75mm as a general purpose lens?

[dr_gn]

I’ve got an 12mm Samyang, 18-50 Sigma and Fuji 100-400 for my Fuji X-T5 (1.5x crop). I’d like something to cover the 50-100 gap. There is the Fuji 55-200 or 50-230 that I can get used quite cheaply, but I’m wondering if the new Viltrox 75mm f1.4 (c.112 equiv.) might be a good prime option to plug that gap. It’s classed as a portrait lens, but presumably at smaller apertures it would give enough depth of field for general purpose photography (mainly events like paddock shots at race meetings, or aircraft on the ground at airshows (where the subject is maybe behind a barrier, too far for the 50mm, but too near for the 100mm, not to mention the inconvenience of the bulk of the 100-400 while milling around in a crowd.

Any thoughts? Thanks.

[Simpo Two]

1.5x crop is the same as my Nikons so I'm well used to it. My general purpose lens is a 17-55mm. The traditional 'standard' lens was/is 50mm on a full frame sensor, or about 35mm on a 1.5x crop sensor. That gives a field of view roughly the same as the human eye.

I would find 75mm far too long as a GP lens even on a FF sensor, let alone a crop sensor. Portrait lens perhaps, but it's really a short telephoto. So if you want to take photos at a fixed 75mm focal length, fine, but it's not what I'd call a GP lens.

I would go for a zoom as you suggest, but then you sacrifice the f1.4. Depends on what you plan to use most!

[GravelBen]

The Fuji 50-230mm is cheap, light and remarkably sharp for what it is, the main drawback is just the small aperture limiting its use in low light. I got one in a bundle with some other second hand gear expecting to move it on quickly, but I can't justify getting rid of it. Its light enough that I take it into the mountains on hiking trips where I would otherwise leave telephoto lenses at home to save weight.

Personally 75mm would be too long for general purpose use for me, but not long enough for telephoto.

You could also consider something like the 18-135mm as an all-rounder zoom to cover occasions when you want one lens to deal with a range of different shots.

[Tony1963]

You really don’t need to cover every mm of range. Remember that plenty of excellent photographers produce great results with a handful of prime lenses and comfy footwear.

[dr_gn]

Thanks all, I suppose “general purpose” was completely the wrong term. I’ve got the 18-50 for that. It is really a lens to fill the 50-100 focal length gap I currently have, and would 75mm be a good compromise over a zoom lens that covered that entire range? The price is about the same, but I guess speed and maybe image quality, and size would be better with the 75 at the expense of focal length range.

I had a 55-250 on my previous Canon M5, which got a fair amount of use even when I rented the 100-400 for various events. I also had an 18-55 zoom.

So on balance I’ll probably end up with a used 55-200 f 3.4 XF rather than the cheaper 50-230 f4.5 XC.

Thanks.

[Simpo Two]

dr_gn said:

It is really a lens to fill the 50-100 focal length gap I currently have

Perhaps another way to look at it is - how badly do you need to fill that gap? How often do you find that 50 is too wide and 100 too long? A view that's slightly too wide can be cropped smaller; most shots have pixels to spare these days, and it's one less lens to cart about.

[dr_gn]

Simpo Two said:

dr_gn said:

It is really a lens to fill the 50-100 focal length gap I currently have

Perhaps another way to look at it is - how badly do you need to fill that gap? How often do you find that 50 is too wide and 100 too long? A view that's slightly too wide can be cropped smaller; most shots have pixels to spare these days, and it's one less lens to cart about.

That's part of the problem - I don't know! I've got three big photography things coming up in the next two weeks: Goodwod FoS, Flying Legends, and a week on Unst - hopefully seeing lots of sea birds. I've just traded my Canon gear in for Fuji, and have a focal length gap that I didn't have previously (having now bought the 100-400 rather than renting one). I'd hate to miss out on some decent shots by not having the right lens, because I deliberately did the swap before these events in order to get to use the new camera at them.

[Simpo Two]

Probably then the best adage then is 'better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it'.

[Craikeybaby]

The Fuji 55-200 is a good lens, it is probably the main one I use with my X-T2. Although I tend to use it either at the wide or long ends.

Other options would be the 50-140mm f2.8 lens, or even swapping your kit lens for the 16-80.

[Derek Smith]

I had a 2.0 50mm prime and 3.5 80(85?)mm prime on a 35mm camera, back in the day, when my interests were family photos, holidays, walks, etc. I only used the 50mm when lighting conditions dictated or when indoors. I preferred the 80mm for all general purpose photography. People appeared more natural. Also, one could stay back from the subject, whatever it was, and not be a part of the event.

Much will depend on your interests as to whether a 75mm lens suits your needs best.

[dr_gn]

Thanks all.

I was on the point of ordering a used 55-200 XF yesterday, but hesitated.

The Viltrox get brilliant reviews, and I’m aware that a prime lens will give sharper results than a zoom. I thought it would be nice to have a lens that might allow the sensor to show what it can do. Since it’s in the middle of the range I’d like to cover, I’m now moving towards that.

BTW it’s a full-frame equivalent of 112 mm

https://opticallimits.com/fuji_x/1159-viltrox75f12

[ch37]

112mm (in 'full-frame' speak) is a pretty weird focal length as a walkabout and certainly not for everyone. I certainly wouldn't advocate 'filling a gap', and I say this as somebody who used to think similar but is now happy to shoot entire weddings with just a 35 or 85 (23 and 56 in Fuji speak), or pretty much entire car events with a 105 (70mm in Fuji).

The vast majority of this set was shot with a 105mm on a full frame camera, so that should give you an idea of what is achievable, but there was a lot more space at this event than there will be at FoS: https://www.flickr.com/photos/harry_s/albums/72177...

I'm off to FoS this weekend and I'll shoot everything away from the track with a 50mm this year, I love having a consistent look to a whole set. I'd say FoS is too busy (and aircraft on aprons at airshows to big) to comfortably use a 112mm without wanting to swap lenses a lot, that is unless you want to really focus on details and portraits (which FoS is great for).

FoS last year, every non-track shot with a 50mm (so 33mm in Fuji speak): https://www.flickr.com/photos/harry_s/albums/72177...

[dr_gn]

ch37 said:

112mm (in 'full-frame' speak) is a pretty weird focal length as a walkabout and certainly not for everyone. I certainly wouldn't advocate 'filling a gap', and I say this as somebody who used to think similar but is now happy to shoot entire weddings with just a 35 or 85 (23 and 56 in Fuji speak), or pretty much entire car events with a 105 (70mm in Fuji).

The vast majority of this set was shot with a 105mm on a full frame camera, so that should give you an idea of what is achievable, but there was a lot more space at this event than there will be at FoS: https://www.flickr.com/photos/harry_s/albums/72177...

I'm off to FoS this weekend and I'll shoot everything away from the track with a 50mm this year, I love having a consistent look to a whole set. I'd say FoS is too busy (and aircraft on aprons at airshows to big) to comfortably use a 112mm without wanting to swap lenses a lot, that is unless you want to really focus on details and portraits (which FoS is great for).

FoS last year, every non-track shot with a 50mm (so 33mm in Fuji speak): https://www.flickr.com/photos/harry_s/albums/72177...

Thanks for that.

Any tips on where to be to get some decent on-track shots? Grandstands any good?

[ch37]

dr_gn said:

Thanks for that.

Any tips on where to be to get some decent on-track shots? Grandstands any good?

Above the flint wall just before you head into the woods into the rally stage, much quieter than lower down the hill and you can get some lovely clean shots up there, most in my gallery are from that area. Also can't recommend the rally stage enough, you don't even need to go head too far into it to get some great shots.

Never had a grandstand pass until this year so no idea, I'm not a big fan of elevated shots so I was planning to use them more to have a rest and watch the shootout on Sunday.

[Derek Smith]

Another way of looking at this: The best lens I've got is a 1.4 50mm lens, decent quality Leica made. I've got two zooms that run from 28mm to 600. Those two cover everything I need, but I still use the 50mm more than either of the others.

[dr_gn]

ch37 said:

dr_gn said:

Thanks for that.

Any tips on where to be to get some decent on-track shots? Grandstands any good?

Above the flint wall just before you head into the woods into the rally stage, much quieter than lower down the hill and you can get some lovely clean shots up there, most in my gallery are from that area. Also can't recommend the rally stage enough, you don't even need to go head too far into it to get some great shots.

Never had a grandstand pass until this year so no idea, I'm not a big fan of elevated shots so I was planning to use them more to have a rest and watch the shootout on Sunday.

Thanks - apologies it's 20 years since I last went - is that in front of the "Flint Wall Grandstand" or further up off the map? When you say above the wall, I'm guessing you mean at the end of it, but the grandstand side? I seem to remember the wall is close to the track opposite the grandstand, with no spectators there?

[ch37]

I mean beyond the Flint Wall (off the top of your map) at the final point you can spectate on the hill, there is a free grandstand there and an opening in the woods onto the rally stage.

[RGG]

Hi,

As usual I'm late to the party.

For what it's worth and looking at you lens list, I would suggest you look at a f1.8 prime and I promise you will see a stellar increase in your image quality and subsequent enjoyment of your images. Subject quality and background bokeh will trounce a zoom in the same setting.

In particular, and my suggestion, look at the Nikon 85mm f1.8 AFS G. Amazing value for what it can do. Bokeh is outstanding. That in itself further enhances the foreground subject.

So many stay with zooms to cover "all focal lengths" when as the discussion has touched on a prime can cover shorter and longer focal lengths, not just the 85mm in my suggestion.

Go for it. I promise you will not regret it.

[RGG]

RGG said:

Hi,

As usual I'm late to the party.

For what it's worth and looking at you lens list, I would suggest you look at a f1.8 prime and I promise you will see a stellar increase in your image quality and subsequent enjoyment of your images. Subject quality and background bokeh will trounce a zoom in the same setting.

In particular, and my suggestion, look at the Nikon 85mm f1.8 AFS G. Amazing value for what it can do. Bokeh is outstanding. That in itself further enhances the foreground subject.

So many stay with zooms to cover "all focal lengths" when as the discussion has touched on a prime can cover shorter and longer focal lengths, not just the 85mm in my suggestion.

Go for it. I promise you will not regret it.

Oops just noticed after reading again (I've got word blindness), You have a Fuji. No problem, what I've suggested still applies. Look for a prime around 70-85mm F1.8 and you won't look back.

[dr_gn]

ch37 said:

I mean beyond the Flint Wall (off the top of your map) at the final point you can spectate on the hill, there is a free grandstand there and an opening in the woods onto the rally stage.

Thank you.

I'm mainly interested in Group C and F1 cars on the hill, and in the paddocks. I'm assuming that I can cross the track at various points between blocks of runs?