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

Greg7579 wrote:

Pierre from Sweden wrote:

Hi,

I wish to add two fast primes to my 6D tree zooms kit. My priority is getting the best possible shots of my family activities, kid sports, people photography, at home, on shorter trips and longer vacations.

I was planning to buy a Canon 35f/1.4L II and a 135f/2L early spring next year to complement my three zooms but one Fujifilm option costing more or less the same money, is to buy a Fujifilm X-Pro2 or X-T2 and 23f/1.4 + 90f/2.

Option 1: Canon 6D, 16-35f4L IS, 24-70f/2.8L, 70-200f/4L IS adding a Canon 35f/1.4L II and 135f/2L.

Option 2: Canon 6D, 16-35f4L IS, 24-70f/2.8L, 70-200f/4L IS adding a Fujifilm X-Pro2 or X-T2 and 23f/1.4 + 90f/2.

Other than the obvious size, weight and dof FF/APS-C differences, how do these two Fujifilm and Canon fast primes compare optically when used wide open? Contrast, resolution, bokeh, CA?

I am very attracted by the smaller size, lighter weight and especially the traditional direct controls on X-Pro2 and X-T2 and the aperture ring on the Fujifilm lenses.

I mostly shoot manually, most often with my lenses wide open. The rendering, resolution, IQ, coma and CA of the lenses when used wide open are the most important factors for me. Shooting two systems is not a problem, I have done this many times.

Option 1, or option 2 and why?

/Pierre

You have the classic decision that most of us have already made. That is switching from Canon or Nikon Full Frame DSLR to Fuji. That decision should not be based on comparing a couple of lenses. It is a huge system change in size, weight, form and feel across the board.

The Fuji lenses are better than L across the whole lineup. The 90 especially. I have all the lenses you mention -- both Canon and Fuji. I have not conducted a scientific comparison but I like the Fuji glass much better for many reasons. Fuji glass is King. But Canon L is very good too. It is a system decision, not a lens decision.

Again, your decision should not be made on quality comparison between just these lenses, but the wide open quality of the Fuji lenses are as good or probably better than the Ls. This is a huge system decision, lenses included. Fuji changes your photography experience entirely. In my opinion, and others on this forum, change to Fuji and you will not be sorry.

You may not think shooting two systems is a problem now, but just wait until you start buying every Fuji lens after you are hooked. You might not think that way for very long. Like with me, your Canon will sit on the shelf. My 5D III and ten big L lenses sit there gathering dust in the closet while I carry my Fuji XT-2 everywhere in my sexy little Domke F803 bag.

Also, I forgot to mention, you will not miss the Canon (or Nikon) Full Frame sensor when you switch to the Fuji XT-2 and its wonderful APS-C, which hits the sweet spot and allows the Fuji to be what it is in terms of size, weight and overall ergo. That is the most important thing about Fuji. That is what you will love the most when you switch.

Get the Fuji XT-2 and 18-55, 16, 90, 23, 35, 56, 10-24, and the 50-140.....

https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

I disagree
I have both system (10 years in Canon, and Fuji since the X100)
Canon is great, but its bigger heavier, and the ergonomic is different.
Fuji is sweat (especially the XT2) , light compact, and I love the ergonomic. IMHO, it only lack a sensitive screen.
Both system have advantages and cons, but the important point is you can take great pictures with both systems.
FF has still an advantage in term of small DOF (but in landscape it's rather the contrary) and real low light performance (because Fuji is optimistic with ISO)
Concerning lenses, Fuji line is great, but not as large than Canon . There is no equivalent in the Canon line , for the 14 mm F2,8, but there isn't big primes like the 300 from 800 mm white Canon lenses.
Some lenses like the 100-400 are still better with Canon. Same apply for the 70-200 2,8 LIS V2 : the 50-150 is great in the center, but not as good in the corners. The Canon 50 #,4 is obsolete by today standarts, but the Sigma 50 1,4 art, is way sharper than the sigma 35 1,4 ...
Perhaps the fujinon 90 mm is better than the Canon 135 L, but this last one, is an old design (but still working fine) and a new one is rumored to be on the way

I bought Fuji, because it"s great for vacations (size and weight) with great IQ, but sometimes my Canon gear can do better.
BTW, my first real numeric camera was a canon eos 10 D. Current gear is so much better now.
--
It's all about photography