Jump to content
paulhphotography

Should I sell the XF 18mm and XF 27th for the XF 50-140mm lens?

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

I'm looking to become a wedding photographer full-time. I had my first wedding in July of this year, which went really well. I mainly used the XT1 and XPro-1 on the day as I was having problems with my Canon at the time. In the end I sold my Canon gear and have never looked back.

I'm thinking of selling the XF 18mm and XF 27mm, so I can put the money towards the XF 50-140mm. Would this be a wise decision? This would be my first zoom lens on the X system as I mainly use primes. The OIS looks really appealing to me especially under low light conditions. Would any of you recommend this lens?

Kind regards,

Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, 'prime lenses', 'fixed focal length' are almost always better quality glass than zooms.  But they are all 'horses-for-courses'.  No one could really say "get rid of one for the other" because it really depends on what you want to do with your photography.  Personally, having just bought an 18 & 35mm and already having the 27mm I wouldn't be parted from them but I also possess the 'cheap' Fujinon XC 16-50mm lens and actually this is also very good and usable for general photography. If I could afford the 10-24mm zoom I would defo buy it but it would be to supplement what I have, not to replace them.

Edited by Earbypics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

I'm looking to become a wedding photographer full-time. I had my first wedding in July of this year, which went really well. I mainly used the XT1 and XPro-1 on the day as I was having problems with my Canon at the time. In the end I sold my Canon gear and have never looked back.

I'm thinking of selling the XF 18mm and XF 27mm, so I can put the money towards the XF 50-140mm. Would this be a wise decision? This would be my first zoom lens on the X system as I mainly use primes. The OIS looks really appealing to me especially under low light conditions. Would any of you recommend this lens?

Kind regards,

Paul

My advice was based on the apparent implication that you had only the 18 and 27.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just reading through this thread again - I see you don't use a 16-55 f2.8. For me if I were still shooting weddings, that lens plus the fast primes would be must have before the 50-140mm f2.8. The fast primes fitted to 2 or more bodies do their job for pre-wedding "bride at home" shots and the inside venue ceremony. The 16-55 f2.8 zoom is not absolutely necessary as you already manage without but it will make your job so much easier especially if paired with the 90mm. The arrival of bride, groom and guests is the province of the 16-55 zoom + 90mm f2. and also the outside after-ceremony shots. The longer zoom could be good for outside use in the venues gardens to capture more candid shots although the 90mm would handle most of these. Back inside for the reception, the 16-55 f 2.8 if there is enough light - but more likely the primes will shine. There is little place for the 50-140 zoom inside unless the venue is very large so really it is a luxury that is handy but not entirely necessary for wedding photography when you already have 56mm f1.2 and 90mm f2.8 both of which have edge in IQ and bokeh.

Of course, if you want it and can afford it then get it but don't forget you have to carry it and it's quite a hefty lump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recommended Discussions



×
×
  • Create New...