New to Fuji: Prime or Zoom?

[turman]

Hey Guys,

 

Im new here and i don't know if this is the right forum to post this question. But i will try Excuse if I am wrong.

 

Last year i discovered my little desire for photography. I bought a Sony Alpha 6000 with the Kit Lens SEL-P1650. I was really dissapointed with the quality of the Lens, so I decided to buy me a better prime lens. The fact that Sonys mirrorless cameras are devided into APSC and FF, deterred me to invest money into the sony lens ecosystem. 

 

Now I prefer to buy a Fujifilm XT10 or XE2s. 

Because of my bad experience with the Sony Kit Lens, I am not sure if I should get the XF 18-55mm f2,8-4 or rather the XF35mm prime lens.

 

While I had the Sony Alpha 6000, I noticed that my favourite focal lengths are 30-40mm. I also like to photograph in the sunset or at night. Is there a big difference at low light perfomance between the XF35mm f2 and f1,4?

 

What else could you expierenced Fuji-Guys recommend? Im thankful for every answer and excuse me in advance if this is not the right forum.

 

Kind regards from germany

[Warwick]

If your favourite focal lengths are between 35-40, the little 27mm might be right for you. It's small and cheap and people like it. It's a 40mm equivalent. And you can sell it in a few months and buy the new XF23mm F2 WR when it comes out - a small, fast-focussing, weather-resistant 35mm equivalent.

 

A prime lens is more limiting than a zoom, but that's a good thing. A zoom lets you take the best possible picture from wherever you happen to be. A prime makes you realise that where you happen to be may not be the best place to take a picture from. It makes you think more about what you're doing, and move more.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited July 27, 2016 by Warwick

[Larry Bolch]

The 18-55mm unfortunately, is the equivalent focal length of many camera maker's kit lens and so all too often is referred to as such. It is a misnomer since it is on par with the rest of the Fujifilm zooms. It just covers the same popular range in its fields of view. Safe to choose whatever lens meets your criteria. Fuji has yet to release a dud. While Fujinon lenses are relatively new to the consumer marketplace they have a long history in the industry. Superb medium and large format lenses as well as lenses for cinema and video production. I just checked the B&H Photo Video web-site and they list 81 different pro-video lenses ranging in price from $3,900 to their top line 101× zoom for $233,490.00. Fuji knows glass!

 

F/1.4 lets in double the light of an f/2.0. In very low light it means 1/60th of a second instead of 1/30th. Realise that the Fuji cameras work very well at high ISO settings. The noise that does exist is quite film-like and can be reduced in processing. Most of what I shoot is indoors in low light and the results are highly acceptable. I will happily accept a bit of noise for sharp detailed images rather than a silky blur. 

[Tikcus]

i'll assume on your sony alpha 6000 you mean your fav focal lengths are 30-40mm you mean on that camera, personally i'd buy body only and one of the 35mm, i own the F/1.4 so can't comment on the comparison with the F/2.(in regards to focus speed etc, the F/1.4 lets 1 stop more light in though)

 

However, in situations where you can not zoom with your feet you may find yourself limited with one lens.

 

Personally I do not use a short zoom, my setup is normally, the XT-10 with the 35mm F/1.4 lens attached, with the 18mm F/2 and 60mm F/2.4 in my bag (occasionally just the 35mm on camera, and the 18mm in pocket)

90% of the time I can zoom with my feet and do not need to change lenses.

 

I only use zooms at the longer focal lengths when zooming with your feet is impossible or not practical (that and as of yet Fuji does not have any long primes)

 

There are advantages to the 18-55 F/2.8-4, not changing lenses being the big one, it is also stabilised (which non of the lenses I use day to day are), granted I don't care abut stabilisation at short focal lengths as I can normal keep the shutter speed fast enough that it does not create a problem (that and stabilisation may help with camera shake, but if the subject is moving being able to handhold at 1/4 second aint going to help you)

 

Optically though having owned the Sony SELP1650, and the Fuji XF 18-55, the Fuji is  much better lens.

 

good luck with your decision

Edited July 27, 2016 by Tikcus

[Phil]

To echo everyone else here, the Fuji 18-55mm is much, much better than the Sony 16-50mm. The cheaper kit with the Fuji 16-50mm is likely quite a bit better than the Sony 16-50mm.

 

If you want to stick with one lens, I'd recommend either body with either the 18-55mm or one of the 35mm's. I own the 35mm 1.4 and it makes fantastic photos, but the autofocus is jittery, and can be prone to hunting, especially in lower light. For more dedicated purposes like portraits or product photography, I'd recommend the 35 1.4, but for an all-purpose lens, the 35mm f/2 is the better choice, and cheaper.

 

Since you like the 35mm focal length so much, my recommendation would be to buy the cheaper kit with the 16-50mm lens (it's just $100 more than the body-only price) to have something versatile, and get the 35mm f/2 to go with it. It's really compact and works beautifully on those bodies, especially the X-E2s IMHO.

[frod]

Just cut to the chase and get the 23mm and 56mm ;-)

[Hermelin]

When I switched back to the FUJI system again (used to have a x100s 3 years ago) recently from Canon, one of the main reason was portability and discretion.

To really maximize this idea primes is the way to go. I only have the 18 f/2 so far, but I'm gonna get the 35 f/2 and probably the upcoming new 50 f/2.

 

HOWEVER. The 18-55 is very tempting as I heard so much great things about it and it would be a terrific travel companion.

I've actually been trying to get the 18 f/2 sold and get the 18-55 which is sold cheaply as a kit with the new X-T2.

 

But since I can't get the 18 f/2 sold for a reasonable price I'll might just stick with.

I guess I could have both the 18-55 and 18 f/2. I can afford it but not sure I can justify it

Edited July 29, 2016 by Hermelin

[immo_p]

The 18-55 is very good for a so-called kit lens, with only some minor weakness at the long end. But I got into Fuji from the 35mm 1.4 as my only lens, which is a brilliant choice overall (despite being noisy) and having only one prime definitely changes your photographic view. The 35/2 is more modern and faster in focusing, but you lose a stop of light and the distortion is higher (but digitally corrected in camera). Would be the alternative if you need weather resistance and quick focusing more than highest apertures.

 

Whatever you choose, you can't go wrong. I'm a fan of high aperture and low light, so it was obvious for me to start with the 35mm. 

[deva]

If you like to shoot at night, then the 1.4 primes are the way to go. And they are gorgeous lenses. I have the 16/1.4, 23/1.4, 35/1.4 and the 56/1.2

 

Shooting out on the street at night, the 23 and 56 are my two most used lenses. I prefer the 23 to the 35 if I were to have to pick one.

[johant]

I had the 18-55 and sold it again, due to its size. I now have the 18/2 and 35/1.4, and I'm very happy with that combination. For compact carrying, I use the 27mm.