Advice on a wide angle lens

Hello,

I kindly ask for the opinion of the fellow photographers on this forum, which has been so useful many times for me.

I currently own the XT4 with some prime lenses: 80mm f2.8 macro, 56mm f1.2, 35mm f1.4, and 23mm f2. I am interested in street and travel/landscape photography, besides macro, which has been my main interest in the recent years. I have just purchased the Rokinon 12mm f2, which is on its way: I have tried night sky photography (with Nikon APS-C), and I also like it (I have many opportunities in rural areas near where I live).

I have found that 23mm / 35mm focal lenghts are a bit long in some situations, in particular for tight interiors or wide vistas. When using Nikon, I had the excellent Tokina 11-16mm, which I shot on equal proportions at both ends of the zoom range, almost entirely for landscapes.

When travelling, I like to take photos of landscapes and cityscapes (I really like night cityscapes using a tripod, with light trails of vehicles and vistas with night lighting.), and that is why I am thinking of buying a wide angle lens. I plan to use the Rokinon 12mm for landscape if there is the opportunity, but my experience with the 11mm FL on Nikon is that distortion is rather an issue for arquitecture / cityscapes. Therefore, after reviewing MANY comments on this and other websites, I'm considering the XF 16mm f1.4 (I really like the fast aperture primes I have), or the XF 16-55mm f2.8. I'm not much worried about the size and weight of the latter, given that I am used to hand hold for long periods the XT4 with 80mm macro plus a full-size flash and a diffuser. A Sunway foto hand grip has served me well for this.

I will be travelling to Montreal for christmas to visit family (my fist time in such a cold weather), and that is what makes me consider these two WR lenses. I have read really good comments on the XF 14mm f2.8, but it has no WR, and as far I have read, not very pleasant suntars (for night photography). I have considered also the new XF 10-24mm f4 WR, which is a very attractive option for landscape (in the future I would like to have it), but I'm afraid it is not as appropriate for city walkaround as the two options mentioned.

I am more attracted to the XF 16mm f1.4, but the potential bad weather of Montreal in the winter makes me think twice reganding lens changing issues, which would be solved by using the XF 16-55 f2.8.

After this LONG explanation, what would you do?

Thanks in advance for sharing your experience.

Why not try the 12mm lens you already bought and take it from there?

biza43 wrote:

Why not try the 12mm lens you already bought and take it from there?

Hi,

That's a good idea. Anyway, I would be buying the new lens in Montreal, so I can wait to try it out. Nevertheless, autofocus would be appreciated for many situations, and the Rokinon 12mm f2 is manual focus only. Again, I can try this out under the real application.

Thanks for your comment.

I have the 16-55 and have used two copies of the 16mm f/1.4. Over their shared apertures, the zoom was every bit as good at 16mm, including in the corners, better sunstars stopped way down too. The 16-55 is excellent wide open too and is great for low light shooting in general.

Thank you Erik,

The great amount of good comments on the 16-55mm make it very attractive. The possibility of high image quality plus the versatility of several focal lengths are very appeling to me.

Pessoaca wrote:

biza43 wrote:

Why not try the 12mm lens you already bought and take it from there?

Hi,

That's a good idea. Anyway, I would be buying the new lens in Montreal, so I can wait to try it out. Nevertheless, autofocus would be appreciated for many situations, and the Rokinon 12mm f2 is manual focus only. Again, I can try this out under the real application.

Thanks for your comment.

Manually focusing is super easy on an ultrawide lens. Plus, Samyang/Rokinon now offers the same lens with AF, if you really need it.

Pessoaca wrote:

distortion is rather an issue for arquitecture / cityscapes.

A lot been said already. Just mentioning that the Laowa 9 mm f/2.8 has virtually no distortion. I have it.

It may be too wide for your purpose (?). It suffers from strong vignetting. But OTOH it is super small and super lightweight. It always fits in every pocket.

BR,

Martin

I like zooms for travel- less lens changing and fewer items to carry- you are able to cover a range of situations. The 16-55mm is an excellent lens.  Combine that with a fast wide angle prime and other than the longer end, you should be set.  While I have carried a 70- 200mm lens on travel with my Nikon set-up (I now have Fuji gear too- I use the Sigma Art 18-35mm f/1.8 for travel with my Nikon D500), I don't usually end up using it very much.

I’m currently pondering buying a wide angle lens and I’m thinking of buying the 14mm as, if I’m going wide angle, I want the startling effect it will give.  I used to have the Samyang 8mm for Sony, which was a ‘real’ fisheye (though not as extreme as some).  With that, I used a plug in called ‘Fish-eye Hemi’ which very effectively ‘defished’ the images into a good  rectilinear image without unduly distorting the edges.  I wonder if it could be used on a wide angle to remove any distortions it might have. No doubt there’s a trial version available.

Hi,

I would strongly recommend the 14/2.8. It is my favourite lens from Fuji. I also owned the 16/1.4 and I still have the 16-55. Here are some night shots though not taken on a tripod with the lens stopped down so no real indicator for you.

https://www.littlebigtravelingcamera.com/?tag=fuji-xf-14mm

I wouldn't be too nervous about the lack of WR. I never had an issue even in very dusty environments.

I first got the Rokinon 10mm and loved the output of this lens. It is long and heavy which I found strange for a wide angle lens and the weight frustrated me so I decided to get the Rokinon 12mm.  I feel it's a big step down in image quality as well as build quality though it is nice and light and a typical size for a wide angle lens.  Eventually I got the Fuji 10-24 and I find it super versatile, sharp and to have great contrast and snap.  For me 16mm is not wide enough for a lot of my landscape work.  I don't see why you could not use the 10-24 for street photography or travel though it's f4 aperture would require higher ISO indoors and at night.

Morris

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

I have the 16-55 and have used two copies of the 16mm f/1.4. Over their shared apertures, the zoom was every bit as gñood at 16mm, including in the corners, better sunstars stopped way down too. The 16-55 is excellent wide open too and is great for low light shooting in general.

Thanks for your input, that lens is very appelaing.

Manually focusing is super easy on an ultrawide lens. Plus, Samyang/Rokinon now offers the same lens with AF, if you really need it.

I have already bought the manual focus version of the Rokinon. I'm ready to use it and enjoy it.

Best regards.

Rightsaidfred wrote:

Pessoaca wrote:

distortion is rather an issue for arquitecture / cityscapes.

A lot been said already. Just mentioning that the Laowa 9 mm f/2.8 has virtually no distortion. I have it.

It may be too wide for your purpose (?). It suffers from strong vignetting. But OTOH it is super small and super lightweight. It always fits in every pocket.

BR,

Martin

Hi Martin,

Yes, 9mm is wider than I would like.

Thans for your comment.

The XF 10-24mm is interesting in towns, and OIS for night shots

I have been amazed by the Fujinon 8-16 2.8

White-collar wrote:

I have been amazed by the Fujinon 8-16 2.8

That really is a fantastic lens.  I've been using it lately for some widefield astro work, which arguably is one of the most demanding usages with respect to IQ.  It's excellent across its FL range.  Not cheap, but if you do a lot of wide angle photography, it's a terrific investment.

Morris0 wrote:

I first got the Rokinon 10mm and loved the output of this lens. It is long and heavy which I found strange for a wide angle lens and the weight frustrated me so I decided to get the Rokinon 12mm. I feel it's a big step down in image quality as well as build quality though it is nice and light and a typical size for a wide angle lens. Eventually I got the Fuji 10-24 and I find it super versatile, sharp and to have great contrast and snap. For me 16mm is not wide enough for a lot of my landscape work. I don't see why you could not use the 10-24 for street photography or travel though it's f4 aperture would require higher ISO indoors and at night.

Morris

I'm a little surprised by your comment on the Rok 12.  I don't own that lens, so no personal experience to share here, but it is widely regarded as pretty well the best astro lens (for starscapes) available for Fujifilm cameras.  Wide field astro is arguably one of the most demanding usages for any lens, with respect to IQ, and will very quickly highlight most any optical issues that the lens might have.  So, I'm a bit curious as to what the IQ issues you experienced might have been.

Concerning the 10-24, I had one in my kit for many years... more recently replaced by the 8-16.  I found it to be terrific for interiors, but find the wider FOV and aperture of the 8-16 to be a real game changer for photographing large, dark interiors like cathedrals.  So far, at least, I'm not really missing the 10-24 much.

As far as your recommendation for using the 10-24 for street photography... it would seem to be awfully wide and impractical for photographing people (except in groups perhaps), regardless.  Unless I'm off base in terms of what is generally defined as "street photography," I'm struggling to see how that would be a really good choice for that.  Perhaps you can set me straight if I misunderstood your comment.

Jerry-astro wrote:

Morris0 wrote:

I first got the Rokinon 10mm and loved the output of this lens. It is long and heavy which I found strange for a wide angle lens and the weight frustrated me so I decided to get the Rokinon 12mm. I feel it's a big step down in image quality as well as build quality though it is nice and light and a typical size for a wide angle lens. Eventually I got the Fuji 10-24 and I find it super versatile, sharp and to have great contrast and snap. For me 16mm is not wide enough for a lot of my landscape work. I don't see why you could not use the 10-24 for street photography or travel though it's f4 aperture would require higher ISO indoors and at night.

Morris

I'm a little surprised by your comment on the Rok 12. I don't own that lens, so no personal experience to share here, but it is widely regarded as pretty well the best astro lens (for starscapes) available for Fujifilm cameras. Wide field astro is arguably one of the most demanding usages for any lens, with respect to IQ, and will very quickly highlight most any optical issues that the lens might have. So, I'm a bit curious as to what the IQ issues you experienced might have been.

Concerning the 10-24, I had one in my kit for many years... more recently replaced by the 8-16. I found it to be terrific for interiors, but find the wider FOV and aperture of the 8-16 to be a real game changer for photographing large, dark interiors like cathedrals. So far, at least, I'm not really missing the 10-24 much.

As far as your recommendation for using the 10-24 for street photography... it would seem to be awfully wide and impractical for photographing people (except in groups perhaps), regardless. Unless I'm off base in terms of what is generally defined as "street photography," I'm struggling to see how that would be a really good choice for that. Perhaps you can set me straight if I misunderstood your comment.

For me the RRokinon 12mm has CA issues and lacks pop.  I don't do astro so I can't comment on it for that.  My 10-24 is used outdoors where it dose a lovely job.  Everyone that uses the 8-16 report great things.

Morris