Lens recommendation: is 23mm a must-have?

Started Mar 13, 2014 | Questions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Regular MemberPosts: 273
Re: 14 23 56
In reply to ballwin12, Mar 13, 2014

Thanks! It seems to be the consensus that 35 is excellent, but 23 is just better, if there is no preference in terms of FL.

ballwin12 wrote:

TravelLight wrote:

No, don't temp me with another option! I have searched here for multiple threads on 23 vs. 35. It seems the main complaint about 35 is that it has a different focus mechanism (don't remember the details) so it's AF is slower than 23, even with firmware update.

Conrad567 wrote:

I have the 23mm and the 18-55. The 23mm is definitely more capable of creating that artistic feel than the 18-55mm but the 18-55mm is every bit as sharp. If you already have the 35mm, it is VERY capable of creating an artistic feel if that is what you want. So I would say, it is definitely nice to have in the arsenal, but NOT a must have.

As I search through my photos, I rarely ever have a picture jump off of the page that I took with the 23mm. More often than not I can't tell the difference between pictures I took with it or with the 18-55mm zoom. However, I constantly have photos that I took with the 35mm jump out at me and make me say WOW, I TOOK THAT.

I have used both 23 and 35 and yes, I confirm that AF of 23mm is faster and much quieter than that of 35mm.

I think 23mm vs 35mm is just about focal length, and AF mechanism. Optically, they are at least equally ( I feel 23mm is little bit sharper wide open but not much). I could not live with that noise coming from 35mm ( latest FW), very annoying. I sold my 35mm right after I got 23mm.

I think i will down my set to 14, 23, 56: the best primes that Fuji has made.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow