Hands-on with the new Fujifilm XF33mm F1.4 R LM WR

It does have an aperture ring, all right, with an A setting past f/16. What it lacks is the pull-for-manual focus ring with scale that the original 23/1.4 has. The new 33 looks the size (and probably weight) of a peach can, at least a beer! Not being a pixel peeper, I traded my 23/1.4 and 35/1.4 for the f/2 versions with which I'm very happy. Won't even look at these two.

Sep 7, 2021permalink

Bob P cz

Yes, you are right! It's been a few years when I had a chance to use 35 f1.4 alongside the 18-55. And because 35 f1.4 is often presented from the opposite side in the internet (so that the apperture scale is not visible) I mixed it with 18-55 for not having an apperture ring scale!

Regarding 35 f2.0 I agree - I also had a chance to try it and I was (unexpectidly) impressed by it!

Sep 7, 2021*permalink

Bob, the 18-55 is a great lens in terms of convenience. Probably not the sharpest in the stable but the OIS comes as a great asset when you drive it to the long end. I've had three of them; one with the very first X-E1 that I got solely to be able to mount my Leica lenses, long gone; then an X-E2 for the Phase Detection focus (essential with manual lenses), also gone and then the third that I got with my X-T4, to which it's the natural companion. I like fast lenses and was tempted by the 16-55/2.8 for the constant aperture, but once I hefted it, I decided it's a neck-breaker, specially for a guy with bad back due to excesses of youth. The 18-55 on the X-T4 give me the ability of handholding it at the long end at 1/15" thanks to the OIS and IBIS combined. The combo is rapidly becoming my favorite travel kit.

Sep 25, 2021*permalink

Papa48

Exactly my best kit as well.

Sep 27, 2021permalink

TN Args

Vastly more expensive than the Canon.

Sep 6, 2021permalink

Photo_AK

Yes, "the Canon" - Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4 STM

Sep 6, 2021permalink

EricWN

Than mount that Canon onto your Fuji camera. Enjoy!

Sep 6, 2021permalink

@ TN Args, that’s like saying the leather in a Porsche is vastly more expensive than the pleather in a Ford Pinto….

Sep 6, 2021*permalink

TN Args

Do kid yourself. I hope that’s not a Fuji-wide trait.

Sep 6, 2021permalink

Is that Canon lens weather sealed?

Sep 6, 2021permalink

Photo_AK

@Tomasz_Wk - if you wouldn't already know the answer to that question, you wouldn't even ask it, now would you?

Sep 6, 2021permalink

Zaax

Vastly cheaper than the Leica.

Oct 1, 2021permalink

Sezano

I’m usually here for the comments, but brother, they are getting longer and longer. Coolidge is rolling over. No fun.

Sep 6, 2021*permalink

Combatmedic870

I can't believe the whole crop vs FF fight is still alive and kicking so strong. I'm just a lurker on forums nowadays because of all of this. 😅
These are just optically corrected, F1.4 weather sealed lenses. They are going to be heavier, larger and more expensive 🤷. Why compare them to FF systems? Fuji made them as large as they needed to be for the Fuji system. 🤦
But I guess it matters to FF Sony users that much going off the comments. 🤷
Don't you guys know that most camera divisions are the manufacturers play things? 😂 Especially Fuji. They could just shut down at any point in time. Just enjoy any of them, while they are still around. Because they all won't be around soon enough. I'm going to enjoy Fuji while it's around.
That is all. Comment back if you want. I won't see it for 2-3 weeks. 😂

Sep 5, 2021permalink

pylorus21

Love Fujifilm gear...They simply know what ticks when it comes to everything photography.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Vit Adamek

Even if all the camera manufactures ceased to manufacture, there will be enough gear for years to come... And great enough gear to take great photos with.

Sep 6, 2021permalink

FF folks, especially on this forum, are not photographers. It’s people who buy expensive gear to make up for their poor capabilities. These are the same folks who chant the typical FF equivalence posts every time a lens is reviewed or announced. They suffer from low self esteem, have poor photography skills, and are not very intelligent. Don’t argue with them, pity them.

Sep 6, 2021*permalink

craigwell47

Comparison of the size and weight difference between new Voigtlander 35mm f1,2 X Fuji mount at 196g to new Voigtlander 35mm f2 E Sony mount at 375g. Much lower price for X Fuji mount.

Even allowing for sensor difference Voigtlander 35mm f2 E mount requires a much longer lens tube. Sony E mount originally designed for APS-C cameras.

Sep 7, 2021*permalink

https://www.facebook.com/jorgemtrevino/photos_albums

The format wars will last 100 years. I remember my film days (75yo geezer here, shooting since 1959) and when I accepted its demise I had 6 35mm cameras, 4 MF 120 and 2 LF 4x5. My darkroom still functions and aone in a blue moon I get there and process **film** (chemical paper is a knife in the groin to the planet, so I scan). The arguments for larger format were always over quality but the 35 always produced better work (most of the time at least).
My first digital "serious" was an APS-C DSLR but when the D700 hit the market I went for it as soon as pocket allowed. Not longer, I recanted and bought my first Fuji X; Now the D700 is with a granddaughter and I shoot almost exclusively my three X mounts. They give me great quality, enlargements to 17x22 (the largest my printer handles), system is affordable (FX cameras not, specially the newer mirrorless) and they don't break my neck nor my piggy bank.

Cheers,

Jorge.

Sep 25, 2021permalink

Les Lammers

They get sucked in by marketing. Lighting and composition are more important than megapixels.

Oct 9, 2021permalink

El Chubasco

Why is Fuji making larger lenses?? One of the main features that makes apsc format attractive for many is its lightweight and compactness in comparison with FF. These lenses are even larger than some FF lenses at equivalent aperture and focal length!!

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Combatmedic870

They are complicated, optically corrected lenses... 🤷 They are going to be larger. This is very common with all camera manufacturers. It's been like this for...100 years now? If you don't like the size. The F2 series is calling your name! That's why they made them... Want faster? They aren't discontinuing the old ones! Problem solved. Are all high end lenses larger? No, but alot of them do get larger.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Mr Bolton

Look at some of the coffee cans Canon and Nikon are making for their new fast aperture glass. Some of those make the Fuji lenses seem downright petite in comparison.

You can get cheaper, smaller size manual focus fast glass that works pretty well. Or you can have modern, high speed autofocus, optically excellent lenses that are larger. That's true of any format.

Sep 6, 2021permalink

So what if they are bigger than “some” FF lenses. Who sits are around worrying about the size of other companies lenses anyways ? I buy lenses and enjoy them, I don’t loose sleep at night worrying about what Sony does or whatever. Stop reading so much misinformation and just enjoy life.

Sep 6, 2021*permalink

Strangefinder

Just different ranges for different purposes. The 35mmF1.4 is still available and half the weight. Choice.

Sep 7, 2021permalink

raevyn

Smaller and lighter was not something I considered when I sold my full frame Canon R and switched to Fuji .

Sep 10, 2021permalink

roshank

@raevyn just curious - but why did you make the switch?

Dec 8, 2021permalink

raevyn

It started with the X100V , the jpegs were so good from the camera. No one else really lets you control the image in camera as well as Fuji. Plus I like the top dials and no one else really does that as well as Fuji . The Canon felt great in my hand but I’m over sitting at a computer editing.

Dec 10, 2021permalink

Michiel953

Give me smaller lenses any time.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Combatmedic870

That's why they made the F2 line up.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

cosinaphile

the 35 1.4 offers similar fov ...same speed smaller lighter cheaper

Sep 6, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

The 35mm f1.4 is basically half the size, half the weight and half the price.

Sep 6, 2021permalink

JT26

16
18
23
27
35
50
60

Those have you covered

Oct 30, 2021permalink

aris14

Fujifilm is loading its lineup the best way they can.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

cosinaphile

i willl keep my 35 1.4 this is a bit big but the WR is nice

seeing the xe4 made me sad its controls are so different from xe2

waited for it and didnt buy for its loss of so many controls and not a fan of cihna made either

Sep 5, 2021permalink

marc petzold

The X-E1 to X-E4 are similar into controls, the only difference hereby is:
X-E1 to X-E2(s) - one dial, and the D-Pad, X-E3 - two dials and joystick, X-E4 - one dial, and the Joystick on the back.

Good Light.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

I will also keep my 35mm 1.4 because I think that it creates great images. But I will replace my 23mm f2 by the new 23mm 1.4. That lens will be amazing!

Sep 5, 2021permalink

cosinaphile

i think calling it similar is a bit kind itlost the 4 way pad that 5 buttons there

along the left side of screen a bunch of buttons a dial its a bit much

im glad they were less curvy than te xe3 but i know a better evf lots of controls japan manufacture and a grip would have had fuji sell many thousands to the xe2 xe2s devoted wanting a faster buffierer megapixelier
upgrade to an almost perect machine

Sep 5, 2021permalink

EricWN

I’ll keep my 35 for now as well, great little lens. With regards to the X-E cameras, I really would wish for a better EVF than anything else, plus IBIS of course.

Sep 6, 2021permalink

Extremely wise decision; I got me one X-E4 for the tiltable screen thinking it would be great for candid street shooting. Wrong!
The pruning of the physical controls made using the thing next to impossible.
I sold it three months later at a loss and grabbed a refurbished X-T4 that is completely the oppossite and is becoming my main camera. The IBIS in addition to the kit lens (18-55) OIS is extraordinary.
Who heard of shooting an 85mm (equivalent) lens at 1/15" and getting rock still images one after the other?
I'm keeping my 1.4 23 & 35 lenses, but I'm perfectly happy with the f/2 "Fujicrons".
The only thing that would make me sell one of them would be a Summicron sized 23/2.

Sep 25, 2021*permalink

Ed_arizona

X-E4 is a money maker for fuji, poor number of controls is a rip off...dealbreaker IMO

Mar 7, 2022permalink

ZioPepino

Was waiting for this lens for my street/documentary photography and....believe it or not , I just ordered the xf 35mm f2....

Sep 5, 2021permalink

IIIV

So, the Fuji 23mm F1.4 is larger, heavier, and more expensive than Sony's FE 35mm F1.8?

No thanks.

Sep 4, 2021*permalink

rtemm

Yes, because it’s a faster and wider lens! Also it’s higher resolution and better image quality! /s

Sep 4, 2021permalink

io_bg

And the cheapest FF Sony camera is larger, heavier and more expensive than any Fuji X body?

No, thanks.

Sep 4, 2021permalink

rationalist

Sonys FE 35mm 1.8 has roughly the same FOV and is half a stop faster than the Fuji 23mm F1.4. On the other hand, Nikons Z 35mm F1.8 is even bigger than the Fuji at roughly the same price. If the quality of the Fuji will be comparable to the Nikon, the price is justified.

Sep 4, 2021permalink

No sure what your point is ? Folks who shoot Fuji like me have zero interest in Sony. The Fuji group I an a member of is full of tons of people leaving the Sony camp for Fuji, so I don’t think equivalence matters…

Sep 4, 2021*permalink

@IIIV - of course, that is one point why I left aps-c. A Sony a7c with some Samyang lenses is very small, lightweight and cheap

Sep 4, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

Twinfighter: The A7C is the A7iii with worse ergonomy and viewfinder, slightly better tracking AF for more money, I'm not sure why people are so into it 2021. It's different sure but when it was released everyone was saying it was old parts crammed into an A6xxx body and I never heard anyone say something positive about A6xxx ergonomy. Not that this has anything whatsoever to do with Fujifilm, all glory to them.

Sep 4, 2021*permalink

ewelch

Since when was 1.8 faster than 1.4?

Sep 4, 2021permalink

@io_bg: You do not buy a new body with every new lens, so at some point the price of the body becomes a not so important factor.

@ewelch: Since Canon and Nikon revived the APS-C format at the beginning of the digital era.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

Great Big Moooooo

@IIIV the Fuji lens with 5 special elements/15 element construction and full sealing is more expensive than the Sony equivalent with a single aspheric/11 element construction and, as per Sony, sealing below the grade of G/GM lenses? Lenses with higher performance and the materials needed to achieve it cost more?

Like, you better write this on a computer you got third hand from a thrift store. Because it's cheaper.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Sylverphoto

@ewelch
Aps-c and FF lenses were compared. A aps-c lens needs to be multiplied by about x1.5. A Fujifilm f1.4 lens would then be f2.1. For me this however, comparing apples and oranges to me.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

It’s an odd discussion that people complain about Sony A7C ergonomic when it’s discussed in a Fujifilm context, a brand who isn’t particularly known for having noticeable grips. Most Fujifilm have no grips at all or barely any and far less then the A7C.

Only their X-H1 can be seen as really having one the rest is barely there. But I understand the decision from Fujifilm parts as it makes the camera smaller, lighter but certainly not cheaper as many of their top end costs an equal amount too the Sony A7C. Fujifilm is not cheap let’s not fool ourselves, many of the fujinon lenses cost and weight as much as a FF version.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

I said this many times before the reason why APS-C and ‘4/3 is lighter and cheaper is because there is no FF equivalent that is offering the same speed and same DOF. Most FF offers a far shallower DOF in APS-C terms the slowest FF is about 1.85 that is why the lenses are typically heavier and more costly. There is no magic trick, an equivalent will always be around the same weight, price and seize of an FF. There is no real gain in APS-C if you want equivalent to what is on offer on FF format.

I always said that if you want speed and shallow dof get a FF or MF there is no gain to be had on crop sensors as your system would be just as big and expensive but have none of the sensor advantage. The advantage with crop is it’s ability to get really really small because of it’s relatively slow lenses or get allot of reach in a small package, for many it’s perfectly fine, they don’t need the dof or lowlights performance.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

No what I’m saying is you don’t have lowlights performance with the small lenses, to get handheld lowlights performance you need lenses that is as fast as an equivalent on FF format, meaning you end up spending an equal amount and having a lens just as big and heavy but gain none of the sensor advantage of a larger sensor.

It’s not snobbery as it’s not a case of money, after all you end up spending the same and in some cases more as you have limited selection of cheaper third party manufacturers.

I don’t understand why people take it so personally, crop sensors advantage has always been to get really small and getting reach, the moment it try to level out the playing field of larger sensor it looses the main advantage in seize, weight and price, the main reason people get it in the fist place. If you just try getting the dof and lowlights performance of a ff on all lenses, then what is the point of actually owning an APS-C as it would cost more or less the same, weight the same.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

Orangorill

The Sony A7C is a nice enough camera, but cheap? Over here at least, the A7C with the 28-60mm kit lens is twice the price of an X-E4 with the 27mm. I'm sure it might be worth it for some, but they're exactly comparable price wise.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

Just another Tog

I think you really missed the point, most who buy the fastest APS-C lenses is buying them because… if it’s not to get the DOF and lowlights performance then what is it for then, you typically get those lenses because you have a wish for getting those abilities you are probably not buying them to shoot landscape where your shooting stoped down. These are made to offer something that you would typically not get with crop sensors meaning very shallow DOF and handheld lowlights .

Therefore what your saying is completely and utterly irrelevant because your talking completely out of context. The context is a fast lens on APS-C that delivers equal DOF and lowlights performance like an Equivalent FF lens. The context is not whether or not or how big or in what situations a larger sensor offer an advantage.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Actually you can get used FF for that amount…

Yes let’s take the lowest of the lowest APS-C and compare it to a FF… I specifically mentioned the pricer versions, as people who are really in the market would look at the top crop on APS-C and bottom section of FF. People who buy the cheapest APS-C is also probably not the ones who go out and buy these lenses either, those who buy the low end is mostly budget users or those who want to keep the system small, this lens is not for those people.

People who buy these are already placing themselves on the upper bracket of APS-C for those it will be a choice between fps etc. and what ever the lower end FF offers. as there is not really much of a price difference, this is not something new the difference between entry level FF and top crop APS-C in the DSLR age where also placed in the sane price range.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

JAT

There are no co-relation between fast and IQ. You can maker a slower lens just as good for example my slow f/2 Voigtländer is a complete equal to the best 1.2 and 1.4. Again most faster lenses aren’t performing groundbreaking better stopped down to bracket below them, allot of cheaper lenses equal these at 5.6-8 so if you buying a fast glass because you think your getting noticable better performance stopped down your really getting conned. You buy these because of their performance fully open and because of said abilities, if you buy these to shoot landscape you haven’t done your homework, there is a reason why many landscape photographers isn’t using the fastes lenses because the gain simply isn’t noticeable enough over slower lenses at their working aperture.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Orangorill

If you're looking at getting a new camera system, and your main priorities are low light and shallow depth of field, sure, you should probably consider full frame. Then again I suspect most prospective Fuji users a) have a price/size/weight preference, and b) have other priorities as well. For the price of the A7C plus the 50mm f/1.8, you can get an X-E4 with the 27mm, the 55-250mm AND the new 33mm f/1.4. The Sony might have a slight advantage in low light, but I know which kit I'd rather have.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Malling - I agree with you on the lenses, but you can make smaller bodies with smaller sensors. Also it's usually silly comparing crop lenses trying to match FF apertures (in mm, where it counts for noise) as they tend to throw the kitchen sink at them and are competing with FF lenses that often aren't trying to do that.
You could compare the 33mm f/1 that was aborted due to size/weight/cost with a 50/1.4, but it would need to be a whizzy one (Sigma Art? Zeiss?) not the basic Canon EF one, for example.

Oh and it doesn't matter at all, but the X-S10 is £949 and the RP £1049 (in John Lewis) with a free EF adaptor (£99 usually).
https://www.johnlewis.com/canon-eos-rp-compact-system-camera-4k-ultra-hd-26-2mp-wi-fi-bluetooth-oled-evf-3-inch-vari-angle-touch-screen-with-ef-mount-adapter-body-only/p4019543
https://www.johnlewis.com/fujifilm-x-s10-compact-system-camera-4k-ultra-hd-26-1mp-wi-fi-bluetooth-oled-evf-3-vari-angle-lcd-touch-screen-body-only-black/p5233929

Sep 5, 2021permalink

@ Malling. I didn’t buy Fuji for weight savings. I was shooting Canon FF and a friend had me try it. My first impression was the image quality was better than my FF body. Sensor size doesn’t matter much these days. I still shoot Fuji because as it stands right now there isn’t another brand on the market with colors and tones as nice (and yea I have shot with the Canon R and Sony A7III extensively). If a FF system comes along that blows me away, I might switch, but right now that does not exist.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

*ggg* so a hot topic for you all. And a lot of you compare apple with oranges. If I need a nice body with good ergonomics I would choose no Fujifilm. I would choose a Canon or Nikon. But ergonomics is not the whole story. You buy a Fujifilm, because you love the design and feeling. You buy a Sony, if you love great electronics. And the A7c is camera, who Fujifilm has no answer for. But is not important for a person who love its Fujifilm.
Topic Samyang: A 35mm f/1.8 Samyang (300 $ ) on fullframe is equivalent to 23mm f/1.2. NOT only in terms of depth of field. Also for dynamic range, noise to signal ratio, colours and image effect to portraits. This is important in evening mood or indoor photography. A fullframe sensor on iso 3200 plays on a different level then an aps-c sensor with iso 3200. You need a 23 mm f/1.2 to close the gap to full frame. And a 23 mm f/1.2 aps-c lens will always be bigger and more expensive then a 35mm f/1.8 fullframe lens. Especially with sony and Samyang

Sep 5, 2021permalink

steviewa

@just another tog
Can you explain why I got a great ff body with gen bg for £185 tho they're generally between £300-500

Sep 5, 2021permalink

"outright false sets of numbers"
Which ones, they are basically correct.
Side A:
F/stop is light per unit area. A smaller sensor gives you the same light per sq mm of the sensor (at the same f/stop), but less light per sq mm of the viewed image (as it enlarges it more) so you get more noise (the less light the larger a part of it is noise).
Side B:
You don't care about a lot of the smaller sensor issues most of the time. Having more noise is irrelevant if you don't notice it as you use the image.
P.S. Crop sensor DoF is greater at the same f/stop due to using a wider lens (giving more DoF) for the same FoV. However you can always stop FF down to get that DoF (but with more noise than when was at the same f/stop if you have to boost the ISO to get the shutter speed you want).
P.P.S. Using apertures in mm when comparing can help explain.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

@Just Another Tog: Too many falsehoods to reply to, I will just address a few:

"Anybody buying into a full frame system..." You are forgetting than many long term posters here have started with APS-C digital and then switched to FF. They, me included, have first hand knowledge of the difference.

What can FF give _you_? Nobody really cares. Billions of people shoot with phones and none of us, you included, tells them that they need to switch to FF or to Fuji APS-C.

What it gives to _me_? In this particular case, a great 50/1.2 lens, 1.5 stops faster than the Fuji discussed here, very sharp corner to corner. More expensive, heavier and all, but I do have a phone as well.

About your 99.9% nonsense, shooting in a dark room, etc. If you do not know what to do with a fast lens, that is fine but you should not let the whole world know about it.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Some guy who used an APS-C camera 10 years ago before switching has the relevant experience on the systems at that point of time. Or you are telling me that APS-S advanced faster since then? BTW, I had an APS-C camera for many years after that, with newer lenses.

Your second paragraph is a rant completely unrelated to my post.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

How would you know if the advantages are blown out of proportions? How much experience do you have with a modern FF system? Even if they seem overblown to you, what makes you believe that they are overblown to everybody else?

Some of my relatives never understood why I spent thousands on my audio system. They think that their boom boxes are not much worse. Should I throw my system away?

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

You cannot be serious. You carry 7.5kg and you are bragging about weight savings???

Why not buy a superzoom - it goes to 1000mm+ eq. and it would be much lighter? Oh, maybe because it is slow and not so sharp. So is your kit.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Oh, you know someone who shoots FF and that makes you an expert on FF. My relatives know someone who owns a decent audio system as well (me) and they do compare what they hear.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

Please find me an APS-C kit that would replicate my 35LII/1.4 and my 50/1.2 on FF. Or that it can match my phone's size and weight?

About your last comment - of course you do. I delete my soft images as well.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

I started on APS and moved to m43 and FF, you can do shallow DoF on all three of them, but the smaller the sensor the more things to think about.

The thing about FF is currently you can get sensors with pixels smaller than the 26MP Fujis (A7r4) so you don't care about equivalence for long lenses (300mm gets similar detail on both) and you get wide quite cheaply as you have a negative 1.5x crop. (So a 70-300 would be the same as a 47-300 on Fuji, which saves weight). (Note I don't shoot Sony E.)

This is at f5.6 on m43 for example...
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51252546

Also sorry if the maths is confusing, I tried not to be, but it's just physics...

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

I don't think shooting f1.8 on FF is gonna enable that much better low light performance than f1.4 on APS-C, there's a couple f1.8 FF lenses that are significantly smaller than the f1.4 APS-C stuff and most are cheaper (then there's body cost etc) *but* not everyone that shoots APS-C is buying 3+ f1.4 primes.

I think that's where these arguments made in a void just get stuck in the mud. A lot of people might buy one or two f1.4 on a smaller format and then pair them with smaller f2s or slower zooms. There's a lot of overlap there overall and as someone that shoots FF (and M4/3) I see no reason to look down or trash the faster sub-FF options.

That's just me tho, when people start going tribal and painting whole swaths of people with the same brush then arguments start going nowhere fast as well...

Sep 5, 2021permalink

I was shooting f/1.2 on m43 this evening, if that would throw any more oil on the fire ;-)
(Although mostly at f/2.8)
On the Fuji f/1.4 primes I'd worry more about AF speed vs the f/2s than light gathering.
FF f/1.8s vary from "free if you buy Pizza, not sharp wide open" to "free if you rent the Pizza parlour for an evening, very sharp all the time"...
Oh, sorry, Canon 200/1.8 - "free if you buy the Pizza parlour, awesome"...

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

Cerridwen

I enjoyed reading this back-and-fourth justification. Thanks guys.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

EricWN

Enjoy mounting the Sony lens to your Fuji.

Sep 6, 2021permalink

Constantin V

I was on the fence between Fuji and Sony A7C and know what? Both sux. Sony has totally unusable wheels and buttons. Fuji has junk sensor. (Yes, I've tested cameras and yes, I know that commercial says different.) Size is equal. Fuji makes big cameras for it's sensor size. Leica FF is the same size. And no, I don't like bells and whistle of Fuji. As they also lack traditional manual focus features as in Leica.

Sep 7, 2021permalink

marc petzold

"Fuji has junk sensor. " It's Lobbyism. I use X-Trans since 9.5 years, nothing "sux". If you don't like Fuji, just don't use it. But don't spread fake news.

/edit typo fixed.

Sep 25, 2021*permalink

“ All three lenses would clearly make a lot of sense if Fujifilm were to introduce a higher-resolution X-series body in the future.”

Richard is right. Those new lenses are future proof.

Sep 4, 2021permalink

New release lens's show that future higher-resolution lens is heavy (compare to old XF 35mm F1.4).

Future higher-resolution X-series body may be heavy than Sony/Canon high-res FF.
1. $1700 X-T4 (26MP APS-C, 6.5 stops IBIS, 607g)
2. $1799 Sony a7c (24MP FF, 5 stops IBIS, 509g)
3. $2500-$3000 X-H2 43MP APS-C?
4. $3500 Sony a7R IV (61MP FF, 5.5 stops IBIS, 665g)
5. $3900 Canon EOS R5 (45MP FF, 8 stops IBIS, 738g)

Note:
1. $899 Sony FE 20mm F1.8G 373 g, linear motor
2. $599 Sony FE 24mm F2.8 G 162g, linear motor
3. $599 Sony FE 40mm F2.5 G 173g, linear motor
4. $599 Sony FE 50mm F2.5 G 174g, linear motor

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

Main selling of APS-C (or MFT) is compact & lightweight. E.g. Ricoh GR III, Fujiflm X100V, Fujiflm X-T1. Best camera is camera always with you.

IMO Fujiflm should try return X-T1 size & weight.

If weight/price doesn't matter, consumer may already go to FF / medium format, why stay in crop system.

History of Olympus told us heavy & pricey crop system will not popular (e.g. Olympus OM-D E-M1X).

For videography, weight very important because it impact gimbal, camera slider, ....

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

@Just Another Tog
Nobody recommend existing user (who locked in crop system) move to FF.

Anybody has own decisions choosing gears via their money.

However, "new" user may choose larger sensor with similar price & weight for better low light performance.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

"New" user may choose larger sensor with similar price & weight at beginning. Heavy crop system (e.g. Olympus OM-D E-M1X) can't earn the profit at beginning.

History of Olympus imaging division already proof it.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

With full frame, you are mostly stuck with heavy and expensive cameras and lenses. With Fujifilm, you have access to both cameras/ lenses that are light and cheap. You also have access to the high quality expensive ones for serious job. It gives you a lot of choices for all pockets. That’s what I love with Fuji and for me it’s the main advantage of APSC. I can both buy a cheap 23mm f2 lens with a x-t30 or the new 33mm 1.4 with a x-t4 whatever my needs are.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

Mr Bolton

FWIW, probably not much, Fuji says the X-H2 will be under $2500, not $2500-3000.

Sep 6, 2021permalink

According Fuji rumors, there will be two Fujifilm X-H2 cameras.
May be one of them which cost more than $2500 use Sony APS-C 43 Megapxiel 8K Stacked BSI Sensor.
May be another below $2500 use existing X-T3 processor.
If X-H2 with 43MP stacked sensor cost less than $2500, may be impact $1700 X-T4 selling.
For market segmentation, both X-H2 may has dual processor (old X-T3 processor) like Nikon Z6.

Sep 6, 2021*permalink

Focus clutch present on the 14mm f2.8 and on the original 23mm 1.4 was great . Why fuji decided to drop it with newer lenses?

Sep 4, 2021permalink

Richard Butler

I think it's because you can adjust the focus response, so a snap-back ring* no longer makes sense because the focus doesn't necessarily change in accordance with the markings underneath.

*technically not a clutch, since there's no mechanical coupling/decoupling going on.

Sep 4, 2021permalink

@Richard , yes technically not a clutch, but having an hard start and stop and an almost mechanical feedback was really nice to have, and you can switch immediately from af to mf.Specially taking in account that even with linear mf setting fuji lenses are not consistent, with differents behavior and often with a jumpy response...

Sep 4, 2021permalink

Elisam

“ technically not a clutch, since there's no mechanical coupling/decoupling going on.”

It is a clutch as it mechanically enables the physical fixed distance encoder. The clutch switches the focus ring, not the actual connection to the lens elements.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Samuel Lucifer

More likely is that Fujifilm with this new design wants to cater for both photographers and videographers.

I think it is sad to see them stepping away from the clutch system. On the other hand the new design helps those doing video.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

The clutch wouldn't guarantee their behavior tho, it just gives you those faked hard stops and you should be able to see on screen when the lens has stopped focusing in either direction (if Fuji doesn't show a graphic with the focus moving from W to T)...

I've got lenses (on two different systems) with linear MF sans clutch that feel pretty much the same as my Oly ones with a clutch, except for the hard stops, most if not all have a MF/AF switch. The clutch lenses are neat but I think they add an expense that not a ton of the market always appreciated.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Tom Schum

Well written and concise article, with minimal comments. Really excellent, keep up the good work!

Sep 4, 2021permalink

Ranger 9

I own the existing 35/1.4 and I use wide-aperture “normal” lenses a LOT, so when I read rumors about this lens, I thought: faster AF plus weather resistance = might be interested. But DPRTV's Canadian bros have opined that although the focus is smoother, it isn't really any faster. That leaves WR, and for that alone I'm not sure it's worth buying. Anybody want to convince me I'm wrong?

Sep 4, 2021*permalink

Mikho

When we'll see next year the next generation sensor the difference between 33mm and 35mm will be more pronounced. The lens is intended for new cameras that will be released during the next decade. In case one plans to buy next year X-H2 or X-T5 camera—or whatever the new cameras will be—it's better to invest in the new generation lenses too. Older 35mm will still be a great option for <2022 cameras.

Considering that the main use-case of the glass is the new upcoming sensor with a bigger resolution the real question is whether future-proofing is worth that extra $200.

Sep 4, 2021permalink

I think you are right. I am sure the old 35mm 1.4 sharpness is more than adequate for future cameras, when used at apertures when sharpness is requested .

Sep 4, 2021permalink

Zinch

The DPReviewTV test was very very simple. I have the 23mm f1.4 and 56mm f1.2 (lenses also regarded as slow focusing lenses) and they focus fast enough if the subject is static. Is when you try to follow some action that they show their weaknesses (not dramatic, but you lose some pictures here and there).

I guess it would be the same with the 35mm and where these new lenses will show their strength

Sep 4, 2021*permalink

Yes, for sure af will be better in continuos mode, but to be honest, with size and weight entering in the FF territory, Sony, canon or nikon offer better continuous af in a similar package.
I am a fuji x user since the day one, I own a lot of lenses and I will keep the old models, an upgrade will cost about as much as new system, and today for sure i would prefer another system.
The main reasons why i chose fuji x was size and phisical dials, looking at the new cameras, i fear that the x-h2 will drop physical dials for a more modern approach like the newer gfx

Wait and see, but not investing other money on the system for now

Sep 4, 2021permalink

The autofocus is already quite fast on the xf35 f1.4 with newer bodys.

Sep 4, 2021permalink

Mr Bolton

If you already own the current 35mm f1.4 and don't shoot out of doors a lot, then the new lens is probably not worth it. But if you're like me and you don't own the current one, and do shoot outdoors in the rainy PNW, then the new WR model is very much worth considering.

Sep 6, 2021permalink

alli69

It also has an “A” lock button. As someone who had the aperture ring on my 16mm and 56mm lenses accidentally move from "A" to "22" this lock is important.

Sep 4, 2021permalink

Andyyy

I am not sure about the size. The original 35mm was small, compact and lightweight.
Optically was already fine, they could have improved the focusing and add bit of weather sealing.
Another chasing for ultimate sharpness and optical perfection and now we are getting into FF lens weight territory.

Sep 4, 2021permalink

panther fan

The old lens was a whole unit focus lens so in order to achieve your two goals (fast AF and weathersealig) you need a whole different optical design

Sep 4, 2021permalink

Dr_J

AFAIK, there was no good way to add "improved focusing and a bit of weather sealing" to that old design. In XF35/1.4 the entire lens moves in relation to sensor and as such there is no easy way to weather seal it. This means Fuji had to redesign the focusing mechanism and use another method (Linear Motor) to achieve focus. This made the focus smoother (and faster) and allowed for weather sealing, but made the lens larger.
There is no free lunch. The original XF35/1.4 is awesome however, and I'm keeping it.

Sep 4, 2021permalink

DarnGoodPhotos

@Andy - The new lenses are larger because they are designed for the upcoming 40+MP sensor which will appear in the X-H2, X-T5, and X-Pro4.

Sep 4, 2021*permalink

Elisam

I dunno, the Canon 32mm f/1.4 resolves very well on 32MP and is a lot smaller than this 33mm.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

Andyyy

Of course, I get that. And i like optically great and sharp lenses.
But the bigger these lenses get, it's harder to justify buying into an APS-C system.
How much bigger is a Nikon Z6 + 50mm 1.8 compared to X-T4 + 33mm 1.4? Not a lot of difference in weight or size.

Sep 5, 2021permalink

DarnGoodPhotos

Sure, but how much larger are all of your fuji cameras and lenses vs the same Nikons. If you get a 40+MP Fuji you'll want the option of hi-res lenses, but if you don't care about that, the Viltrox, Tamaron, 20MP Fuji, and the upcoming Sigma lenses will satisfy your needs.

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

" But the bigger these lenses get, it's harder to justify buying into an APS-C system. " -Andy

One lens doesn't make a system, you still have smaller f2s, some smaller zooms, etc. High end and roughly equivalent lenses being roughly similar in size shouldn't come as a shock IMO, in that sense there's always gonna be some overlap between formats and some debate over value...

You have to look at the extremes (smaller bodies, longer teles, etc.) to justify smaller formats, same for FF really (f1.4 or faster FF glass, exotic teles, ultra UWAs). In the middle they're gonna keep converging, and people are gonna keep pointlessly arguing about it while ignoring the stuff at the extremes that makes each option/system unique.

If frequent visitors stop regurgitating arguments about where systems overlap and instead focus on where different formats leverage their strengths, the level of discussion around here would be elevated a ton and it might even be a friendlier place for newcomers...

Sep 5, 2021*permalink

@impulses - yes and no. It depends on your system setup. And it easy to set up a sony-system with some nice f/1.8 lenses and all of them will be smaller (and sometimes cheaper) then equivalent Fujifilm system components. Especially the premium f/2.8 universal zooms are expensive and big. The equivalent fullframe f/4 zooms on fullframe are not bigger and don't costs more money. A sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 costs 799 euro incl. 19% VAT. It got a very solid build quality and very nice optical performance. Show me the Fujifilm 18-50mm f/2.0 zoom that can match this comparison. Especially with this price point. The Fujifilm 16-50mm f/2.8 is very big, heavy and expensive and don't match f/2.0. I used to own and use 1" , m4/3, aps-c and fullframe cameras since decades. It is nice to go hiking with a ZV-1 with a bright f/1.8 - 2.8 lens. But it will never match an f/2.8 or f/4 aps-c Fujifilm or even a sony A7-c. It is not time to paint aps-c black, but you should know the limitation of each system

Sep 7, 2021permalink

You don't have to try and sell me on FF, I'm shooting Sony FF alongside some M4/3 gear... I do think there's instances where the f1.4 APS-C lens can be smaller than the closest equivalent f1.8 FF lens tho, eg Sigma 56/1.4 vs pretty much any FF 85mm, the only FF short tele that comes close is the Samyang 75/1.8 (and the upcoming Sigma 90/2.8, which will be slower by equivalence).

APS-C bodies can also be smaller and less compromised than say, an A7C that's stuck with an always on EFCS (which will negatively impact the rendering of those fast primes). I still see plenty of use cases and value proposition to smaller formats even if I'm shooting FF, an APS-C w/a 70-350 can get you a decent bit more reach in daylight at a far smaller size than a FF 100-400.

Sep 8, 2021permalink

(continued)

An X-E with a pancake or a tele prime is an ideal pairing with some other gear... Some of Fuji's zooms are indeed large for APS-C, and I'd argue their longer tele primes are all just large period. The 90/2 may be great and all but it's larger/heavier than the average FF 85, that does make little sense. At shorter FLs I think things are much closer tho.

That's why I made it a point of mentioning the instances where a smaller format *can* be smaller (teles, f2 primes that often have no FF f2.8 equivalent, bodies, etc ). This one lens doesn't invalidate all that. It's just a nice option for people already invested in all that.

Sep 8, 2021permalink