27mm is the fuji best lens

[tom burke]

If I am out on the street at night, I'll often open up the lens. I love the shallow depth of field look.

This is the 35mm at f/2.0

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!

[vondauster]

The 27 has been and remains one of my favorite Fuji lenses. Yes, it is compact and unobtrusive, but I also find it is consistently as sharp as my 23 and 56 - albeit with somewhat lower contrast. It has never let me down in regular use. Overall, I think it is a lens with a lot of character, which is not that easy to achieve for its rather pedestrian focal length.

[abjurina]

Just bought this lens for use on my xt-10. It makes the camera about the size of the 100 series. It focuses faster then the 35mm (which isn't hard to do), and the field of view is terrific for matching to what we naturally see. I was very surprised at how good it is. For mine refurbished on Amazon for 199 U.S. Dollars. Couldn't argue with that.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[darknj]

Just bought this lens for use on my xt-10. It makes the camera about the size of the 100 series. It focuses faster then the 35mm (which isn't hard to do), and the field of view is terrific for matching to what we naturally see. I was very surprised at how good it is. For mine refurbished on Amazon for 199 U.S. Dollars. Couldn't argue with that.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The unusual field of view takes some getting used to, but I really like it. It's like an acquired taste, takes a bit to really appreciate it the, nor really wide, like the 23mm, nor tighter like the 35mm.

 

I often swap between the 27mm and the 35mm due to practicability and bokeh needs or if light drops.

[frod]

~40mm equiv. is the actual 'normal'.

 

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/why-40mm.html

[user_01]

I get x100 used for the price of 27mm and find it the way better

[everaert]

It is almost permanently attached to my X-T10.  I travel a lot on business and the combination is small and gets great results.  I don't pixel peep though and don't need large® format prints. For me, its all about capturing the moment/image, less about technical specs.

[abjurina]

I wouldn't call anything an "unusual field of view". I mean, it's whatever you are expecting to see when you use that particular lens. It's not like some sort of crazy 8mm fisheye perspective.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bobitybob]

I've had chance to use this a few times now and must say my opinion has not changed, I really like using it and think it will be my go to lens for my X-E1.  

 

As I said it would be good for dog walks, here's one of my walking companion.

 

 

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!

 

 

 

[Lumens]

I don't normally care for using primes, I like the versatility of the zoom lenses.  My bag carries the 10-24, 18-55, & 55-200.  

 

The thing is my doctor insists I start to get some exercise so I must start taking walks on a daily basis.  I don't want to carry the whole bag so I picked up the 27 mm with a small fanny pack.  I am really beginning to like this lens.  Being a normal lens it does seem more versatile than I originally thought and it is nice and sharp.  

[Vidalgo]

I'm not used this lens so much since buyed two month ago and I'm mostly "vacation shooter with zooms". Anyway I tried to use it at last trip to Malta, so here are two shots taken at night, f/2.8 iso3200, with no time to positioning, composing etc. Just "on the way".

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!

[MartinP]

Hmmm, there's always something to change. It's perfect for me for what it is. Don't mind the one stop f/2 <-> f/2.8 (same aperture as all those fantastic very bright f/2.8 zooms ). And since it's half the size of the 18mm makes it more pocketable. There will probably be more smallish lenses in te future, 35mm f/2.0 first. So I guess in a year everyboady can be happy

ok, i clicked on your photo group with the 27mm and i dont know if im just having one of my rare weak moments, but browsing the pictures spurred a mix of emotions in me.. like tension releasing laughter with tears of joy (just in a slight manner) reading and studying the scene. it all has a sense of gentleness in it. i suspect the fine composition and scene selection by you is to be blamed too. maybe the lense is really boring as mc pite says up above, but then you are a hell of a good photographer to be able to transmit the moment of the photo to me like that. it may be the lense has a character too as someone else stated earlier. it made me even register on this forum before i got a fuji camera myself.. damn, i didnt plan for this at all! sorry for the rant.

[frod]

Wouldn't mind getting a silver uv filter for mine. Can't find anything except ultra expensive Leicas though - anyone know any alternatives?

[Sluw]

ok, i clicked on your photo group with the 27mm and i dont know if im just having one of my rare weak moments, but browsing the pictures spurred a mix of emotions in me.. like tension releasing laughter with tears of joy (just in a slight manner) reading and studying the scene. it all has a sense of gentleness in it. i suspect the fine composition and scene selection by you is to be blamed too. maybe the lense is really boring as mc pite says up above, but then you are a hell of a good photographer to be able to transmit the moment of the photo to me like that. it may be the lense has a character too as someone else stated earlier. it made me even register on this forum before i got a fuji camera myself.. damn, i didnt plan for this at all! sorry for the rant.

 

Hey martin, thanks for the kind words! Don't think the 27mm is really boring though! Since it's on aps-c it has a 40mm equivalent and as stated by Mike Johnson:

 

So why 40mm? I'd say that the 40mm focal length is special precisely because it's not special. Purely by convention, 50mm has long been considered the "normal" focal length for 35mm photography. Early WA's were 35mm. Many photographers have made a choice between these two focal lengths as their own "normals." Many, like myself, have switched back and forth. The truth is, neither of these common focal lengths are quite "normal" for 35mm. 50mm is just a touch long, and 35mm is just a touch wide. Using the diagonal of the format as the standard, the true normal would be about 42mm 

 

You can read the rest here: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/why-40mm.htmlhttp://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/why-40mm.html

[signalz1123]

I'm new to the forum, but have been stalking this lens on Ebay for a few months now, trying to get a used one for under $200, which is proving hard to do.  I have the 18-55 and the 35 1.4, so I'm not sure I can justify spending more than that on something that is a redundant focal length for the sake of portability. Has this lens really increased the frequency of taking your camera along just by virtue of the more slender profile? It seems like it would be a "nice to have" lens vs a "must have" lens and might come later to those with a limited budget. I don't have the 14mm yet, for instance.

[marcelo_valente]

I'm new to the forum, but have been stalking this lens on Ebay for a few months now, trying to get a used one for under $200, which is proving hard to do. I have the 18-55 and the 35 1.4, so I'm not sure I can justify spending more than that on something that is a redundant focal length for the sake of portability. Has this lens really increased the frequency of taking your camera along just by virtue of the more slender profile? It seems like it would be a "nice to have" lens vs a "must have" lens and might come later to those with a limited budget. I don't have the 14mm yet, for instance.

the lens is tiny!! It sure raises the "take the camera everywhere" factor. I love mine. I do struggle sometimes if I'd take the 27 or the 35 out. For street where I'd be shooting f/8 during the day...27mm for sure.

 

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk

[Sluw]

I'm new to the forum, but have been stalking this lens on Ebay for a few months now, trying to get a used one for under $200, which is proving hard to do.  I have the 18-55 and the 35 1.4, so I'm not sure I can justify spending more than that on something that is a redundant focal length for the sake of portability. Has this lens really increased the frequency of taking your camera along just by virtue of the more slender profile? It seems like it would be a "nice to have" lens vs a "must have" lens and might come later to those with a limited budget. I don't have the 14mm yet, for instance.

 I have exactly those lenses and bought it for a little over $200 on ebay. I also have the Samyang 12mm. I can assure you I definitely take my camera more often with me. With the 27mm my X-E1 has the same form factor and portability of the x100 series. 

[signalz1123]

I get x100 used for the price of 27mm and find it the way better

I'm curious --better in what way? I've been looking at both on Ebay and am wondering if I should just get the 27mm for my xe1, or add a second body in the X100. The x100 goes for $300 to 400 depending on condition, the 27mm goes for $200 to $275.

[Sluw]

I'm curious --better in what way? I've been looking at both on Ebay and am wondering if I should just get the 27mm for my xe1, or add a second body in the X100. The x100 goes for $300 to 400 depending on condition, the 27mm goes for $200 to $275.

Depends on what you're looking for. If you're looking for a wider field of view, back-up body and one stop faster lens you might go for the x100. The x-e1 has a 16mp and x-trans sensor though. Plus the 27mm is sharper and you can change lenses . 

[Paul Crespel]

signalz1123, when I use my X-Pro1 I ONLY use the 27mm lens now... the 35 and 28 have become redundant.

 

It's extremely portable, and 42mm (FF equivalent) is pretty well exactly how the human eyes see things.  For me, it is the ideal length for street photography.

[signalz1123]

Thanks for all the advice -- I'm probably leaning toward the 27.

[Nosegunner]

Having read all the independent reviews, I've steered away from the 27mm as I don't see the results being of high enough quality to match the X-T1's performance and those of my other XF lenses (14mm & 35mm). I'm struggling to get a small, portable and fast lens at the 35mm equivalent focal length that's up to the same standard as some of the other lenses in the XF range. I think Fuji need to plug this gap quickly in their range of primes - the current 23mm lens is bulky and slow with only very average performance. I too wanted some portability with quality at least as good as the lens found on the X100T..

[Sluw]

Having read all the independent reviews, I've steered away from the 27mm as I don't see the results being of high enough quality to match the X-T1's performance and those of my other XF lenses (14mm & 35mm). I'm struggling to get a small, portable and fast lens at the 35mm equivalent focal length that's up to the same standard as some of the other lenses in the XF range. I think Fuji need to plug this gap quickly in their range of primes - the current 23mm lens is bulky and slow with only very average performance. I too wanted some portability with quality at least as good as the lens found on the X100T..

What don't you like about the 27mm? It's sharper than the 35mm f/1.4 and the 14, same build quality. Just no aperture ring due to size restriction. Also the rendering is great. You can say a lot of things about the 27mm, you might not like the focal length, lack of aperture ring, no weather sealing, size etc.. But the quality is great (check the reviews, amongst others: photozone.de, Ken Rockwell, Dan Bailey etc.) .

[Nosegunner]

- Sluw

 

I don't have much beef with the 27mm other than its only 'pretty good' rather than exceptional - I don't think it's up to the standard of other lenses in the XF range - Phoblographer, ePHOTOzine and PhotographyBlog aren't exactly blowing smoke up it's proverbial.! The 23mm seems to be good quality but why on earth is it so cumbersome? And the 18mm is just a long way off the quality of the XF range and needs to be dropped or replaced. Fuji has created an outstanding system underpinned by a wonderful ethos. Functionality is great, fantastic sensors and IQ, but the 27,23 and 18mm primes are comprehensively out-performed by other XF lenses and more importantly, by other manufacturers' 35mm (equivalent) lenses. There should be a 23mm (i.e. 35mm equivalent) XF prime than is able to compete with the Zeiss 35mm primes on offer with Sony. It would make the Fuji system unbeatable and do the camera body/sensor justice at this focal length.

[johant]

The 27mm is pretty good, but if you don't like it, don't use it ;-)

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk