Lens Advice

Reskr wrote:

Thank you all again for your ideas. I'm really glad I asked as otherwise I would've just followed the hype surrounding all these lenses and not really considered my actual needs. Checking through my photos over the last two years, I've found maybe a handful of shots over 50mm and an even smaller number of shots where I would've wanted anything approximating 80 or more. My interactions with wildlife tend to be by chance rather than deliberate, and while there is the possibility that I just don't bother trying to take photos outside of my equipment's capabilities, I think I'd be lying to myself if I said I'd use something like the 50-140 or the 80 a lot.

Do you have a deadline?

None, other than the end of the rebate period, but I'm returning to my home country for a few weeks next month and was hoping to purchase the new kit there.

Why can’t you do macro on your 16 1.4? Fuji calls it a wide angle macro lens.

You're absolutely right. I've had some really nice close-up shots with the 16 with really pleasing background blur.

In light of this, would a better path perhaps be to get the 56 to satisfy my desire for a portrait lens,

I would still suggest you don't disregard the 50mm and the 60mm. Both are cheaper, the latter takes stunning portraits, both are lighter and smaller, and with the 60mm you get some macro. The 16mm does go quite close, but keep in mind it actually has just a 0.21:1 magnification. Compared to the 0.5:1 of the 60mm, which can cheaply and easily reach 1:1 with the extension tubes (Which don't really work on the 16mm), the versatility and differences become obvious.

The 16mm is an excellent lens, and I enjoyed having it for the time I did. But I must agree with some forum regulars here who have mentioned that the practice of shooting very close with it to achieve that blur etc. is generally unnecessary.

and to update my body to the XT2 or XT3 to open up cropping room? If so, which would you recommend for someone who rarely takes video? I liked the look of the touch to focus on the XT3, but I'm not sure how much I'd use it as I almost always shoot using the viewfinder. Is the new processor significantly better?

The X-T3 is obviously an upgrade to the X-T2, there's no denying that. Personally, if you can afford it, I would go for the X-T3, as it is more future proof. If money is an issue, then the X-T2 is just as excellent. I don't think it's actually going to make much of a difference to your photography, but you'll be getting firmware updates for a longer time, you'll have faster AF etc etc. If it's a question about choosing between the X-T2 + an extra lens, or just the X-T3, then I'd still argue for the X-T2.