Shedding some weight

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by BobbyT, Nov 11, 2017.

  1. BobbyT

    BobbyT Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Bobby Tingle
    I write about my gear changes occasionally in case it can help others with their thought process when deciding on gear choices.

    I've talked on here before about how I do an annual review at the beginning of every year to see if any adjustments in gear need to made. I am doing that a bit early this go around. My event crew has decided to retire. Again. This time I hope it sticks.

    The crew retiring, along with the weight of my current kit starting to wear on me when using it, is why I did the review early. The 16-55 and 50-140 are amazing lenses. Good enough that prime lovers wanting to use zooms can get those lenses with confidence. The image quality is what you're used to. But, the weight of those lenses has been wearing on me. My back and hips were hurting after we covered the Zombie Walk this year. Reminding of why I originally changed to mirrorless. So I caught a stretch this week when neither of those lenses were for sale on FM and sold mine immediately.

    Going forward, I will be shooting daily family life, portraits, some street style candids, the occasional landscape, and some work for the church like baptisms. And I may shoot a couple of larger concerts next year. After reviewing my most used focal lengths and comparing to my shooting needs. I am going to the complete polar opposite in weight. Getting the 16mm 1.4, 35mm f2, and 50mm f2. We have a 50-230 that my son and I share. Which will cover a great range when needed while still remaining very light. If I do take the concerts, I will grab a 90mm f2.

    The 16mm, 35 f2, and 50 f2 combined weigh nearly the same as the 16-55. But the weight is distributed much better in a camera bag. And not on the camera itself all at once. There will be a lot of times I only carry two lenses. @Jose Carpin@Jose Carpin has inspired me with his work using only the 16mm and 35mm.

    I chose the 35 f2 and 50 f2 because of their smaller size/weight and weather sealing. Both factors are important to me. While the 56mm 1.2 could be the superior portrait lens over the 50mm. We are talking Fuji lenses. The 50mm is still going to be quite capable of delivering incredible portraits. Same for the 35 f2 vs the 35 1.4. As we have said repeatedly in different discussions, Fuji does not make a bad lens. Everything in the lineup is capable of fantastic images.

    I am looking forward to seeing what I can do with this new lens lineup. And sharing as I continue to learn.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Lightmancer

    Lightmancer Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Feb 2, 2013
    Sunny Frimley
    Bill Palmer
    Bobby, I hear you. I am fortunate to have built up an arsenal of Fujinon lenses over the years, largely funded by the sale of almost all of my old Leica kit - itself an early foray into travelling light. I think I can only recall selling three lenses in that time - the 60 (replaced by the excellent Zeiss Touit 50mm) the 23 1.4 and the 90 2.0 (both too heavy for what they were) I still have some big guns - the 100-400 and the 18-135 as well as the 56 - but they are not daily carry stuff.

    My regular carry today is the X-Pro2 with 23, 35 and 50 2.0 lenses. This kit tackles 80% of what I shoot. If I want more length I use the 50-230 - a remarkable lens that punches far above its weight - and for more width the 14mm.

    My main photographic ouvre these days is what could loosely be called "travel" so skimming off ounces is important to me. I'm a bit older than you and I have reached the stage where an extra kilo of weight carried equates to a mile not walked - and I would rather cover the distance, particularly when I am somewhere interesting, than carry 5 or 6 heavy lenses just to ensure I get the perfect framing.

    I suppose this is a long-winded way of saying not only do I agree with you but my chiropractor does too...
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. BobbyT

    BobbyT Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Bobby Tingle
    I could build up an arsenal. But I've come to have a minimalist mind set. So I keep my gear low. I would just have a two lens kit, but with primes and what I shoot, that just is not doable. Over the years I have gotten very good at buying and selling gear to the point I can switch back and forth as I want/need to. Also I know the Fuji lens lineup very well, so there is no seeing what works best together.

    I considered the 23 f2 to round out the trio. But I love the 24mm focal length, and the Fuji 16mm 1.4 is the best 24mm option I have shot with. After shooting the 2.8 zooms, the 16 is still going to feel small and light. With the other f2 lenses, I can still fit all 3 with one mounted to the Pro2 in a small carry bag.

    I carry the camera with me almost everywhere I go. Even accompanying the family to the grocery store. So the light weight is really important to me. I agree about preferring to cover distance over the perfect framing.

    While I still train 4-6 days a week. The 2.8 zooms would still wear me out on long shoots. After the last zombie walk, my shoulders and hips were sore. Unfortunately also, I'm not as young as I look. I may need to see your chiropractor.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. BobbyT

    BobbyT Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Bobby Tingle
    I have rounded out this prime kit with the 90mm f2. I will need it for some of the work I will be doing. But it won't be part of my daily kit. More than likely when using the 90mm, I will be covering something using just it and probably the 35mm f2. Or in a studio/location setting where I won't be carrying my gear. Which still works with the keep the weight down mentality.

    At one time I tried really hard to be minimalist, having just two primes at any given time. But the reality is that I need 4 to competently cover everything I will be shooting. And I can live with that. :biggrin:
     
  5. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Feb 15, 2013
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    I'd love to sell my 23 f1.4 and turn it into the f2 version. And I'd LOVE to have my grubby little hands on the 100-400. But man, that price... the wife's trying to talk a local wine producer's consortium into hiring her / me / a designer friend to rebrand them for next year, and my portion for pay for that lens. Or, it would pay for an XE3 body and ... something else. I could very badly use a second body - both for redundancy (that XT1 has been used heavily, for 4 years?) and for a second lens to be always mounted and ready immediately.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Sad Sad x 1
  6. Mike G

    Mike G FujiXspot Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    572
    Oct 7, 2016
    London
    Mike Gorman
    They will have to claw the 23mm 1.4 from my cold dead fingers!
     
  7. BobbyT

    BobbyT Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Bobby Tingle
    You could sell your 1.4 version, get the f2, and pocket a good amount of money. More if you bought a used f2.

    I seriously considered the 23mm f2. Looking back on my work from the past 3 years, the work with the 16mm and 35mm stood out more. So those were a better fit for me.
     
  8. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Feb 15, 2013
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    My 23 1.4 has a slightly notchy feeling aperture ring, where it initially is a tiny bit harder to turn than it feels like it SHOULD be, and then it's fine. Between that and not having the box anymore, I'm always afraid that if I do sell it, I'll get less $ than I think I should. I should research this and actually DO something, I guess.
     
  9. BobbyT

    BobbyT Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Bobby Tingle
    Just going off my head, I would think you could get at least $500-$550 for it. I've recently seen 23mm f2's going for $325-$350. So you make enough to buy the f2 new, or used and pocket $100+.
     
  10. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Feb 15, 2013
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    I'll clean it up tonight, and take a few pics so I can list it, then.
     
  11. BobbyT

    BobbyT Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Bobby Tingle
    They're selling for $625-$650 with minimum marks and the box, caps, hood, etc on Fred Miranda. Once sold recently for $600 in with a scuffed focus ring, no box, etc. So yeah, someone will buy your lens in the ballpark we're talking.
     
  12. Lightmancer

    Lightmancer Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Feb 2, 2013
    Sunny Frimley
    Bill Palmer
    I sold the 23 1.4 a couple of months before the 2.0 was released. I never really got on with it so it was mint, boxed and I got a very good price. The 2.0 is a better lens in almost every way, and I have 35 and 56mm if I need the speed.

    To be honest, as I said earlier, the 23-35-50 f2 "holy trinity" pretty well does it for me. In particular I don't remember the last time I used the 35 1.4. I would sell it, but I don't think I would get much for it - it's a common lens.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. TonyTurley

    TonyTurley FujiXspot Top Veteran

    894
    May 2, 2016
    Tony
    I'm so hoping Fuji comes out with the 18mm F2 WR. I like that FL a lot, but the places and times I shoot, WR comes in handy. I sort of miss my old 18mm F2, but I do have the 23mm WR, which is a fine lens . . . just not as compact.
     
  14. BobbyT

    BobbyT Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Bobby Tingle
    An 18mm f2 with weather sealing would make sense with the rest of the weather sealed f2 lineup. I'm really surprised that Fuji isn't reworking the 35mm 1.4 with the newer, quiter AF and weather sealing also.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Feb 15, 2013
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    This is what 15 minutes and a general lack of talent will get you, if you try hard enough... product shots with dust all over the product. Better than nothing? I tossed both remote flashes at it, the right one washing the wall with a purple gel on. I have no tripod anymore, which reeeeally sucks for this kind of thing.

    38412055066_a9846bc7b1_b. KBRX4324 by gordopuggy, on Flickr

    38436034712_0828565338_b. KBRX4341 by gordopuggy, on Flickr
     
  16. BobbyT

    BobbyT Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Bobby Tingle
    Looks better than most of the for sale photos I post.
     
  17. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Feb 15, 2013
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    Thanks, man. I was determined not to try too hard, and yet too proud not to try a little.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Dean Smith

    Dean Smith FujiXspot Regular

    52
    Nov 3, 2016
    Back to Bobby's original post, I chose the Fuji system because of the weight factor and a desire to return to shooting as I did in the late '50s and '60. The XP-1 and the 35mm 1.4 seemed perfect and has worked very well. I did add the 18mm 2, but seldom use it. Working with this set up I'm enjoying photography again.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. BobbyT

    BobbyT Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Bobby Tingle
    That's why I switched from Canon to Fuji. Then I got the 2.8 zooms to make event coverage easier. But oh man, those lenses get heavy. They are excellent, but that excellence comes with heft.