One Year On... Fuji 35mm F/2

ViMa wrote:

Hi! It's very interesting that you stayed glued to the X100F. [...] Having said that, the reason I sold it was the focal length itself. I wanted to play with a 35mm.

[...]

Presumably, I see that in theory I could also only own a nice good wide and the 60mm and not need anything in between.

[...]

Time for a bit of my story! As a child, my dad had a Pentax Spotmatic with a 35/3.5, 55/1.8, and 135/2.5. Not really knowing anything yet, I used the 35. When I started taking classes in high school, our cameras had 35s and 50s on them. So from the get go, I was already biasing toward wide/standard. For this reason and its ease of use, I don't know if I'll ever not have an X100* camera.

The X-E2/35 was truly an impulse purchase. Not even lying, I went to the camera store to avoid traffic for half an hour and browse. They just so happened to have a used X-E2 and a used 35mm f/2, both marked EX. So why not??? I gave them a number, and they agreed (which probably meant I could have gone lower haha); out the door I went with my new kit.

I do find with the 23mm X100F that I miss certain shots for lack of reach. That's almost never a problem, but 35mm is juuuust enough to let me bring elements closer without losing context, and without having to change how I compose. I am specifically thinking of a recent trip to where I wanted to take a picture of some research telescopes off in the distance, nestled in a small mountain range, but the trail was just the right distance away that they would never be more than a few small specks. A 35 or 50 would have been been perfect, and I do actually regret not having the right lens for that one.

I agree that a good wide/standard and a good short-medium tele make for a solid kit. I just picked up a 90mm f/2 to really see if I can get away from wide-angle, and as a luxury piece, a 100-400 so that I can finally take pictures of all the wildlife and birds whenever I am out camping/hiking.