Not quite as good on some items as the "Black Friday" deal earlier this year, but not a bad sale.
I'm going to pick up the XF 100-400 lens to go with my Fujifilm X-T2 from the previous sale.
OP notes: Prices were reduced as of Christmas Eve, so whilst it's technically a Boxing Day sale, it's available before then, too.
That's what she said!
*excludes Gift Cards, Nikon D850, 70-200mm FL Lens, Sony A7R III, A9, A99 II, 24-105mm G Lens, Leica M10, DJI, Canon C100, C200, ONA Bowery and any pre-order items.
Starts tomorrow only? It already shows prices with 10% off now.
States Minimum 10% of everthing and excludes the most sought after things…
Its no deal its a shame.
No D850, a7riii and how can you exclude DJi????
Disappointment.
No Sony GM lenses :(
The Leica I want is excluded too
Finally pulled the trigger on the XF16-55mm. Probably as good a deal as ever…
I thought about that one as well but ultimately stuck to my budget. I've got that range covered (10-24, 18-55 original kit lens, 23 and 35 primes to compensate for the lack of quality of the 18-55, 50-140) and really do get use out of the wide end of my 10-24 if I'm shooting wide. Typically the 10-24 lives on my X-T1 and the 50-140 on my X-T2, with the primes, 18-55 and 100-400 carried in my location gear bag as required) and I tend to use my primes instead of the zoom for 35 and 50mm (full frame equivalent) if I have time to swap.
(And next year, wait for it, I'll be eating my words and wanting both the anticipated 8-16mm and the 16-55mm to replace my 10-24 / 18-55 combo and the primes in my gear bag, LOL. Only concerned about the difference in weights, considering that I'm already carrying around the 50-140 (edit: dyslexic) always and the 100-400 about half the time. My gear bag can't really take any more!) [ Further edit: OK, no. I'm also concerned about losing the ability to get both wide and 35mm equivalent framings on a single lens, as I use both of these A LOT and get this on the 10-24 albeit at some sacrifices. Oh, sometimes deciding on gear can be so difficult! ]
Oh neat! Do you shoot professionally?
I had nothing in the focal range between my 14mm and 56mm (aside from a 27mm pancake) until now. Been tracking prices and mulling over 18-55mm vs 16-55mm over the better part of the year. Figured I maybe shooting events soon and potentially get paid for it so it seems like a good investment.
I'm eagerly waiting for the 8-16mm too! Hopefully it will be a good lens. My only concern at the moment is square filter adapters as it the wide angle lens bulge at the front from what I've seen in the mockup photos. There was a few times I came close to buying a 10-24 second hand but I feel like I'm too lazy to commit to doing more landscapes even though I love it.
The 50-140 is absolutely my favorite. The sharpness and OIS just blows my mind! It's a godsend for my shaky hands. Have done both landscape and portraits with it and always happy with the result.
I'm considering selling my 14mm next (replace with a wide angle zoom) and maybe get the 80mm in the far future (macro macro macro!). When I have the money to blow, get a set of Mitakon speedmaster F0.95 lenses to full fill my bokeh wet dreams. Oh, and a second body! And some sort of gear container for all the lenses and what not…
The GAS is strong in this one…
@doxy I do occasional freelance work but it is mostly a hobby / barter activity.
I have to tell you that the 10-24 isn't a bad lens. I like the results I get with it better than the wide angle L glass I used some years ago on my Canon. If the 8-16 is better than the 10-24, it'll be stunning, because the 10-24 is more than acceptable.
Wide angle lenses that bulge considerably at the front make me nervous. I shoot out in the wild, and can run up steps and across scaff with some amount of abandon when it's required. I need my equipment to be able to take a bit of abuse now and then. The 10-24 and I get along nicely… I've even fallen into a work pit with it and it lived with a few cosmetic scratches.
Yes, +5 for the OIS on the 50-140. It's probably the objectively "best" lens I own, maybe even more so than my old Canon 24-70. I'm not the steadiest either; I can only hand-hold the 100-400 at the lower end, and do take a bit of guff from mates who have no trouble going for a tight zoom handheld with the same gear.
I used to have a macro prime for my Canon 10 or so years ago. I found it was a novelty that I enjoyed for a while, but the novelty wore off. Beautifully sharp lens for macro work; I just had limited use for it. 100mm, I believe it was.
Friend actually had one of those Mitakon lenses on his kit the other day. I've never shot with one and therefore don't know what I'm missing. I do have the 23mm f/1.4 though, and oh, yes, bokeh and experimentation with ND filters for the win.
Second body = VERY, VERY useful. You'll notice that I bought the X-T2 before the 100-400 zoom, which I'd hired a few times in the past and finally decided it was worth buying. I've had the 100-400 out 3 times since I bought it and whilst I'm glad I have it, unless I plan to stick to the lower end of the zoom, I feel obligated to schlep a tripod around if I really want it to be worthwhile, which is annoying. BTW, I also bought the battery grip, because you know, my new X-T2 wasn't heavy enough with just the 50-140 on it, so I had to make an extra effort to make it heavier. ;-)
Gear bags, meh. If I don't have my gear out (I use two cross-body straps), I'd just as soon hide it in a generic daypack with a bit of foam glued to the insides, with each component in a microfibre cloth so as not to be a target. The only photo-specific gear bag I felt was worth having was the Lowepro Magnum, because it makes it just so darn easy to change lenses when out and about. But once I got the second body, I didn't need to do that nearly as frequently, so "not being a target" currently wins out for me.
That 100-400 mm is huge!