sdsyver
Rookie
- Name
- Shawn
Thanks for reminding me of that. More photos in my catalogue have been taken with a superzoom of one brand or another than any other lenses. 18-135 it is. 3rd lens will be easy. Another fast prime. Likely the 16
-
Cameraderie, a friendly photography forum, join now for free!
B
Blythe
Guest
At various points, with the XPRO1 and the XT1, I have owned the; 18-135, 18-55, 16-55 2.8, 35, 27, 18, 14, and the Zeiss 50mm Touit because its a 1:1 macro and I love the images from it.
I now own the 16-55 2.8 and the Zeiss 50mm Touit. That's it. I have only found wildlife is impossible but then I would want the 100-400 and an XT2 anyway for that.
I now own the 16-55 2.8 and the Zeiss 50mm Touit. That's it. I have only found wildlife is impossible but then I would want the 100-400 and an XT2 anyway for that.
sdsyver
Rookie
- Name
- Shawn
I now own the 18-135. I like images im seeing so far!
Well, I just snagged a 35 1.4 from KEH. I currently have the 27 and the 50 f2 so that will be my ongoing kit. The 1.4 is not as fast to AF but this gives me one really fast lens. The 27 is not very wide but it's a pancake. I'm not a big WA guy and this leaves me open for (maybe) getting the 18 f2 some day. I also realize that i could have done all of with the 18-55 2.8-4 but I'm a prime guy who likes small camera/lens combinations.
Oh yeah, two lenses? 27 and 50.
Oh yeah, two lenses? 27 and 50.
Last edited by a moderator:
KillRamsey
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Hood River, OR
- Name
- Kyle
I change my mind on which two lenses it would be pretty much daily.
tonyturley
Legend
- Location
- Scott Depot, WV, USA
- Name
- Tony
Yeah, so do I. I like my X-T1, but on bike rides of late, I've been carrying only the X30. The IQ ranges from good to excellent, depending upon available light. If there was a wide high quality pancake available in X mount, it would be on the X-T1 all the time. The 27mm is not wide enough for what I like to do.
KillRamsey
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Hood River, OR
- Name
- Kyle
The 35 1.4 is an old design, for Fuji XF lenses, but MAN did they get it right. The moving front element, and the little chittering racking noise as it focuses seem crude compared to the newest stuff. But the images still blow away pretty much everything else that's come out since. And the focus isn't SLOW slow, just not as fast as the newest internal-focus stuff. I love that lens. I especially love the little square hood... put a clear filter on in there, and you'll never need a lens cap.
Phoenix
All-Pro
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
- Name
- Phoenix Gonzales
It's the first lens I have used when I moved to Fuji. I have bought (and sold) various lenses over the years but kept on coming back to the 35 1.4. It's been 5 years since I bought my XP-1 and the 35 1.4, and after all this time it is still the only lens connected to my camera. This may change soon with the 16mm 1.4, but I know I will still come back to this lens for particular shots and situations, it's the one lens that I'll always have.
KillRamsey
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Hood River, OR
- Name
- Kyle
^ what Bobby said, tho I don't own the other two... wish I did.
I love the 35 f1.4
I also have the 35 f2, which is ok, but I've not taken to it as much as I love the 1.4, but it's early day
I can certainly see why people love the f2
I just got a secondhand 23 f1.4... I agonised about that with the 23/2 being... well you know the spec, but the love of the 35 1.4 made me decide the 23 1.4 was the way to go - I get it one week tuesday... ask me then..
I've also been thinking about simplifying my bag... not keeping lenses I never really use..
I've decided on 23/35 f1.4 and the 60
The 60 perhaps should read 56 but I do use the close focus, and I love the size of it
I doubt I'll flip the 35/2 to handy for WR and quick AF and it didn't cost much, likewise my xc50-230, came free with my XE1, it's the only zoom I have and never gets used, but owes me nowt and can cone in handy
So 2 lenses?
No three (and by three I actually mean five
)
But my day to day bag will be the 35/59/90 eqv primes
I also have the 35 f2, which is ok, but I've not taken to it as much as I love the 1.4, but it's early day
I can certainly see why people love the f2
I just got a secondhand 23 f1.4... I agonised about that with the 23/2 being... well you know the spec, but the love of the 35 1.4 made me decide the 23 1.4 was the way to go - I get it one week tuesday... ask me then..
I've also been thinking about simplifying my bag... not keeping lenses I never really use..
I've decided on 23/35 f1.4 and the 60
The 60 perhaps should read 56 but I do use the close focus, and I love the size of it
I doubt I'll flip the 35/2 to handy for WR and quick AF and it didn't cost much, likewise my xc50-230, came free with my XE1, it's the only zoom I have and never gets used, but owes me nowt and can cone in handy
So 2 lenses?
No three (and by three I actually mean five
)But my day to day bag will be the 35/59/90 eqv primes
KillRamsey
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Hood River, OR
- Name
- Kyle
I have this odd relationship with the 23 1.4... I love the images from it (up close / portrait at 1.4, "everything in focus" at 2.8 or above, don't love wide shots at 1.4). But I often don't love using it as much as other lenses. It's big, heavy, my aperture ring sticks, the lens hood is a petal style, and that do-it-all focal length means that while it
A) Does fairly well at everything, it
B) Doesn't give you any focal-length-advantages. What do I mean by that?
By that I mean that with ultra-wides, you can stretch out the corners and let them run, clawing in all the periphery into the compostition, making the picture look "different," which is paramount in the age of "everyone has a camera in their pocket but they're all one wide focal length." And with longer focal lengths you have that compression, the shallow depth of field, and the lovely isolation of not having half the free world in your composition. The 23 "does it all," and there's no debating that. But for a prime, especially a prime **on an interchangeable lends body**, it doesn't give you any "focal length tricky" that I so often love.
I had the good fortune of being taken for lunch today at work, including two beers, so take this with a grain of barley.
A) Does fairly well at everything, it
B) Doesn't give you any focal-length-advantages. What do I mean by that?
By that I mean that with ultra-wides, you can stretch out the corners and let them run, clawing in all the periphery into the compostition, making the picture look "different," which is paramount in the age of "everyone has a camera in their pocket but they're all one wide focal length." And with longer focal lengths you have that compression, the shallow depth of field, and the lovely isolation of not having half the free world in your composition. The 23 "does it all," and there's no debating that. But for a prime, especially a prime **on an interchangeable lends body**, it doesn't give you any "focal length tricky" that I so often love.
I had the good fortune of being taken for lunch today at work, including two beers, so take this with a grain of barley.
You might be right... we'll (well I will) see...
Buying second hand I guess my money's fairly safe if it's a huge mistake..
I think for me.. I just don't really have the frame discipline for wide... I like wide, 28 is a great FOV for my tastes, but 18mm I just end up with weird looking pictures where I haven't made a good job of managing the field curvature, bendy looking buildings and stuff like that
Buying second hand I guess my money's fairly safe if it's a huge mistake..
I think for me.. I just don't really have the frame discipline for wide... I like wide, 28 is a great FOV for my tastes, but 18mm I just end up with weird looking pictures where I haven't made a good job of managing the field curvature, bendy looking buildings and stuff like that
KillRamsey
Hall of Famer
- Location
- Hood River, OR
- Name
- Kyle
Given that I don't use photoshop or anything similarly capable of un-bending such crazy curves, I tend to just embrace it and use the WIDE lenses for things that work with those problems...
KBRX8277 by gordopuggy, on Flickr
KBRX7656 by gordopuggy, on Flickr
DSCF9453 by gordopuggy, on Flickr
KBRX7235 by gordopuggy, on Flickr
KBRX5176 by gordopuggy, on Flickr
Lazy Saturday by gordopuggy, on Flickr
...things in the corners that not only "can" be allowed to stretch out, but that maybe even draw peoples eyes in if they do. Or at least, these are the things I tell myself.
...things in the corners that not only "can" be allowed to stretch out, but that maybe even draw peoples eyes in if they do. Or at least, these are the things I tell myself.
tonyturley
Legend
- Location
- Scott Depot, WV, USA
- Name
- Tony
Today I'm listing a couple of cameras and lenses on eBay and Amazon. If I can sell everything, I plan to use the funds to get the 23mm WR for my X-T1, and that will be the only camera/lens combination I carry. It's not quite as small and doesn't have the versatility of the X30, but Stephen's "Yosemite in B&W" thread shows what that lens can do on an X-mount camera, although my X-T1 isn't a "pro" body with ACROS. If an 18mm f/2 WR is ever released, I would give strong consideration to making that my second lens for the X-T1.
Your X-T1 is still a pro camera in the Fuji lineup. Just not the newest Pro camera with the latest film simulation. And I've read that a new version of the 18mm is on the top of Fuji's to do list. Most likely with WR to bring it in line with the other f2 primes out now.
tonyturley
Legend
- Location
- Scott Depot, WV, USA
- Name
- Tony
That would be a good thing, Bobby. I like to shoot waterfalls and stream-side landscapes, but I really don't like carrying larger lenses, especially when I'm on my bike. I've considered the current 18mm, but it still carries a premium price for a lens that has been panned by a number of people.
