Deliberating on kit for event and portraiture. 16-55, or others?

hotaruhikari wrote:

I've given this a lot of thought recently, but I think all that's left is to ask for some external advice and then decide the option I want to pull the proverbial trigger for.

Until recently, my photography has been purely personal. When switched to the Fuji X-T2, along with a sole 35mm f1.4 lens, I recall feeling completely satisfied with my setup. For the mixture of portraiture, lifestyle and street photography I shoot, it was enough. I did find that the autofocus was sometimes limiting for the wide-open style of street shooting I do, but I could afford to miss a shot here and there.

That changed, however, as I've been looking to expand my repertoire into event work and portraiture. As a university student, I've had many opportunities to informally cover events for societies and non-profits there. My time there has made me realise that this may be something I would want to do professionally part-time, even if that means starting off with small paid gigs in the same vein of scenarios I've been previously been volunteering for the experience.

If that's my aim, my current kit isn't going to cut it. I love the images my 35 produces when it hits, but that's the key part: when it hits. Even for small-scale gigs, I need to trust my gear to produce consistent results.

That thought process has led me to considering the 16-55 zoom. I know the 18-55 is also an option, but the shallower depth of field at longer FLs, the faster autofocus (which is a large part of why I can't just work with my 35mm) and the weather sealing (it rains almost every photowalk here in the UK) skews the balance for me. Besides, since I mostly photograph people, I prefer wider apertures over the slower shutter speeds enabled by the OIS. I can find the 16-55 for around £650 used, and can sell my old Canon f4 L zoom which I haven't used since I started with Fuji.

My main concern here is the implications of that decision for the rest of my kit. Alongside event work, portraiture's very important to me, and to most that would scream "56". However, considering I already have the 35 and perhaps the 16-55, it would feel too redundant FL-wise. A "final" kit I'm considering is the 35mm f1.4, the 16-55mm f2.8, and 90mm f2 (which would give me the reach I occasionally need for larger events and telephoto landscape), and would be within my budget. I wonder whether the 35 + 90 combo for traditional portraiture, along with the zoom for environmental shots, would be enough (without one of the 56s)?

I would love the 56 1.2, but from what I hear, its autofocus might just compound the problem I have with the 35, and not having two Fuji bodies (only a Canon as backup), I don't think that'd be versatile enough for event work...

Anyways, I apologise for the ramble I've gone on. Would love some advice and thoughts from others who've perhaps had the same dilemma.

Hi Hikari,

I would suggest you get the 90mm and either the 56 or the 50 or the 60mm.  I would think the Brick is too heavy and also the 2.8 would probably not be great when it comes to event work, especially when it gets dark. This would also place the 60mm at the lower end, both because of its similar 2.8 but also because of its AF which is not stellar.

If you can afford the 56mm + the 90mm I think that in conjunction with your 35mm f1.4, you should be in a great place. the 50mm f2 could be a good (cheaper) alternative to the 56mm too.