Questions – Answers!
Old truck 18-135
Ideas for blog – since you have just come from a major shooting experience…
Carl Turner
What lenses did you use most?
18-135 80% of the time. 10-24 15% of the time, the other 5% split between the 16mm f 1.4 and the 90mm f 2, sorry use the 100-400 a couple of times, 1% I know that’s 101%
What lenses did students use most?
I would say 24-70 equiv. 75% 70-200 equiv. 10% Super wide zooms 10%
What lenses were most “fun”?
I love the 16mm f 1.4 and the 90mm f 2 shot wide open, and the 18-135 is just so handy and so sharp and the OIS works great. The 10-24 is the bomb when you need to go that wide and the 14mm f 2.8 is tack tack sharp, but then all of them are!!!! Can you all tell I’m having fun!
I personally love:
The 90mm f 2, just so great a lens, and feels wonderful in your hands!!! The images are just something special, it is my favorite lens, but a 135mm f 2 does not fit every situation!!!
Any lenses surprised you? If any?
I’m pretty familiar with all these lenses, but the 100-400 continue to amaze me, when you consider that at 600mm it is only one stop slower than Nikon’s 600mm f 4 and is pretty close to just as sharp wide open and the cost difference is nearly ten grand, it is an amazing piece of glass at a bargain price.
What lens would you never leave home without?
The 18-135, without a doubt. I use it so much I’m considering buying another just as a back-up, just in case, can’t imagine being out there without it!!!!! I wasn’t even going to buy one until Mike Roberts loaned me his, in 15 minutes I was hooked, had one ordered that night!!!! Thanks Mike!!!!
What did you shoot the top 5 photos with?
I haven’t decided what my top five are yet, I know one was the old Hudson the two tepees in Monochrome that was the 10-24, I loved the Watson Bar B Q sign as an American flag that was the 18-135, several images in the motorcycle museum were favorites they were with the 16mm f 1.4 both at 1.4 and stopped down to f 16, that lens is sharp through the whole range of apertures. One image of folding hills is one instance I made great use of the long end of the 100-400. I will come back to this question after I do more looking at the 17 day take!
There you go!!!
Blessings,
the pilgrim
…..and thanks Carl, for asking!!!!
This entry was posted on Thursday, March 24th, 2016 at 1:32 am
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
“Dang you, Mike!” was a common refrain I heard from you at Acadia when you looked at my images with the 18-135.
“Dang you, Bill!” I bought the 16mm f1.4 because you like it so much. I guess what goes around comes around. They are saving rooms next to each other for us at the poorhouse…
I’ve already checked in!!!!
I will be right there with you!!!!
THANKS so much for answering those questions!!! You really confirmed the way you shoot now that you have shared this! On my trip to Colombia, SA, last October, I shot over 1500 of the 2000 frames with the 18-135 – and the whole time I kept thinking, “What would Bill shoot this with?” – now it is confirmed that I am well trained by my friend!!! I probably will sell the kit lenses – not they are not sharp, just they are covered (almost) by the others and see very little/no use. Again thanks for sharing this information – VERY informative/enlighting!! Love all the photos you have shared already!!!
Thanks Carl, I appreciated the questions and your friendship even more!!!!!
Thanks to your “complaining” about Mike’s 18-135 at Acadia, I ended up buying one and it quickly became my most-used lens. If I have to use just one lens, that’s invariably my choice. In fact, lately I’ve been purposely making a point of using my other lens just so I don’t become so dependent on the 18-135. I recently bought the 90 f/2 (after borrowing it at Mt. Rainier last August), but I haven’t gotten much opportunity to use it yet; I always liked the 135mm range when I used to shoot film. I’ve got the 100-400 on order. The two lens I’m most curious about are the 16-55 f/2.8 and the 50-140 f/2.8. I’ll have to plan on borrowing them at Olympic Nat’l Park in May.
I own both the 16-55 f 2.8 and the 50-140 f 2.8 and while both are stellar performers, the are large compared to the rest of the Fuji XF lenses ( with exception of the 100-400 which is understandably larger!) While both perform very well, I tend to leave them in the SUV and work with the lighter lenses, especially the 18-135 ! It is a classic case of the great being the enemy of the exceptional!!!!
Let me add to that, is the 16-55 and the 50-140 sharper than the 18-135? Yes, but not by as much as you would think!!!!
Being that I have the 55-200 I have been considering the 100-400 in stead of the 40-150…. hmmm may have to give up that MF Nikon 300 if I go that route. Sure liking the 16-55 for my wildflowers.
The 100-400 has pretty much replaced my 50-140!
Great set of questions, Carl! Great set of answers, Bill!
Great comment, Tim!!!!!!