#124

i’m going to second what @mattlowery said about lenses - skip the kit lens. a 100mm focal length is equiv to 150mm on an APS-C sensor which might be Way Too Close but the selection of lenses for X mount is very good and affordable. there are good choices across focal lengths with wide available apertures.

you know the space you are working with so go from there. go to a shop to check the lenses if there is one in your area, or buy from a shop w a solid return policy.

looks like the audio input on fuji’s is 2.5mm so buy that adapter.

yes but ymmv. i can’t predict how autofocus will actually work thru an adapter (if you care about autofocus). I use a grip of vintage primes w my sony mirrorless but those are pretty small lenses and easy to handle with a basic adapter.

2 Likes
#125

Thanks both for the help!.
What do you mean with “kit lens”. English is not my language, so I don`t know if I fully understand.
You mean:

1.-Don’t buy any lens that has zoom? So only buy fixed focal lenght lenses
2.-Don`t buy any lens that comes with the camera?

#126

This! Usually the lens bundled with the camera is meant to be a low-ish quality multitasker; capable of doing many things, but not really excelling at any of them. I would advise you to buy just the body, and do some research as to what kind of lens you want. Sigma has some great zoom lenses that are very fast (the 18-35 1.8 is wonderful). Rokinon is a good budget choice if you don’t mind pulling focus manually. But the kit lens will likely land you in territory that is consistent with what you’ve already shot. Which isn’t bad! It just seems like you’re looking for a different aesthetic.

3 Likes
#127

again +1 to @mattlowery above.

my suggestion is this:

buy the body you like! almost all remotely contemporary mirrorless camera are very good-definitely great.

go to a shop and buy a lens that meets most/all of your criteria

OR

buy the cheap EF-X mount adapter you linked, see how the Canon 28-80 works out for you. 28mm ~= 42mm on the Fuji which should be wide enough depending on its minimum focus distance and what your shooting conditions are. Assuming you are going to be shooting from a tripod that should mitigate potential awkwardness of the Canon’s size/ergonomics. DO NOTE that that ~$20 adapters are metal barrels and you will have to be able to operate all the lens’ settings by hand - if it doesn’t have a manual aperture ring, you won’t be able to open/close the aperture.

if you discover that ~Nmm is your ideal length and want to get a nice modern lens at that range, then buy one.

1 Like
#128

However: the Fuji 18-55 f2.8-4 is, by all accounts, a very good performer, and far better than most cheap “kit lenses” - it’s built well, high quality, and optically performs similarly to the cheaper Fuji primes. (Steer clear of the cheaper 14-45, which is a bit cheap/cheerful)

Also, there are no real budget lens options for Fuji - third party makers don’t make things for them. The f2 primes are all very nice, but that 18-55 variable aperture is surprisingly good, performance wise. Here is Thom Hogan on the lens

3 Likes
#129

I should note- I’ve never used the kit lens in question, so take my opinion with a grain of salt.

I think that @baleen’s idea is really smart. Buy the adapter and use the glass you’ve got. If you don’t like it, pick up a different lens. But a lot of that old glass is great.

1 Like
#130

just going to pop in to say that buying a good performing kit lens (like that Fuji) is actually a good idea.

it’s very true that for stationary video work, you might want faster apertures/more extreme viewing angles/closer working distances than the kit lens offers, but it will almost never be a negative to have a decent walkaround lens, especially given the big discount you get for buying it with the body.

2 Likes
#131

Disclaimer, I am very bad at all of this but… I second the buy an adapter and old glass recommendation . I have a Sony A7 Mkii and I only have M42 lenses and an adapter. I have a ton of options ( manual focus only) for way less than a single “reputable” lens would have cost me for this camera. There is definitely inconvenience which comes with that and you are of course looking 4K which my camera cannot do but… I am a hack and the lenses I do have help me make something cool. Plus it’s fun to find them.

2 Likes
#132

if you don’t have one please do yourself the favor and get the Pentax SMC 35/3.5 for m42 its really really nice.

1 Like
#133

Will add it to the list. My collection is pretty minimal at the moment. Visual stuff in general is not my strong suit. Currently I have a Helios 44-2, a jupiter-9 2/85 and a Zeiss 2.8/20

1 Like
#134

I learned on a Pentax spotmatic F and wanted to keep using my old lenses, so I’ve been using the adapted M42 lenses and just started trying out a couple much smaller Pen-F lenses. Here’s one with Pen-F 100mm and nex-6.

ofu84jgvepz3
ofu84jgvepz31200×1806 810 KB

6 Likes
#135

Oh and the absolute crazy good lenses I have seen are the Voigtlander lenses, which are pretty expensive as I understand it. As I said I am bad at visual stufff but luckily I have help and that help (Kiril) utilises these to amazing effect on an adapter:




All shot on my body and lenses (plus an unknown Voigtlander) by an actual expert.

2 Likes
#136

i’m on a sony a6500 rn (was on an a6000 long story in this thread i think) and getting into adapting vintage lenses has been really fun and instructive,

my main modern lens is the zeiss touit 32/1.8 which for aps-c emount is unmatched.

my vintage lineup is

•olympus zuiko 24/2.8
•pentax smc 28/2.8 (k mount, incredible lens)
•pentax smc 35/3.5 (m42, also great)
•minolta md 45/2 (was $15, makes for an awkward focal length on aps-c but also a great lens)

i don’t think i’ve paid $200 total for that whole bag of glass

1 Like
#137

They’re not that expensive if they’re not f0.95 or so :slight_smile:.

My main lenses when I had a Canon were a Voigtlander Ultron 55mm f1.4 (30-40 years old) and a more recent Voigtlander 40mm f2. Both were excellent. I was really into manual focus at the time.

I only use the Fuji 35mm f2 on my X-T10, and I really appreciate the autofocus now (taking more pictures of my kids than of random textures/scenes in the street these days) but I’m tempted to get an adapter to use the 55/1.4 on the Fuji. Would be about 85mm equivalent, which could be nice sometimes. And tons of bokeh…

1 Like
#138

Not sure I 100% agree with the point about kit lenses… I’ve won photo comps (national) with the kit lens on my Nikon D3100… lots of photos with that lens have been published in books and magazines… nothing shabby about that lens at all… (Just for reference I could have used my D800 or D600, along with the ‘pro’ Nikon lenses eg 24-70 etc but didnt). Kit lenses are often really good lenses! They may be more fragile or have less wide apertures but for most photography they’re really good! (Ps I chose the D3100 here as it is tiny, good quality and fits in the packing container for a jungle caving expedition in Borneo… it’s also my choice of camera for winter mountaineering - again with the kit lens). Now dont start on tripods :slight_smile: (That is where you unfortunately really really need to spend money! The one used above was more expensive than camera + lens!)

#139

So, just to be clear- yes, wonderful work can be done with any lens, or with an iPhone for that matter. What matters more than anything is 1) who’s holding the camera and 2) how the scene is lit. Of course kit lenses can take great pictures when wielded by someone with experience and talent.

I was answering the question in a very specific context, namely “how do I shoot a video that looks like this one that you did”; see the example a few posts upthread. And the answer is to light it well and then use a fast, prime lens, because that’s the only way to severely restrict DOF on an ASP-C sensor.

But please don’t take away the idea that “kit lenses are always crap, and your photos are doomed”, because that’s not my position. Cameras and lenses are like musical instruments. On the one hand, the instrument matters. On the other hand, give Nils Cline a $50 guitar and he’s still going to blow you away,

3 Likes
#140

Apologies - I misunderstood what you were saying (I did read your post but just misunderstood! Again - many apologies!)

#141

No sweat! I just didn’t want anyone to think this was one of those “you can only do good work with the nicest gear” conversations. There are enough of those on the internet :grinning:

More like, for this specific shot, you need this specific kind of gear.

5 Likes
#142

sigma fp

anyone have this? have been into photography for quite a while but not bought a new camera for about 5 years (last one was olympus om10mk1).

I’m thinking this might be the digital equivalent of my old rollei 35s i used to carry everywhere, but interested to hear from any actual users…

#143

Not much love for Olympus in this thread. Any particular reason? Ive been looking at the Olympus E-M1 Mark II (since the mark III has just come out there’s some good deals on the old version).

1 Like