Fuji Fuji prime lenses

[ferrydds]

I have Fuji XE-2 and XF 18-55mm. zoom lens and the FUJI XF 55-200mm. zoom lens.Very happy with the images with these lenses.What difference in IQ will I see, if I purchase Fuji primes.Thanks,DR. DAVID FERRY,PLANT CITY,FL.

 

[Lightmancer]

David, at the risk of being contentious, you won't.

the zooms are very good. The primes are for the most part undoubtedly better, but unless you print large, or go on a pixel-peeping expedition, you won't notice the difference. That is not because the primes are mediocre, quite the contrary, it is because the zooms are that good, the 18-55 in particular.

There are other reasons than just IQ for going with primes - a reduction in weight, for a start. The discipline of shooting with a single focal length, and the benefit of much larger apertures.

The best advice I can give is to think about WHY you want a new lens, before you consider WHAT to get.

 

[ferrydds]

Bill,thanks so much for your reply.I read the reviews of the primes and I think I am stupid for not purchasing them.However,the Fuji XF 18-55mm. is so good,I just use it 90% of the time.I shoot jpeg and use them SOOC.

 

[Lightmancer]

David, there is nothing wrong with that. I have a number of the primes, but the 18-55 is still my go-to lens when travelling and generally out and about. There is nothing as yet to beat the 55-200 for reach yet, unless you use manual lenses and adaptors, so a two-lens kit taking you (in old money) from 27-300mm is pretty good going. That said, probably the best and most all-around useful of the primes in my opinion is the 35mm - fast and light, it would give you a low-light capability at lower ISO that you currently lack, together with more pronounced bokeh than either of your current lenses.

Hope this helps!

 

[ferrydds]

Thanks so much for your advice.

 

[ferrydds]

If I am taking shots of people ,would the 56 be better than the 35---I don't want to stick my camera in their face.I am very diversified in my shooting,do not have a favorite ---like street photography or portraits. With that being said,would you recommend the 56.David.

 

[Lightmancer]

Well, that is a good question. If portraiture per se is your thing, the 56 is your friend. If street photography comes out on top I would go for the 23, 27 or 35 depending on how "up close and personal" you want to work. If you want to do some street and some portraiture with the same lens, then I would stick with the 35 - it is wide enough for one, and tight enough for the other. That said, as an aside, I believe that there is no such thing as a "portrait", "street" or "landscape" lens - you can shoot anything with anything. There are, however, lenses that will help you realise a certain vision. Think of your lenses as an artist does his brushes - sometimes you will want something broad, sometimes something fine.

 

[Gary]

1) You can/will see a difference in DOF.
Possibly the most immediate difference you will visually notice will be that fast primes will have a significantly shallower DOF at the larger aperture associated with primes. I've been using the 55-200 for youth soccer wide open and while the lens is pleasantly sharp, I am constantly wishing for greater subject isolation via larger apertures. This holds true not only for sports but most other genres and subjects. Often, the photographer desires subject isolation via shallow DOF and with Fujinon zooms you are handcuffed by the lack of large apertures.

2) You will feel a difference in handling.
Typically, primes are more compact and lighter than zooms. So for the same focal length the prime will be easier to handle. The very fast 56mm and 23mm are an exception as their extremely large frontal elements is a trade-off between light gathering and compactness. But, on the flip side, a zoom with similar large apertures as the 23mm or the 56mm would be much larger than the primes.

3) Sharpness, typically is superior with a prime than a zoom. The prime has less light altering elements than a zoom. Fujinon zoom are exceptionally sharp and the difference between a Fujinon prime and a Fujinon zoom would be considered insignificant by most photographers ... but it is there ... you just have to blow-up the images way the hell up in order to see the difference and/or the differences cannot be resolved by the sensor. Significance is subjective.

4) Typically, AF focusing speed is faster with primes as the prime has less glass to move around and again typically the greater light gathering capability of the prime contributes to AF speed. Is the AF speed significantly improved ... in good light probably not ... in diminishing light I find my primes lock better than my smaller apertured zooms. But significance is subjective. (I like alliteration.)

5) Typically a prime(s) will make ones photography more difficult. One focal length vs. many focal lengths. This difficulty is cause for reflection, this difficulty forces the photographer to think more about subject and camera. One has to move to fill the frame (the 'Foot Zoom'.) So once one is no longer sedentary one thinks about greater possibilities and positions and lighting and et al. A fixed focal length camera can be very motivating and unleashing all those dammed-up creative juices. Yes, there is no reason other than laziness for one to shoot a zoom creatively ... but a prime just sorta forces it all upon you.

I am not a proponent of Primes over Zooms. I have both. I am a proponent of shooting. I don't care what you shoot with, as long as you shoot.

Gary

 

[Lightmancer]

Well said, particularly your last point.

 

[Gary]

If I am taking shots of people ,would the 56 be better than the 35---I don't want to stick my camera in their face.I am very diversified in my shooting,do not have a favorite ---like street photography or portraits. With that being said,would you recommend the 56.David.

You may want to consider the Fujinon 60mm and Zeiss 50mm. Both are extremely sharp, both are what most photographers consider prime focal length for portraits and both can be used for extreme close-ups, the 60mm will give you 50% magnification and the 50mm is a true macro at 100% magnification. The Fujinon 60mm is a bargain compared to the 56mm and the 50mm.

Gary

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

60mm

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

50mm

 

[ferrydds]

Gary,these are extremely sharp.Very nice shots.David.

 

[Gary]

I think the 60mm is a sleeper. The 60mm hunts a lot, it is much slower to focus than the Zeiss 50mm. The Zeiss is an internal focus, which for macro is an important thing, not so much for portraits. I haven't any experience with the 56mm. I've read that it is a slow focuser and hunts a bit. I like that the 60mm and the 50mm can be dual purpose and excellent at both. Remember that there is a lot more to DOF than just aperture. Distance from lens-to-subject and distance from subject-to-background also play a role.

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Unextended 60mm on the left - 50mm on the right

Multi-Role

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

60mm

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

50mm

I was asked how the 50mm would do on landscape and architectural, (lol) ... so here a few landscape and architectural images:

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Lightmancer]

I had the 60, now I have the 56. Trust me, it hunts a LOT less.

 

[Gary]

I had the 60, now I have the 56. Trust me, it hunts a LOT less.

I do trust you. I said the 60mm "hunts a lot" and I read that the 56mm "hunts a bit".

 

[ferrydds]

What bag do you carry your primes in?In other words how do you work out of a bag with primes,as I have never done this.David

 

[Gary]

I used to be a news photographer back in the film only days when zooms used the bottoms of Coke bottles for elements. So back then all I used were primes and I shot out of a Domke bag. Again, lol, way-back-then, Jim only made one size bag and that is what I and most every other news photog used. (I think he was making them out of his garage.) I believe that bag is now it is F2. Much too big for the average Fujifilm user. Domke bags are very fast to work out of (the one without the zippers anyway). Today, with Fuji, I use a a Domke F-X3 with the F2 insert in the main compartment. No problema.

Gary

PS- I almost never carry a camera in a camera bag, just lenses stuff. Camera can't take many pictures from inside a bag. For all day events I'll trade out a lens for a wrap of Fig Newtons.
G

 

[flysurfer]

It used to be so easy when only 3 primes were available for the X-Pro1.
Paradise.
Gone.

Today, I carry 3 backpacks filled with Fuji cameras and lenses, and there's more to come. The lens roadmap is alive and kicking, and some of the upcoming offerings will be rather large and heavy.

Too many choices.
I catch myself thinking about taking the oh so simple and pure X100S route with its 2 converters, a proposition to be even more sweetened with the advent of the rumored X100T. And I know I'm not alone.

I also like the idea of using the new 18-135mm on an X-T1 as a single travel lens kit. No bag, no additional stuff, just one camera with one lens.

Primes? Sure, I do need them when the light is poor and when the DOF is supposed to be small. Recently in Istanbul, I shot a wedding with 100% primes (14, 18, 23, 35, 56) on two X-T1 bodies and spent the next day sightseeing with an X-E2 and just the "kit zoom", basically only using the built-in RAW converter. So it really depends on the task at hand.

 

[Lightmancer]

I have more bags, built up over the years, than I really need - but over a year I do seem to use most!

Main users are a Billingham Hadley Pro, A Safrotto CF700 and two Domkes - an FX5b which I find is good for the X-Pro with one lens attached and one carried, and an ancient F3X which is good for the X-T1 with grip and lenses. The other thing I do is take the inserts out of the Billingham and the Safrotto and use them in other bags, particularly cheap canvas ones from the likes of Gap when I don't want to attract attention.

As to carrying primes instead of zooms, the same rules apply - I don't carry everything at once, and I keep lens changes to a minimum - the more you carry, the less you shoot, I find. I also have a couple of "secret weapons" - lens end caps stuck back to back a la Leica. You need to insert an old SD card in between and use strong glue (the black tape just keeps it neat) if you take care, you can line up the lens designations as I have here.

Fuji B2B coupler par Lightmancer, on ipernity

This works well in a deep bag, like the Billingham, or in a wrap in a normal bag.

 

[Lightmancer]

Camera can't take many pictures from inside a bag.

Amen to that!

For all day events I'll trade out a lens for a wrap of Fig Newtons.

Jaffa cakes in the Winter, otherwise I agree! I also have a small twin-compartment "Sistema" lunch box that takes dried apricots on one side and almonds on the other. That, plus a small water bottle and I am good for the day.

 

[Gary]

I love dried apricots. I need to plant an apricot tree.

G

PS- I just Googled Jaffa cakes ... looks pretty good ... but why Winter?