If you we're given $1500 and had only two choices.

A Fuji x100s or a new lens for your dslr what would you go with and why?

I'm on the waiting list at amazon for a x100s but each day I wait I think about canceling the order and picking up a 50l. I have a 5d2 with the sigma 35 1.4, and a 135l, and after going through numerous focal lengths I have settled on my 3 favorite, 35, 50,135. Just need the 50l.

On the other hand I am so sick of lugging the dslr around when I want to shoot. I see the x100s as freedom, allowing me to have a camera on me in cases I would leave the Markii home.

What would you do?

AltgnJoey wrote in post #16134544
On the other hand I am so sick of lugging the dslr around when I want to shoot. I see the x100s as freedom, allowing me to have a camera on me in cases I would leave the Markii home.

I think you answered your own question.

Fuji XM-1 and 35/1.4. The image quality is just so good.

You know, although I don't use it a lot, I love having my small mirrorless. I simply have it with me more often than my DSLR, and as you know, the best camera in the world does you no good if it's not with you.

That said, I'd really look at whether you really want/need the 50L vs. the 50 f/1.4. You're paying a lot of money for what is honestly very little gain between the two. The 50L gives you slightly smoother bokeh, an extra 1/3 stop, and of course the associated shallower depth of field. The photos do also have a slightly different look between the lenses, but as far as pure image quality goes, they're pretty much identical. The f/1.4 is also a very well built lens with a smooth manual focus ring. Although I could have afforded the 50L, I just couldn't justify spending an extra $1K. Of course, that's not to say it isn't the lens for you, but just a thought.

I love the old school look of that Fuji as well. That's just a sexy little camera.

i guess it boils down whether you need another 35mm focal length camera or a 50mm lens.
you already have a 35mm on your 5DII and IMO you might find 50mm too close to what you currently have.
and like what IslandCrow said, at 1/3 the cost of the 50L you can get the Sigma 50 (which BTW I'm selling ) and gives you 90% the performance of the 50L.

the Fuji X100s is a fantastic camera, always have it with me and the reason why I finally sold my 5DII, it's just always with me and takes fantastic images.

my 2c but maybe sell the Sigma 35 1.4 and buy a 50mm lens and pair it with the 135L.
then buy the X100s as your 35mm camera.

that's what I did
X100s - 35mm
Leica M6 - 50mm
EOS3 - 135L

although I'm debating on downgrading the 135L to an 85 1.8

taemo wrote in post #16134829
i guess it boils down whether you need another 35mm focal length camera or a 50mm lens.
you already have a 35mm on your 5DII and IMO you might find 50mm too close to what you currently have.
and like what IslandCrow said, at 1/3 the cost of the 50L you can get the Sigma 50 (which BTW I'm selling ) and gives you 90% the performance of the 50L.

the Fuji X100s is a fantastic camera, always have it with me and the reason why I finally sold my 5DII, it's just always with me and takes fantastic images.

my 2c but maybe sell the Sigma 35 1.4 and buy a 50mm lens and pair it with the 135L.
then buy the X100s as your 35mm camera.

that's what I did
X100s - 35mm
Leica M6 - 50mm
EOS3 - 135L

although I'm debating on downgrading the 135L to an 85 1.8

That's actually not a bad idea, hmm.

I would definitely put the $1500 into DSLR lenses.

Why? Well, size & weight don't matter to me - when I go somewhere to take pictures, well, that's what I am there for, to take pictures. If that is my only reason for being somewhere, which it is, then I certainly don't mind carrying my DSLR with me. If I am not taking pictures, then I am not taking pictures, period. I don't do things that are non-photography related, and think it'd be nice to have a camera along "just to capture the moment".

Good images are worth taking the time and deliberation to set up for. And if it's not going to be a very good, professional-quality photo, then I don't want it, period. Hence, having something to "stick in a shirt pocket"" is useless to me. But having more/better DSLR lenses would be a huge advantage to my image-making endeavors. So, I'll take the lenses.

Used ZF 21 or 100, or 24-70 (although I have no idea if used ones go that low).

Fuji

CAL Imagery wrote in post #16135453
Used ZF 21 or 100, or 24-70 (although I have no idea if used ones go that low).

Had a 24-70l for a while and decided a 35 prime is better suited for me. Anything wider then 35 I do not need.

100-400L for my old 20D thanks!

Alan

Vacation?

Tom Reichner wrote in post #16135271
I would definitely put the $1500 into DSLR lenses.

Why? Well, size & weight don't matter to me - when I go somewhere to take pictures, well, that's what I am there for, to take pictures. If that is my only reason for being somewhere, which it is, then I certainly don't mind carrying my DSLR with me. If I am not taking pictures, then I am not taking pictures, period. I don't do things that are non-photography related, and think it'd be nice to have a camera along "just to capture the moment".

Good images are worth taking the time and deliberation to set up for. And if it's not going to be a very good, professional-quality photo, then I don't want it, period. Hence, having something to "stick in a shirt pocket"" is useless to me. But having more/better DSLR lenses would be a huge advantage to my image-making endeavors. So, I'll take the lenses.

This...

I'd get an x100 and spend the rest on a trip.

Lens.