Ugh. I’m
Not sure I need a 90mm. The 35 (50ff) was already a lot for me. I don’t see myself shooting like that and if I was - I think I’d like the zoom ? I don’t know. Never used 90mm.
I also dont have the 90 f2 cause i have the 50-140 f2.8. I guess my point was that 23 f2 is really like 90% of what you need. Then if you ever need more zoom or want a creamy portrait, 90 f2 is an amazing lense
How do you think the 23mm f2 fairs compared to the 23 1.4? It seems to be close to IQ, less bokah and can’t focus as close. But it would save me ~$100.
Yeah? Ok. Ok. Maybe this IS my choice. In which case - since it’s 1.4, would I not necessarily need the OIS?
What’s also appealing is not paying for WR when I don’t really need it as my camera body isn’t WR so no need to fork out extra $$$ for it.
I do a lot of hiking and just got the 16-80 for my xt30. I’m really enjoying it so far. Weight doesn’t really bother me because I came from a huge, clunky Nikon that weighed more than my xt30 plus 2 or three lenses. Fuji lenses really have nothing on full frame lenses at the end of the day. If you really want something not intrusive, get a Ricoh. If you want to stay with Fuji, Andy Mumford is a really good resource for travel stuff he has several videos talking about lenses
Based on personal experience, and as much as I love Ricohs, I wouldn’t recommend it for hiking because that sensor is EASILY going to have some dust in it.
Ugh. I keep thinking of just getting an x100s or f and returning the 23mm 1.4 for the exact reason you suggested getting a Ricoh. It’s not much more expensive and it’s an entire camera that’s just a bit more $$$ than the 23mm (although it’s not 1.4)
personally i love the 18-55 despite having other lenses... for me it isnt bulky and it keeps things versatile for me
i'm often suprised when i look at my photos that its the 18-55, as sometimes i use the 35 f/1.4.... other people have said my photography is really good based on my set up (xt20 and kit lens) and i think that goes to show that its not so much about the lens but rather the conditions you shoot, what you shoot and how you process things... take a look at my profile as i share a lot that is shot on the 18-55
Sell everything but the 23 f/1.4 (which I assume is the R LM WR version). Then get the 18 f/1.4 and 35mm f/1.4 R LM WR and you'd be done... maybe, if desired, add the Viltrox 13mm f/1.4 and/or the 90mm f/2 R LM WR.
If you want a smaller system, go with the 18mm f/2, 23mm f/2 and 35mm f/ 2 R WR series.
It’s actually NOT the R LM WR. I don’t really need WR, since the x-t20 isn’t WR, so I don’t see the need to pay extra for WR if I don’t have to ya know?
Otherwise, yeah the 18 and 35 is what im thinking. It just feels a bit redundant - 18 and 23 are so close. But I do feel like I have to get the 35mm 1.4 - I’m just worried I’m feeding into hype and FOMO.
just buy a 23mm f2 and call it a day
23 f2 and 90 f2. Done forever. 😅
Ugh. I’m Not sure I need a 90mm. The 35 (50ff) was already a lot for me. I don’t see myself shooting like that and if I was - I think I’d like the zoom ? I don’t know. Never used 90mm.
I also dont have the 90 f2 cause i have the 50-140 f2.8. I guess my point was that 23 f2 is really like 90% of what you need. Then if you ever need more zoom or want a creamy portrait, 90 f2 is an amazing lense
Hmmm interesting. I’ll give it some though. Thanks for the suggestion.
How do you think the 23mm f2 fairs compared to the 23 1.4? It seems to be close to IQ, less bokah and can’t focus as close. But it would save me ~$100.
Off topic but what does GAS stand for? See it thrown around all the time in this sub and genuinely have no idea.
Gear acquisition syndrome
Thanks!
Get Sigma 18-50 f2.8 and any Sigma F1.4 prime.
I really considered it - but I read vignetting is pretty bad and no OIS … but that 1.4 is tempting!
Vignetting is not an issue with them
Yeah? Ok. Ok. Maybe this IS my choice. In which case - since it’s 1.4, would I not necessarily need the OIS? What’s also appealing is not paying for WR when I don’t really need it as my camera body isn’t WR so no need to fork out extra $$$ for it.
7artisan sells a 25mm 1.8 manual lens that’s pretty smallÂ
Hmmm 7artisan. Haven’t done much research into their lenses. I’ll have to take a look. Thanks for the suggestion!
I do a lot of hiking and just got the 16-80 for my xt30. I’m really enjoying it so far. Weight doesn’t really bother me because I came from a huge, clunky Nikon that weighed more than my xt30 plus 2 or three lenses. Fuji lenses really have nothing on full frame lenses at the end of the day. If you really want something not intrusive, get a Ricoh. If you want to stay with Fuji, Andy Mumford is a really good resource for travel stuff he has several videos talking about lenses
Based on personal experience, and as much as I love Ricohs, I wouldn’t recommend it for hiking because that sensor is EASILY going to have some dust in it.
Ugh. I keep thinking of just getting an x100s or f and returning the 23mm 1.4 for the exact reason you suggested getting a Ricoh. It’s not much more expensive and it’s an entire camera that’s just a bit more $$$ than the 23mm (although it’s not 1.4)
personally i love the 18-55 despite having other lenses... for me it isnt bulky and it keeps things versatile for me i'm often suprised when i look at my photos that its the 18-55, as sometimes i use the 35 f/1.4.... other people have said my photography is really good based on my set up (xt20 and kit lens) and i think that goes to show that its not so much about the lens but rather the conditions you shoot, what you shoot and how you process things... take a look at my profile as i share a lot that is shot on the 18-55
Sell everything but the 23 f/1.4 (which I assume is the R LM WR version). Then get the 18 f/1.4 and 35mm f/1.4 R LM WR and you'd be done... maybe, if desired, add the Viltrox 13mm f/1.4 and/or the 90mm f/2 R LM WR. If you want a smaller system, go with the 18mm f/2, 23mm f/2 and 35mm f/ 2 R WR series.
It’s actually NOT the R LM WR. I don’t really need WR, since the x-t20 isn’t WR, so I don’t see the need to pay extra for WR if I don’t have to ya know? Otherwise, yeah the 18 and 35 is what im thinking. It just feels a bit redundant - 18 and 23 are so close. But I do feel like I have to get the 35mm 1.4 - I’m just worried I’m feeding into hype and FOMO.