Fujifims recommendations please!

Messages
841
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm looking to switch my Nikon system (D610, and 3 lenses) for a fujifilm system (APS-C, not GFX). Mainly for size and weight.

Budget is around £1400-1600. Camera-wise, I was thinking X-T20, then a wide prime, mid-telephoto portrait/macro lens, and tele-zoom (70-200 equivalent).
 
Messages
18,341
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
The f2 primes are great value - is 16mm wide enough (24mm FF) - then the 18-55 is a steal at the price its available for, yes the 16-55 is better but 3x price and heavier. The 55-200 is good although dont use much. The XT3 is a very good body but may be a but much with those lenses
 
Messages
5,958
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
If you want lightweight, then I would suggest

Samyang 12mm or Fuji XF14mm
XF18-55mm
XC50-230mm - this is a lot lighter that the XF55-200, its optically very good, but ultimately not quite as good as the XF55-200mm

As @cambsno says the XF16-55 is very good, but its bigger and heavy, though it is more akin to having a zoom full of primes (it is that good, and IMO noticeably sharper than the 18-55mm) - if it was wide enough at the wide end, maybe you don't need an additional wide prime, but it doesn't balance well on an X-T20, but is fine on an X-T2/3, even better on an X-H1

I would seriously consider an X-T2 over the X-T20, as the larger EVF is worth the slight increase in entry price alone. Secondhand the X-T2 is a bit of a steal

An alternative option might be the 10-24 at the wide end, and then get a prime for the portrait work (ie 35mm F1.4) and the telephone for the long end.
 
Messages
5,896
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
No
If it were me, knowing what I know now, I'd pick up a second hand X-T2 to save the cash, and spend the rest on lenses. £300-£500 for the camera, leaving you £1000 for lenses.

I'd then pick up the 16mm f/2.8 for around £300 s/h (16 is plenty wide enough for me, but you might find the 14mm to be better as well as more expensive) as the wide angle, the 35mm f/1.4 (£350 ish s/h) as the "do anything and make it look beautiful" lens (I do have a soft spot for it because it renders really nicely). Then I'd speak really nicely to my wife to up the budget and pick up the 50-140 f/2.8 as the portrait & telephoto lens. I've had the 55-200 and the 50-140 and the latter is just beautiful - especially for portraits. Alternatively you could get the 35 f/2 to save a bit of cash.

I've been shedding my Fuji kit over the past 12 months and all I'll be keeping is the 16 f/1.4, 35 f/1.4, 50-140 and the 18-135 as a walkabout. I've sold the 16-55 (too big, heavy, and clumsy for the smaller X-T bodies), 56 f/1.2 (the 50-140 does the job better and with more flexibility), 18-55 kit lens (the 18-135 has more versatility and the quality is comparable) and the 23 f/2 will be going simply because 35mm as focal length isn't my bag.
 
Messages
395
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
Yes
Budget is around £1400-1600. Camera-wise, I was thinking X-T20, then a wide prime, mid-telephoto portrait/macro lens, and tele-zoom (70-200 equivalent).
Unless size is an issue or if pricing on the X-T20 is really good then the X-T2 is the same generation and offers better EVF and weather resistant

I don't think you can go far wrong with the cheaper primes - I would suggest you maybe look at the option of the 18-55, 55-200, and one of the F2/F2.8 primes - the 16mm F2.8 as an example - which also is weather resistant. The 16-55 has a very good reputation - but it also can be quite expensive.
 
Last edited:
Messages
5,896
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
No
but the 50-140 isn't exactly lightweight (or cheap), even though its optically stunning.
I agree, but whereas I'd happily drop the 16-55 2.8 in favour of the 18-55 kit lens (or 18-135), you'd have to pry the 50-140 from my cold dead fingers. Probably because the 16-55 is a "walkabout" lens that I'd hate to walk about with all day, but the 50-140 is only used for portraits and thus isn't slung over my shoulder for hours.

16 f/2, 35 f/2 and 55-200 would be a much more affordable alternative.
 
Messages
7,037
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Don`t forget the new 70-300 coming soon :) 14mm is a cracking little prime, and only sold mine to help fund a 16-55. But a lot depends on how wide you want to go. Human nature suggests if you want wide, you want wider, and if you want long, you want longer ;)

I am pondering putting my T2 up for sale soon, too ;)
 
OP
Tom Pinchenzo
Messages
841
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
If you want lightweight, then I would suggest

Samyang 12mm or Fuji XF14mm
XF18-55mm
XC50-230mm - this is a lot lighter that the XF55-200, its optically very good, but ultimately not quite as good as the XF55-200mm

As @cambsno says the XF16-55 is very good, but its bigger and heavy, though it is more akin to having a zoom full of primes (it is that good, and IMO noticeably sharper than the 18-55mm) - if it was wide enough at the wide end, maybe you don't need an additional wide prime, but it doesn't balance well on an X-T20, but is fine on an X-T2/3, even better on an X-H1

I would seriously consider an X-T2 over the X-T20, as the larger EVF is worth the slight increase in entry price alone. Secondhand the X-T2 is a bit of a steal

An alternative option might be the 10-24 at the wide end, and then get a prime for the portrait work (ie 35mm F1.4) and the telephone for the long end.
If you want lightweight, then I would suggest

Samyang 12mm or Fuji XF14mm
XF18-55mm
XC50-230mm - this is a lot lighter that the XF55-200, its optically very good, but ultimately not quite as good as the XF55-200mm

As @cambsno says the XF16-55 is very good, but its bigger and heavy, though it is more akin to having a zoom full of primes (it is that good, and IMO noticeably sharper than the 18-55mm) - if it was wide enough at the wide end, maybe you don't need an additional wide prime, but it doesn't balance well on an X-T20, but is fine on an X-T2/3, even better on an X-H1

I would seriously consider an X-T2 over the X-T20, as the larger EVF is worth the slight increase in entry price alone. Secondhand the X-T2 is a bit of a steal
Thanks - I might look into the Samyang 12mm as its wider and faster than the 14mm Fuji. When shooting wide, I tend to go quite wide - usually 16mm FF. And also do astro so the wider and faster the better. Also I’d only ever be manual focusing it anyway. Regarding telephoto, weight isn’t my primary criterion. I know I said I was changing system for size/weigh, but anything will be smaller and lighter then my current set up so I’m not counting the grams. I also shoot long quite a lot so would be inclined to go with the better lens if i can afford it
 
OP
Tom Pinchenzo
Messages
841
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
If it were me, knowing what I know now, I'd pick up a second hand X-T2 to save the cash, and spend the rest on lenses. £300-£500 for the camera, leaving you £1000 for lenses.

I'd then pick up the 16mm f/2.8 for around £300 s/h (16 is plenty wide enough for me, but you might find the 14mm to be better as well as more expensive) as the wide angle, the 35mm f/1.4 (£350 ish s/h) as the "do anything and make it look beautiful" lens (I do have a soft spot for it because it renders really nicely). Then I'd speak really nicely to my wife to up the budget and pick up the 50-140 f/2.8 as the portrait & telephoto lens. I've had the 55-200 and the 50-140 and the latter is just beautiful - especially for portraits. Alternatively you could get the 35 f/2 to save a bit of cash.

I've been shedding my Fuji kit over the past 12 months and all I'll be keeping is the 16 f/1.4, 35 f/1.4, 50-140 and the 18-135 as a walkabout. I've sold the 16-55 (too big, heavy, and clumsy for the smaller X-T bodies), 56 f/1.2 (the 50-140 does the job better and with more flexibility), 18-55 kit lens (the 18-135 has more versatility and the quality is comparable) and the 23 f/2 will be going simply because 35mm as focal length isn't my bag.
I’m tempted by the 50-140 but it ain’t cheap! I’d get the x-t20 body 2nd hand which goes for around £250, which would leave £1150-1350 for glass....I could get the cheaper tele-zoom and a dedicated portrait/macro prime.... so many options
 

Nod

Krispy
Messages
36,835
Name
Nod (NOT Ethel!!!)
Edit My Images
Yes
Lens wise, I reckon the 10-24 and 18-135 would cover most eventualities then see what the change will get you in the way of bodies.
 
Messages
5,958
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
Thanks - I might look into the Samyang 12mm as its wider and faster than the 14mm Fuji. When shooting wide, I tend to go quite wide - usually 16mm FF. And also do astro so the wider and faster the better. Also I’d only ever be manual focusing it anyway. Regarding telephoto, weight isn’t my primary criterion. I know I said I was changing system for size/weigh, but anything will be smaller and lighter then my current set up so I’m not counting the grams. I also shoot long quite a lot so would be inclined to go with the better lens if i can afford it
If Astro is important then the Samyang 12mm fits both the remit for this and UWA - budget around £200 s/h

This still leaves lots (too many options) - for instance (all prices s/h)

X-T20 (£250) + Samyang 12mm (£200) + XF18-55 (£250) + XF50-140 (£850) = £1650 only £50 over budget!!

X-T2 (£400) + Samyang 12mm (£200) + XF18-55 (£250) + XF55-200 (£400) = £1250

If long is important then the new 70-300 could be of interest - this would balance better with the X-T2 but £150 could be saved with the X-T20

X-T2 (£400) + Samyang 12mm (£200) + XF18-55 (£250) + XF70-300 (£730 - new) = £1580

There are so many combinations available you are spoilt for choice, you need to decide on what is important with regard to weight and IQ and compromise accordingly!
 
OP
Tom Pinchenzo
Messages
841
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
If Astro is important then the Samyang 12mm fits both the remit for this and UWA - budget around £200 s/h

This still leaves lots (too many options) - for instance (all prices s/h)

X-T20 (£250) + Samyang 12mm (£200) + XF18-55 (£250) + XF50-140 (£850) = £1650 only £50 over budget!!

X-T2 (£400) + Samyang 12mm (£200) + XF18-55 (£250) + XF55-200 (£400) = £1250

If long is important then the new 70-300 could be of interest - this would balance better with the X-T2 but £150 could be saved with the X-T20

X-T2 (£400) + Samyang 12mm (£200) + XF18-55 (£250) + XF70-300 (£730 - new) = £1580

There are so many combinations available you are spoilt for choice, you need to decide on what is important with regard to weight and IQ and compromise accordingly!
Thanks for your input. I’m leaning towards the cheaper option with the tele-zoom, I.e. the 55-200, then a dedicated portrait/macro, like the 80mm. I don’t really shoot much between 24-70, so a standard zoom isn’t that important. Maybe a 35mm prime instead.
 
Messages
3,911
Edit My Images
No
A new X-T20 with 2 year warranty for £349 from Wex is a bargain (£650 less than a new X-T2). Add a £15 eBay L bracket, and it's a lovely camera to handle. I'd say go for the T2 if you have big hands, often shoot in bad weather or next to the sea, or are obsessive about viewfinder size.

It's probably not the focal length you're after, but the XC 35mm f2 is also great value at ~£160 new, as it's the same optical formula as the XF, for less than half the price.

The 10-24mm is a very useful length, and excellent quality especially at the 10mm end. The original version has dropped to about £450 used now the WR version is out. I'd also have a look at the 55-200mm. Not too big, expensive or heavy, and a very useful range from portrait to longish telephoto.
 
Messages
5,958
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
Thanks for your input. I’m leaning towards the cheaper option with the tele-zoom, I.e. the 55-200, then a dedicated portrait/macro, like the 80mm. I don’t really shoot much between 24-70, so a standard zoom isn’t that important. Maybe a 35mm prime instead.
The 80mm is a very big and heavy piece of glass and whilst its had great reviews for Macro work and is 1:1, for the times that you need it, the bokeh isn't the prettiest and may not be ideal for portraits, in this respect the XF90mm is a much better portrait lens (the bokeh comparison could also be applied between the XF50-140 and XF55-200, with the 50-140 being the much better portrait lens - in fact this lens is hard to beat for outdoor portraits where you can get a bit of distance between yourself and the subject.

Fuji don't really have a best lens for portrait and macro, they have a great macro lens and some great portrait lenses. If you can live without the OIS, then the 90mm with one of the extension tubes might make a better all-rounder for portrait/macro than the 90mm (and is lighter/cheaper (s/h) as well)

If macro is important then obviously the 80mm is the best lens that Fuji make for that purpose.

If you want 'new' kit - don't forget to look at the Fuji refurb shop as often their prices are comparable with retail s/h
 
Messages
7,587
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
If you want lightweight, then I would suggest

Samyang 12mm or Fuji XF14mm
XF18-55mm
XC50-230mm - this is a lot lighter that the XF55-200, its optically very good, but ultimately not quite as good as the XF55-200mm

As @cambsno says the XF16-55 is very good, but its bigger and heavy, though it is more akin to having a zoom full of primes (it is that good, and IMO noticeably sharper than the 18-55mm) - if it was wide enough at the wide end, maybe you don't need an additional wide prime, but it doesn't balance well on an X-T20, but is fine on an X-T2/3, even better on an X-H1

I would seriously consider an X-T2 over the X-T20, as the larger EVF is worth the slight increase in entry price alone. Secondhand the X-T2 is a bit of a steal

An alternative option might be the 10-24 at the wide end, and then get a prime for the portrait work (ie 35mm F1.4) and the telephone for the long end.

I would go 10-24 f4 all day long. The 16 1.4 is magnificent, but pricey. My main kin is based on 10-24, 35 f1.4 & 50-140 f2.8 (the latter is quite heavy compared to the others). A used T2 is what to look for, they're great value.
 
Messages
7,587
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Thanks for your input. I’m leaning towards the cheaper option with the tele-zoom, I.e. the 55-200, then a dedicated portrait/macro, like the 80mm. I don’t really shoot much between 24-70, so a standard zoom isn’t that important. Maybe a 35mm prime instead.
The 90 f2 is a much better portrait lens than the 80 f2.8, and for Macro just get a set of tubes. I have some from Amazon that cost me around £35. The 35 f1.4 is a great "utility" lens, shoots head & shoulder portraits well, and it's close focus distance is incredible. Use it with a tube and you are within 25mm of the subject.
 
Messages
630
Name
John
Edit My Images
No
You've had lots of specific advice, here by contrast is a bit of personal experience. I had an XT20, loved it, light and capable. But then found out the hard way that it is not weather resistant (wasn't raining that much, but ruined). Replaced it with an XT2, heavier but feels much more durable, and feels really good to use.
 
OP
Tom Pinchenzo
Messages
841
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
The 90 f2 is a much better portrait lens than the 80 f2.8, and for Macro just get a set of tubes. I have some from Amazon that cost me around £35. The 35 f1.4 is a great "utility" lens, shoots head & shoulder portraits well, and it's close focus distance is incredible. Use it with a tube and you are within 25mm of the subject.
Good advice. I’m getting tempted to get a set of primes...

Maybe 12mm Samyang. 35mm 1.4, 90mm f/2 and X-T2. That would be around 1600.

What would be your thoughts on x-t2 vs x-t30?
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,587
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Good advice. I’m getting tempted to get a set of primes...

Maybe 12mm Samyang. 35mm 1.4, 90mm f/2 and X-T2. That would be around 1600.

What would be your thoughts on x-t2 vs x-t30?
I've never used a T20 or T30, but I have a T2 & T3 myself, and generally use the T2 with the 35mm & the T3 with the zooms. The 90mm is an absolutely cracking lens, but it is a bit long on a crop body, so you'll need room to work for portraits as it's about the same as 135mm on FF.
 
Messages
34
Name
Stuart
Edit My Images
Yes
I sold all my Fuji kit except the XT2 body which I use with adapted Canon lenses. The XT2 is an absolute steal these days, though if I was in your shoes, with hindsight and all that, I'd probably get a XH1 for the better ergonomics and IBIS, and some f2 primes, which are not only inexpensive but also the absolute business, assuming of course you don't need anything faster. Bear in mind though that two or three small f2 primes even out in cost and weight with a 16-55. The 55-200 gets good reviews, I've never used one though.
 
Top