Which BR LENS 120/4 OR 150/3.5 for XF/3100

[rollei8is]

I am planning to get one of these lenses BR 120/4 OR BR 150/3.5 for my XF/3100 system.

I will be using it mainly for landscape. My requirements are corner to corner sharpness and a excellent performer on the IQ3100 back.

All suggestions and recommendations are welcome.

thank you in advance,

R----

 

[dougpeterson]

Any reason you aren’t considering the 150/2.8? If you can live with the weight/size it is the best of the three.

 

[rollei8is]

Any reason you aren’t considering the 150/2.8? If you can live with the weight/size it is the best of the three.

Hi Doug,

I did consider the 75-150 zoom, it also weighs 4pounds, I already have the 28mm and the 40-80 zoom. I wanted a third lens to make it three lens system.

That being my objective I thought a lighter lens would suffice. If I were to agree to a 4 pond lens, I would consider the 75-150 (similar weight) and more versatile.

Your thoughts.

R----

 

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

I have both the BR lenses you mention. The 120 is superb but also pretty heavy. The 150 is lighter, slightly faster and takes the same filters as the 55 mm and 80 mm lenses. Those three are my most used lenses so it's nice to carry only one set of filters.

It is true that the BR 150 2.8 is a stellar performer but I don't find it so much better than the 3.5 that it's weight when hiking is justified. In fact at f8 I can't tell the difference, and as a landscape shooter I rarely use apertures much wider than f5.6.

If you already have the 40-80, I'd go with 150 as it's a bigger step up from 80 mm. But if you do do macro work, the 120 is absolutely essential.

Dante says you should get both....

Good luck!
Bill

 

[dougpeterson]

If you already have the 40-80, I'd go with 150 as it's a bigger step up from 80 mm. But if you do do macro work, the 120 is absolutely essential.

Dante says you should get both....

^^^