DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

16mm vs 16-55mm for travel

Started Apr 1, 2017 | Discussions thread
OP Sfowler Regular Member • Posts: 138
Re: 16mm vs 16-55mm for travel
  1. scott2click wrote:

I'll add my voice to this for posterity since it seems like you already made a decision...

I love the 16-55 and when I travel for adventure (fly fishing, mountain biking, etc), I bring it and a long lens. Most of the time the 16-55 stays on the camera though. I also usually bring the X100 as a backup/lightweight option.

Traveling with kids is a completely different story though. The 16-55 isn't too heavy for me to carry all day but it is large and tends to swing around and generally get in the way when dealing with children. I find that I enjoy the travel experience that much more when I'm not fussing about with different lenses and focal lengths and carrying a lot of weight, and can just be in the moment. To me this means the X100 series (I just upgraded to the F) is my winner as I get plenty of great photos and the camera gets out of the way.

So to answer your question about the 16-55 vs the 16, I might suggest the 16 and the 90 (or something even longer) in your bag for that rare free hour, and the X100 (which it looks like you already have) for hanging out with the family.

I agree with this statement the most. I have the x100t and while I don't like it as much as my xt2 it does take good photos and is less intrusive. Your answer is what I have come to pretty much although I may substitute the x100t for alternative lenses if I have particular needs.

thanks for your comments

sam

 Sfowler's gear list:Sfowler's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R +3 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow