Suggestions for wide angle lens (for landscape/astro/street)

jjz2 wrote:

14 2.8

Quindere wrote:

IMHO the best for Architecture, Landscape, Cityscape. Totally optical corrected. It is tack sharp wide open frame to frame. If you crop just 15% you have the same Field of View (FoV) of the 16mm. Could be hand holder around 1/25sec. Valid the same observations about low light as XF 10-24.

XF 16mm f1.4: I was close to this lens for my choice. Because of hearing many positive opinions about it, i would like to try it. I was almost sure till fujifilm announced new xf18mm f1.4 16mm has amazing min focus distance, sharpness but i heard that autofocus is noisy, especially for video.

XF 18mm f1.4: This lens seems to be perfect for me, but it is the most expensive one between options that i observed. Money is not an issue, but i am a little worried that what happens if i buy it and not like using wide lens or wish to buy wider one?

Both (16F1.4 and 18F1.4) Best for group portraits, events, low light. At F1.4 could raise the shutter speed to freeze the subject motion blur. IMHO for street and documentary 18mm is a little bit more adequate than 16mm. The choice between each one is subjective, it is more about your FL preference.

XF 18mm f2: I would like to try that one; cheaper, lighter and i could understand easily that wider than 23mm is suitable for me or not. But people told that this lens is soft and not sharp, i am not a pixel peeper guy but i really dont like softness or ghosting. Of course i can manage if a little, but i heard that this lens has a quite softness. Your opinion?

You're right. It is soft at edges, but sharp enough at center. It is inadequate for Architecture, Landscape and Cityscape, but adequate for Street, Documentary, Still Life, Travel, All-Around, Walk-Around.

If you share your opinions, i will be appreciate. Thanks in advance.

My 2 cents contribution.

Great analysis.

I used to try to pick lenses based on how far apart, or wanting lots of coverage... but ended up with lenses that didn't get used much and collecting dust.

It wasn't really until I laid out specific objectives for each lens where I was satisfied.

I picked the 14 2.8 as a dedicated landscape/cityscape lens.

The 27 2.8 is perfect for street and walking around with my XE3.

And the 56 1.2 I picked as a dedicated portrait lens.

All these lenses are kind of niche to specific tasks, but do an excellent job at those tasks.

Now that I've downsized my lenses, I'm not sure what my next lens will be, or if I'll need one...but I'm sure it will present itself to me when the time comes.

I am totally agree that lenses should be minimalized for your own purpose of photography. When I start to shoot with Fujifilm, at first every kind of lenses I loved and bought them. But after a while, as you said they just collected dust. So I sold some of them and leave ones that I need for my style. By the way, I used xf 27mm before and it was perfect lens. Very sharp, very compact. I just sold it because of my lovely xf 35mm f1.4 I knew that as long as I have 35mm, 27mm would stay in dust. So because of that, if I buy a wide lens and like it, I am planning to sell x100v because I know that I will not use it much again.

As you did, 3 lenses are totally enough to cover focal length that you would need.