Tip for travel kit to Bora Bora (switching from Canon to Fuji X)

[Giuseppe D'Agata]

Dears,

I need your advice.

I'll be in Polynesia (Bora Bora) in September for my wedding trip.

For me is also the right time to switch from Canon to Fuji X.

The idea is to buy the new FUJI X-T10 (body only), that will be available at the end of the month in Italy for around 650 euro. X-T1 in silver with 100 euro rebate costs around 1200.

I want to bring with me only two lens (maybe 3) and my budget is around 2000 euro. If I buy the X-10 I have more or less 1400 euro for the lenses (only 850 if I buy the XT-1).

The place offers beautiful views, so I'll be mainly concentrated on landscapes, but I also wants to captures some family pictures (I'll be there with bride and my two children).

My idea for the lens set-up is:

• 35mm F/1.4
• 16mm F/1.4 or 10-24 F/4

In Italy there is a rebate for certain Fuji lens (but not all). I have 100euro less for the first lens (35mm) and 200 euro less for every other lens (The 10-24 for instance). Unfortunately the 16mm is NOT included in the rebate.

Question:

1. Which is your lens proposal for such kind of trip considering assumptions made above?
2. With XT-1 or XT-10?

Thanks and best regards,

Giuseppe

 

[jf_tea]

Hello,

I think it's important to have a few months of experience with new equipment before travelling and relying on it.

The 18-55/2.8-4 is sharp and convenient. You can add a prime with your favorite focal length to complete your travel kit.

The choice of camera is less important. But you should not rely on a very new model without using it for 2+ months, minimum.

Enjoy your trip, and, congratulations,

 

[deednets]

Dears,

I need your advice.

I'll be in Polynesia (Bora Bora) in September for my wedding trip.

For me is also the right time to switch from Canon to Fuji X.

The idea is to buy the new FUJI X-T10 (body only), that will be available at the end of the month in Italy for around 650 euro. X-T1 in silver with 100 euro rebate costs around 1200.

I want to bring with me only two lens (maybe 3) and my budget is around 2000 euro. If I buy the X-10 I have more or less 1400 euro for the lenses (only 850 if I buy the XT-1).

The place offers beautiful views, so I'll be mainly concentrated on landscapes, but I also wants to captures some family pictures (I'll be there with bride and my two children).

My idea for the lens set-up is:

• 35mm F/1.4
• 16mm F/1.4 or 10-24 F/4

In Italy there is a rebate for certain Fuji lens (but not all). I have 100euro less for the first lens (35mm) and 200 euro less for every other lens (The 10-24 for instance). Unfortunately the 16mm is NOT included in the rebate.

Question:

1. Which is your lens proposal for such kind of trip considering assumptions made above?
2. With XT-1 or XT-10?

Thanks and best regards,

Giuseppe

I think you will be absolutely fine with the 16 and the 35, I live in the South Pacific and have been to the islands incl Tahiti many times. For Bora Bora, that combo is near perfect.

Regarding the zoom, not a bad lens, but I sold it because the primes are just more "special"

Enjoy your trip

Deed

 

[Sfowler]

I agree that the 35mm is a must but if you have a tripod I would go for the 14mm as:
- an x-t10 will not be weather sealed and seems to be a good option at the moment. You therefore have no need of the 16mm weather sealing.
- the 16 is faster but if you have a tripod and you are generally doing landscapes at a high f stop then it doesn't matter
- the 14mm is awesome, just ask anyone that has one
- you have 2mm more
- the 14mm is very light for packing
- you will be able to get cheap used 14mm lenses now everyone is jumping on the latest wide angle so this may leave more money for something like the 27mm (also easy to get used)

Anyway, my two cents

 

[Muresan Bogdan]

I would vote for the 14mm as well. Lighter and smaller than the 16mm and the wider angle of view will make a difference. Also cheaper. Then you can get maybe the 23 instead of the 35. Newer lens, faster autofocus and a bit wider for inside family shots.

 

[Giuseppe D'Agata]

I would vote for the 14mm as well. Lighter and smaller than the 16mm and the wider angle of view will make a difference. Also cheaper. Then you can get maybe the 23 instead of the 35. Newer lens, faster autofocus and a bit wider for inside family shots.

Thanks for your answer.
14mm is not so cheaper, just -100 euro comparing to 16mm. The 16mm is a newer lens, fast aperture an size/weight is ok for me.
23mm could be an option, I agree with you, but length is not ideal for close portraits and price is about 350 euro more than 35mm.
Moreover, but maybe I'm wrong, all you can do with the 23mm you can also do with the 16mm moving close to the subject.


Having more money I would take 3 lenses: 16mm, 23mm and 56mm but having to choose two I would go for 16mm + 35mm

Regards,

Giuseppe

 

[Giuseppe D'Agata]

I agree that the 35mm is a must but if you have a tripod I would go for the 14mm as:
- an x-t10 will not be weather sealed and seems to be a good option at the moment. You therefore have no need of the 16mm weather sealing.
- the 16 is faster but if you have a tripod and you are generally doing landscapes at a high f stop then it doesn't matter
- the 14mm is awesome, just ask anyone that has one
- you have 2mm more
- the 14mm is very light for packing
- you will be able to get cheap used 14mm lenses now everyone is jumping on the latest wide angle so this may leave more money for something like the 27mm (also easy to get used)

Anyway, my two cents

Yes, I agree about aperture and landscape. For sure I can use 16mm also indoor and the greater aperture may help but generally speaking you are right.

I'm just thinking that Fuji has rebate on 14mm while it is not for 16m so the 14mm will cost 300 euro less than 16mm. Not trivial.

Regards,

Giuseppe

 

[KennyXYZ]

I would consider the XE2 also. My lens choice would be for sure the 10-24 and a set of LEE filters.

 

[klownshed]

I sometimes take an adapted manual focus lens for when I want something longer than 35nm, usually an Olympus OM 50mm f1.8 as they are compact and render lovely photos on the Fuji. They are also very cheap, as are the adaptors.

Having said that, when i have fewer choices I tend to make more interesting compositions (I think!) so I usually stick to the 18 and 35.

 

[evoprox]

You already have some really great answers. I'm not much of a tele shooter so I'd take:

• the excellent, relatively fast and flexible 1855 and a faster lens like the 18mm or 35mm for those low-light needs or especially the 35mm for the shallow DOF at f1.4 (portraits, ...)

or

• the 1855, 35mm AND the 12mm Rokinon/Samyang (instead of the 14mm).

or

• a prime triplet: 12-18-35 with the 18mm as my allday walkaround lens.

BTW, my 18mm (3rd copy) is a MUCH better lens than what most reviews I've read would make you think. It's tack sharp in the center at f2, has great microcontrast (clarity) and colors and the corners are not that bad at all. Just my 2...

 

[ryan2007]

Dears,

I need your advice.

I'll be in Polynesia (Bora Bora) in September for my wedding trip.

For me is also the right time to switch from Canon to Fuji X.

The idea is to buy the new FUJI X-T10 (body only), that will be available at the end of the month in Italy for around 650 euro. X-T1 in silver with 100 euro rebate costs around 1200.

Why do you need Two camera bodies that are so different. If weather resistance does not matter and you truly need two bodies get two XT-10's, why pay more for the same camera as the XT-1 is.

I would also think by the time you have two camera bodies, lenses even if it is two lenses you need a camera bag to get all that into you might as we stay with Canon because you are not saving any size or weight.

I want to bring with me only two lens (maybe 3) and my budget is around 2000 euro. If I buy the X-10 I have more or less 1400 euro for the lenses (only 850 if I buy the XT-1).

The place offers beautiful views, so I'll be mainly concentrated on landscapes, but I also wants to captures some family pictures (I'll be there with bride and my two children).

Keep in mind Fuji is awful for video needs and does not have image stabilization in video mode and of course most Fuji lenses are not stabilized anyway.

I suggest zoom lenses with a fast prime lens.

You will also need a hand grip for the XT-1 and if the XT-10 has it, get it. These cameras are VERY small with POOR hand grips as is. It will be very hard to balance and your hand will cramp up faster without a grip. Either Fuji, Really Right Stuff or the JB camera grip.

My idea for the lens set-up is:

• 35mm F/1.4
• 16mm F/1.4 or 10-24 F/4

Do the 10-24 you do not need a 16 mm prime. The 10-24 has OIS to help. PLUS you need to be on top of the subject to get shallow DOF with a wide lens anyway then you have to worry about distortion wide lenses have.

In Italy there is a rebate for certain Fuji lens (but not all). I have 100euro less for the first lens (35mm) and 200 euro less for every other lens (The 10-24 for instance). Unfortunately the 16mm is NOT included in the rebate.

Question:

1. Which is your lens proposal for such kind of trip considering assumptions made above?
2. With XT-1 or XT-10?

Thanks and best regards,

Giuseppe

Get the XT-1 if you have a solid photographic background. The XT-10 is a light entry level version of the same camera with quick access to Auto mode.

Get the 23 mm prime for group shots, the 35 mm is not wide enough. Get the 16-55 mm and 56 mm prime 1.2 lens (non APD version) or 90 mm prime.

Unless you do lots of landscape stuff here you do Not need anything wider than 16 mm or the 24 mm focal length for the FF conversion.

23 mm prime

16-55 zoom 2.8

56 mm OR 90 mm for portraits

It is more cost effective to get the 16-55 zoom vs the 16 mm prime lens.

**Last consider a waterproof p&s like the Olympus TG-4 for any beach or water activities if you want to shoot in the water. Other ways to travel light the Panasonic LX-100, FZ-1000, Sony RX-10

 

[Giuseppe D'Agata]

I sometimes take an adapted manual focus lens for when I want something longer than 35nm, usually an Olympus OM 50mm f1.8 as they are compact and render lovely photos on the Fuji. They are also very cheap, as are the adaptors.

Having said that, when i have fewer choices I tend to make more interesting compositions (I think!) so I usually stick to the 18 and 35.

 

[Giuseppe D'Agata]

Hi ryan2007,
thanks for you precious comments.
I badly explained regarding XT-1 / XT-10 (sorry my English is far to be perfect).
I was not sure which one to choose, but yesterday I have pre-ordered the F-X10.
I'm not interested about video. I'll use my iPhone for such trivial practice
In Polynesia, I believe, most of my shots will be on landscapes, a wide angle is required.

 

[klownshed]

With some practice it's certainly doable.

To be honest, I get better results photographing my daughter with a MF lens than I did with my old Nikon DSLR (newer models than mine tracked better, but mine was rubbish at tracking, as is my X-Pro!).

Probably wise not taking it though, it may end up a distraction on holiday, but I think you'll be pleasantly surprised with your 50 when you have the time to play with it. It's not necessarily good for everyday use but it's fun using adapted lenses.

 

[Muresan Bogdan]

I agree that the 35mm is a must but if you have a tripod I would go for the 14mm as:
- an x-t10 will not be weather sealed and seems to be a good option at the moment. You therefore have no need of the 16mm weather sealing.
- the 16 is faster but if you have a tripod and you are generally doing landscapes at a high f stop then it doesn't matter
- the 14mm is awesome, just ask anyone that has one
- you have 2mm more
- the 14mm is very light for packing
- you will be able to get cheap used 14mm lenses now everyone is jumping on the latest wide angle so this may leave more money for something like the 27mm (also easy to get used)

Anyway, my two cents

Yes, I agree about aperture and landscape. For sure I can use 16mm also indoor and the greater aperture may help but generally speaking you are right.

I'm just thinking that Fuji has rebate on 14mm while it is not for 16m so the 14mm will cost 300 euro less than 16mm. Not trivial.

Regards,

Giuseppe

This is why I said that the 14mm is much cheaper because I saw that there are rebates in some countries. And now you can put the difference to that 23mm

Also moving closer with the 16mm is a no no unless you really want the distortion and wide angle view. 35-40mm (35mm equivalent) is where the lens tend to look natural, up to 60-70mm. After that you get that flat look of a tele. For enviromental portraits I find 35mm better than 50-85 because it places the subject more into the enviroment and gives a more 3D look. Even at 35mm you still need to be carefull at the angle that you look at your subject. 50mm (35mm equivalent) is more on the safe side as it makes you move away from the subject. But I find it to tight for indoor portraits in most of the cases.

If 14-23-56 would make your favorite lineup start with the first two and build up.

Also 14mm might not be a new lens but it's one of the best in Fuji's lineup. I have not seen anybody say something bad about it.

You mentioned that the 10-24 is too large but you say the 16mm is ok. They are actually very close in size:

16mm - 73.4 x 73 mm, 375 gr

10-24mm - 78 x 87 mm, 410 gr

14mm - 65 x 58.4 mm, 235 gr - almost half the size

Just saying - for travel I would go for the widest and lightest option. Also one to consider is the Rokinon/Samyang 12mm f2 as I saw gret reviews.

 

[Giuseppe D'Agata]

This is why I said that the 14mm is much cheaper because I saw that there are rebates in some countries. And now you can put the difference to that 23mm

Correct!

Also moving closer with the 16mm is a no no unless you really want the distortion and wide angle view. 35-40mm (35mm equivalent) is where the lens tend to look natural, up to 60-70mm. After that you get that flat look of a tele. For enviromental portraits I find 35mm better than 50-85 because it places the subject more into the enviroment and gives a more 3D look. Even at 35mm you still need to be carefull at the angle that you look at your subject. 50mm (35mm equivalent) is more on the safe side as it makes you move away from the subject. But I find it to tight for indoor portraits in most of the cases.

I'm just saying I can't use 16 nor 23 for portraits due to distortion. For indoor, if I have space it is a matter of distance from the subject, both 16 and 23 are more or less the same.

If 14-23-56 would make your favorite lineup start with the first two and build up.

Also 14mm might not be a new lens but it's one of the best in Fuji's lineup. I have not seen anybody say something bad about it.

You mentioned that the 10-24 is too large but you say the 16mm is ok. They are actually very close in size:

16mm - 73.4 x 73 mm, 375 gr

10-24mm - 78 x 87 mm, 410 gr

14mm - 65 x 58.4 mm, 235 gr - almost half the size

Just saying - for travel I would go for the widest and lightest option. Also one to consider is the Rokinon/Samyang 12mm f2 as I saw gret reviews.

Yes, correct about size. I was thinking about 16-55 F 2.8 that is 655gr.

So many options:

10-24 + 56

14 + 23 + 56

14 + 35

....

 

[deednets]

Hi ryan2007,
thanks for you precious comments.
I badly explained regarding XT-1 / XT-10 (sorry my English is far to be perfect).
I was not sure which one to choose, but yesterday I have pre-ordered the F-X10.
I'm not interested about video. I'll use my iPhone for such trivial practice
In Polynesia, I believe, most of my shots will be on landscapes, a wide angle is required.

I think you are going round in circles here, your original thought of the 16 and the 35 might be the most rewarding as you can use the 16 indoors and for fabulous landscapes without the ultra wide angle look of the 14.

Don't get me wrong, the 14 is a fantastic lens, but since you mentioned Bora Bora, I thought that the 16 plus the 35 would be bang on right.

Other combos just way too confusing, I think. Sometimes your original gut feel re what you thought is just fine.

Deed

 

[HornOUBet]

Hi ryan2007,
thanks for you precious comments.
I badly explained regarding XT-1 / XT-10 (sorry my English is far to be perfect).
I was not sure which one to choose, but yesterday I have pre-ordered the F-X10.
I'm not interested about video. I'll use my iPhone for such trivial practice
In Polynesia, I believe, most of my shots will be on landscapes, a wide angle is required.

I am no expert, but if you search YouTube for lessons on how to shoot wide angle lenses, there are many videos that tell you wide angle IS NOT for landscapes...I tend to believe that and would suggest the 23mm and use Microsoft ICE to stitch your own panoramas....or not.... I am afraid of wide angle distortion at 16mm and wider, but regardless of your choice post some pictures upon your return...

Which Canon are you giving up for the Fuji??

 

[KariP]

I assume it is not just a photography trip... you will spend time with your wife too ?

Using prime lenses means that you have to swap lenses - and that can be quite inconvenient if you are not traveling alone . A zoom like 18-55 will be useful and if you have some special need for a super wide angle (10-24) lens or a longer tele (55-200) that can be the lens No 2.

Two lenses is the maximum and 90-95% of the images you will take with the 18-55

 

[deednets]

I assume it is not just a photography trip... you will spend time with your wife too ?

Using prime lenses means that you have to swap lenses - and that can be quite inconvenient if you are not traveling alone . A zoom like 18-55 will be useful and if you have some special need for a super wide angle (10-24) lens or a longer tele (55-200) that can be the lens No 2.

Two lenses is the maximum and 90-95% of the images you will take with the 18-55