I have the 23mm f2 and love it. However.....the lens hood sucks! I can get a UV filter on the lens and replace the lens hood, but not a circular polarizer. The lens hood won't fit with my polarizer in place! Fuji makes great glass but their hoods and lens caps are crap.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
35mm F2 vs F1.4
- Thread starter Weebsy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fujifilm x-t1
CeeDave
Senior Member
The rectangular hoods for the 16/1.4, 18/2, 23/1.4 & 35/1.4 (which also fits the 60/2.4) are pretty good, although the 16 and 23 hoods are too expensive and add-ons. I can stack IR and polarizers on the 35 and 18, but not the others. I wish they had slots to allow polarizer rotatation (I think at least one telezoom hood has this; it's awkward to work with polarizers with these hoods.
Aside from the inability to stack and rotate -- that is, for light and physical protection, and its cap -- the 16's hood is exceptionally well made. In my opinion. The cap doesn't stay on the others as well, even my copy of the very similar 23/1.4 hood.
I'd love to see similar hoods for othe wide primes, ideally with more room to stack filters, rotation slots, and caps that stay on in a bag.
edit to add: Clarifying, I can get at least one filter on all the lenses under the hoods, but I sometimes stack polarizer + IR or ND, and those won't fit under the rectangular hood on the 16.
--
Chris
Selected photos at https://500px.com/ceedave
A couple of Fuji cameras and assorted X-mount and adapted primes
Last edited:
dv312
Veteran Member
This is a good review between the 2
www.fujivsfuji.com
IQ may favor the 1.4 slightly
AF favors the f2
DOF separation between 1.4 and 2 is quite negligible to my eyes
Since Fuji noise suppression is so good a stop difference is immaterial IMHO
I'd say I favor the f2 since it has many things going for it: WR, cheaper, smaller, lighter, faster AF and more silent
But the 35mm focal is not my preferred focal, the 23mm is
Something to think about
Best wishes
Fuji XF 35mm F1.4 vs. XF 35mm F2 WR — Fuji vs. Fuji
Fuji XF 35mm F/1.4 vs. XF 35mm F/2 WR A detailed comparison of Fuji’s XF 35mm f/1.4 and XF 35mm f/2 WR.
www.fujivsfuji.com
IQ may favor the 1.4 slightly
AF favors the f2
DOF separation between 1.4 and 2 is quite negligible to my eyes
Since Fuji noise suppression is so good a stop difference is immaterial IMHO
I'd say I favor the f2 since it has many things going for it: WR, cheaper, smaller, lighter, faster AF and more silent
But the 35mm focal is not my preferred focal, the 23mm is
Something to think about
Best wishes
grazuncle
Veteran Member
.I got it for an effective price of just £180. I Meant to sell it straight away after getting it and did actually put it on eBay..
whilst it was on and in the process of selling it I regretted it; hoping the sale would fail. It did.
Whilst it will not be the most used lens.. I can't give it up. When people said that there was something about it.. They were all right
Admittedly I got it cheap and would think twice before paying full price, it is a gem.
whilst it was on and in the process of selling it I regretted it; hoping the sale would fail. It did.
Whilst it will not be the most used lens.. I can't give it up. When people said that there was something about it.. They were all right
Admittedly I got it cheap and would think twice before paying full price, it is a gem.
shakenmartini
Forum Enthusiast
I recently bought both lenses to decide which to keep. I ended up keeping the 35 mm f/1.4 and returning the f/2.
The 35 mm f/2 has a bit of weird distortion and the bookeh isn't quite as nice. The f/2 aperture is just a bit slower than I prefer at 35 mm.
The f/1.4 has all the wonderful optical qualities of the 56 mm f/1.2 is a shorter focal length. Like the 56 mm, its AF is a bit on the slow side compared to the f/2 equivalent. The 34 mm f/1.4 is also a bit noisier when focusing (AF or MF - it focuses by wire) than the f/2.
The f/1.4 is about 10-20% larger than the f/2, but much smaller than the 56 mm f/1.2.
The 35 mm f/1.4 has beautiful bookeh and is razor sharp at 1.4, and sharpens up just a touch more at f/1.6. The DOF at f/1.4 is just barely usable for portraits. At f/1.6 t f/1.8 it is perfect depending on the facial features of the subject (if using it for portraits or candids).
Compared to the highly regarded Nikon 35 mm f/1.8 DX, the Fuji equivalent is far superior. Better bookeh, and the slightly faster aperture gives you better full frame equivalence.
The 35 mm f/2 has a bit of weird distortion and the bookeh isn't quite as nice. The f/2 aperture is just a bit slower than I prefer at 35 mm.
The f/1.4 has all the wonderful optical qualities of the 56 mm f/1.2 is a shorter focal length. Like the 56 mm, its AF is a bit on the slow side compared to the f/2 equivalent. The 34 mm f/1.4 is also a bit noisier when focusing (AF or MF - it focuses by wire) than the f/2.
The f/1.4 is about 10-20% larger than the f/2, but much smaller than the 56 mm f/1.2.
The 35 mm f/1.4 has beautiful bookeh and is razor sharp at 1.4, and sharpens up just a touch more at f/1.6. The DOF at f/1.4 is just barely usable for portraits. At f/1.6 t f/1.8 it is perfect depending on the facial features of the subject (if using it for portraits or candids).
Compared to the highly regarded Nikon 35 mm f/1.8 DX, the Fuji equivalent is far superior. Better bookeh, and the slightly faster aperture gives you better full frame equivalence.
Marco Cinnirella
Veteran Member
I completely concur - I recently shot some natural light portraits with the 35 1.4 and was reminded just how beautiful and special its rendering is - it really is a special lens and used prices make it a steal if you can find a good one. In contrast I'm not feeling the love for my new Fuji 90 f2 but that's another story...
Al Downie
Senior Member
Just to throw an alternative point of view into the mix...
Historically, I'm a bokeh nutcase, and a standard lens nutcase, and I owned both of these lenses simultaneously for a while. But having too many lenses (=too many decisions) meant I had to let one of them go, and I ended up getting rid of the f1.4 and keeping the f2. Here are the things I didn't like about the f1.4, compared to its smaller sibling:
- It's noisy
- It's slow
- It's not as contrasty
- It shows aberrations in the corners
- It suffers more from purple fringing
- The front of the lens extends and retracts every time the camera is switched on. This bothers me when I'm switching on to review images for example, because I often rest the front of the camera on a table etc.
I agree with the comments about the f1.4 having a kind of natural magic, and that's definitely the kind of characteristic that appeals to me, but the fast focus and silent operation of the smaller lens won the toss for me. How could I NOT keep the lens that caught this image...
Storytime for Sleepyhead
Historically, I'm a bokeh nutcase, and a standard lens nutcase, and I owned both of these lenses simultaneously for a while. But having too many lenses (=too many decisions) meant I had to let one of them go, and I ended up getting rid of the f1.4 and keeping the f2. Here are the things I didn't like about the f1.4, compared to its smaller sibling:
- It's noisy
- It's slow
- It's not as contrasty
- It shows aberrations in the corners
- It suffers more from purple fringing
- The front of the lens extends and retracts every time the camera is switched on. This bothers me when I'm switching on to review images for example, because I often rest the front of the camera on a table etc.
I agree with the comments about the f1.4 having a kind of natural magic, and that's definitely the kind of characteristic that appeals to me, but the fast focus and silent operation of the smaller lens won the toss for me. How could I NOT keep the lens that caught this image...
Storytime for Sleepyhead
Bilbo_bobbins
Forum Enthusiast
shakenmartini
Forum Enthusiast
Marco Cinnirella
Veteran Member
yardcoyote
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 18,132
- Solutions
- 14
- Reaction score
- 18,310
I agree with most of this. I can see myself owning the 35mm f/2 eventually, but only as a WR lens for a WR camera, almost certainly an X-Pro. But I think I would probably choose the 50mm f/2 first.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum