computer? You can still use the camera for the actual conversion and it would solve most of your problems in naming and batch conversion.
×
×
  • Create New...