Jump to content

10-24 + 35 or 16 + 35. Which combo?


Hermelin

Recommended Posts

I almost bought the 16mm during the last sale, but resisted at the time. I have the 10-24mm and the 35mm. I think if I could only have one of the two combos, I'd go with the 16 and 35. I don't often want to go wider than the 16mm and from what I am seeing the IQ is better. I like the 10-24mm, but it is missing something for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on your shooting style. I had a similar decision to make and opted for the 16.

Retrospectively, best decision ever - changed my shooting style! Love taking these people shots in an environemental context.

 

Fuji just gave me the inspiration to get rid of all the zooms ;). A stellar ultra wide zoom could change that in the future, but for now I am fine with the primes.

 

Imho, if you are more into landsacpe, architecture -> 10-24, if you are more into people in context, story telling, street -> 16

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 has the highest resolution in XF. It resolves more details if you zoom in to 100%+. And F/1.4 makes it such a wonderful lens for galaxy photography.

But if I had to choose, I'd still go for 10-24 and 35 combo.

There're 2 reasons that the advantage of 16 can't really attract me.

1. I don't take landscape for commercial purpose. The super high resolution isn't a MUST.

2. Of course I don't always take galaxy that often. 

And here is the reason why 10-24 can be the replacement.

1. Landscape seldom taken by big aperture, F/4 is huge enough, except galaxy.

2. 10-24 gives you much more than just 16.

----24: A 36mm in 135 is wonderful for street photography.

----18: A 28mm in 135 is another nice option for street photography and it's also suitable for landscape.

----16: A 24mm in 135 is just nice for usual landscape.

----10-14: Ultra wide angle provides a strong visual impact to your photo.

Ultra wide is not a MUST, but you'll falling love with it if you have one.

I do use 14 to take portraits. The perspective makes girls leg longer and thinner. And the visual impact with good background such as great architecture gives you a stately feeling.

3. Every time before travelling, I never think about which lens to bring. I just mount my 10-24 onto the camera, that's all I need. No matter street, cityscape or great landscape, the 10-24 can manage everything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How many landscape and architecture shots you tend to take is the main question, but also how much you intend to travel. One of my favorite travel combinations is 10-24, 35 f/1.4, and 55-200, but I have also taken the 16, 23, 35 f/1.4 and the 55-200 while traveling too depending on the location. If my travel is oriented toward landscapes, then I lean toward the 16 when I'm packing. If I'm going to be in cities, then I take the 24. So even within landscape and architecture there are some considerations to be made. If I could only have one of them, it would probably be the 16mm because of the image quality edge, but if I only had the 10-24, I wouldn't necessarily be disappointed.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...