Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Fuji X Series > Fuji X Lenses & Images

View Poll Results: What are your Favorite Fuji X lenses?
XF14/2.8 34 14.91%
XF16/1.4 29 12.72%
XF18/2 48 21.05%
XF23/1.4 49 21.49%
XF27/2.8 29 12.72%
XF35/1.4 98 42.98%
XF35/2 47 20.61%
XF56/1.2 53 23.25%
XF56/1.2 APD 5 2.19%
XF60/2.4 Macro 17 7.46%
XF90/2 12 5.26%
XF120/2.8 Macro 0 0%
XF 1.4 Teleconverter 1 0.44%
XF10-24/4 15 6.58%
XF16-50 3.5-5.6 1 0.44%
XF16-50 /2.8 I 1 0.44%
XF16-50 /2.8 II 0 0%
XF16-55 /2.8 6 2.63%
XF18-55 /2.8-4 36 15.79%
XF18-135 /3.5-5.6 5 2.19%
XF50-140 / 2.8 2 0.88%
XF50-230 /4.5-6.7 I 1 0.44%
XF50-230 /4.5-6.7 II 0 0%
XF55-200 /3.5-4.8 15 6.58%
XF 100-400 2 0.88%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 228. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

What are your Favorite Fuji-X lenses?
Old 11-13-2015   #1
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,695
What are your Favorite Fuji-X lenses?

What are your Favorite Fuji-X lenses?

Multiple Choices OK

You can only vote once,
so think out your multiple choices!

Also post with your opinion of the lenses,
pros /cons !
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #2
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 51
Posts: 6,258
That's easy.... The FujiLux 35mm f1.4

I really like the 55-200 also. The first zoom I have ever really liked.
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #3
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 4,022
I voted for the ones I have... 16, 35, 18-55, 60. They're all GREAT! And I'm looking forward to the new 35/2.
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Fuji X-H1; X-Pro1; XF10; Polaroid 250 (waiting for an 'art' project)

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #4
daveleo
what?
 
daveleo's Avatar
 
daveleo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: People's Republic of Mass.
Posts: 3,686
I have the 18/2.0, 27/2.8, 35/1.4 and 18-55/2.8-4.0

The 35/1.4 is easily the #1 best of these. It's one of the very best lenses I have owned.

I voted the 18-55 as #2 as easily the best "bang for the $$$$" for versatility and quality.
__________________
Dave

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #5
emayoh
Registered User
 
emayoh is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 135
I can't bring myself to go to the Fuji 35mm because I love my adapted VL 35mm 1.4 on there so much. So I went with the 18mm 2.0 because of the incredible size factor - 27mm equiv is a sweet spot for me. (28mm with one bonus millimeter of width :-) It feels just right most of the time. Wish it was a bit more sturdy. I wouldn't mind a little extra weight if it had the same size. (e.g. less plastic.)

Just borrowed the 56 1.2 at a Fuji meet last night and it was pretty dreamy...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #6
macjim
Registered User
 
macjim's Avatar
 
macjim is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 463
XF-35 f1.4...That's it!
__________________
Cheers, Macjim
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #7
MCTuomey
Registered User
 
MCTuomey's Avatar
 
MCTuomey is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: U.S.
Age: 65
Posts: 3,309
35/1.4, 56/1.2, 10-24/4 would be my favs
__________________
--Mike

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #8
lukitas
second hand noob
 
lukitas's Avatar
 
lukitas is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Brussels, belgium
Posts: 759
Got the XE-2 with the 18-55, 2,8-4 kit zoom.
Very good lens, sharp and flare resistant. perfect traveling companion : wide to short tele-portrait. And the OIS adds a stop or two of usability.

But since I got the 18 mm f2, it hasn't been off my camera. More flare than the zoom, but it is a much smaller lens, even with the shade. And most important : a diaphragm ring with fixed numbers on the barrel.

Thinking about the 35 f2, not sure wether I want to go back to the 'standard' angle of view yet.

Cheers
__________________
lukitas

Gallery

photos by lukitas
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #9
narsuitus
Registered User
 
narsuitus's Avatar
 
narsuitus is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,233
I voted for the ones I own and use:

16mm f/1.4 Fujinon

23mm f/1.4 Fujinon

56mm f/1.2 Fujinon

50-140mm f/2.8 Fujinon

I could not vote for the 120mm f/2.8 macro since it has not been released yet. However, it may be my next lens purchase.


Fuji Available Light Kit by Narsuitus, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #10
twopointeight
Registered User
 
twopointeight is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 456
16-55, a workhorse, covers 90% of all my daylight shooting.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #11
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,067
35mm f1.4 is the sweetest of the lineup IMO.

Pity the x100's 23mm f2 isn't on the list because I would have voted that too.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #12
seajak
Registered User
 
seajak is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Tyagarah, Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 193
I bought my X-E1 to use with legacy lenses but I have a 27/2.8 which lives on the camera in my bag for EDC. I'm really enjoying the 40mm eq. focal length and the lens is really unobtrusive for candid shots.

cheers,
clay
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-13-2015   #13
lxmike
Barnack fan
 
lxmike's Avatar
 
lxmike is offline
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Co Durham NE England
Age: 53
Posts: 3,245
Has to be the 35 1.4 for me, stuck for words to describe how much l like this lens, l quite like the 18/2 to and l am still toying with getting a 27
__________________
Currently loaded: Leica IIIc. IIIg and Bronica ERTS.

Glass currently in regular use: Voigtlander 15mm 4.5 Helliar

Soon to arrive Leica MDa

myblog:lifefromawindow
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2015   #14
ruby.monkey
Registered User
 
ruby.monkey is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Garden of England
Age: 49
Posts: 4,553
35mm f/1.4 and 56mm f/1.2 Fujinons. Haven't used the 18mm f/2 enough for it really to grab me, but it looks promising so far.

I have yet to try any of the other lenses; and having acquired a Metabones Speed Booster Ultra for Nikon F lenses to go with my X-T1, and also owning Fuji's Leica M adapter, I may not bother with any of them other than the new 35mm f/2.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2015   #15
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,298
With a few exceptions (mainly the highly corrected 18/2) the XF prime lenses are all more similar than different. They are crisp in the center from wide open to when diffraction occurs. The corners are less sharp wide open. Out-of-focus rendering is neither special or flawed. The coma levels are nothing special. The lens coatings are very similar, if not identical, which keeps color rendition and contrast similar. I like this because it keep post work easy. Other probably prefer diversity. The levels of ghosting and flare are low – even for the primes with large fields of view.

The XF primes are well made. Quirky is an adjective commonly used when discussing the X Series. The are several different designs and aperture ring feel is inconsistent. There are different AF motor technologies. The petal lens hood for some of them are huge. Only recently have the lens caps become useful. Some of them have recessed front and, or real lens elements which makes them tricky to clean. I have never had to clean a rear lens element though.

What I enjoy most are the relatively low levels of longitudinal CA. For many contemporary lenses lateral CA is corrected automatically either in camera or is trivial to correct during post. The longitudinal CA is not. After I transitioned from film to digital the high levels of longitudinal CA in Nikon's fast primes drove me nuts. For me this is a significant flaw in their out-of-focus rendering.

Fujifilm depends heavily on lens automated correction models to control vignetting, lateral CA and barrel/pin cushion distortion. Regardless of one's view of this increasingly common practice, I noticed Fujifilm corrects barrel/pin cushion distortion. Regardless of one's view of this increasingly common practice, I noticed Fujifilm corrects for higher order (a.k.a. mustache distortion) barrel/pin cushion effects. This was unique in my experience with compared to other brands of wide-angle lenses.

I used the 10-24/4 zoom for professional interior photography. This lens significantly outperforms the four F-mount zooms (three Nikkors and a Tokina) I used for this purpose. Its performance at 10mm is amazing as is the ghosting level (even at 10mm). Typically, the lens hood attachment is quirky which requires a bit of extra attention.

The overall XF lens performance is the main reason I am pleased with the X-Series. The ability to use the hybrid OVF/EVF finder is the other. I consider Fujifilm's slow, but steady stream of firmware improvements to be an advantage. I respect those who feel otherwise. By the way, this applies to lenses as the 18/2 barrel distortion corrections were improved as well via firmware updates.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2015   #16
ARB
Registered User
 
ARB is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 12
I think the 60mm lens actually has a maximum aperture of f/2.4.

-Alex
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2015   #17
narsuitus
Registered User
 
narsuitus's Avatar
 
narsuitus is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
I used the 10-24/4 zoom for professional interior photography. This lens significantly outperforms the four F-mount zooms (three Nikkors and a Tokina) I used for this purpose.
Willie 901,

Please tell me which three Nikkors lenses are outperformed by the 10-24 Fuji. Also, are you saying that the 10-24 on a Fuji body outperforms the three Nikkors when mounted on a Nikon body or are you saying that the 10-24 on a Fuji body outperforms the three Nikkors when mounted on the same Fuji body?

Thank you so much for your very informative post and thank you for any additional information you are able to provide.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2015   #18
CliveC
Registered User
 
CliveC is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Toronto, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 677
All I have is the 35mm 1.4, though I did get to try a 60mm once. Interested in getting a 56mm 1.2 at some point.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2015   #19
FranZ
Registered User
 
FranZ's Avatar
 
FranZ is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 142
I currently own:
Primes: 14/2.8; 18/2.0; 23/1.4; 35/1.4; 56/1.2 and 60/2.4 (indeed NOT 2.8)
Zooms: 18-55 and 18-135.
My favorites lie very much apart:
1) for indoors people photos, I use and enjoy a 2 camera setup: XP1-23/1.4 and XT1-56/1.2.
this is a very nice combination although I sometimes wish for identical operations on the 2 bodies.
2) for hinking I really like the weather resistant and versatile XT1-18/135mm combination.
__________________
Regards,

FranZ


'The question is not what you look at, but what you see' - Thoreau

Sony A7R3, RX1Rm2, RX100M6 & a lot of fun
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2015   #20
MCTuomey
Registered User
 
MCTuomey's Avatar
 
MCTuomey is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: U.S.
Age: 65
Posts: 3,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by twopointeight View Post
16-55, a workhorse, covers 90% of all my daylight shooting.
+1

I have 2 fast primes for lowlight club shooting but the more I use the XF zooms, the more I like 'em.
__________________
--Mike

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2015   #21
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by narsuitus View Post
Willie 901,

Please tell me which three Nikkors lenses are outperformed by the 10-24 Fuji. Also, are you saying that the 10-24 on a Fuji body outperforms the three Nikkors when mounted on a Nikon body or are you saying that the 10-24 on a Fuji body outperforms the three Nikkors when mounted on the same Fuji body?

Thank you so much for your very informative post and thank you for any additional information you are able to provide.
Sure, the 12-24 DX, the 17-35/2.8 AFS and the 16-35/4 VR G. The 16-35/4 was the best of these three.

I never used a Nikkor on the X-T1. I used the Nikkors on D300 or D700 bodies. I was specifically discussing how much effort and accommodation was required recording the images and then during post production in LR/PS. The X-T1 body itself has higher analog dynamic and signal-to-noise than the D700. The difference is small (~half a stop from base ISO to ISO 400) but real. At ISO 800-1600 the D700 is ~ 1/3 stop better. Of course, the D700 sensor (irrespective of the color-filter array differences) uses older technology.

All three Nikkors did not match the Fujinon at their minimum focal length especially at the frame edges. Also the barrel distortion contained higher order curvatures which ACR could not remove. With all three Nikkors I was comfortable using them only when their minimum focal lengths were set at 2 to 4 mm longer.

Often I had to photograph residential exteriors when the sun was in front of the camera. In these cases the ghosting and flare resistance of the Fujinon was significantly better than the Nikkors.

Ignoring the convenience of reduced size and weight, in my case the bottom line my post-production time was reduced by at least 25% when I started to use the Fujifilm system for gigs. Because clients valued having the images early the morning after the shoot, life became easier and the results were slightly better.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2015   #22
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,140
i'm lucky in that my favourite focal lengths happen to be excellent in the fuji line.
i have always liked 24/35/85...lots of time i also had a cute little 40 in the mix as well.
with fuji, the 16/23/56 and even the pancake 27 are all better at making images than i am!
the xe line of cameras are close to rf in feel of use and do what i like cameras to do...no deal breakers in the line up for me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2015   #23
Avotius
Some guy
 
Avotius's Avatar
 
Avotius is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,520
That 55-200 lens is damn good, and the 50-140 has one of the best in lens image stabilizers. And the 16 f1.4 is awesome as well. But honestly my top 3 would have the Rokinon 12 f2, its that good.
__________________
Flickr.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2015   #24
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,819
Big fan of the new 35mm f/2 ...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2015   #25
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Big fan of the new 35mm f/2 ...
tell us more...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2015   #26
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by back alley View Post
tell us more...
It focuses fast, the size is right, and the results look good. I don't over-complicate this stuff.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2015   #27
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
It focuses fast, the size is right, and the results look good. I don't over-complicate this stuff.
keeping it simple!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-17-2015   #28
MCTuomey
Registered User
 
MCTuomey's Avatar
 
MCTuomey is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: U.S.
Age: 65
Posts: 3,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avotius View Post
.... But honestly my top 3 would have the Rokinon 12 f2, its that good.
I want to rent & try one. I've read it's THE lens for astro uses, among other things, and it's f/2 and pretty small for pete's sake. Is there a lot of copy variation in the Rokinon's?
__________________
--Mike

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2015   #29
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
It focuses fast, the size is right, and the results look good. I don't over-complicate this stuff.
In my experience jsrockit's succinct summary describes the new 35/2.

All I will add is I enjoyed the results from the 35/1.4 Fujinon yet I don't regret selling it. When I sorted the photos I took with this lens hardly any were at f 1.4.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2015   #30
SuperUJ
Registered User
 
SuperUJ is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
It focuses fast, the size is right, and the results look good. I don't over-complicate this stuff.
Mine is supposed to arrive tomorrow. I can't wait to pick up my X-E2 again with it.

John
__________________
My Site
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2015   #31
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperUJ View Post
Mine is supposed to arrive tomorrow. I can't wait to pick up my X-E2 again with it.

John
Good to hear John... but don't let that M246 get lonely.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2015   #32
SuperUJ
Registered User
 
SuperUJ is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Good to hear John... but don't let that M246 get lonely.
Will try a tag team approach: M246 + CV35 f/1.2 & X-E2 + XF35 f/2 for size and weight; color and B&W; manual and autofocus. The form factor of the XF35 f/2 should help blend in better in certain situations

John
__________________
My Site
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2015   #33
f2bthere
Registered User
 
f2bthere is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 12
I have the 35/1.4, Zeiss Tuite 50/2.8 makro, 56 APD/1.2, 16/1.4 and the 18-55/2.8-4. I also have a Nikon mount Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 with an adapter.

My photography tends to be more documentary (candid images of people who are engaged in some way, externally or internally) and because I want to be unobtrusive (not "sneaky" but also not "in your face"), the Xpro1 is the best platform I have used. Much of my work is in lower light, so fast lenses are important. My subjects are almost always people and sometimes also dogs.

The 35/1.4 is the best all around and can be had for a great price. This lens draws very well and the focal length is very handy--long enough to use for portraits, wide enough to photograph most things. If you could have only one lens, this is a good choice.

The 56 APD is expensive, let's in less light than the regular version and doesn't focus as well on the newer Fujis (I use the XPRO 1, so either would focus slower for me). I was lucky enough to get a great deal on it. It renders significantly better than the non-APD version, so for me it is well worth the trade-offs. It is not quite as good as the Zeiss 85/1.4 Planar (but what is?), but it beats the Canon 85/1.2 and the Nikon 85/1.4, which are both fine lenses--the regular 56/1.2 is not as good as these two. A portrait lens isn't as versatile as a normal, but what it does, it does very well.

The sweet sixteen, 16/1.4, is a fantastic lens and fairly new to me. The 16mm (like a 24mm in full frame) sits at the sweet spot between very wide and ultra wide. For photographing people, it is still pretty easy to take normal looking images without having to be extra careful, the way you do with an ultra wide--not to say you can be careless, but it can be used quickly once you are used to it. The 23 is probably more practical and much easier to use, but if I want wider than the 35, I want more width than the 23 or even the 18 will give me. The 16 hits the spot. It also combines a fast aperture and great close focus ability (down to 6"!). These two characteristics give it the ability to deliver very unique images which you can't really get otherwise. Wide images with shallow depth of field to separate subjects and draw the viewers attention while providing a significant amount of context--fabulous!

The 18-55/2.8-4 is a versatile lens and for many it would be a great "if I only had one lens" choice. I prefer primes. For my work, I often need faster lenses. But if I know I will be in daylight or working with studio lights (and hence stopped down), this is a handy lens. I could live without f1.2 at the portrait end and even without f1.4 (although I do use them), but I wouldn't want to give up f2.0. I tend to need f1.4 a lot at the normal end (low light) and I want something wider and faster at the wide end (hence the 16mm). So this is the lens I could most easily part with. But quickly changing situations in good light, not to mention the light weight given its versatility, make this a nice lens to have.

The Zeiss 50mm is a great lens, but I find f2.8 limiting, which makes it hard to justify the weight in the bag. The 56mm is far more likely to hold the portrait lens spot. This is a superior macro lens, going to 1:1 if needed. It draws very well and is a great portrait lens to f2.8, which is fast enough for most portrait needs. But for the type of work I tend to do, the 16 is great for close ups (not macro, but close enough for most purposes) and the 56 APD edges it out for portraits. And both beat it for low light. I do find myself bringing it out more in the studio or for images of objects (or for real macro photos), but not as much in the field anymore.

So my tendency is to take just one lens (whichever seems appropriate or fun) or, if I need versatility, three: 16, 35 and 56. This trio is, I think, the perfect combination for my way of working out of a bag.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2015   #34
Big Ursus
Registered User
 
Big Ursus is offline
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 280
I picked up my new 35/2 last week. I haven't worked much with it so far, but I was immediately impressed by its size and, especially, by how fast it focuses with the firmware update.

I also have the 18/2.0, which is still my fave, and the 18-55/2.8-4.0. I'd like to get a longer, faster zoom, but I can't justify it - though I keep trying.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2015   #35
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
 
Pherdinand's Avatar
 
Pherdinand is offline
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: by the river called the Gender
Age: 42
Posts: 7,819
the 23/2...glued to the x100 i have
__________________
Happy New Year, Happy New Continent!
eye contact eye
My RFF Foolery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2015   #36
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
 
rhl-oregon's Avatar
 
rhl-oregon is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,015
I think I'm about to enjoy the 16/1.4 as much as I have enjoyed the 35/1.4--wide open unless the light or circumstances dictate otherwise.
__________________
Robert Hill Long
Southern Pines, North Carolina USA


http://rhl.photography
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-28-2015   #37
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
 
coelacanth's Avatar
 
coelacanth is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,475
Loved 35/1.4 and 56/1.2 (original) when I had a kit of native lenses and a few bodies for an assignment. My remaining X-E1 had been permanently mated with Fuji's official M adapter and used as a film scanner using BEOON until today.

I just got myself the newly released 35/2. So far looking great but I need to get out and shoot some.

Liked 23mm a lot as well, but it was way too big for me. With those very positive reviews of the new 35/2, I hope Fuji will consider making 23/2 in similar size.
__________________
- Sug

b/w guy.

flickr | Instagram

  Reply With Quote

Old 12-28-2015   #38
Baby of Macon
Registered User
 
Baby of Macon is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 215
The 14 is an exceptional lens. Not that common a choice but worth checking out.
__________________
And where are you now that your baubles all are gone. Rent and bereft like the Baby of Macon.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-10-2016   #39
macjim
Registered User
 
macjim's Avatar
 
macjim is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 463
I'm hoping my favourite lens will be the replacement for my XF-35 f1.4, my last favourite lens, the replacement is: the XF-35 f2!
__________________
Cheers, Macjim
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2016   #40
macjim
Registered User
 
macjim's Avatar
 
macjim is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 463
Getting new lens tomorrow

Flickr: thesrpspaintshop
__________________
Cheers, Macjim
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:10.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.