10-24mm or 16mm?

Txla · May 14, 2017

Hello! I currently have the 23mm F/2, 18-135mm, and will be acquiring the 16-55mm. I was wondering which would be better to get: 10-24mm or 16mm? I like the F1.4 of the 16mm and the WR, but am torn with 10-24's zoom.

I plan to shoot landscape and architecture with it. Any advice would be appreciated!

a l b e r t · May 14, 2017

I've both lenses. If you're going to shoot architecture and landscape, 10-24 is the one to get.

The 16 is more of an environmental portrait lens. For getting people shot with close distance with aperture wide open. For a landscape lens, I do not find it to be wide enough. The 14 is better in this case.

The sharpness of the 10-24 @ 14mm is actually as good as the 14 f2.8 lens.

Txla · May 14, 2017

a l b e r t said:
I've both lenses. If you're going to shoot architecture and landscape, 10-24 is the one to get.

The 16 is more of an environmental portrait lens. For getting people shot with close distance with aperture wide open. For a landscape lens, I do not find it to be wide enough. The 14 is better in this case.

The sharpness of the 10-24 @ 14mm is actually as good as the 14 f2.8 lens.

Do you think it would be redundant to get the 16mm as I already have the 16-55mm?

57even · May 14, 2017

Txla said:
a l b e r t said:

I've both lenses. If you're going to shoot architecture and landscape, 10-24 is the one to get.

The 16 is more of an environmental portrait lens. For getting people shot with close distance with aperture wide open. For a landscape lens, I do not find it to be wide enough. The 14 is better in this case.

The sharpness of the 10-24 @ 14mm is actually as good as the 14 f2.8 lens.

Click to expand...

Do you think it would be redundant to get the 16mm as I already have the 16-55mm?

For me, yes. The 10-24 would be more useful I think.

JacquesC · May 14, 2017

My vote goes to the 10-24.

I have both lenses, and both are very good.

However for your intended use the 10-24 offers you better options, it has better range and remember it also has OIS which might be handy.

In fact, with the 10-24 also in my bag I very seldom use the 16mm - to the point where I'm considering selling it.

laddsmith · May 14, 2017

JacquesC said:
My vote goes to the 10-24.

I have both lenses, and both are very good.

However for your intended use the 10-24 offers you better options, it has better range and remember it also has OIS which might be handy.

In fact, with the 10-24 also in my bag I very seldom use the 16mm - to the point where I'm considering selling it.

MarcosV · May 14, 2017

Txla said:
Hello! I currently have the 23mm F/2, 18-135mm, and will be acquiring the 16-55mm. I was wondering which would be better to get: 10-24mm or 16mm? I like the F1.4 of the 16mm and the WR, but am torn with 10-24's zoom.

I plan to shoot landscape and architecture with it. Any advice would be appreciated!

I suggest considering other factors beyond selecting one of these two excellent lenses.

Do you travel or do lots of photo walks? If so how much gear are you planning on carrying? The 10-24mm is bigger and a bit heavier than other options. But, then again, you got an 18-135 and plan to get the 16-55 --- all of these are bigger and heavier options.

Are you planning any special trips soon? Which lenses would be perfect for that trip?

If you shoot landscape and architecture, plan on stopping down the lens and using a tripod for maximum sharpness and better DOF. In those situations, the 16's f/1.4 might not be as useful.

If you go with the 16mm, reflect on which lens would you get for wider than 16mm. A 14mm? A Rokinon 10mm or 12mm?

Personally, I would get the 10-24 for the ultra wide option and OIS. Especially if you do get the 16-55.

If you shoot landscapes on a tripod, you have the option of doing stitched panoramics with your 23mm.

I find that I use my 16/1.4 in situations where I would leave my 23/1.4 at home. I would bring the 10-24 if I needed to go 10mm or 12mm wide.

borderplatz · May 14, 2017

im not using my 16mm as much as i thoght i would either, my 35 f2 is on the xpro2 90 percent of the time, but i dont plan on selling it, i think it would haunt me

a l b e r t · May 15, 2017

Txla said:
a l b e r t said:

I've both lenses. If you're going to shoot architecture and landscape, 10-24 is the one to get.

The 16 is more of an environmental portrait lens. For getting people shot with close distance with aperture wide open. For a landscape lens, I do not find it to be wide enough. The 14 is better in this case.

The sharpness of the 10-24 @ 14mm is actually as good as the 14 f2.8 lens.

Click to expand...

Do you think it would be redundant to get the 16mm as I already have the 16-55mm?

I've the 16-55mm too. It is a lens for different purpose. The 16-55mm can't shoot at very close distances, which make it not as great for environmental portrait. And since it is f2.8, you don't get the kind of creamy background blur when you get very close to your subject.

vegetaleb · May 15, 2017

This question is tricky:

The best landscape zoom vs the best landscape prime!

I think though that as long as you have a 23mm lens and you don't need to go as wide as 10mm, I would have a slight preference for the 16mm, this prime is a jewel given users experiences

DP13Photo · May 15, 2017

Being a new X-T20 owner I eventually plan to get both... as they really are for two different needs. The only question for me is which to get first and it will probably be the 10-24 as it's an ideal landscape lens for my style.

Vic Chapman · May 15, 2017

Txla said:
a l b e r t said:

I've both lenses. If you're going to shoot architecture and landscape, 10-24 is the one to get.

The 16 is more of an environmental portrait lens. For getting people shot with close distance with aperture wide open. For a landscape lens, I do not find it to be wide enough. The 14 is better in this case.

The sharpness of the 10-24 @ 14mm is actually as good as the 14 f2.8 lens.

Click to expand...

Do you think it would be redundant to get the 16mm as I already have the 16-55mm?

Yes it would. - The 16mm end of the zoom actually performs better than the 16mm f1.4 (according to charts so probably the same to the naked eye in real life pictures). All you would gain is the wide aperture and once you've done the obligatory narrow DoF close up you wont use that feature very often.

No way is the 10-24 as good as the 14mm f2.4 except for its OIS but it is more versatile for very minor cost in IQ. For dedicated architectural shooting and also for street, I still prefer my 14mm but otherwise I am super happy with the 16-55mm f2.8 which gives me more options inc great bokeh and narrow DoF at the long end.. I would take my 14mm with 15-55 rather than a 10-24 because those two lenses make quite a hefty load.

The 16mm f1.4 does make a great street and people lens if used creatively. (Checkout the weekly Fuji X pictures thread).

Vic

Txla · May 15, 2017

Vic Chapman said:
Txla said:

a l b e r t said:

I've both lenses. If you're going to shoot architecture and landscape, 10-24 is the one to get.

The 16 is more of an environmental portrait lens. For getting people shot with close distance with aperture wide open. For a landscape lens, I do not find it to be wide enough. The 14 is better in this case.

The sharpness of the 10-24 @ 14mm is actually as good as the 14 f2.8 lens.

Click to expand...

Do you think it would be redundant to get the 16mm as I already have the 16-55mm?

Click to expand...

Yes it would. - The 16mm end of the zoom actually performs better than the 16mm f1.4 (according to charts so probably the same to the naked eye in real life pictures). All you would gain is the wide aperture and once you've done the obligatory narrow DoF close up you wont use that feature very often.

No way is the 10-24 as good as the 14mm f2.4 except for its OIS but it is more versatile for very minor cost in IQ. For dedicated architectural shooting and also for street, I still prefer my 14mm but otherwise I am super happy with the 16-55mm f2.8 which gives me more options inc great bokeh and narrow DoF at the long end.. I would take my 14mm with 15-55 rather than a 10-24 because those two lenses make quite a hefty load.

The 16mm f1.4 does make a great street and people lens if used creatively. (Checkout the weekly Fuji X pictures thread).

Vic

Jazz1 · May 15, 2017

I'm finding the 10-24mm very versatile for landscape and even a bit of street photography (in tourist areas where people expect cameras). It even comes in handy for events where a smallish office with a lot of people.

Gov. Terry Branstad next Ambassador To China at bill signing

markam04 · May 15, 2017

I recently had to make the same decision and went with the 16mm 1.4

I tried the 10-24 and found that I favoured 16mm as that was as wide as I can go without too much perspective distortion. Also, I will be using the lens in doors and I need a fast Lens.

Really depends on your usage, but the 16mm is a lot faster.

maxxxx · May 16, 2017

I had the 16 for a while and the only time I really used it was in Paris at night handheld. With F1.4 and high ISO you can shoot in extremely dark scenarios. Besides nightshots the 10-24 covers all my other needs.

iRanN · May 16, 2017

Txla said:
Hello! I currently have the 23mm F/2, 18-135mm, and will be acquiring the 16-55mm. I was wondering which would be better to get: 10-24mm or 16mm? I like the F1.4 of the 16mm and the WR, but am torn with 10-24's zoom.

I plan to shoot landscape and architecture with it. Any advice would be appreciated!

I wasn't a big fan of the 10-20 for landscape, at 10mm I felt like the corners weren't great even stopping down. The 16mm is my favorite Fuji lens but is probably not wide enough for architecture.

chris baron · May 16, 2017

You guys are killing me. I have a 16 F/1.4 and I'm debating on trading it for a 10-24 because I mostly do landscape shooting. However, I live in the Vancouver area where is rather soggy for 5-6 months out of the year. The 16 is pretty wide, but clearly not 10-15 wide. It's sharp, and I do like using it for wide aperture shots particularly in low light, but I really do miss having an ultrawide lens having moved from Nikon and giving up my 12-24 Tokina.

If money was infinite I'd have both. I could do the trade, but I'm sure that I'd then regret it somewhat after doing so. I could stick with the 10-24 and get a 35mm F/2 for WR, and that's tempting, but still, I wish I could in no uncertain terms get a "dude, just do the trade if you have a willing trader" from the majority of folks. It does seem as if people fall on both sides of the fence, but that's often due in part to them only having one or the other lens, and not having owned both.

iRanN · May 16, 2017

chris baron said:
You guys are killing me. I have a 16 F/1.4 and I'm debating on trading it for a 10-24 because I mostly do landscape shooting. However, I live in the Vancouver area where is rather soggy for 5-6 months out of the year. The 16 is pretty wide, but clearly not 10-15 wide. It's sharp, and I do like using it for wide aperture shots particularly in low light, but I really do miss having an ultrawide lens having moved from Nikon and giving up my 12-24 Tokina.

If money was infinite I'd have both. I could do the trade, but I'm sure that I'd then regret it somewhat after doing so. I could stick with the 10-24 and get a 35mm F/2 for WR, and that's tempting, but still, I wish I could in no uncertain terms get a "dude, just do the trade if you have a willing trader" from the majority of folks. It does seem as if people fall on both sides of the fence, but that's often due in part to them only having one or the other lens, and not having owned both.

There really isn't anything like the Fuji 16mm 1.4 but you have some options for wider, you can always pick up the rokinon/samyang 12mm f2 for $300 and have the flexibility without giving up the 16mm. Did I mention the Riki on 12mm is supposed to be one of the best choices for astrophotography?

chris baron · May 16, 2017

iRanN said:
chris baron said:

You guys are killing me. I have a 16 F/1.4 and I'm debating on trading it for a 10-24 because I mostly do landscape shooting. However, I live in the Vancouver area where is rather soggy for 5-6 months out of the year. The 16 is pretty wide, but clearly not 10-15 wide. It's sharp, and I do like using it for wide aperture shots particularly in low light, but I really do miss having an ultrawide lens having moved from Nikon and giving up my 12-24 Tokina.

If money was infinite I'd have both. I could do the trade, but I'm sure that I'd then regret it somewhat after doing so. I could stick with the 10-24 and get a 35mm F/2 for WR, and that's tempting, but still, I wish I could in no uncertain terms get a "dude, just do the trade if you have a willing trader" from the majority of folks. It does seem as if people fall on both sides of the fence, but that's often due in part to them only having one or the other lens, and not having owned both.

Click to expand...

There really isn't anything like the Fuji 16mm 1.4 but you have some options for wider, you can always pick up the rokinon/samyang 12mm f2 for $300 and have the flexibility without giving up the 16mm. Did I mention the Riki on 12mm is supposed to be one of the best choices for astrophotography?

I've wondered about the 12mm, and it might be nice to tide me over until the 8-16mm F.28 WR is released. If I didn't have a dedicated QSI683 WSG-8 for Astrophotography already, it would very much be a determining factor

Sadly the rain here is extremely frustrating and when it is clear, it's rare it's a completely clear night for a good part of the year. Love the clouds for photography, hate them for astrophotography, at least when I'm shooting 30 minute subs for narrowband images anyway.

You're right though; I should just pull the trigger on the 12 and be done with it. I can always sell it when the 8-16 does show up.

Thanks for the reply iRanN!

10-24mm or 16mm?

Member

Senior Member

Member

57even

Guest

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Active member

Leading Member

Active member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts