Need Advice On Fuji Lenses

[Photographer_101]

Hi all.

I recently got a new Fuji XT-5 in late May 2025. I bought the body new and a used Fuji18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS lens.

I did serious research, including renting the Fuji 35mm f.20 WR lens and I originally was going to get a few lenses but now I'm not so sure and want some advice.

I was going to get the Fuji 33mm f1.4 for night photography, and for shooting events for portrait type photos and for street photography.

I was then going to get the 23mm f.1.4 Viltrox lens to use for street photography and maybe landscape photography not a huge fan of 16mm.

Eventually I was going to get a Fuji 18mm f1.4 lens for landscape photography.

I was going to buy the 33mm Fuji f1.4 lens in early July but now I heard Sigma is releasing a 17mm-40mm f.18 lens in late July 2025.

Do you think I should just save up for the Sigma 17mm-40mm zoom f1.8 lens or is it worth getting the Fuji 33mm f1.4 lens?

Price is not that much of an issue, I'll save up for quality it means saving money in the end by only buying 1 lens (the sigma) that does it all instead of buying 3 different lenses.

The Sigma lens barrel is a bit big/long but other than that, I'd love to get your opinion.

Is f.1.8 really that much of a difference for shooting in low light between f.1.4?

I'm a bit conflicted!

 

[MattKing]

Thread moved to what seems to be a more appropriate sub-forum.

 

[_T_]

f/1.4 is only 2/3 stop brighter than f/1.8, so you'd be gaining very little in terms of shutter speed. The appearance of bokeh on the other hand would be somewhat different with the bokeh balls being about 23% bigger for the f/1.4, all else being equal.

You're also mention landscapes, which require much narrower apertures. For that purpose the f/1.4 setting on your lens is not going to be used.

Whether you want to get a single zoom lens or 3 prime lenses is a bit difficult to help with. With all the computer processing power and machinery available to optics manufacturer's today it's much easier now to produce a zoom lens of comparable image quality to a prime lens. The various trade-offs that need to be considered when making a zoom lens still exist, but it is possible to reduce their negative effects in the design stage. The question is, how well have these effects been mitigated in the design in question, and therefore how much does it cost to get a zoom that is of comparable image quality to a prime?

You would need to research and compare the test performance of the various lenses you are interested in and make a decision about what kind and amount of aberration you're comfortable accepting, at what price point, in order to gain the convenience of carrying one lens rather than three. It's not a decision that anyone can really help you to make as your idea of what's acceptable might be completely different from mine or anyone else's.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I have gone a different path, so disregard the following if you so choose.

Most of my photography is landscape with a bit of wildlife taken while hiking or on the deck of a boat, so zooms take priority because you don’t often get to choose the vantage point. Don’t shoot much wide open.

My first lenses ranged from the 8-16 to the 100-400 but my Fujifilm X pack weighed more than my 4x5 field camera pack. Now have the 16-80 and a 70-300 with a 1.4 TC attached and the pack is much lighter.

Having only two lenses means having to change them less...a bonus when it’s raining, snowing, or the biting flies are fierce.