Fujifilm 23f/1.4 and 90f/2 vs Canon 35f/1,4L II and 135f/2L, has anyone shot with both alternatives?

Pierre from Sweden wrote:

Joachim Gerstl wrote:

Hi,

I shot the 35L and 135L and loved them both but there is one thing to consider. Fuji AF might be slower but it is much more reliable. You can shoot lenses wide open without hit and miss.

You loose a little "DOF play" but it should still be fine. The 35L I shot mostly at F2 anyway to increase sharpness, gain some DOF and reduce the risk of missing focus. The 135L on the other hand was really amazing at f2 for distance shots. For tight head shots I stopped it down to f2.8 or even better to f4 to have both eyes and the nose in focus.

Thanks Joachim,

I have owned the old 35L, bokeh was very good but it was only really sharp in the center used wide open. Sadly the old 35L had to much CA and also very strong Coma smeared stars and city lights really badly so I sold it. Have you used the 35L II?

I regret selling the 135L f/2, I was really planning to upgrade my 70-200f/4L IS to the faster 2.8L IS II version but I still have my trusty smaller, half weight and very sharp 70-200f/4L IS. I bring it everywhere and it is my second most used lens after my 24-70f/2.8L II.

/Pierre

You are welcome. I never shot the 35L II. I had both the 70-200/4 and the 70-200/2.8 II which is a fantastic lens but big and heavy. It is great bot still no substitute for the 135L.

But now I changed completely to Fuji X since my focus is on traveling and I don't want to burden myself down with heavy gear. The Fuji X is a elegant and light solution and real world image quality is the same.

I would definitely look into the Fuji for face detection/eye focus alone and the trusty contrast AF. Makes things to much easier compared to shooting fast primes on a DSLR.