35mm f2 WR or 35mm f1,4?

Greg7579 wrote:

Hi Skalsa,

I'm not going to fuss at you for this post because you have a legitimate question -- the same one we all had when the f/2 was announced. There has been 500 posts on this board about this in the last 8 months. Just search a little. So much has been written on this. If you need the older lens because of the large aperture then get one. The F/2 is better for every other reason. Why? Because the newer Fuji lenses are always better. Always, always, always. Read this Fuji forum. Guys are waiting for the newer smaller and tighter primes. Fuji is going to be revamping their prime line-up by going f/2 with weatherproofing, faster and better focus motors, smaller and lighter lenses and better technology all around. Fuji makes the best lenses in the world. Every time they make a new lens, it is even better. All the first generation FX lenses are still great. But if I were you, get the new F/2. But if you get the older first generation faster model, you will be happy too. I agonized over this same decision and ended up not getting either one because I do not favor that standard FOV and decided if I ever need 50mm equivalent I will just slap on the old 18-55. Besides, I need every cent to convince my wife to let me buy the 100-400, which I'm about to do. This will involve some trickery and false promises to my mate of 33 years, but I will get that lens. And when that Fuji true macro hits the street, I will get it too.... I lay in wait..... By the way ... the 16 is the best lens Fuji makes. God I love that lens. Can't get it off the XT-1.

Greg

Greg, Did you get the 100-400? I've had one for a while and curious to know how people do at the long end for focus.  And have the 1.4 TC.    Also looking at the XF 800mm macro. I use X-T2 with grip and X-E2. Birds and mushrooms.