Would 35mm F2 IS be too redundant?

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16885976
I will say that the Fuji files seem to have much more leeway in regards to pulling back highlights over Canon, but the Canon files are easier to push the other way (shadows), so maybe that's what you observed. I get blown away with certain shots from the Fuji though when I see that a whole part of an image that I assume is lost from being blown out is fully recoverable, that pretty much doesn't happen with the Canon and as I tend to expose more the the right of the exposure comp. meter, it can be a problem with the Canon.

BAM! We are in 100% agreement there. I was actually thinking of adding this to my response, but I wanted to check my files first.

The Fuji in-camera does not blow out highlights as much, and recovery is easier as well. I agree with you completely.

Because of what I like to shoot and how I shoot it (people indoors), generally I find I underexpose more. Tricky lighting, backlit situations, etc. So I pull shadows a lot, and I find the 6D a tad better in that regard.

So yes, I think you hit it on the nail.

Thanks Dark Knight. I think I'm in the same boat. I like the idea of the X100s but for its price I feel I may be better served with one of their interchangeable lens cameras with the 23 or 35 prime. I don't know about you but I am not so keen on having 2 different interchangeable lens systems. ( probably why the 100s seems favorable and probably why you went with it ) but its hard to justify the price, especially in your case since it seems you would probably prefer the canon with a 35 prime.

Tommydigi wrote in post #16886004
Thanks Dark Knight. I think I'm in the same boat. I like the idea of the X100s but for its price I feel I may be better served with one of their interchangeable lens cameras with the 23 or 35 prime. I don't know about you but I am not so keen on having 2 different interchangeable lens systems. ( probably why the 100s seems favorable and probably why you went with it ) but its hard to justify the price, especially in your case since it seems you would probably prefer the canon with a 35 prime.

No problem. Again, I do not want to sell the X100s short. From what I've experienced so far, yea I might slightly prefer the 35mm f2 is on my 6D for IQ. But that's a "might", since I've never actually used the lens before, haha.

But man, the X100s is such a fun camera to shoot with, and so capable too.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #16885994
BAM! We are in 100% agreement there. I was actually thinking of adding this to my response, but I wanted to check my files first.

The Fuji in-camera does not blow out highlights as much, and recovery is easier as well. I agree with you completely.

Because of what I like to shoot and how I shoot it (people indoors), generally I find I underexpose more. Tricky lighting, backlit situations, etc. So I pull shadows a lot, and I find the 6D a tad better in that regard.

So yes, I think you hit it on the nail.

Makes sense then. I would do what I do if I were you and use about +2/3-1 exposure competition pretty much all the time in conjunction with center average metering, works wonders for me, even if it means the camera chooses a higher ISO value (I use auto ISO most if the time).

You could always rent a 35 or even if you buy one you can always sell it for a good price. It does look like a good lens and being less than half the price of the fuji it seems like a solid option. I'm sure the 35 is better than the 40 and the 40 is really sweet. Like you said the fuji has the fun factor.

I think if the price of the fuji x100s does drop I'l give it a try.

My thinking was the pancake would serve this need but I often find my self using my 50L over the pancake.

I think picking something for casual standard use is the hardest choice.

Tommydigi wrote in post #16886054
You could always rent a 35 or even if you buy one you can always sell it for a good price. It does look like a good lens and being less than half the price of the fuji it seems like a solid option. I'm sure the 35 is better than the 40 and the 40 is really sweet. Like you said the fuji has the fun factor.

I think if the price of the fuji x100s does drop I'l give it a try.

My thinking was the pancake would serve this need but I often find my self using my 50L over the pancake.

I think picking something for casual standard use is the hardest choice.

Yea, just to muddy the waters I have a chance to buy a brand new RX1 for $1600 (before tax). Of course if I get that the X100s definitely has to go, so on the fence right now. GAS is a horrible thing. Feels risky dropping that kind of coin on a fixed lens camera, but seems like the RX1 is pretty legit IQ wise.

True about the GAS but I find the most difficult choice is getting something for everyday general use type stuff. Finding the right balance between price, performance, size, weight, versatility etc. You also never really know what you'll be shooting so its even more difficult.

For me its not GAS, I've actually purchased very little gear the past 2 years or so and I've even sold off some stuff but finding something for general use is difficult.

I don't want to even look at the RX1. haha

The Dark Knight wrote in post #16886071
Yea, just to muddy the waters I have a chance to buy a brand new RX1 for $1600 (before tax). Of course if I get that the X100s definitely has to go, so on the fence right now. GAS is a horrible thing. Feels risky dropping that kind of coin on a fixed lens camera, but seems like the RX1 is pretty legit IQ wise.

I wouldn't even consider it... sure, it'll give you a bit more DOF control over your Fuji, and a bit more DR, but you lose the VF (optical and EVF, RX1 has neither) and you lose the awesome Fuji Controls, though the RX1's are definitely not as bad as the a7 imo.

Tommydigi wrote in post #16886094
True about the GAS but I find the most difficult choice is getting something for everyday general use type stuff. Finding the right balance between price, performance, size, weight, versatility etc. You also never really know what you'll be shooting so its even more difficult.

For me its not GAS, I've actually purchased very little gear the past 2 years or so and I've even sold off some stuff but finding something for general use is difficult.

I don't want to even look at the RX1. haha

Haha, I think I actually may have the opposite dilemma. I'm blown away by the IQ from cameras these days. We've come a long way from my Canon ELPH 2mp camera. I do think any sensor smaller than say Micro 4/3 does limit creative options somewhat, but any sensor larger than that seems to do wonders. Of course I'm a strict amateur so stringent IQ is not hugely important for me.

So I find a lot of cameras work for me for general usage. My X100s probably covers 90% of what I want to shoot adequately.

It's that other 10% that I think I'm keeping around way too much gear for.

That being said since the x100 does 90% of what you need maybe you should look at something out side of the general range when it comes to your DSLR. Maybe macro or UW or whatever may interest you. Seems you have a lot gear that covers the same thing.

I agree with you about cameras, even my G15 does very well in many situations.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16886103
I wouldn't even consider it... sure, it'll give you a bit more DOF control over your Fuji, and a bit more DR, but you lose the VF (optical and EVF, RX1 has neither) and you lose the awesome Fuji Controls, though the RX1's are definitely not as bad as the a7 imo.

You're probably right considering I never used the LCD to frame pictures on my X100s, I always use the VF.

It would be easier to consider the RX1 if the damn EVF didn't cost another $450!

Tommydigi wrote in post #16886225
That being said since the x100 does 90% of what you need maybe you should look at something out side of the general range when it comes to your DSLR. Maybe macro or UW or whatever may interest you. Seems you have a lot gear that covers the same thing.

I agree with you about cameras, even my G15 does very well in many situations.

Thanks for the advice. I'm still trying to feel out my gear, get everything right for what I like to shoot.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #16883959
From my gear list, you'll see that I don't really have a terrific prime. The shorty forty and the nifty fifty are solid, but nothing that will blow your socks off.

The 35mm f2 IS has come down in price, and the samples and reviews look really good. Plus after getting an X100s I've starting to really like the 35mm focal length.

That being said, I'm wondering if said X100s with its 35mm equiv FL makes getting a 35mm prime for my 6D a bit redundant?

I'm using my 6D much less after getting the X100s, but (my opinion only) the X100s still comes up short in IQ to the 6D. So I do grab the 6D for "dedicated" photo outtings where I want the best IQ I can muster. So I'm thinking for those situations the 35mm f2 IS might be very good and versatile. But then again, I do have the 40mm already...

Heya,

The focal length is not just equivalent between the 6D and the X100s. You're comparing APS-C to full frame. 35mm F2 on a full frame looks rather different than it does on an APS-C, where image wise, it looks more like 55ish mm, and the depth of field is more akin to what F2.8 looks like.

The 35 F2 IS is an amazing low light lens. The 35mm focal length on full frame is solid, I enjoy it more than 50mm by far. There's something about the slight distortion that comes from a wide angle lens, and the wide aperture blows out the background. The 35 F2 IS has beautiful bokeh and is razor sharp at F2. Not just kind of sharp. Very sharp. 4 stop IS is outstanding, for low light, and combined with 6D's ISO abilities, you can do photography in the dark quite well.

So to me, it's not redundant. The resulting image from your full frame is superior by quite a bit, than what a crop sensor 35mm will produce. Different perspective & field of view, different depth of field that is significant, different sharpness.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #16886889
Heya,

The focal length is not just equivalent between the 6D and the X100s. You're comparing APS-C to full frame. 35mm F2 on a full frame looks rather different than it does on an APS-C, where image wise, it looks more like 55ish mm, and the depth of field is more akin to what F2.8 looks like.

The 35 F2 IS is an amazing low light lens. The 35mm focal length on full frame is solid, I enjoy it more than 50mm by far. There's something about the slight distortion that comes from a wide angle lens, and the wide aperture blows out the background. The 35 F2 IS has beautiful bokeh and is razor sharp at F2. Not just kind of sharp. Very sharp. 4 stop IS is outstanding, for low light, and combined with 6D's ISO abilities, you can do photography in the dark quite well.

So to me, it's not redundant. The resulting image from your full frame is superior by quite a bit, than what a crop sensor 35mm will produce. Different perspective & field of view, different depth of field that is significant, different sharpness.

Very best,

Just to be clear, the Fuji X100s's lens is a 23mm f/2. So it gives a 35mm FOV in 35mm film terms. So from the same distance framing should be same as a 6D with 35mm. Although the Fuji's lens will probably act more like a 35mm f/2.8, so the 6D at f/2 will give shallower DOF than the Fuji. Is this what you meant?

The Dark Knight wrote in post #16886924
Just to be clear, the Fuji X100s's lens is a 23mm f/2. So it gives a 35mm FOV in 35mm film terms. So from the same distance framing should be same as a 6D with 35mm. Although the Fuji's lens will probably act more like a 35mm f/2.8, so the 6D at f/2 will give shallower DOF than the Fuji. Is this what you meant?

Yeap

A stop of depth of field, to me, is a big deal. It's like "ok" to "oh wow" often. Kind of like how 200 F2.8 and 200 F2 look.... so different. Granted, it's more dramatic at that focal length. But I find on a wide lens with a full frame, it does matter. It does less of an effect on a crop, since the magnification keeps you from getting close and crushing depth of field, at lower focal lengths. But it still makes for nicer isolation.

Also, the 35mm F2 IS can focus at just over 9 inches. On a full frame, the depth of field is wonderful here, for isolation.

Very best,