Would you dump your 14mm and 23mm for a 10-24 zoom? - Why or why not?

[Qualistat]

I use my 14 mm a lot for landscapes. Love the lens. I have a 23 mm (1.4)  that I also like, but I have a 100S which has a 23, so since I carry that around everywhere, I find I rarely put my 23 mm lens onto my XP1 and XP2 bodies. From a lens point of view I prefer fixed focal lengths and bright lenses, but there seems to be some advantages to the 10-24. 

 

So I'm thinking I could sell them both and get a 10-24. Not sure about the F4, but I believe it has IS. 

 

Just looking for some technical advantages/disadvantages outside of what I am thinking

[dalto]

The most obvious reason to switch would be to shoot wider than 14mm.

 

The 10-24 does have OIS.  I am much more likely to be shooting static subjects once I get to UW so OIS is huge for me.

 

That being said, if you prefer shooting primes and don't need to go wider than 14mm why not stick with what you have?

[frod]

I use my 14 mm a lot for landscapes. Love the lens.

don't sell a lens you love!

[Skyyton]

I have the 10-24 as well as the 16 and 23.  I use the 16 and 23 a LOT, but rarely use the 10-24.  The 10-24 is a great lens, but I just prefer the primes.  It is nice having it when I want to go really wide, but I don't find that need very often.

[Warwick]

If you want to go wider, people have very good things to say about the Samyang 12mm - and it's cheap

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[yazri]

I would:

 

1) definitely sell the 23mm since it doesn't get much use, and the x100s covers that focal length anyway

 

2) sell the 14mm and replace it with a Samyang 12mm (wider and faster) if autofocus is non-essential; or

 

3) sell the 14mm and replace it with the 16mm (narrower but faster) if autofocus is a must

 

For landscape or astro, autofocus isn't exactly important so I would personally go with Samyang.

[Aswald]

Sounds like it's a tussle between the 14 and 10-24, ultimately.

 

10-24's main advantages is the wider angle for landscape which is great. However, at 23, it will never replace the 23mm F1.4.

 

It does sound like you don't need the 23mm F1.4 which is predominantly a street/environmental portrait/general lens. For people who shoot these, the 23 F1.4 is indispensable.

 

For your case, and unless you do LOTs of landscape/interiors, I'd recommend sell the 23 F1.4, stick with the 14 or get a Samyang 12mm.

[Vidalgo]

I manage to keep two lens lines: zooms for travel (where my 10-24 is used probably at 50-60% of time) and primes for planned works when I have a time and possibilities  for preparing.

So I keep 23/1.4 and happy with it, 14/2.8 is my next planned purchase.

[darknj]

I have the 10-24 F4 and because of it, I see no point in owning the 14 F2.8, the extra stop of light can be mitigated by the OIS by going lower speed. The 23 F1.4 is something I need to really consider, it's about the same size and weight, but almost 3 stop of light could be nice but the gain doesn't seems that appealing to me because of the weight.

 

Now the smaller 23 F2 is really appealing, the light gain is still nice but it looks a lot smaller, plus WR, which is something the 10-24 greatly lacks in for needs. So it could be my walk around wider lens in almost all weather.

[Sluw]

Another point of consideration, the 14mm is 230 grams and the 10-24 410, that's almost twice as heavy. Some people don't mind, personally I love walking around with a high quality and light combination.

 

I'd sell the 23mm anyway since you almost don't use it. 

[Nero]

For the wide to normal focal lengths, I have the 10-24, 16, 23, and 35. I like the versatility of the 10-24 for landscape, architecture, and travel. The OIS works well. The downside is that although the 10-24 has very good image quality, it simply does not match the quality from the 16 or 23, especially when the OIS is in use. I still find it worth owning, but I will return to places with the 16 or 23 and reshoot them if I think there is a truly great photo to be had. I would not give up my primes for the 10-24, but I would consider adding it eventually if you think you would use it. I recently went to Budapest and shot everything on my 23 and 35 f/1.4 lenses. The 10-24 never came out of my backpack.

[Azimuth]

In your shoes I would just keeping using the 14 and 23 and be happy.

[Qualistat]

Hey, Thanks to everyone who commented. I really appreciate the feedback. For now I am going  status quo. Maybe rent the 10-24 and head out for a day and see what I like or don't like. Since I have an XP1 and XP2 as well as 100S, I have lots of options. I appreciate the wisdom is keeping to the prime lenses, as that has always produced the best results for me. Maybe spend more time honing my skills. 

[Sluw]

Hey, Thanks to everyone who commented. I really appreciate the feedback. For now I am going  status quo. Maybe rent the 10-24 and head out for a day and see what I like or don't like. Since I have an XP1 and XP2 as well as 100S, I have lots of options. I appreciate the wisdom is keeping to the prime lenses, as that has always produced the best results for me. Maybe spend more time honing my skills. 

Spending some time shooting with the gear you have is never a bad idea ;-)

[dcisive]

Because the 10-24 f4 OIS can do THIS and the 14 wouldn't quite make it, I'm glad the 10-24 was my choice. I found out my last outing that it ended up staying on pretty much the entire time. I had no idea I truly needed things that wide to get it done, but for ME it was the answer. Can't say enough good things about it.

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!

[aladroer]

I'm photographing a lot of landscape. And my 10-24 is my most used lens. I sold my 14mm when I bought my 10-24 and I don't regret it all! I couldn't make with it the photos I'm making now.

 

And I've sold my 23/1.4 to get a 23/2. I use this lens for street photography. In this case, I prefer a small, fast focussing lens. It's clear it doesn't produce the same bokeh. But I checked in my Lightroom that the number of pictures taken with my 23/1.4 at f 1.4-2, during the years I've had it, was minimal.

[Sluw]

Still... I'd keep shooting with what you have. Everybody is pushing to buy something else but as you say yourself "Maybe spend more time honing my skills." The 14mm and 23mm (on x100s or separate) are wonderful high-end lenses and you already have 'em.

Edited December 25, 2016 by Sluw

[Fiddlergene]

I have the 14mm, 23mm, and the 10-24mm........and I'm getting the new 23mm in January. Every lens works best at what it's designed for. Primes and zooms both have advantages and diadvantages, all of which I'm sure have been discussed above. The answer to your dilemma is not a life or death issue, it's what I'd call a 'first world' problem.

 

Depends on what you shoot, how often you shoot it, how important fine, exacting detail is fir you. And of course how much you're willing to invest monetarily to get that detail. Only you can answer those questions. But if it were up to me, I say to hell with the mortgage and college for the kids!

[budjames]

I own a bunch of Fuji XF lenses including the 10-24, 23 f2 and 35 f2. I sold my 23 f1.4 and 35 f1.4 after acquiring the f2 versions.

 

When I go on my 1-3 week travel vacations, I always take the 10-24. Two years ago we went to Spain, Morocco, Gibraltar and Portugal. The 10-24 accounted for over 50% of the images taken. My X100S accounted for about 30% of the images taken. When shooting in cityscapes or street the 10-24 lens proved to be worth the weight and size. You can check out my Spain portfolio on my website, www.budjames.photography, to see some of the images taken with the 10-24.

 

When Fuji introduces a weather sealed version of the 10-24, I will sell mine and upgrade. Until then, the 10-24 has a permanent place in my travel bag.

 

Happy Holidays!

 

Bud James

 

www.budjames.photography

[macrobernd]

Hi, I have a XF16, XF23 and a X100T and I bought the 10-24. I am also a prime lens shooter. I thought the 10-24 will fix the gap between 16 and 23mm and extend the focal lenght down to 10mm. I made a lot of comparision test between primes and the 10-24. The results are clear. The primes are sharper and they have better resolution. Sometimes I took only the 10-24 on trips and I found it boring.

So I sold the zoom and bought the Samyang 12/f2.0.

 

P.S.: I still own thr X100T cause it is totally different

[wonilsuh]

It really depends on what kind of photographer you are. I had both, 23 + 14, and 10-24, loved all of them. But 10-24 was just too big for me, almost negated mirrorlessness of X mount and I felt like I was back on an DSLR, which, I felt, was an issue for me as I am a street and people photographer, and large lenses, especially wide angle ones that requires getting closer to subjects, simply wasn't right. So I ended up selling it and am happily with 23 + 14.

 

That said, I recommend that you keep both for a while and see which one works for you.

[gdanmitchell]

I use my 14 mm a lot for landscapes. Love the lens. I have a 23 mm (1.4)  that I also like, but I have a 100S which has a 23, so since I carry that around everywhere, I find I rarely put my 23 mm lens onto my XP1 and XP2 bodies. From a lens point of view I prefer fixed focal lengths and bright lenses, but there seems to be some advantages to the 10-24. 

 

So I'm thinking I could sell them both and get a 10-24. Not sure about the F4, but I believe it has IS. 

 

Just looking for some technical advantages/disadvantages outside of what I am thinking

 

 

Different tools for different circumstances. 

 

I acquired the 16-55mm zoom specifically for landscape photography, for which I generally prefer to use zooms and a high MP full frame system. Typically I would not choose my XPro2 over the other system for that sort of work, but I'm anticipating a particular situation in which I will need to minimize the amount of equipment I carry and I'll want to photograph some landscapes — so my plan for this is to carry only two lenses, the 16-55 and the 50-140 only.

 

On the other hand, my primary use for the Fujifilm system is for travel and street photography. For these purposes I much prefer the relatively small Fujinon primes — and my core lenses are the 14mm f/2.8, 23mm f/1.4, and 35mm f/1.4. (I could see replacing the latter two with the smaller f/2 versions, except that I do quite a bit of night street photography.)

 

For me it is a question of which is better for the task at hand. If your primary need is landscape, and you like using zooms for that, I'd consider the zoom option. On the other hand, if you also photograph in situations in which the overall size of your gear makes a difference, you might want both or you might want to continue with the primes.

 

dan

[RogerB]

I love these questions as the variety of replies always gives me something to think about. I'm pretty much in the camp of stay with what you have - there's a lot of good use cases in these comments to evaluate for one thing.

 

I can only comment on my experience and what's good for me and why, so here goes.

 

X-Pro2, 14mm f/2.8, 23mm f/1.4, 23mm f/2 35mm f/2, 18-55mm f/2.8 and X100 - that's my kit for family, friends, events, street, travel

 

I work in urban, rural, dusty and dark environments along with all the others.

 

I bought my Fuji as a light weight alternative to a DSLR which I still have.

 

I find the 14mm f/2.8 and 23mm f/1.4 to be extremely useful lenses especially in the way they interface with or promote manual focus. I bought the 23mm f/1.4 as a result of having the 14 and discovering the MF clutch.

 

The Fuji is my go to camera. The 23mm f/1.4 is my indoor family/event lens, the 14mm f/2.8 is my urban travel, landscape and travel interior lens, the 35mm f/2 is my family head-shoulder, small group, candid  and street lens. The 23mm f/2 is my walk-about-in-the-desert lens, the 23mm f/1.4 is my critical stitched panorama lens, the x100 will do all of the above and did until I got my XPro2.

 

Whenever I have an equipment crisis, especially lenses, I search LR for all the times I used the lenses involved, or those close to those focal lengths. I see what worked and try to think of what I missed in those situations and if a new focal length/aperture would help. Then I take the lenses in question and use it only for a week/month as an evaluation of what does/doesn't work. When I concentrate on just one focal length I often find that it boosts my creativity and vision with that focal length. If I'm thinking about a prime and I have a zoom that covers that focal length, I do the same for a week/month with the zoom taped to the focal length in question. I can't think of when I've really lost ground with those efforts - I almost alway come out a more creative and skilled photographer. 

 

Another thing that helps me is that I try to think about my equipment usage as "roles" rather than features. That often mitigates the questions about focal length overlap or too much/little of something. As you can see, I have three active 23mm lenses. They have different roles. There's hardly a time when I've spent/wasted time deciding on which one to use - they have their jobs. 

 

One thing that does help my decision process is that I have an XPro2 and the 23mm f/2 lens sometimes begs for usage because it is more VF friendly on that camera. What also fits into the roles on my equipment is weight. The travel weight, carrying a camera for 24/7, does have a role in deciding on personal comfort and ease of travel, especially if I'm on a concentrated public transportation tour.

 

Just some things to think about as you sort this out.

 

The advice of never sell a lens that you like is IMO good advice. If you look at my lens closet, you might extend that to "never sell a lens". That's because in my experience, life changes and sometimes you meet your going requirements, coming. I've been photographing for several decades and my prime lens has been the 35/23/35/23 lens, several times for different, non-contiguous decades. That's because my life and family have been through different stages where there are naturally different emphasis on life and recreation. There is also the personal growth as a photographer to consider. Years ago I would never be comfortable photographing a person with a 17mm lens, now I routinely do that with a 14mm lens.

 

Good luck and 

Best Regards,

Roger

[psurrette]

 

Another thing that helps me is that I try to think about my equipment usage as "roles" rather than features. That often mitigates the questions about focal length overlap or too much/little of something. As you can see, I have three active 23mm lenses. They have different roles. There's hardly a time when I've spent/wasted time deciding on which one to use - they have their jobs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is very well stated. We to often get hung up on the fact that one lens can/should replace another. The fact that manufacturers offer several overlapping focal length options proves that not everyone needs are the same. For the record, I did trade the 14mm for the 10-24. I will actually look to pick up a 16mm at some point in time as that fits my needs better than the 14mm did for low light. But the 10-24 fills a need as well for me.

 

Happy Holidays,

Pete

[El Lawrence]

I sold mine and stuck with the 10-24 because I didn't find a significant difference at the 10-14mm range and my 16-55 f2.8 is very sharp at 16-23 ranges. I'm shooting quite a lot of real estate interiors these days and the 20-24 f4 is my go to lense till Fujifilm comes up with a super-wide WR lens. The 10-24 with its IS is a very beautiful lens, I just wish it was a little better at 24mm end and here in Hawaii WR is good to have.