Fuji 10 24 and 16 55 or 16 55 and 50 140 for a trip to USA national parks

Fujishooter1970 said:

I have a dilemma, i will go to the USA this summer to go for a roundtrip to visit a lot of national parks. Grand Canyon, Bryce, Zion, Monument valley etc

I own the 16 55 and 50 140 but right now I am doubting wether to bring both or to bring the 16 55 and buy a 10 24...

I have the feeling the 10 24 can take more epic shots in the national parks compared to the 50 140....

What do you suggest me to do?

Click to expand...

Never easy to tell another how to roll. . . For those locations especially I'd want the 50-140 along with the other two. Though I might use it the least I know I'd regret not having it at times. All if it fits into a Tactic 350 pack (X-T2 w/50-140, X-H1 for the other two), but I admit the mass of the 50-140 is the elephant in the pack.

But that's me.

16 is pretty wide; take what you've got. You'll get a deal more out of a medium tele-zoom.

Practice stitching to cover the occasional need.

--
Andrew Skinner

To make things complicated… I would go for the 10..24 and 50..140 as long as wheight/size isn't an issue.

I'd prefer all three, but if you only get two then I'd stick with what you have. UWA is just not as appealing, but that's just my subjective opinion. 16mm is pretty darn wide already. Also remember that you could maybe just rent the 10-24 for the trip.

Fujishooter1970 said:

I have a dilemma, i will go to the USA this summer to go for a roundtrip to visit a lot of national parks. Grand Canyon, Bryce, Zion, Monument valley etc

I own the 16 55 and 50 140 but right now I am doubting wether to bring both or to bring the 16 55 and buy a 10 24...

I have the feeling the 10 24 can take more epic shots in the national parks compared to the 50 140....

What do you suggest me to do?

Cheers

Click to expand...

You do have a dilemma. Bryce is totally different environment than Zion and both are totally different than the Grand Canyon. The Zion Narrows is totally different than than other parts of Zion. Not a long hike up into the Zion Narrows into the slot and you can touch both walls with your hands at the same time. This is slot canyon country, home of some of the most interesting slot canyons you will find. There is the Zion Narrows, Orderville Canyon and Paria Canyon.

Bryce Canyon shot with a Mamiya RB67 and 127 mm lens



The Face at Zion Mamiya RB67 127 mm





I would think leaving the 50-140 home to be a mistake. I am not a fan of pictoralist style of landscape so I don't own a Fuji lens shorter than 18 and don't plan to - often times going too wide in these places can defeat your purpose. If you are a fan of pictoralist style of landscape - then you might want to invest in a wider angle. But I would not do it at the expense of not have the long option of the 50-140.

BTW while you are at it don't miss Capital Reef NP and the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument - hidden gems. In the summer of 1996 we were staying in Torrey, UT in preparation for the 100 mile Race of Champions endurance (horse) race. From where we kept the horses, it was a 1/4 mile ride to US 24 and across it was the Northwest corner of Capital Reef. We wondered that park for close to a month on horseback first doing some last minute tuning up and conditioning and then after the race seeing some of the most beautiful country on the face of the earth.

The ranger said - "just make sure you have a map and a compass and plenty of water because the box canyons of Capital Reef (called reefs) was where Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid came to lose the law and it's really easy to get lost in the reefs" He also showed us some places that The Gang built hidden steps so they could go from on reef to another and lose the Pinkertons as they came to the end of the reef and nobody.

Absolutely beautiful country. Have fun. I could spend a summer exploring off UT 12.

--
Truman
www.pbase.com/tprevatt

As I personally tend more to shoot with longer focal lengths I would definitely take the 50-140 with me on such a trip. Also, lacking the skills to really use a UWA lens to it´s best I personally would not think about the 10-24 lens as the 16-55 lens serves my needs and skills regarding short focal lengths at least 95-99% of the time. But that´s just me...!

What are you normally shooting? What are your preferred (most used) focal lengths in your normal shooting conditions? Evaluating such aspects may help you also to decide.

Last but not least, again just me... most likely there are no more "epic shots" to get in these spots you want to visit. All these spots have been photographed countless times already. All you can do is working to get the shots you personally really like... and that´s something you will most likely achieve when using focal lengths you are comfortable with and you like in your shootings.

Herbert

markusw said:

To make things complicated… I would go for the 10..24 and 50..140 as long as wheight/size isn't an issue.

Click to expand...

Definitely an option to consider. The only thing you'd really be missing is something near 35mm.

Fujishooter1970 said:

I have a dilemma, i will go to the USA this summer to go for a roundtrip to visit a lot of national parks. Grand Canyon, Bryce, Zion, Monument valley etc

I own the 16 55 and 50 140 but right now I am doubting wether to bring both or to bring the 16 55 and buy a 10 24...

I have the feeling the 10 24 can take more epic shots in the national parks compared to the 50 140....

What do you suggest me to do?

Cheers

Click to expand...

The 10-24 and the 50-140 is the way to go. Throw in a prime like the 23 or 35 for lowlight shots and lightweight times and you’re set.

Yes, I never got the hang of very wide, it certainly takes practice. There is a risk you end up with tiny details with a dull surrounding.

Hi.

IMHO, for your purpose, 10-24 and 50-140 would be a great combo. The 10-24 for the expansive landscape shots, and 50-140 for the high-impact, compressed close-ups of distant points of interest.

However, personally, I would bring with me all three zooms.

Also -- just sharing my 2 cents -- if I faced this dilemma, I would also consider rounding out my pro zoom trio with 8-16 instead of 10-24. In my mind, this would open up a whole new world of possibilities for wide-angle photography. I would wait for another Fujifilm sale though, as they recently had 8-16 at $500 USD off (if I recall correctly). In such a case, I would just bring 16-55 and 50-140 with me, and lean on 16mm FL for the wide angle shots.

https://jonasraskphotography.com/20...m-f2-8-mini-review-a-wider-shade-of-fujifilm/

Thank you and kindest regards.

Fujishooter1970 said:

I have a dilemma, i will go to the USA this summer to go for a roundtrip to visit a lot of national parks. Grand Canyon, Bryce, Zion, Monument valley etc

I own the 16 55 and 50 140 but right now I am doubting wether to bring both or to bring the 16 55 and buy a 10 24...

I have the feeling the 10 24 can take more epic shots in the national parks compared to the 50 140....

What do you suggest me to do?

Cheers

Click to expand...

Personally I would bring both for such a trip; often telephoto landscapes are more compelling to shoot and view than standard wide-angle shots of everything. That being said, I would suggest that you consider the relatively cheap Rokinon/Samyang 12mm f2 X-mount lens for wider shots, and for astrophotography. You should have some stellar ;-) opportunities for some great astro shots in those parks, and the 12mm is a proven performer.

Ultrawide and the longer end of the tele zoom give a lot of scope for original compositions. I had the 8-16, 16-55 and the 50-140 on a recent trip to the southwest. To my own surprise most of my favourite shots I returned with were with the 8-16, so I would agree with the advice above on the 10-24 if that is what you have. I equally took some tele and stitched panoramas with the 50-140 that I liked. The vastness of the landscape sometimes requires reach.

Having said that, personally, I would not like to travel to such a location with a gap between 24 and 50 though...

markusw said:

To make things complicated… I would go for the 10..24 and 50..140 as long as wheight/size isn't an issue.

Click to expand...

I agree .... this is my go-to combination for landscapes ... sort-of (I have the 55-200 instead of the 50-40) ...... but aware not everyone is comfortable with ultra-wide. I particularly use ultrawide for sescapes, where the foreground holds more interest, but for the mountains the 16-55 may be of more use than 10-24.

As others have mentioned a third lens could be the 12mm Samyang, or a 35mm prime depending of which zoom you take.

You-tuber Andy Mumford is a professional landscape photographer - he just uses 10-24 and 55-200 (also carries 18-55 for video) - he has a couple of videos on the topic that are well worth checking out

You're going to LOVE this trip! I just got back from a two-week drive through the same parks and was blown away by the beauty at every stop.

I had all three of these lenses with me. Also used my iPhone quite a bit, my X100F some, and my 16 1.4 for astro shots. The 16-55 was by far my most used lens.

You can see the EXIF data in these shots:


Have a great time!

...and this can be done with the tiny 35 f2 or also f1.4....

yes definitely...the more gear we have the more difficult choices to make..

Truman Prevatt said:

Fujishooter1970 said:

I have a dilemma, i will go to the USA this summer to go for a roundtrip to visit a lot of national parks. Grand Canyon, Bryce, Zion, Monument valley etc

I own the 16 55 and 50 140 but right now I am doubting wether to bring both or to bring the 16 55 and buy a 10 24...

I have the feeling the 10 24 can take more epic shots in the national parks compared to the 50 140....

What do you suggest me to do?

Cheers

Click to expand...

You do have a dilemma. Bryce is totally different environment than Zion and both are totally different than the Grand Canyon. The Zion Narrows is totally different than than other parts of Zion. Not a long hike up into the Zion Narrows into the slot and you can touch both walls with your hands at the same time. This is slot canyon country, home of some of the most interesting slot canyons you will find. There is the Zion Narrows, Orderville Canyon and Paria Canyon.

Bryce Canyon shot with a Mamiya RB67 and 127 mm lens

The Face at Zion Mamiya RB67 127 mm

I would think leaving the 50-140 home to be a mistake. I am not a fan of pictoralist style of landscape so I don't own a Fuji lens shorter than 18 and don't plan to - often times going too wide in these places can defeat your purpose. If you are a fan of pictoralist style of landscape - then you might want to invest in a wider angle. But I would not do it at the expense of not have the long option of the 50-140.

BTW while you are at it don't miss Capital Reef NP and the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument - hidden gems. In the summer of 1996 we were staying in Torrey, UT in preparation for the 100 mile Race of Champions endurance (horse) race. From where we kept the horses, it was a 1/4 mile ride to US 24 and across it was the Northwest corner of Capital Reef. We wondered that park for close to a month on horseback first doing some last minute tuning up and conditioning and then after the race seeing some of the most beautiful country on the face of the earth.

The ranger said - "just make sure you have a map and a compass and plenty of water because the box canyons of Capital Reef (called reefs) was where Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid came to lose the law and it's really easy to get lost in the reefs" He also showed us some places that The Gang built hidden steps so they could go from on reef to another and lose the Pinkertons as they came to the end of the reef and nobody.

Absolutely beautiful country. Have fun. I could spend a summer exploring off UT 12.

Click to expand...

Thanks a lot for your response and suggestions! Yes Capitol Reef we well see as well!

CG Cols said:

You're going to LOVE this trip! I just got back from a two-week drive through the same parks and was blown away by the beauty at every stop.

I had all three of these lenses with me. Also used my iPhone quite a bit, my X100F some, and my 16 1.4 for astro shots. The 16-55 was by far my most used lens.

You can see the EXIF data in these shots:

https://www.flickr.com/gp/58348901@N02/U5s2wK

Have a great time!

Click to expand...

Thanks a lot Chris for the response and your flickr pictures...you made some great sunstars with the 16 55!

Lettermanian said:

Fujishooter1970 said:

I have a dilemma, i will go to the USA this summer to go for a roundtrip to visit a lot of national parks. Grand Canyon, Bryce, Zion, Monument valley etc

I own the 16 55 and 50 140 but right now I am doubting wether to bring both or to bring the 16 55 and buy a 10 24...

I have the feeling the 10 24 can take more epic shots in the national parks compared to the 50 140....

What do you suggest me to do?

Cheers

Click to expand...

Personally I would bring both for such a trip; often telephoto landscapes are more compelling to shoot and view than standard wide-angle shots of everything. That being said, I would suggest that you consider the relatively cheap Rokinon/Samyang 12mm f2 X-mount lens for wider shots, and for astrophotography. You should have some stellar ;-) opportunities for some great astro shots in those parks, and the 12mm is a proven performer.

Click to expand...

Thanks! the Rokinon is a good option!