Prime 2/3-lens setup

FTOG wrote:

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.

You should try an X-Pro2, then. The "digital split image (color)" focus aid works a treat in the "electronic range finder" in the bottom right corner of the optical viewfinder!

FTOG wrote:

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.

Last year, my eye doctor said you're starting to get cataracts but it will be years before you have to worry about them. Ha, years turned into months and my distance vision turned to c**p. Should be getting surgery to remove them in a few weeks, But I was playing around with my Minolta MD 50mm f1.7 on my X-E2 and I can still focus it well.

My manual lens focus method on the X-E2 is to shoot RAW with film simulation set to B&W, peaking set to red, high or low, and the lens wide open. The red peaking shows up real well against the B&W image and once I'm focused, I stop down to whatever aperture I want to use for the shot. Blue works also, but red seems better to me. Sometimes, if I'm doing a landscape with a lot of green foliage, I change the film simulation to Velvia and the peaking to white. Against all the green, the white peaking is impossible to miss. After I have the RAW file, I can do a jpeg with whatever film simulation I want.

I'm using a Fotodiox MD/FX adapter but if I had some great M-mount lenses, I would consider investing in Fujis M-mount adapter to get full use of the Mount Adapter Setting.

I decided to go Fuji when I realized I rarely carry my DSLR with me because of its weight and size.  I thought I should get a smaller camera with a few (small and light) lenses so that I would carry it with me more. I ended up getting the X-T10 plus the following lenses: Samyang 12mm f/2, 27mm f/2.8 and 60mm f/2.4 (at that time the 50 wasn't out but if it was today I might've picked up the latter). The X-T10 paired with the pancake is a really small combo that I don't mind taking with me anywhere. 27mm is sometimes a bit too narrow but the 23mm f2 is quite larger in size.

FTOG wrote:

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

If it works for you it is great. I think I'm more a wide angle guy. If choose to shoot with only three primes it's: 14/2.8, 23/2, 35/1.4. I would still recommend to think twice about the 50mm. It sits a little but in-between all chairs for me. Too short for a pure portrait lens and much too long for street shooting.

Thought I might give an update. After some more consideration, I did pull the trigger on the 23/2.0 WR. My first impressions are very positive. Lovely aperture ring: just the right amount of click firmness. AF is nigh-silent and snappy. Although I knew about the lens weight, it is still astonishingly low in the hands and balances well with my X-E2. As for iQ, I have not yet enough of a chance to try the lens. I have only checked some snaps on the back LCD, hardly a valid way of judging my lens sample's IQ.

As for the 27mm, it might now be on the way out. While it is significantly shorter than the 23mm, I would have the 18mm as a future alternative when the camera/lens combo needs to be as compact as possible.

Now, the burning question will be the third lens to choose. I have some Olympus OM Zuikos (24mm, 40mm, 50mm, 135mm) I might adopt with a cheapo adapter. That would also allow me to use them with some extension rings I have lying around.

In the near future, the hottest contestants remain the 35/2.0 WR and 50/2.0 WR.
And a rumoured 18mm Mk II (with WR?) or 14mm could be a nice replacement on the short end.

You have resurrected a one year old thread... 
In the meanwhile, I ended up building a 14/2.8, 23/2.0 and 50/2.0 kit.

I am new to Fuji and I will most possibly go with a 14, 27, 60 combo when fun and high Image quality are my main goal and with the 18-55 (maybe plus the 14) when flexibily is key.

I don't mind the bigger gaps between 14 and 27mm and between 27 and 60mm. To the contrary: I like it because it gives every focal length a unique look. Ultra-wide, normal and short/medium tele plus the possibility to shoot macros.

18 and 23mm would definitely be too close together for me but YMMV.

Just my personal opinion. For my X-T20 I am now collecting the lineup of 3 primes:

1. 23/2 - "normal" lens 35mm equiv. for everyday use, I already have it
2. 56/1.2 (non-APD) - portrait lens usable for some street and event photography as well, this one is the next one to buy
3. Samyang 12mm - wide-angle, this one is the third in my priority list.

Also the beercan XF 55-200 is in near plans (maybe even earlier than 12mm) and XF 100-400 is planned for later (it's expensive).

With this line of 3 primes, I have all my most common use-cases covered.

No 50/2 because of 56/1.2. No 35/2 because I just don't like the "normal" 50mm-equivalent focus, 35mm equiv. is more natural for me. For wide-angle, I just don't see the benefit of paying more, Samyang is "good enough" for me.