One lens to cover the focal length of 3?

[bishbosh12]

Hi,

Been mulling over an idea that may be a bad idea.... I have a an X-E2 and lenses as follows: Fuji 10-24, 18-55 and 50-230. On a recent walk when on holiday I took them all and the environment I was walking through, open countryside with sheep, a road and sweeping landscape meant I ended up using all 3 lenses swapping them in and out, which became a bit painful.

So I began to wonder if a single lens that covered the most used focal lengths would be a good idea and save me swapping out the lenses every 2 minutes. Looking at the photos I took I reckon an ideal range would be 12-14mm to 130-140mm.

However, the lenses that are available seems limited to:

• Fujifilm XF 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6
• Sigma16-300mm f/3.5-6.7

In my mind the Fuji lower focal length is too close to the 18-55, and the Sigma upper focal length I doubt I'd use, as I hardly really use the full range of the Fuji 50-230 I have.

So, my questions.... is this a bad idea? If not have I missed some lenses that might suffice?

Ta,

Tony

 

[Morris0]

Photography is full of tradeoffs. Lens of the type you list are very convenient yet less sharp and have slower maximum apertures making it difficult to blur backgrounds or shoot in the dark. If your goal is to record what you have seen in bright light they can do a fine job at this yet they will make it harder to take stunning photos.

You might want to consider the two body approach where you have two lenses mounted that will cover most of what you expect to see. Then changing lenses is as simple as grabbing the other camera hanging around your neck.

Morris

 

[Jeff Biscuits]

You might want to consider the two body approach where you have two lenses mounted that will cover most of what you expect to see.

That was going to be one of my suggestions.

The other is to just leave the house with one lens and concentrate on looking for more and better images in that range, rather than constantly trying to context-switch from near to far and from wide to tight. You may find that you discover new avenues that you previously hadn’t explored. Constraints breed creativity… plenty of people go out with not merely just one lens, but just one focal length

 

[bishbosh12]

You might want to consider the two body approach where you have two lenses mounted that will cover most of what you expect to see.

That was going to be one of my suggestions.

The other is to just leave the house with one lens and concentrate on looking for more and better images in that range, rather than constantly trying to context-switch from near to far and from wide to tight. You may find that you discover new avenues that you previously hadn’t explored. Constraints breed creativity… plenty of people go out with not merely just one lens, but just one focal length

This is probably what I should do, and I should add that I also have the Fuji 27mm so in fact already do this I suppose when on holiday I want to photo as much as possible, mind you we'll be returning to the Isle of Lismore in the future I'm sure, and as for me it would be about photography I can do just that and ignore the sheep

 

[bishbosh12]

Photography is full of tradeoffs. Lens of the type you list are very convenient yet less sharp and have slower maximum apertures making it difficult to blur backgrounds or shoot in the dark. If your goal is to record what you have seen in bright light they can do a fine job at this yet they will make it harder to take stunning photos.

You might want to consider the two body approach where you have two lenses mounted that will cover most of what you expect to see. Then changing lenses is as simple as grabbing the other camera hanging around your neck.

Morris

Yeah, I did think it might be a bit of a compromise to be fair. I'm not sure about two bodies I think I'll focus on a task in hand. Ta

 

[jonikon]

A nice wish, but I think you are hoping for too much from one lens. I would be happy if Fujifilm made their patent for a 16-200mm lens a reality.
Changing lenses in your home is no problem, but changing them in the field can easily result in water ( in mist or rain), or debris contamination of the sensor with mirrorless cameras. It has happened to me anyway.. DSLRs protected the sensor with a closed shutter when changing lenses, but mirrorless camera sensors are open to the environment when the lens is removed. And then there is always the possibility of dropping a lens while switching them out which would be a costly and disappointing experience, (that I thankfully have not experienced as of yet!).

 

[Gaber]

I have found the 16-80 to be a wonderful travel lens.

 

[Maoby]

This is exactly my practice, one fixed lens at a time.

 

[bishbosh12]

A nice wish, but I think you are hoping for too much from one lens. I would be happy if Fujifilm made their patent for a 16-200mm lens a reality.
Changing lenses in your home is no problem, but changing them in the field can easily result in water ( in mist or rain), or debris contamination of the sensor with mirrorless cameras. It has happened to me anyway.. DSLRs protected the sensor with a closed shutter when changing lenses, but mirrorless camera sensors are open to the environment when the lens is removed. And then there is always the possibility of dropping a lens while switching them out which would be a costly and disappointing experience, (that I thankfully have not experienced as of yet!).

 

[bishbosh12]

I have found the 16-80 to be a wonderful travel lens.

 

[Jeff Biscuits]

I have found the 16-80 to be a wonderful travel lens.

To be honest the shot I needed the big zoom (50-230) was used at 80mm, and I absolutely love the 18-55 so maybe the 16-80 would do, I suppose I was just wanting a little more headroom either side. I'll look into this lens.

I don’t use zooms much, but I do use them for hiking, and the 16-80 has served me very well in that role.

It’s a nice lens to use, with a very useful range. (Mind you, in many hiking locations I could say the same of the 10-24… I’ve been happy with both of those on their own in places like the Lakes and Snowdonia, without feeling like I needed more range.)

That said, next week I’m off to the Brecon Beacons (somewhere I’ve previously used the 16-80) and I’m trying to stick to my guns and keep it light and simple with just an X100

 

[Yannis1976]

A nice wish, but I think you are hoping for too much from one lens. I would be happy if Fujifilm made their patent for a 16-200mm lens a reality.
Changing lenses in your home is no problem, but changing them in the field can easily result in water ( in mist or rain), or debris contamination of the sensor with mirrorless cameras. It has happened to me anyway.. DSLRs protected the sensor with a closed shutter when changing lenses, but mirrorless camera sensors are open to the environment when the lens is removed. And then there is always the possibility of dropping a lens while switching them out which would be a costly and disappointing experience, (that I thankfully have not experienced as of yet!).

Can't resist popping up whenever someone brings up this topic!! The lack of good zooms for Fujifilm is one of my main reasons using also Sony FF. There are many more available lenses, especially zoom lenses, that are not super heavy or super expensive and actually very sharp!

Come on Fuji!!!! This year you introduced so many bodies, some lenses, but still not the 16-200 or at least an update to the ancient 18-135.

And now Tamron and Sigma are releasing two wonderful lenses for Sony FF (25-200 G2, 20-200)...

 

[jonikon]

I have found the 16-80 to be a wonderful travel lens.

To be honest the shot I needed the big zoom (50-230) was used at 80mm, and I absolutely love the 18-55 so maybe the 16-80 would do, I suppose I was just wanting a little more headroom either side. I'll look into this lens.

It depends what your subject is at 80mm. Due to it only being sharp in the center at 80mm, with only fair borders and poor edges, (at any aperture), the XF 16-80 appears to be primarily a portrait lens at the long end and not suitable for subjects requiring good border and edge sharpness. OTOH, the XC 50-230mm has very good sharpness across the frame at 80mm and even at 230mm for that matter, (at least in my copy), so it can be used for landscapes as well.
If you do decide to try the XF 16-80 f4, then I suggest you buy used from a reputable used lens reseller that allows easy returns. I have seen many used 16-80s being offered by lens resellers well bellow half the price of a new one, so no reason to pay full price for a new one when so many used ones in "excellent" or "like new" condition are readily available.

 

[MrAndreas]

I'd second Morris's and other respected forum members' suggestion: proceed with a two-body approach. This is my standard practice since the early 1990s. However, I don't use many zooms — my standard setup is an X-E3 with an XF 23/2, the second body is an X-T20 with an XF 50/2, and the zoom — Sigma 18-50/2.8 — sits in the bag or in the pocket for specific occasions. Covers 99.9% of scenes.

If I am limited to one camera, it's the X-E3 with a Sigma zoom.

I. Hate. Changing. Lenses. In. The. Field. Period.

--
https://www.viewbug.com/member/stesinou

 

[Jeff Biscuits]

It depends what your subject is at 80mm. Due to it only being sharp in the center at 80mm, with only fair borders and poor edges, (at any aperture), the XF 16-80 appears to be primarily a portrait lens at the long end and not suitable for subjects requiring good border and edge sharpness.

You can overthink these things, though. There’s nothing really stopping it being used for landscapes at 80mm.

 

[Yannis1976]

It depends what your subject is at 80mm. Due to it only being sharp in the center at 80mm, with only fair borders and poor edges, (at any aperture), the XF 16-80 appears to be primarily a portrait lens at the long end and not suitable for subjects requiring good border and edge sharpness.

You can overthink these things, though. There’s nothing really stopping it being used for landscapes at 80mm.

Great shots!!!

--
Yannis

Yannis Tzevelekos

Explore Yannis Tzevelekos’s 969 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

Login • Instagram

Welcome back to Instagram. Sign in to check out what your friends, family & interests have been capturing & sharing around the world.

www.instagram.com

https://www.viewbug.com/member/Yannis76

 

[Superscroll]

Biscuits bringing the gravy! Great shots!

IMO a fantastic argument for ditching zooms and going prime so you can 'see' those compositions more easily.

 

[Jackpot101]

It depends what your subject is at 80mm. Due to it only being sharp in the center at 80mm, with only fair borders and poor edges, (at any aperture), the XF 16-80 appears to be primarily a portrait lens at the long end and not suitable for subjects requiring good border and edge sharpness.

You can overthink these things, though. There’s nothing really stopping it being used for landscapes at 80mm.

Wow ! very nice shots - Saw my X-T1 among them. Bravo.

The resolution of these images is incredible for these cameras. I especially love the windmill (very gutsy composition - well done) and lighthouse shots — it’s amazing how well the detail holds up even when zoomed in; you can clearly see the windmill blades.

 

[biza43]

The lens for your intended 1 lens approach already exists, as mentioned by others. F/8 is a great equalizer, and a 16-300 will serve you well. If the light is getting lower, consider a travel tripod.

Another option is 1 camera (or 2) plus something like the 16-50 and the 70-300.

 

[biza43]

It depends what your subject is at 80mm. Due to it only being sharp in the center at 80mm, with only fair borders and poor edges, (at any aperture), the XF 16-80 appears to be primarily a portrait lens at the long end and not suitable for subjects requiring good border and edge sharpness.

You can overthink these things, though. There’s nothing really stopping it being used for landscapes at 80mm.

Good ones. Of course, the lens is perfectly usable in the real world, as any other modern lens. I remember shooting a landscape assignment for a travel magazine 23 years ago with a Canon EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 zoom, which was considered not good enough...

--
www.paulobizarro.com

PauloBizarroPHOTOBLOG – Some of my photography