Prime 2/3-lens setup

Hey guys,

I've been using the X-E2 for a while now with 18/2.0 and 27/2.8.
I do not want to lug around too much gear and like to focus on 2-3 prime lenses.

On my film bodies, my wide normal walk-around lenses were in the range of 35mm to 40mm:

• Olympus OMs: 24mm, 40mm, 85mm
• Leica M2/Voigtländer R2m: no wide, 35mm, 50mm

I mostly shoot candid scenes from landscape to street photography. As a general purpose lens, the 40mm equivalent often feels a bit too narrow for me, therefore I consider acquiring the 23/2,0 and ditching the 27/2.8:

• Wider view angle
• One stop faster aperture
• Aperture ring
• Supposedly faster AF
• (Weather resistance, is nice-to-have but no a big criteria for my use)

Mid-/Long-term, I'd want to supplement the pair with a 50/2.0 to complete my kit.

• What are your thoughts on that prime lens stepping: 18/2.0, 23/2.0, 50/2.0?
• If you have a similar gap between 23mm and 50mm, does it bother you?
  In the past I did not find myself liking 35mm (50mm ff equivalent) too much, favouring wider perspectives or short tele lenses. But I also have been on a bit of a photography hiatus recently and I am re-exploring what works for me and what does not

Thanks for the input!

F

Don't necessarily follow all the Fuji 18mm naysayers, but know that among Fuji lenses it has the most.

There are a ton of 16/1.4 fans and it servers multiple uses being wide angle, fast, and close focusing. Comparatively big and heavy-ish though. For non-fly-by-wire manual focusing reasons, I've recently mostly converted over to using M-mount lenses on my XP2 (BTW, the Voigt 21f/1.8 and 21f/4 are both nice) and the 16 is one of only two Fuji lenses I've kept around.

For your range question, the other keeper was the 35f/2 and although I have a soft spot for a few other lenses (especially the 90f/2), basically the Fuji 16 and 35f/2 were responsible for 90% of my shots over the last couple years.

blessingx wrote:

Don't necessarily follow all the Fuji 18mm naysayers, but know that among Fuji lenses it has the most.

There are a ton of 16/1.4 fans and it servers multiple uses being wide angle, fast, and close focusing. Comparatively big and heavy-ish though. For non-fly-by-wire manual focusing reasons, I've recently mostly converted over to using M-mount lenses on my XP2 (BTW, the Voigt 21f/1.8 and 21f/4 are both nice) and the 16 is one of only two Fuji lenses I've kept around.

From what I have seen, the 16mm is an absolute beast of a lens. Great performance, but I could neither stomach the price of admission nor the dimensions of the lens - especially the latter.

Wide angle is not my main focus, and so far I have not been disappointed by the 18mm. It is a good lens among a plethora of great Fuji lenses. I can see where people are coming from, but so far the 18mm has been - quite literally - good enough for me. Let's see what a rumoured 18/2.0 Mk II might have in store for us.

blessingx wrote:

For your range question, the other keeper was the 35f/2 and although I have a soft spot for a few other lenses (especially the 90f/2), basically the Fuji 16 and 35f/2 were responsible for 90% of my shots over the last couple years.

I have considered the 35/2.0 as an alternative third lens, as opposed to the 50mm. Seeing that I would have a wide standard lens in the 23/2.0 I wonder if a bit more reach would offer more versatility than the 35mm, which is closer to the 23mm. If I didn't limit myself to three lenses, the 35mm would be high on the list.

Add the 35 f2 to fill the gap...

I'd say 14 - 23f2 - 50f2.

My three prime lens setup for Fuji is 23mm f/2 (on an X100T in my case), 35mm f/1.4, and 60mm f/2.4- the classic 35-50-90 spread from film days.

I also have the 27mm, but it stays on my X-M1 as my "small camera".

FTOG wrote:

But I also have been on a bit of a photography hiatus recently and I am re-exploring what works for me and what does not

There are many reasons why photographers get stuck in a rut and lose their mojo - I went through a similar thing recently, and I put it down to two things:

1) I was spending too much time looking at other people's photographs. Subconsciously, I found myself going out and trying to take photos like other people, and I completely lost touch with my own photographic interests and 'style' (such as it is!).

2) I had acquired a whole bunch of Fuji lenses, and became constantly anxious about which lens to take out with me. Maybe the 23? I prefer the 35! But the 56 is great too. What about the 90? I tried taking them ALL out in a giant bag a couple of times, but that really annoyed me and I found I was still flustering over lens decisions even after I'd seen the thing I wanted to photograph. After a few days in Paris shooting with a single prime, I've decided to downsize now - loads of kit is up for sale.

If I was you, I'd get the 23mm f1.4 and deliberately NOT buy anything else for a few months - see how your photography interest/style perks up when you free yourself from all lens decision-making. I think it's true that, when you only have a single prime lens, you truly start to 'see' your images clearly in your head before you take them. That's huge.

Good luck,

Al

I have an X-E2 and had the 18mm plus the 27mm for a while. My plan was to leave the house with one lens on the X-E2, usually the 18mm, and the other lens in my pants pocket, usually the 27mm, plus a spare battery and microfiber cloth in the other pants pocket. Perfect lightweight kit; no bag to lug around. But I found that I rarely switched between the two lenses and when I did use the 27mm, it just didn't seem to work. For a while I was using just four manual focus lenses, Bower 8mm f2.8, Rokinon 12mm f2.0, Rokinon 21mm f1.4, and Rokinon 50mm f1.2. The 18mm and 27mm sat on the shelf, so I sold them. I've actually gone through eleven different primes with my X-E2, trying to figure out that perfect combination for me.

In my case, I discovered that I tend to use just one lens 95% of the time and also, since going digital, I rarely use anything longer than 23mm. I also discovered that after more than 55 years of shooting film, I do better with manual focus lenses. Right now I'm using the X-E2 with the 14mm f2.8 and 23mm f1.4. Both have the AF/MF clutch plus DOF/Distance scales so, I can use either as a traditional manual lens or quickly switch to AF; the best of both worlds. And as with my other combos, the 23mm gets most of the use.

If you're not happy with the 27mm, get rid of it. Also, don't forget that a 50mm lens will give you a 75mm FOV while still performing as a 50mm lens otherwise. You have the 50mm f2 if you want AF or the Samyang/Rokinon 50mm f1.2 is a fantastic lens if you're ok with MF and if you are ok with MF, there are all those older manual 50mm lenses out there from when the nifty fifty was the standard kit lens.

Hi,

Lens choices are all personal.  I'm mostly into landscape and nature.  My most commonly used trio is the 16, 23 & 60.  (My 23mm happens to be the f1.4 version only because it was available first.)  I generally shoot landscapes with the 16 & 23 and things in the landscape with the 60mm.  I suspect the 50mm would substitute very well for the 60mm in a similar set up, particularly if you weren't into close focusing and macro.

On the 18mm......  I had one but sold it.  Compared  to the 16mm, it's closer to the 23mm FL so the step isn't as noticeable.  On IQ, it's fine for general use, but if you print large and want fine detail, it simply isn't as sharp in the outer image area as either the 14mm or 16mm lenses.

On the gap between 23mm and 50mm.....  In my kit it's the gap between 23mm and 60mm.  The 35mm FL isn't my favorite and I don't notice it a lot of the time.  However, sometimes subjects crop up where the 35mm is THE answer, and of course then I do notice it.  The only solution is to carry four lenses, but I really just don't want to if I'm carrying a full pack as well, so it's the 35mm that gets left at home.  I wouldn't swap the 23m or 60mm for the 35mm in my trio.

It just comes down to your interests and style and what you prefer.

Cheers, Rod

As was mentioned before: it's all very personal.

I have basically 4 primes at my disposal: 16 f1.4, 23 f2, 35 f1.4 and 60 f2.4. There's also the 90 f2, but I'm selling that as it doesn't see enough use.

If I go out and stick to two primes, I'll usually take either of these combo's: 16/35 or 23/60. If I take three it's 16/60 with either the 23 or 35, depending on what I feel like and/or what I'm shooting (usually it's the 23 though). Sometimes I also take the 16/23/35 combo. It all depends really...

baobob wrote:

Add the 35 f2 to fill the gap...

I really am trying to keep my lens line up slim. Else there will be more to lug around than I wish, and some lenses might not see much use.

If anything, the 35/2.0 could be an alternative to the 50/2.0 in my planning.

PeteHolland89 wrote:

I'd say 14 - 23f2 - 50f2.

The 14mm certainly could be an alternative on the short end. Wide angle is not my most frequently used focal range, so I might replace the 18mm last. Whether for a 14mm, a 16mm, a potential 18mm Mk II or something different entirely remains to be seen.

Al Downie wrote:

FTOG wrote:

But I also have been on a bit of a photography hiatus recently and I am re-exploring what works for me and what does not

There are many reasons why photographers get stuck in a rut and lose their mojo - I went through a similar thing recently, and I put it down to two things:

1) I was spending too much time looking at other people's photographs.

2) I had acquired a whole bunch of Fuji lenses, and became constantly anxious about which lens to take out with me. I tried taking them ALL out in a giant bag a couple of times, but that really annoyed me and I found I was still flustering over lens decisions even after I'd seen the thing I wanted to photograph. After a few days in Paris shooting with a single prime, I've decided to downsize now - loads of kit is up for sale.

There is a lot of thruth in this, Al. I haven't looked much at other people's photographs, but throught the years I have been going through iterations of gear philosophising.

That is one of the main reasons I am focusing on a three lens line-up, two of which I currently own. My other systems will likely end up being mostly sold, except for some dear pieces of kit I don't want to let go.

Al Downie wrote:

If I was you, I'd get the 23mm f1.4 and deliberately NOT buy anything else for a few months - see how your photography interest/style perks up when you free yourself from all lens decision-making. I think it's true that, when you only have a single prime lens, you truly start to 'see' your images clearly in your head before you take them. That's huge.

Good luck,

Al

In the past, I have done a lot of one-lens sessions and it is an eye opening experience. I do not plan to acquire a terrible amount of kit in the near future. My max is deciding on the third lens and potentially replacing the 27mm with a 23mm. I am leaning toward the 23/2.0, but the 23/1.4 definitely is still in contention.

bs1946 wrote:

...  I've actually gone through eleven different primes with my X-E2, trying to figure out that perfect combination for me.

In my case, I discovered that I tend to use just one lens 95% of the time and also, since going digital, I rarely use anything longer than 23mm. I also discovered that after more than 55 years of shooting film, I do better with manual focus lenses. Right now I'm using the X-E2 with the 14mm f2.8 and 23mm f1.4. Both have the AF/MF clutch plus DOF/Distance scales so, I can use either as a traditional manual lens or quickly switch to AF; the best of both worlds. And as with my other combos, the 23mm gets most of the use.

If you're not happy with the 27mm, get rid of it. Also, don't forget that a 50mm lens will give you a 75mm FOV while still performing as a 50mm lens otherwise.

Thanks for the input, Bill. 35mm or 40mm FF equivalent is my sweetspot as well. Therefore my main focus is on deciding about a 23mm or keeping the 27mm.

I have considered adapting some manual lenses to the Fuji, but unfortunately some eye issues don't make my manual focusing very fast or reliable -at least on an EVF. The old matte screens and the rangefinder patch focusing feel easier and faster to me, personally.
Which is a shame, since I would have particularly Olympus OM and Leica M lenses from 24mm through 135mm which could be fitted through adapters.

wouterv wrote:

As was mentioned before: it's all very personal.

I have basically 4 primes at my disposal: 16 f1.4, 23 f2, 35 f1.4 and 60 f2.4. There's also the 90 f2, but I'm selling that as it doesn't see enough use.

If I go out and stick to two primes, I'll usually take either of these combo's: 16/35 or 23/60. If I take three it's 16/60 with either the 23 or 35, depending on what I feel like and/or what I'm shooting (usually it's the 23 though). Sometimes I also take the 16/23/35 combo. It all depends really...

The 16mm is a stellar lens, but I don't plan on spending that much on a wide angle, and the dimensions are a bit larger than I'd like.

As for the mentioned trio's, 18/23/35 or 18/23/50 are indeed the two most likely options at this point. The former would give a bit more even steps between moderate wide and normal, while the latter would offer a wider range and a "hole" to live with.

Rod McD wrote:

On the gap between 23mm and 50mm..... In my kit it's the gap between 23mm and 60mm. The 35mm FL isn't my favorite and I don't notice it a lot of the time. However, sometimes subjects crop up where the 35mm is THE answer, and of course then I do notice it. The only solution is to carry four lenses, but I really just don't want to if I'm carrying a full pack as well, so it's the 35mm that gets left at home. I wouldn't swap the 23m or 60mm for the 35mm in my trio.

I agree strongly with these lines. I equally do not really want to carry 4 lenses just for those times where the gap might be annoying. In all likelihood, I would carry 18/23/50 unless I do notice repeat pains of missed shots that would have demanded a 35mm. Which I don't expect to happen, as 50mm is my most underused lens on the Leica and Olympus, and I have not missed an equivalent on my Fuji yet.

A few thoughts:

- In general, I too like and recommend a simple 2 or 3 prime setup: http://www.pbase.com/marcoraugei/whatlens

- I don't mind having "gaps" in-between focal lengths. In fact, I think these "gaps" are often a creative asset.

- I think a medium tele would be a better complement to a moderate wide-angle, rather than your suggested 18 + 23, which are very similar to one another.

- My current "minimalist" setup is composed of the 23/1.4 and the 90/2:

X-Pro2 + grip, XF 23/1.4, XF 90/2, tripod, filters (Pol, ND, GND) - that's it!