09/05/2026 5:26 am
Topic starter
Notifications
Clear all
Photography Tips
3
Posts
4
Users
0
Reactions
30
Views
0
honestly so sick of my heavy 16-55 brick killing my neck on trails. im hitting the Dolomites in two weeks and need to shed weight fast.
my logic was the 18-55 kit lens but i hate the variable aperture honestly. should i just grab the 23mm f2 or maybe the 18mm? budget is 600 max...
3 Answers
11
09/05/2026 5:27 am
> honestly so sick of my heavy 16-55 brick killing my neck on trails. Yeah that 16-55 is basically a gym weight lol. I carried that beast for one season and never again. If youre heading to the Dolomites, every gram counts on those climbs. Since you hate the variable aperture on the kit lens, just skip it... youll just end up frustrated. Quick tip: grab the Fujifilm XF 23mm f/2 R WR. It is light, weather-sealed for when the clouds roll in, and fits your budget. It works great for general hiking, tho you might find it a bit tight for massive landscapes. If you need more room, the Fujifilm XF 16mm f/2.8 R WR is a decent option with a wider field of view, though the f/2.8 is slightly slower. It really depends on your focal length preference, but these small primes are the way to go for backpacking. They dont weigh you down and the quality is solid.
10
09/05/2026 5:40 am
I swapped my zoom for the Fujifilm XF 23mm f2 R WR and love it! Its way faster than the Fujifilm XF 18mm f2 R which feels clunky. Go with the 23!
1
09/05/2026 6:10 am
I'm dealing with the same weight dilemma... that 655g mass is just not ergonomic for mountain trekking. I've been analyzing the technical data for my own Dolomites trip:
- Fujifilm XF 23mm f/2 R WR: 180g, weather-sealed, $449 approx.
- Fujifilm XF 27mm f/2.8 R WR: 84g, $399 MSRP. Honestly still haven't pulled the trigger myself since balancing weather resistance against total weight is a tough call.
