I am planning to acquire an X2D2 in October and I am struggling on lens choice. I am coming from using a combination of a Leica M11 and a variety of primes as well as an SL3 with a variety of lenses. My use case is primarily travel in Europe and some limited product photography once in a while.
After a lot of reading I have narrowed my lens choices to 25V+38V+75P or 28P+38V+75P. I do shoot low light a great deal of the time. I am torn due to the slightly wider view on the 25V and the extra stop vs the smaller angle of view but being much more portable 28P.
I went 25v/38v/90v (not a big fan of the 55v) I think that makes for potentially the best travel setup unless you want to go with the single zoom lens approach. Of the 3 lenses the 90v is definitely the star of the group. I like that they all have the same filter size and the lenses all work the same way for activating manual focus. As for the 25v vs 28p field of view I think 28 and 38 don't work as well together. I think if you're going 28 then the 45 probably makes more sense?
I did consider going 30/65/90v but I'm pretty happy with this setup. I realize AF-C is one of the big selling points of the V lenses and the X2D2 and it works but it wouldn't be a primary reason to go that route.
25V and 38V are a great combo. Although the 38V is certainly lighter, the 25V is very well balanced and does not feel heavy by premium lens mirrorless standards. Both will seem heavy, compared to M gear (obviously).
Both lenses are also perfectly sharp wide open and usable there, with appropriate attention to DoF…corners won’t be sharp, I’m not in same plane as center, for instance.
You might consider getting a Q3-43 instead, if you are already comfortable with the M11 and didn’t want to change lenses. The lens on the 43 is staggeringly good. The Hassie however does have its incredible IBIS and dynamic range.
Instead of these three (or four) lenses, it is simpler and far cheaper to buy the 35-100. Older lenses 21-30-45-65-80-90-135 outperform newer ones in terms of optical characteristics, but their advantages matter only when there are very high demands for edge-to-edge sharpness or when a specific artistic rendering is required (such as that of the 80/1.9 ).
I should have mentioned, I have held the zoom and while it handles well for its size, there are place and situations where I think it would draw too much attention. I also think having a light lens on the camera in hand and two moderately light lenses in the bag is easier on my old man body overall.
I owned the Leica 24-90SL for my SL3 and ended up not using it for the above reasons. Also an amazing zoom like the 35-100, just not as good a sensor
Thanks for the insights and replies so far, much appreciated. Getting into new systems can be daunting for me.
Do you not enjoy that focal length? Or are there other reasons you dont use the 25V?
On my M I shoot the 18mm F3.8 and do use it a fair amount, probably 20% in Europe when I am trying to get interiors or large buildings from narrow alleyways.
I have every Hasselblad X camera and lens ever made. I generally pack my kits based on the location and need to be portable. When I carry primes I flip between the 25V and 28P, although the 28P gets more use.
The reason for this is I know I tend to shoot longer more often than wider. In my main three prime kit (25or28/55/90) the 55V and 90V account for 85% of my use. Therefore it makes more sense to carry the smaller wide. If I re-visiting a place where I saw more wide angle opportunities I’ll pack the 25 instead. I do like the focus clutch and control ring of the V lenses, so if I were a photographer who shoots wide more often I’d probably favour the 25V.
I too am waiting for the longer zoom to complete the *trinity*. As someone who does tend to favour the 50-200mm range it’s a lens I’m especially eager for. Sometimes I’ll also pack a GFX100Sii use to have the 100-200 with me.
DKLeica wrote:
Do you not enjoy that focal length? Or are there other reasons you dont use the 25V?
On my M I shoot the 18mm F3.8 and do use it a fair amount, probably 20% in Europe when I am trying to get interiors or large buildings from narrow alleyways.
I just don't use that wide a focal length frequently enough to justify carrying the additional +/- 350g of the 25V over the 28P.
It sounds like in your case that might be different. As a V-lens the 25V also has the focus clutch if that is important to you.
I use the 907x 100c almost exclusively for landscape. I fell hard for the 30/3.5 and 45/4P and like the 135/2.8 enough to hang on to until Hassy gives us a smaller, lighter tele option that's as good for landscape. The TC's useful when you need the reach, but the size and weight mean you're carrying another big lens. I thought I would miss an ultra wide, but the 30's proven very easy to pano. That said, should Hassy ever get Fuji to produce a rebranded 23/4 with a central shutter, they can have my money. That kit's been with me for a couple of trips to Iceland and up and down the Rockies this summer, and it never fails to impress.
It sounds like you want more of an all-around kit, which is how my guy uses his X2D. His kit is the 38V, 55V, and 90V. He stuck with the Vs for their overall usability, particularly the clutched MF and wider apertures. It's become his daily carry. I think the 55 is a love/hate lens depending on how you use it. It'd never be my choice for landscape, but, as a walk-around normal, it's charming. Still, when he wants to get down to one lens, it's the 45P he snags from the dry cabinet.
That gets me to my only real recommendation: Don't ignore the 45P. It's easy to dismiss it as just another pancake, and the resolution isn't as punchy as my other two lenses, but it is very well behaved across the frame otherwise. It's worth a rent, at least.
DKLeica wrote:
Thanks Gordon, do you find much of a difference in quality of images from the 25V to the 28P? How big does the 3mm "feel" in real world?
Thanks!
Darrin
Honestly, not much difference. Personally I tend to stop down wides when I use them. Very occasionally the extra speed of the 25V is super useful in low light. But not often. Thanks Hasselblad IBIS. Pushed I’d say the 25 is marginally better at wider apertures. Marginally.
As for the focal length, I really like 21mm (135 equivalent) and these two sit either side of that. I have no issues with a step forward or a step back. For some it might be a bigger deal. Also since you’re choosing the 38 (over my preference for the 55) the 28 may feel a bit close. For me the 28 is a near perfect doubling of focal length the the 55V. I’d really love a 110mm so I could have a 28,55,110 trio. I really like a 100% split in my lenses or as close as I can get. Or a 100-2xx zoom.
I went 25, 55, and 90 and wish I would have went 25, 38, 90. The 55 isn't bad, but it just doesn't click for me in the 4:3 aspect ratio like it did with the Leica Q3 43.
Kyle Meshna just released a video on the 25V,28P and 20-35 Zoom in a comparison on Youtube. I don't know anything about him or how credible he is, but he favored the 25V overall. For anyone else in my position wondering which lens to get, one more data point.
Also consider the 100mp sensor and the ability to crop if you’re considering a 38V or 55V.
Unless your needing a 20mm focal length for most of your shooting and you can level the lens when shooting to avoid distortion you may want to rent the 20-35mm and shoot some with it.
I shoot the 20-35mm, 35-100mm, the 135mm w the 1.7x and the 55mm all that's missing is the long zoom 150-250mm, and a tilt-shift lens.
XCD zooms are incredible and provide a thrifty solution to owning four primes. The XCD 135 surprised me I shot it for two days straight in Chicago on the street and got some killer images.