Reading mode: Light Dark

Get the 35 and 23 f2, or the 18-55 ?

Go to last post
A

AMSOS

Leading Member
Messages
678
Reaction score
60
For me besides its many strengths the compelling reason to get a Fuji is the lens based aperture ring making for an intuitive shooting experience. But I am having a hard time deciding between the 35 and 23 f2 (and possibly the 50 f2 later) and the 18-55 kit lens (which does not let you set aperture without using the EVF/rear screen).

Basically I will be paying for only that 1 stop of light gathering which is a bummer. Shallow DOF is not a requirement for me. A big plus is the OIS on the kit, and the fact that I will also get the 18 and 55 FL's in one lens!

Also, one potential deal breaker for me is that despite the aperture ring on the 18-55 you can't set aperture without using the EVF/rear screen, or can you?

Is there a way to set default aperture at say f4? That way you could turn the aperture ring a little and easily go up or down 1 stop without having to see the EVF/rear screen. This might seem like nitpicking but not having the ability to set aperture as with the primes is a big deal for me.

Are there others who faced this dilemma and which option did you choose and why?

Thanks!
 
I do not get that aperture setting thing... which camera do you want to use?

Regarding OIS, it depends on the subjects you're shooting. For static subjects, OIS is perfect and delievers more than +1 stop as the aperture of the primes. However, if you shot moving subjects (e.g. humans), OIS is useless.
 
IMHO the essential question is the way you take photos I mean do ypu prefer fixed FL or zoom

In the fist you have to move to get your ideal frame in the second you zoom instead of moving and the final result might be less dynamic

That said the 18-55mm is IMHO a nearly perfect toool ion terms of performance/size/weight/price
 
AMSOS said:
For me besides its many strengths the compelling reason to get a Fuji is the lens based aperture ring making for an intuitive shooting experience. But I am having a hard time deciding between the 35 and 23 f2 (and possibly the 50 f2 later) and the 18-55 kit lens (which does not let you set aperture without using the EVF/rear screen).

Basically I will be paying for only that 1 stop of light gathering which is a bummer. Shallow DOF is not a requirement for me. A big plus is the OIS on the kit, and the fact that I will also get the 18 and 55 FL's in one lens!

Also, one potential deal breaker for me is that despite the aperture ring on the 18-55 you can't set aperture without using the EVF/rear screen, or can you?

Is there a way to set default aperture at say f4? That way you could turn the aperture ring a little and easily go up or down 1 stop without having to see the EVF/rear screen. This might seem like nitpicking but not having the ability to set aperture as with the primes is a big deal for me.

Are there others who faced this dilemma and which option did you choose and why?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
One more thing to note is that, if you haven't bought the camera yet, its worth getting whatever lens comes as part of a kit. The 18-55 is an especially good deal bought this way.

How are you taking pictures if you aren't looking through the EVF or using the LCD?
 
Yes, I wondered that, but it might be like me - I look down to check / adjust the aperture on the ring before taking a quick street shot for example, perhaps without fully composing or from the waist. I didn't realise the usefulness of this until I had an X100. I think the OP could perhaps clarify why this is critical, but if it is, then it's the primes.
 
Last edited:
23 and 35 f2

F2 against something in between 3 and 3.5 with zoom

Aperture rings (very nice and you can see the aperture without looking at screen or evf

WR

Smaller

18-55

Has aperture ring but you'll have to check screen or evf

Aperture varies from 18 to 55

Has VR which works good and compensates faster primes (but only when subject is not moving)

Like you said has 18mm (which is a big plus if you like 18!)

Is bigger but not too big

Af is not as fast as 23 and 35 but I don't think difference is big or even noticeable.

You don't have to change lenses

If depth field is not really important I'd get the zoom, unless you really like seeing aperture. Either way you cant go wrong. Are you sure if you het the primes you want the 23 and 35? Most people either like 23 or 35 but that doesn't have to be you.
 
Welcome to Fuji? Which camera you are using is something that would help out in terms of response. As for your choices, I was going through the same dilemma you are recently. I acquired the 18-55 with my X-T2 and got a fantastic price. Search around and you will see similar pricing. It is a great lens and completely selectable. Not sure why you think it won’t be adjustable, aperture wise, as mine is. Then again, I haven’t operated a Fuji other than my current camera. As for your lens choices, I started to go the way of the magic troika: 23/35/50 f2 lenses. I then started to look at the total cost of those primes along with the necessity to change lenses Every time I wanted to change FL. I quickly started to research the 16-55 awesome lens as I started to think about total IQ of the 18-55 lens versus the troika. I ended up acquiring the 16-55 lens and haven’t looked back AT ALL. The necessity for OIS is minimal for me, but liked in my video usage of the X-T2. See? It really is what works best for you and my experience thus far is just one more story to tell regarding your lens choices and options. Good luck and my the brick be with you!
 
Elyharbour said:
Yes, I wondered that, but it might be like me - I look down to check / adjust the aperture on the ring before taking a quick street shot for example, perhaps without fully composing or from the waist. I didn't realise the usefulness of this until I had an X100. I think the OP could perhaps clarify why this is critical, but if it is, then it's the primes.
Click to expand...
Well, I am used to the common way of handling the aperture and SS - use the EVF of the screen and twiddle the dials. I now find this somewhat fiddly and the idea of just setting the aperture even before turning on the camera and/or bypassing the EVF/screen is appealing. Let's you concentrate on the scene etc. not to mention that it's more discreet than turning on a screen and fiddling with it.

So while the 18-55 has the aperture dial, it's not marked and one would have to set aperture using either the EVF/screen i.e. just like you do in other digital cams. And that's what I am trying to avoid.,,
 
Xe11ent said:
23 and 35 f2

F2 against something in between 3 and 3.5 with zoom

Aperture rings (very nice and you can see the aperture without looking at screen or evf

WR

Smaller

18-55

Has aperture ring but you'll have to check screen or evf
Click to expand...
Exactly. The aperture ring in itself is not a big deal and the f markings that let you set aperture without turning on the cam are the big deal - for me. I really wish Fuji would find some way to have the f numbers marked on their variable aperture lenses such as the 18-55. Otherwise the lens experience becomes patchy.

Of course the f2.8 pro lens would do the trick, but there is no way I am going to carry around and attach those huge lenses on the cam (I am thinking of using these on the X-E3).
Xe11ent said:
Aperture varies from 18 to 55

Has VR which works good and compensates faster primes (but only when subject is not moving)

Like you said has 18mm (which is a big plus if you like 18!)

Is bigger but not too big

Af is not as fast as 23 and 35 but I don't think difference is big or even noticeable.

You don't have to change lenses

If depth field is not really important I'd get the zoom, unless you really like seeing aperture.
Click to expand...
Yes, yes, yes! :-) For me that is one of the main draws of Fuji. Otherwise, if I am having to fall back on using the EVF/screen to set aperture then how is that different from regular mirrorless cams? If I can adjust the aperture while taking the cam out of the bag, then I only need to bring it up to my eyes to frame and shoot (the Fuji Auto ISO is really good because you know that SS won't go below the threshold you set).
Xe11ent said:
Either way you cant go wrong. Are you sure if you het the primes you want the 23 and 35? Most people either like 23 or 35 but that doesn't have to be you.
Click to expand...
 
I have all three and regularly use each one on my X-E2.

Got the zoom in the kit and totally happy, but once the f/2's came on the market I had to have one -- light weight, wicked sharp, speedy autofocus, and (yes) looked really nifty. Nice to have the aperture ring with click stops.

Got the 35 first and the 23 almost a year later. Delighted with both.

Suggest starting with the 18-55 and do try to get it as part of a kit -- can be a great price break.

Set your sights on the other two and give in when the GAS takes over. You will enjoy the results.

Terry
 
Get the 23f2 if you are planning on the 50f2 later.
 
markusw said:
I do not get that aperture setting thing... which camera do you want to use?

Regarding OIS, it depends on the subjects you're shooting. For static subjects, OIS is perfect and delievers more than +1 stop as the aperture of the primes. However, if you shot moving subjects (e.g. humans), OIS is useless.
Click to expand...
 
Easy Rider said:
markusw said:
I do not get that aperture setting thing... which camera do you want to use?

Regarding OIS, it depends on the subjects you're shooting. For static subjects, OIS is perfect and delievers more than +1 stop as the aperture of the primes. However, if you shot moving subjects (e.g. humans), OIS is useless.
Click to expand...
Several posters have mentioned OIS on being not good for shooting moving people.

I shoot street with the X100T so not an issue. I also sometimes sue my Nikon 5300 and Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM.

Are you honestly saying I'd be better off with OS turned off for street?

If so, I'll try it for sure. Could you please explain the reasons why?

Thank You
Click to expand...
Not exactly true; depends on your focal length. At 55mm you would normally need ~1/160 to guarantee no camera shake induced softness, but OIS will let you go slower.
 
Getting blurred pics by motion may have two reasons. First, movement of camera. Without OIS, there was the ‚EFF = minimum exposure time‘ rule in the past. A 35mm translates to approx. 50mm EFF, meaning you should not get below of 1/60. OIS helps here, you may get some stops faster, i.e. 1/15 (with my former PEN-F, I gained 3 stops in practice).

Second, movement of subjects. If your subject moves faster than the exposure is able to deliever a not-blurred shot, nothing helps. This may happen esp. indoor or at night: you take pictures of people, the OIS brings exposure down to 1/30 for instance, but the person is turning his head around –> blurred due to his movement. And here, OIS doesn‘t help.

to your question: turning OIS off is not necessary, it does not make things worse, but it may not help. But one reason could be to save power for longer battery life.
 
Watertight said:
I have all three and regularly use each one on my X-E2.

Got the zoom in the kit and totally happy, but once the f/2's came on the market I had to have one -- light weight, wicked sharp, speedy autofocus, and (yes) looked really nifty. Nice to have the aperture ring with click stops.
Click to expand...
yes, I am looking forward to shooting with a small but high quality prime. Except, I keep reading about the 23 being soft at close distances, and the 35 having heavy distortion issues. Apparently, you see some distortion with closeup straight lines even after corrections. What's your experience been here?
Watertight said:
Got the 35 first and the 23 almost a year later. Delighted with both.

Suggest starting with the 18-55 and do try to get it as part of a kit -- can be a great price break.
Click to expand...
the kit definitely seems a wonderful lens and while it doesn't have aperture markings on the lens - that one crucial feature for which I am interested in Fuji - I am coming around to eventually getting it. And as you say in kit form it is simply an unbeatable deal. Look at a similar lens from Panasonic Leica and it's 1000 $ !

Btw, one key reason for my interest in the kit lens is its OIS. Does that work only while pressing the shutter, or do you also see its benefits while composing through the EVF in manual focus mode with a magnified view?
Watertight said:
Set your sights on the other two and give in when the GAS takes over. You will enjoy the results.

Terry
Click to expand...
 
DarnGoodPhotos said:
Get the 23f2 if you are planning on the 50f2 later.
Click to expand...
I would really like to get the 50mm later except I am a little unsure of the 75mm EFL for portraits as well as street that I like to do. I guess I would be more comfortable in the 80 - 90 mm range.

Also, one issue I've been meaning to ask members here has to do with the shooting experience of the non OIS lenses. To me the kit lens with OIS and 55mm seems better on the face of it at least. I often use manual focus with magnified view where OIS makes a big difference to the process of composing an image.

So, it will be interesting to hear from people who composes manually in magnified view with the 50 f2, 56f1.2, and even more importantly the 80 and 90 primes. Given the complete lack of any stabilisation do they have a hard time using these lenses in magnified manual view, or is it not a big deal at all?
 
If max af speed is important to you then go F2 primes. Noticeable difference.

If max sharpness is important to you then go F2 primes. Marginal to noticeable difference depending on aperture setting.

If max portability and minimum hassle is important to you then the zoom. That really the only advantage to the zoom outside of total cost.

For me, I find that the F2 lenses are so small and light that its quite easy to get clear shots shooting handheld.

I also found the 18-55 to not match the quality that is often bestowed upon it but that could be due to hindsight having started with the primes and then using the zoom. Don't get me wrong, it's a better than average cropped sensor kit zoom lens as it does most of what it should fairly well but it doesn't stand out in any single way and its a lesser lens in almost every way compared to its more capable big brother. The 23 f2 and 35 f2 at least have that extra level of sharpness and af speed that make them great buys given their small size and price.

Personally, I would skip the 50 f2 and go with the 16 1.4, 23 F2, and 35 F2.
 
Last edited:
Easy Rider said:
markusw said:
I do not get that aperture setting thing... which camera do you want to use?

Regarding OIS, it depends on the subjects you're shooting. For static subjects, OIS is perfect and delievers more than +1 stop as the aperture of the primes. However, if you shot moving subjects (e.g. humans), OIS is useless.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Yeah I'm mostly shooting well over the reciprocal and usually 95% of the shots in the 17mm to 23mm (APS-C) range, I rarely go wider.

Even at night or indoors with 1/60 and F2.8 at higher ISO's with 17mm-23mm I have not noticed any blur or shake, some a tiny bit OOF but not that bad, some a tiny bit of motion blur but again, not very much.

I just thought that maybe the poster was saying turning off OS would improve things even more.

Thanks for replies
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top