Laowa 9mm vs Fuji 10-24mm

[David Hwang]

Now I have only one lens left: 16mm f1.4 which is I love the most among Fuji lenses.

I'm planning to buy 35mm f1.4 and an ultra-wide lens.

There are two candidates: Laowa 9mm f2.8 Zero-D and Fuji 10-24mm

Laowa 9mm

- 35mm equiv. 13.5mm super wide FL with only slight barrel distortion (as the name Zero-D indicates)

- looks good with x-t20

- small and light (215g)

- 500 USD

- I can't think of any other lens which has such a super wide angle with such light-weight and distortion characteristics.

- It's a MF lens, and it may be annoying at times (9mm FL will surely alleviate such annoyance though).

Fuji 10-24

- perfect zoom range for travel (IMO, at the same time it is not ideal for travel because of its size and weight).

- I think there might be overlap in usage with 16mm in real-use.

- I can buy it for 750 USD.

For right now, I'm a little more inclined to Laowa 9mm (I think I've read all existing reviews on this lens)

If it were 400 USD, I would have bought it already, but the price gap between Laowa 9mm and 10-24 doesn't seem to be that great for me, so I'm not sure.

Any suggestion or advice?

 

[georgehudetz]

The 10-24 is immensely more versatile and useful than the 9 (I have both).

BUT the 9 would make a great compliment to the 16.

You don't say what kind of photography you do. If landscape figures highly, I'd suggest getting the 10-24, but be prepared for the eventuality that you won't use the 16 much except for low-light street & quasi-macro wide shots with nicely blurred backgrounds.

In fact, the 10-24 + 35 would be a great kit.

 

[David Hwang]

The 10-24 is immensely more versatile and useful than the 9 (I have both).

BUT the 9 would make a great compliment to the 16.

You don't say what kind of photography you do. If landscape figures highly, I'd suggest getting the 10-24, but be prepared for the eventuality that you won't use the 16 much except for low-light street & quasi-macro wide shots with nicely blurred backgrounds.

In fact, the 10-24 + 35 would be a great kit.

 

[Sjak]

Why not keep the cash i your pocket for now? 16 + 35 sounds like a solid and versatile kit. With time, you will figure out whether you want something substantially wider.

Size is also something to consider when travelling; the smaller lens is usually more versatile as it will end up in the bag more often than a bulky one.

 

[David Hwang]

Why not keep the cash i your pocket for now? 16 + 35 sounds like a solid and versatile kit. With time, you will figure out whether you want something substantially wider.

Size is also something to consider when travelling; the smaller lens is usually more versatile as it will end up in the bag more often than a bulky one.

That sounds like a good plan, too. I'm having the itch for UWA, but I can live with that for a time.

 

[Bobo Hodls]

Having both lenses, IMO the 10-24 would be the practical choice for your motives. Unless a lens of 10-24 size would be a problem to bag, or you challenge yourself with no-light studies at night (when OIS or IBIS is useless, and the faster lens matters), that is.

. f/4 1/25s ISO 5000



--
...Bob, NYC
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

Bobo Hodls

Explore Bobo Hodls’s 5,812 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

http://www.bobtullis.com

.

 

[Greg7579]

Bob, did you mean IBIS was useless at night on a Tripod? Not sure what you meant. IBIS is immensely useful in low light situations as we all know so not sure what you meant. Great shot, again, by the way. That guy looks like he had a bit of flash on him. Great image.

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas

Greg Johnson’s albums | Flickr

www.flickr.com

 

[Bobo Hodls]

Bob, did you mean IBIS was useless at night on a Tripod? Not sure what you meant. IBIS is immensely useful in low light situations as we all know so not sure what you meant. Great shot, again, by the way. That guy looks like he had a bit of flash on him. Great image.

No flash - possibly there was light from a car at the light to the left.

Pause for a moment. . . think about how you would execute a "no light study" of anything. There's only two possibilities.

When you need to explain why IBIS is useful, remember that many of us were using IBIS before, and while, you were parroting the lie Fuji told their user base about why IBIS was impossible for them. Thanks, though.

 

[Greg7579]

Bob, did you mean IBIS was useless at night on a Tripod? Not sure what you meant. IBIS is immensely useful in low light situations as we all know so not sure what you meant. Great shot, again, by the way. That guy looks like he had a bit of flash on him. Great image.

No flash - possibly there was light from a car at the light to the left.

Pause for a moment. . . think about how you would execute a "no light study" of anything. There's only two possibilities.

When you need to explain why IBIS is useful, remember that many of us were using IBIS before, and while, you were parroting the lie Fuji told their user base about why IBIS was impossible for them. Thanks, though.

 

[georgehudetz]

The 10-24 is immensely more versatile and useful than the 9 (I have both).

BUT the 9 would make a great compliment to the 16.

You don't say what kind of photography you do. If landscape figures highly, I'd suggest getting the 10-24, but be prepared for the eventuality that you won't use the 16 much except for low-light street & quasi-macro wide shots with nicely blurred backgrounds.

In fact, the 10-24 + 35 would be a great kit.

 

[Bobo Hodls]

Bob, did you mean IBIS was useless at night on a Tripod? Not sure what you meant. IBIS is immensely useful in low light situations as we all know so not sure what you meant. Great shot, again, by the way. That guy looks like he had a bit of flash on him. Great image.

No flash - possibly there was light from a car at the light to the left.

Pause for a moment. . . think about how you would execute a "no light study" of anything. There's only two possibilities.

When you need to explain why IBIS is useful, remember that many of us were using IBIS before, and while, you were parroting the lie Fuji told their user base about why IBIS was impossible for them. Thanks, though.

 

[Greg7579]

OK. Thanks Bob. Your night images of NYC are world class. Not just technically, but you have the eye, which is something I struggle with.


Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas

Greg Johnson’s albums | Flickr

www.flickr.com

 

[Bobo Hodls]

OK. Thanks Bob. Your night images of NYC are world class. Not just technically, but you have the eye, which is something I struggle with.

Of 10 taken in the cathedral, for example, typically one or two will be stand outs. What makes the difference - is something one would want to take the time to appreciate. Those post-exposure evaluations can go a long way for future compositions, but it takes time to do, and the results aren't immediate.

Exposures are mostly easy, and sensor invariance offers room to err and still succeed. You clearly have no-flash exposures nailed (and you've got your flash working well with your grandkids too), as well as the developing. If you feel composition is your weak point, you can try to slow down the volume and seek something else from yourself, but that's your call.

 

[DarnGoodPhotos]

Consider the Fuji 14mm f2.8, Fuji XC15-45, Samyung 12mm, and the upcoming Fuji XF8-16 f2.8 as alternatives.

--
www.darngoodphotos.com

 

[David Hwang]

The 10-24 is immensely more versatile and useful than the 9 (I have both).

BUT the 9 would make a great compliment to the 16.

You don't say what kind of photography you do. If landscape figures highly, I'd suggest getting the 10-24, but be prepared for the eventuality that you won't use the 16 much except for low-light street & quasi-macro wide shots with nicely blurred backgrounds.

In fact, the 10-24 + 35 would be a great kit.

--
http://georgehudetzphotography.smugmug.com/
My Flikr stream: http://flic.kr/ps/Ay8ka

Oh ... I forgot to mention that. I usually do photography of my family (my 17-month-old little daughter and my wife). I like 16mm's versatility since you can shoot indoors and outdoors with comfortable FL and the fast aperture. And I think I've been fond of a kind of look that 16/1.4 gives (I liked EF 24/f1.4 a lot when I used Canon FF DSLR). I had 16 and 23/f1.4 for a while but felt that I don't really need to have both. I definitely prefer 16 over 23/f1.4, so I eventually sold 23 yesterday for getting other lenses.

And above all, you don't have to go farther go take a photo of them with 16mm. In this sense, I decided to go for 35/1.4 over 56/1.2. I feel that 56 is not for family photography in many cases since you should go farther. I think 35 works better for me (Actually, I used to have 35/f1.4 but sold it for 23/1.4. Now I'm getting it back again).

But I'm not sure when it comes to UWA (I have always thought that I need UWA, but I just sold 23/1.4, so now I became afford). I'm a student now, and I'm planning to travel to a couple of places before the semester begins, but I like to travel light (sometimes I feel that even 16 is heavy, and the burden of weight is one of the main reasons I moved from Canon FF to system), but I also know that going for 9mm prime would mean that you need to change lenses more, which is really bothersome when you travel with young children. It sounds like I want to have cake and eat it too.

I do agree with the previous poster that said avoid the 9mm for now. Such a wide focal length is a very specialized tool, and if you don't know what you'd use it for, I would not buy it, particularly if you are on a budget.

By the way, the 18/2 is a nice alternative to the 16 if you want to keep things light.

But overall I'd say you have a good kit and you should just go out and shoot!

--
http://georgehudetzphotography.smugmug.com/
My Flikr stream: http://flic.kr/ps/Ay8ka

Now due to all the inputs by you guys, I'm getting a little more inclined to 10-24.

 

[David Hwang]

Consider the Fuji 14mm f2.8, Fuji XC15-45, Samyung 12mm, and the upcoming Fuji XF8-16 f2.8 as alternatives.

 

[vratnik]

I had 10-24. It's a big and heavy lens but as said multiple times, more versatile. Also useful for video.

Now I have Laowa 9mm - wider (fov), smaller, extremely light. Great match for X-T20. However, what was not mentioned here, I am missing the "Fuji color", the magical Fuji look in images. This lens provides significantly different color tones. The fuji color is simply "not there". Missing the fuji magic. Film simulations look different with this lens, a bit on the cooler side.

tl;dr: the Laowa is great, but.. it's not Fuji.

I'll keep it though, it's extremely portable.

 

[TOMSDPR]

I think you will not get happy with this ultra wide 9mm. As soon as there are vertical lines in the frame the distorion looks ridiculous and it will produce very funny faces in your family*s faces for sure. The 10 - 24 might be a bit too bulky for you- so I would rather recommend the very small and lightweight XC 15 - 45 or anther fast prime, like the Samyang 21 mm F 1.4 or XF 23 mm F 2.0 in addition to your 16mm F 1.4.

The are both more on the heavy side but very compact.

 

[Advent1sam]

I think you will not get happy with this ultra wide 9mm. As soon as there are vertical lines in the frame the distorion looks ridiculous and it will produce very funny faces in your family*s faces for sure. The 10 - 24 might be a bit too bulky for you- so I would rather recommend the very small and lightweight XC 15 - 45 or anther fast prime, like the Samyang 21 mm F 1.4 or XF 23 mm F 2.0 in addition to your 16mm F 1.4.

The are both more on the heavy side but very compact.

MJD, the 10-24 doesn't feel very big at all on the X-T100, especially as I added the l-plate grip. I would say the 10-24 is one of my favourite lenses and I see it as a real 16-35 walkaround lens alternative, in fact its 15-36 and it's super sharp. It also has a very good ois system too. It might be nice to have the 9mm as well if you need wider than 10, I did think of adding the 8-16 but it needs a special filter adapter, huge, and then 150mm square filters etc and the 8-16 is big already so I decided to stick with the 10-24 which is a great great lens, love the little 15-45 too, the 15mm end is like a razor

 

[Montanawildlives]

I had the 14 which I truly loved but when I was testing out the 10 to 24 there is just no comparison. The trivial amount you might give up in sharpness and speed is repaid 100 fold in versatility.

And it's really not that big.