Zoom or two bodies with primes?

Dec 31, 2013
124
Louisville, Ky
The prices on used Fuji bodies has me wondering about just picking up a second body and selling my zoom. The 16-55 2.8 is an excellent lens. And when versatility is needed, that lens is hard to beat in it's focal range. Looking at the prices of X-T2's and X-Pro2's on Fred Miranda got me to wondering if grabbing one of those. Then running it with a prime along with my current Pro2 and another prime would just as good of an option for how I like to shoot vs the 16-55.

For reference, the Pro2's and T2's are selling in the $700-$800 range, which is the value of the 16-55. So even trade there. The 16-55 weighs 1.44lb. The Pro2 w/16mm 1.4 weighs 1.8lb. The T2 w/16mm 1.4 weighs 1.9lb. And I would only carry this when in situations where I would have been zooming constantly.

What say you, Cameraderie? Which way would you go.
 
May 31, 2017
124
Central Florida
Timothy Williams
I have two bodies, XT1 and XT3. I have been having this battle with myself in reverse. I'm not sure I will ever be satisfied but I will say this. When I shot Nikon I had a D700, , 80-200 2.8, 24-70 2.8 and a 24 2.8 ais and that's it. I was happy. I shot sports and landscapes but I have more interest now so choice is not so simple.
I wish you luck with this Bobby as it has been a personal battle for me for some time. XT3 , 16-55, 50-140, 16 1.4 or 23 f2, Done. Sounds simple. Don't know why I won't just do it. Sorry I'm not much help.
 

Richard

Top Veteran
Feb 1, 2013
104
Marlow, UK
Sorry to interrupt an interesting thread, but I just got to the bottom of the page, and below Shop Related Products I found myself looking at images of women in what appears to be black swimming suits. Nothing too alarming (these are Amazon ads) but I wondered how these were "related products" to the topic of discussion ? Then I worked it out - they aren't one-piece swimsuits, they are body-shaping body-suits (for ladies with one body) and that's the connection.

I apologise if the paragraph above results in yet more of them - aren't algorithms wonderful ?

-R
 
Dec 31, 2013
124
Louisville, Ky
@Tim Williams I was the opposite of you. When I shot Canon, I did the two bodies thing with a prime on each. And a third prime in a pouch. 1D3 with Sigma 85mm 1.4, 1Ds2 with Sigma 35mm 1.4, and a Canon 135mm f2 in case I needed reach. The weight of walking around with that kit is what sent me to Fuji.


@Richard that was great for a morning chuckle.
 

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
124
Melbourne, Australia
Instead of two bodies and two f/1.4 lenses, I would also be happy with one body and three things to cover wide, standard, and telephoto:

- an equivalent 50mm f/1.4 (or equivalent 35mm f/1.4 if that's your preferred standard).

- a fast 90mm or longer telephoto.

- instead of a wide f/1.4 to cover the wide end of things, I'd just get a high end compact like, for example, the Panasonic LX10 or LX100 II. They both do fast & wide very well. They can also function as a backup camera with decent telephoto reach if necessary. And they can do very good 4K video. If your main body fails, you've always got a high end compact to get you through.
 

Luke

Super Moderator
Nov 11, 2011
214
Milwaukee, WI USA
Luke
Bobby, this is the UNIVERSAL camera dilemma. There is no right answer. And that is the entire reason for camera fora....and classifieds!

Good luck in your search.

To keep myself from going back and forth anymore, my solution has been a Sony RX1 (fullframe sensor with permanently attached high quality normal lens) and a Panasonic FZ1000 for close-up photography, wide angle, anything longer than normal and high quality video.

If I were to lock myself into Fuji, I could roll with two bodies and two primes. But for how I shoot, I might go instead for two bodies, one with the 35mm f1.4 (my all-time fave Fuji lens) and the 18-135 on the other body (a great jack of all trades, but maybe bigger than most want to carry around).
 
Dec 31, 2013
124
Louisville, Ky
Most of the time, one body and 1-2 primes will get me by easily. The two things I do which a zoom is really useful are behind the scenes work, of when we go off-roading. Off-roading especially as lens changes in that environment could be bad. But then there are times when two bodies/two primes with another prime in a pouch is ideal, or a zoom.
 
Dec 31, 2013
124
Louisville, Ky
Instead of two bodies and two f/1.4 lenses, I would also be happy with one body and three things to cover wide, standard, and telephoto:

- an equivalent 50mm f/1.4 (or equivalent 35mm f/1.4 if that's your preferred standard).

- a fast 90mm or longer telephoto.
With my recent acquisitions, I have/will have all of this. I also have the 16mm 1.4. Which, combined with seeing the prices of bodies on the used market, is what got me to pondering this. Combined with realizing I tend to shoot a little too much with a zoom due to the easiness of it.
 

mike3996

Top Veteran
Apr 2, 2018
104
I wouldn't carry more than one FL so in any given situation, family gathering or no, so that there wouldn't be hesitation what camera/lens to use.

This totally depends on what your preferred FLs are and whatnot. Me being a 35mm guy, and having being accustomed to two-body carrying, an X100F and an accompanying Fuji X body would be a nobrainer, for me.

Like for example I shot Leica Q for my normal angles (28-50) and then Olympus would usually come with a 70-200 equivalent. I like when it works. (Now i'm actually greatly disturbed by the fact that I have a Leica Q and Leica M with a 35mm ... the FLs overlap so much in my book I should be selling one of the items but just can't.)
 
Last edited:

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
124
Melbourne, Australia
With my recent acquisitions, I have/will have all of this. I also have the 16mm 1.4. Which, combined with seeing the prices of bodies on the used market, is what got me to pondering this. Combined with realizing I tend to shoot a little too much with a zoom due to the easiness of it.
I suppose it depends on what you usually shoot and what your needs are. I shoot with a 50mm lens 98% of the time. 1.5% I might shoot with a 35mm if I'm in a tight space and need a wider angle. The rest of the 0.5% I would shoot on a 90mm or longer but they're very specific circumstances only.

So for myself, I'm happy to have a single body with a 50mm semi-permanently attached to it. If I need a wider angle (or macro), I'd whip out my LX10 which does a perfectly adequate job. In my everyday bag I have a 90mm just for kicks. That rounds out my photography needs for the vast majority of the time.

I occasionally do paid gigs like weddings. In those circumstances I carry a body with my 50mm attached. I have a second body on which I alternate between a 35mm and the 90mm as needed throughout the shoot.
 

Biro

Super Moderator
Aug 7, 2011
124
Jersey Shore
Steve
While I certainly own more than one camera body, I'm the sort who doesn't like to have more than one camera in any given situation. I love primes and often shoot with them. But if I think I'm really going to be in a fluid situation, that's when I mount a zoom on the body. I wish I could be more helpful.
 

MoonMind

Hall of Famer
Dec 29, 2013
124
Switzerland
Matt
In all honesty, I'd try things out. If you suspect you'd be happy with the two-body, two-prime setup, go for it and try it - at worst, you lose a few dollars reversing your decisions, but reading your post, I doubt you will.

A two-body setup can be a real boon anyway - though I tend to pick a single body these days, together with a bunch of primes (which usually means three or four when travelling, so that everything save the accessories fits into a small bag). However, I also have my backpack with two bodies ready at all times, each with a zoom mounted (one standard, one tele) - that setup saves me from having to change lenses in the woods, and the backpack makes carrying the load a comparative breeze.

I myself adore primes; in fact, I could - at least most of the time - probably live with a single 35mm-e (it's what I have with me these days). But I use and clearly prefer zooms for reportage style work, and even when travelling with primes (which I absolutely love doing), I usually carry a premium zoom compact as well. So it's not one or the other for me, it's horse for courses. But what you prefer, only you can decide.

M.
 
Dec 31, 2013
124
Louisville, Ky
I suppose it depends on what you usually shoot and what your needs are. I shoot with a 50mm lens 98% of the time. 1.5% I might shoot with a 35mm if I'm in a tight space and need a wider angle. The rest of the 0.5% I would shoot on a 90mm or longer but they're very specific circumstances only.

So for myself, I'm happy to have a single body with a 50mm semi-permanently attached to it. If I need a wider angle (or macro), I'd whip out my LX10 which does a perfectly adequate job. In my everyday bag I have a 90mm just for kicks. That rounds out my photography needs for the vast majority of the time.

I occasionally do paid gigs like weddings. In those circumstances I carry a body with my 50mm attached. I have a second body on which I alternate between a 35mm and the 90mm as needed throughout the shoot.
These days, I have been shooting a variety of things. Behind the scenes, portraits, candids, events, live musicians, cemeteries, and more. I have managed to avoid any more weddings since my retirement wedding a couple of years ago. Events, and maybe live music would be where two bodies/two primes would be used the most. Everything else has more time available to change lenses and think about compositions. Offroad driving is one of the situations where you don't want too much gear, and you don't want to be changing lenses due to the environment. Which is one of my sticking points.

While I certainly own more than one camera body, I'm the sort who doesn't like to have more than one camera in any given situation. I love primes and often shoot with them. But if I think I'm really going to be in a fluid situation, that's when I mount a zoom on the body. I wish I could be more helpful.
For me, behind the scenes work and going off-roading with a group is where I really need to be fluid. With the latter being an environment where I wouldn't want to be doing lens changes much or at all.

In all honesty, I'd try things out. If you suspect you'd be happy with the two-body, two-prime setup, go for it and try it - at worst, you lose a few dollars reversing your decisions, but reading your post, I doubt you will.

A two-body setup can be a real boon anyway - though I tend to pick a single body these days, together with a bunch of primes (which usually means three or four when travelling, so that everything save the accessories fits into a small bag). However, I also have my backpack with two bodies ready at all times, each with a zoom mounted (one standard, one tele) - that setup saves me from having to change lenses in the woods, and the backpack makes carrying the load a comparative breeze.

I myself adore primes; in fact, I could - at least most of the time - probably live with a single 35mm-e (it's what I have with me these days). But I use and clearly prefer zooms for reportage style work, and even when travelling with primes (which I absolutely love doing), I usually carry a premium zoom compact as well. So it's not one or the other for me, it's horse for courses. But what you prefer, only you can decide.

M.
I am also in the adoring primes camp. Shooting with a zoom is out of necessity. Although I have to say, the Fuji 16-55 delivers excellent images. And doubles as a great studio portrait lens. My 16-55 I was able to get for a steal during one of the Fuji rebates, so you are correct in thinking that I would break even or only be out a small amount of money. This is something to give heavy consideration.

I'd help you out, but my preferences seem to change often. My kit seems to be constantly "evolving".
My preferences don't really change, but my actual needs often do. Which leaves me with a constantly changing or evolving kit. I'm blessed to be at a point right now where I can piece together a permanent kit. At least lens wise.
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom