Reading mode: Light Dark

Is the Fuji 23mm f/1.4 Worth it in 2019?

Go to last post
Meetmer said:
The reason I like user reviews is because they are unpaid and not from professional reps for companies.
Click to expand...
Neither are lenstip nor is OpticalLimits. Lenstip is my preference as their reviews are more thorough and not boiled down to a number of stars.
Meetmer said:
The marketplace is efficient and it’s a free market world. A 4.8 vs a 4.3 on Amazon is a huge difference and shouldn’t be discounted .
Click to expand...
It's not a scientific test in any way. What you get from Amazon is the love factor which tells you if people who are willing to write have a positive feeling about the lens - well founded or not. I can go review it now even though I didn't buy mine from Amazon. I can review anything on amazon even if I don't own it. That's not objective data by any stretch.

So back to the lens: don't put too much stock in amazon reviews or at least not where it's not warranted; look at some objective test data and know where any lens is before you buy it. It's that simple.
 
I again agree but also disagree. Actual use by actual end users is more important than anything. If the lens performs according to specs then reviews should be great. If end users find that’s not the case then the reviews should reflect that. No review sites are going to be truly independent. People don’t work for free and equipment costs money. If Fuji or other manufacturers are lending equipment to reviewers the reviewers are going to be careful what they write. If they write a lot of negative reviews they’re gonna stop getting equipment loaned to them. Unless you actually worked for one of those sites that did the “independent” reviews you wouldnt really know what the real deal was. furthermore, all of these other professional photographers that review equipment get money if you click on the link on their website to purchase. So I take a lot of that stuff with a grain of salt and a lot of those guys do their own technical tests as well. You don’t know how accurate it is.
 
Meetmer said:
I again agree but also disagree. Actual use by actual end users is more important than anything. If the lens performs according to specs then reviews should be great.
Click to expand...
Well, they do and that's a fact.
Meetmer said:
If end users find that’s not the case then the reviews should reflect that.
Click to expand...
Meetmer said:
No review sites are going to be truly independent. People don’t work for free and equipment costs money. If Fuji or other manufacturers are lending equipment to reviewers the reviewers are going to be careful what they write.
Click to expand...
Meetmer said:
If they write a lot of negative reviews they’re gonna stop getting equipment loaned to them. Unless you actually worked for one of those sites that did the “independent” reviews you wouldnt really know what the real deal was.
Click to expand...
Meetmer said:
furthermore, all of these other professional photographers that review equipment get money if you click on the link on their website to purchase. So I take a lot of that stuff with a grain of salt and a lot of those guys do their own technical tests as well. You don’t know how accurate it is.
Click to expand...
Okay, that's pretty silly. You haven't even taken the smallest second to check into what I'm telling you. Instead, you're bent on spouting lazy speculation.
 
I will take the time to specifically look over the two review sites that you mentioned. However I have read dozens of other reviews on both of the lenses by professional photographers and at least a couple of hundred reviews from various sites such as Amazon, B&H, Adorama, so I’ve already done most of my homework.

Sounds like you’re pretty stuck in your dogma though. If that works for you great.
 
Meetmer said:
I will take the time to specifically look over the two review sites that you mentioned. However I have read dozens of other reviews on both of the lenses by professional photographers and at least a couple of hundred reviews from various sites such as Amazon, B&H, Adorama, so I’ve already done most of my homework.
Click to expand...
Okay, so you're quoting all the real heavy hitters, I can already see that you're a budding optical performance expert.
Meetmer said:
Sounds like you’re pretty stuck in your dogma though. If that works for you great.
Click to expand...
I can see you prefer lazy speculation rather than actual data that can be tested and referenced. That's not much good for anyone really.

Okay, only 171 posts for you and you're done. Officially ignored.
 
Last edited:
Kenneth Soto said:
stevo23 said:
Kenneth Soto said:
I've recently uploaded a video where I talk about the Fuji 23mm f/1.4, and I give a few reasons why this lens is worth owning. I actually owned this lens previously, but foolishly sold it when I switched to Panasonic. When I switched back to Fuji I knew it was a lens I wanted to have in my kit, so I bought it for $600 used. It was in mint condition, so I'm pretty happy about it :)

If you're interested, here's the link:

If you have any suggestions or comments please let me know, I'm looking for feedback, and anything helps.
Click to expand...
Its a great lens. Not much else to say - its as good in 2019 as it always was.

I'm a bit confused why you want feedback after you bought the lens?
Click to expand...
I was asking for feedback on the video :)
Click to expand...
So you are.

If you're going to ask if the lens is till viable in 2019, I would have thought you would compare it to something like the 90 f/2 or the new 80 f/2.8.

I have to disagree that the 1.4 is sharper/better. I've used / owned both and you really have to talk about where each is sharper/better than the other. f/2 has the highest tested sharpness, especially around f/4 and f/5.6 where most lenses are their sharpest.

But perceptive sharpness is equally important and with LoCA, I can tell you that the 1.4 has it's fair share and that's the one that isn't easily correctable. f/2 has nearly none as I can confirm but also as confirmed by lenstip. I think you'll find that this contributes quite a bit to the overall perception of sharpness of each lens. And further, the 1.4 has quite a bit of Coma, more than the f/2.

So I think you have to consider hard evidence with these lenses and avoid judgement before either making your own tests/observations and providing that data or at least reference good objective data like lenstip or even opticallimits to supplement your video.

I can see that you have the potential for creating engaging videos. I think you need to work on the content a bit more - get down into the lens a bit more and come up with your opinion based on something you can actually demonstrate to us. And if you can't or don't have time to produce your own viable data, reference trustworthy data that's out there, even if it contradicts your initial thoughts or feelings about the lens.

I think you're spot on about the focus clutch though.
 
Clearly you don't have a lot else going on if you have 20 K posts. Later
 
so you can ignore me if you want to, but i looked at Lenstip and so others reading this should benefit from my actual information. The website has tons of ads. They get the equipment as loaner from Fuji. I am not actually impressed at all with their testing, which seems very superficial anyway. There are other sites with more detailed testing.

They say the 35 mm F2 is sharper in the center, nearly record setting in their words, and has more pleasing Bokeht than the 23 2.0, which i know to be true from all the other reviews i have read. They also say the 23 1.4 has better Bokeh, also something I know. All your concerns about the other flaws are software corrected and not really an issue. If you look at the their sample images you can appreciate that the images look better coming out of the 35 F2 compared to the 23 F2.

Please don't spout things off as fact that you haven't actually researched yourself. It's annoying.
 
Meetmer said:
can you post a few pics from the 23 mm F2? Wondering if you are happy with your decision
Click to expand...
If you don't mind. . . here's a collection of 23/2.

I prefer less mass in hand when I can get away with it, but also when it was was ready to acquire a 23mm and 35mm primes, WR was high on the checklist. Don't regret it one bit. Wide open, close focus is not my specialty [shrug]. I use adapted Voigtlanders when I want something special with low light (distinctive spiking of light sources, for 'punctuation' [g]).

I might not use the most well-regarded brushes, but I like what I can paint with the ones I do use.
 
Meetmer said:
Well, i have to disagree with you on the 35 mm F2. I like the output much better than the kit lens, which i also own. I love that lens, so do most. Some mixed reviews on the 23 F2, mostly about the close focus softness but also the Bokeh not quite as good as the 1.4 version. I just need to figure out if those two things really matter that much. Would sure be nice to have a very compact, weatherproof, fast focusing lens. Problem is i always want the best and not sure if the sacrifice in image quality with the F2 is something that will bother me or if I will even notice it.
Click to expand...
I'm referring to corner sharpness, which is highly disappointing on the 35mm f/2 when compared to the 18-55mm f/.2.8-4 . The are just outright soft, which is a compromise that Fuji had to make when designing these f/2 versions. What I think you're referring to is the faster f/2 apertures that you get vs. the 18-55mm at 35mm which at f/3.6 won't blur out the background like the 35mm f/2 will. I owned the lens for just over a month and had to return it as I found the image quality to be unacceptable.

I also made a video comparing the 35mm f/2 vs. the Zeiss 32mm f/1.8, and the sharpness and clarity that the Zeiss is able to produce shows how bad the 35mm f/2 really is. I had to make a compromise, and so I returned the 35mm f/2, sold the 32mm f/1.8, and bought the 35mm f/1.4 for a second time. It's a long video, but here's the link if your interested: Fuji 35mm f/2 VS Zeiss Touit 32mm f/1.8 (2019)

In my case, and having tested the only three 35mm lenses for the Fuji X-Mount, I found the 35mm f/2 to be the worst performer due to the blurry corners, and slight petzval-like bokeh depending on the background. Second place goes to the 32mm f/1.8 as it gives even sharpness across the frame, but the bokeh can be distracting at times. Lastly, the 35mm f/1.4 has the best of both worlds as it produces better bokeh than the other two, but also gets sharper when stopped down. I value image quality first, and that's what I get with the 35mm f/1.4. I can live without WR, "slower and noisier AF", and a "bigger" lens.
 
Last edited:
stevo23 said:
Kenneth Soto said:
stevo23 said:
Kenneth Soto said:
I've recently uploaded a video where I talk about the Fuji 23mm f/1.4, and I give a few reasons why this lens is worth owning. I actually owned this lens previously, but foolishly sold it when I switched to Panasonic. When I switched back to Fuji I knew it was a lens I wanted to have in my kit, so I bought it for $600 used. It was in mint condition, so I'm pretty happy about it :)

If you're interested, here's the link:

If you have any suggestions or comments please let me know, I'm looking for feedback, and anything helps.
Click to expand...
Its a great lens. Not much else to say - its as good in 2019 as it always was.

I'm a bit confused why you want feedback after you bought the lens?
Click to expand...
I was asking for feedback on the video :)
Click to expand...
So you are.

If you're going to ask if the lens is till viable in 2019, I would have thought you would compare it to something like the 90 f/2 or the new 80 f/2.8.

I have to disagree that the 1.4 is sharper/better. I've used / owned both and you really have to talk about where each is sharper/better than the other. f/2 has the highest tested sharpness, especially around f/4 and f/5.6 where most lenses are their sharpest.

But perceptive sharpness is equally important and with LoCA, I can tell you that the 1.4 has it's fair share and that's the one that isn't easily correctable. f/2 has nearly none as I can confirm but also as confirmed by lenstip. I think you'll find that this contributes quite a bit to the overall perception of sharpness of each lens. And further, the 1.4 has quite a bit of Coma, more than the f/2.

So I think you have to consider hard evidence with these lenses and avoid judgement before either making your own tests/observations and providing that data or at least reference good objective data like lenstip or even opticallimits to supplement your video.

I can see that you have the potential for creating engaging videos. I think you need to work on the content a bit more - get down into the lens a bit more and come up with your opinion based on something you can actually demonstrate to us. And if you can't or don't have time to produce your own viable data, reference trustworthy data that's out there, even if it contradicts your initial thoughts or feelings about the lens.

I think you're spot on about the focus clutch though.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I do appreciate your feedback.

I have used both, but not owned both. That being said, I did find that the f/1.4 was sharper at f/5.6-8. Perhaps I got a bad copy, who knows.

I tried going more in depth in a previous video when I compared the 35mm f/2 vs. the Touit 32mm f/1.8, but I think that because it's a lengthy video, it didn't do well. As a matter of fact, that video has no comments yet, which tells me that people weren't as interested. So I decided to keep it as short as possible, while at the same time covering the aspects that I think make the 23mm f/1.4 great.

I will take your advice and compare the sharpness to all the lenses I own, including the 90mm f/2 which is hard to beat in my opinion.

Also, I haven't had the best luck with with the f/2 "Fujicrons", and I've found them to be lackluster. I don't know if the Philippines plant where they manufacture them has any issues with their QC process, but I'm hesitant to try them again as they have left me with a bad first impression
 
Kenneth Soto said:
stevo23 said:
Kenneth Soto said:
stevo23 said:
Kenneth Soto said:
I've recently uploaded a video where I talk about the Fuji 23mm f/1.4, and I give a few reasons why this lens is worth owning. I actually owned this lens previously, but foolishly sold it when I switched to Panasonic. When I switched back to Fuji I knew it was a lens I wanted to have in my kit, so I bought it for $600 used. It was in mint condition, so I'm pretty happy about it :)

If you're interested, here's the link:

If you have any suggestions or comments please let me know, I'm looking for feedback, and anything helps.
Click to expand...
Its a great lens. Not much else to say - its as good in 2019 as it always was.

I'm a bit confused why you want feedback after you bought the lens?
Click to expand...
I was asking for feedback on the video :)
Click to expand...
So you are.

If you're going to ask if the lens is till viable in 2019, I would have thought you would compare it to something like the 90 f/2 or the new 80 f/2.8.

I have to disagree that the 1.4 is sharper/better. I've used / owned both and you really have to talk about where each is sharper/better than the other. f/2 has the highest tested sharpness, especially around f/4 and f/5.6 where most lenses are their sharpest.

But perceptive sharpness is equally important and with LoCA, I can tell you that the 1.4 has it's fair share and that's the one that isn't easily correctable. f/2 has nearly none as I can confirm but also as confirmed by lenstip. I think you'll find that this contributes quite a bit to the overall perception of sharpness of each lens. And further, the 1.4 has quite a bit of Coma, more than the f/2.

So I think you have to consider hard evidence with these lenses and avoid judgement before either making your own tests/observations and providing that data or at least reference good objective data like lenstip or even opticallimits to supplement your video.

I can see that you have the potential for creating engaging videos. I think you need to work on the content a bit more - get down into the lens a bit more and come up with your opinion based on something you can actually demonstrate to us. And if you can't or don't have time to produce your own viable data, reference trustworthy data that's out there, even if it contradicts your initial thoughts or feelings about the lens.

I think you're spot on about the focus clutch though.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I do appreciate your feedback.

I have used both, but not owned both. That being said, I did find that the f/1.4 was sharper at f/5.6-8. Perhaps I got a bad copy, who knows.
Click to expand...
That wouldn't be the result of sample variation. I really don't think you can tell the difference at 5.6 or 8 other than an actual test. The f/2 is sharper at that point in the center, the f/1.4 wins on the edges. But neither is weak in any way at 5.6 or 8, it's just relative.
Kenneth Soto said:
I tried going more in depth in a previous video when I compared the 35mm f/2 vs. the Touit 32mm f/1.8, but I think that because it's a lengthy video, it didn't do well. As a matter of fact, that video has no comments yet, which tells me that people weren't as interested. So I decided to keep it as short as possible, while at the same time covering the aspects that I think make the 23mm f/1.4 great.

I will take your advice and compare the sharpness to all the lenses I own, including the 90mm f/2 which is hard to beat in my opinion.

Also, I haven't had the best luck with with the f/2 "Fujicrons", and I've found them to be lackluster. I don't know if the Philippines plant where they manufacture them has any issues with their QC process, but I'm hesitant to try them again as they have left me with a bad first impression
Click to expand...
QC has nothing to do with it really, it's just the overall design and lens formula in these cases. The 23mm f/2 is a better lens than the 35mm f/2 hands down. For sharpness and optical performance, I've been impressed with the 23mm f/2. I think most people put it down because of tribal loyalty and because it costs less than the f/1.4. But test results don't lie.

The 50mm f/2 is a sharp lens from an optical standpoint, they don't make many lenses that sharp. But it suffers from LoCA and a good bit of distortion. But beyond that, it's fairly impressive. Low coma - very low. But alas, it gets a lot of negative press because if it's bokeh?

As for the 35mm f/2, it is a weak lens. Fuji's weakest. It has aberrations that are either poorly corrected (massive distortion) or can't be corrected in post (LoCA, Coma). This being said, it has a sweet spot or two as they say and one can coax great images from it. For $200 on sale, I didn't expect much. It's a drawer dweller most of the time for me, but it gets out from time to time.
 
Ken, I have no idea what that OP is talking about regarding the 35 F2. He must have a poor copy. Everyone loves that lens. The lens has some issues but they are software corrected. I shoot jpeg not raw , and that lens gives me really great results. I see none of the issues he is talking about. Very sharp across most of the frame, corners minimally soft, pretty descent Bokeh, nice colors and contrast. It’s my go to lens above all of them. He claims the 23 mm F 2 lens is the best? Hello, what about the 23 1.4?? Side by side photos from the 1.4, better. It’s also twice the price and I would expect that. The 23 F2 is a good lens, but the 1.4 is better. Good luck. I’m gonna check out your video later today ....

doug
 
Meetmer said:
Ken, I have no idea what that OP is talking about regarding the 35 F2. He must have a poor copy. Everyone loves that lens. The lens has some issues but they are software corrected. I shoot jpeg not raw , and that lens gives me really great results. I see none of the issues he is talking about. Very sharp across most of the frame, corners minimally soft, pretty descent Bokeh, nice colors and contrast. It’s my go to lens above all of them. He claims the 23 mm F 2 lens is the best? Hello, what about the 23 1.4?? Side by side photos from the 1.4, better. It’s also twice the price and I would expect that. The 23 F2 is a good lens, but the 1.4 is better. Good luck. I’m gonna check out your video later today ....

doug
Click to expand...
What software do you use to correct LoCA and coma?
 
Kenneth Soto said:
I've recently uploaded a video where I talk about the Fuji 23mm f/1.4, and I give a few reasons why this lens is worth owning. I actually owned this lens previously, but foolishly sold it when I switched to Panasonic. When I switched back to Fuji I knew it was a lens I wanted to have in my kit, so I bought it for $600 used. It was in mint condition, so I'm pretty happy about it :)

If you're interested, here's the link:

If you have any suggestions or comments please let me know, I'm looking for feedback, and anything helps.
Click to expand...
I like the lens... Not sure about the f2 version. But I have been in many situations where I need the 1.4, especially doing indoor portraits. I put the 23 1.4 and 35 1.4 head to head and reviewed the photos at one point, preferred the colors and look of the 23 1.4 better, it seemed lower contrast also and just a smooth/crisp look to it, even though people say the 35 1.4 is "magic." I didn't ever see that, it does have a different "drawing" and maybe more micro contrast going on, but again, I like the look of the 23 1.4, to me it had better skin tones and colors I preferred, and is a more useful focal length, for me. The only thing I don't like is the size, and sometimes it misses focus in high contrast situations...
 
Last edited:
jjz2 said:
Kenneth Soto said:
I've recently uploaded a video where I talk about the Fuji 23mm f/1.4, and I give a few reasons why this lens is worth owning. I actually owned this lens previously, but foolishly sold it when I switched to Panasonic. When I switched back to Fuji I knew it was a lens I wanted to have in my kit, so I bought it for $600 used. It was in mint condition, so I'm pretty happy about it :)

If you're interested, here's the link:

If you have any suggestions or comments please let me know, I'm looking for feedback, and anything helps.
Click to expand...
I like the lens... Not sure about the f2 version. But I have been in many situations where I need the 1.4, especially doing indoor portraits. I put the 23 1.4 and 35 1.4 head to head and reviewed the photos at one point, preferred the colors and look of the 23 1.4 better, it seemed lower contrast also and just a smooth/crisp look to it
Click to expand...
I can see how it's lower contrast. I've used both and the f/2 stood out to me as more but not excessively contrasty. But I didn't do any formal tests for it.
jjz2 said:
I didn't ever see that, it does have a different "drawing" and maybe more micro contrast going on, but again, I like the look of the 23 1.4, to me it had better skin tones and colors I preferred, and is a more useful focal length, for me. The only thing I don't like is the size, and sometimes it misses focus in high contrast situations...
Click to expand...
In high contrast is misses focus? That's the opposite of what I would expect. Never noticed myself, but I'll have to see if I can repeat that with mine.
 
I don’t shoot Astrophotography so coma is not really an issue for me. Chromic Abberrations are not not really an issue for me. Flaws only take away from photos if people are looking for them and if the lions share of the photo doesn’t stand on its own. Corner softeners is rarely an issue, no one looks at the corners unless doing landscape photography and the 35 F2 is not a landscape photog lens, and the corner softness is only wide open anyway. I shoot jpeg and the Fuji camera software corrects mostly everything on that lens. They made that lens light because they knew the software would correct nearly all of the issues and the people appreciating that lens are not going to be worrying about small small issues that 95% of people will not care about. Look at some random shots I took, ZERO work on these pictures, in other words JPEGs SOOC. Now tell me this is Fuji’s worst lens? Worst among what, a pile of excellent lenses ? Thus lens is awesome and it’s $400.

299f0a4efa9b4c02a5b35c72795b636d.jpg

1bd3c59fab7b4675bb72883836bc77a6.jpg

d70186fc70a048c7b3b2e6a4cf7051e7.jpg

56bb263fda884173a83998344ba457e5.jpg
 
Last edited:
stevo23 said:
jjz2 said:
Kenneth Soto said:
I've recently uploaded a video where I talk about the Fuji 23mm f/1.4, and I give a few reasons why this lens is worth owning. I actually owned this lens previously, but foolishly sold it when I switched to Panasonic. When I switched back to Fuji I knew it was a lens I wanted to have in my kit, so I bought it for $600 used. It was in mint condition, so I'm pretty happy about it :)

If you're interested, here's the link:

If you have any suggestions or comments please let me know, I'm looking for feedback, and anything helps.
Click to expand...
I like the lens... Not sure about the f2 version. But I have been in many situations where I need the 1.4, especially doing indoor portraits. I put the 23 1.4 and 35 1.4 head to head and reviewed the photos at one point, preferred the colors and look of the 23 1.4 better, it seemed lower contrast also and just a smooth/crisp look to it
Click to expand...
I can see how it's lower contrast. I've used both and the f/2 stood out to me as more but not excessively contrasty. But I didn't do any formal tests for it.
stevo23 said:
I didn't ever see that, it does have a different "drawing" and maybe more micro contrast going on, but again, I like the look of the 23 1.4, to me it had better skin tones and colors I preferred, and is a more useful focal length, for me. The only thing I don't like is the size, and sometimes it misses focus in high contrast situations...
Click to expand...
In high contrast is misses focus? That's the opposite of what I would expect. Never noticed myself, but I'll have to see if I can repeat that with mine.
Click to expand...
I've had it miss a few times when I thought it was spot on somebodies face, the back scene was really busy or bright though and guess it locked on to something behind them.
 
jjz2 said:
stevo23 said:
jjz2 said:
Kenneth Soto said:
I've recently uploaded a video where I talk about the Fuji 23mm f/1.4, and I give a few reasons why this lens is worth owning. I actually owned this lens previously, but foolishly sold it when I switched to Panasonic. When I switched back to Fuji I knew it was a lens I wanted to have in my kit, so I bought it for $600 used. It was in mint condition, so I'm pretty happy about it :)

If you're interested, here's the link:

If you have any suggestions or comments please let me know, I'm looking for feedback, and anything helps.
Click to expand...
I like the lens... Not sure about the f2 version. But I have been in many situations where I need the 1.4, especially doing indoor portraits. I put the 23 1.4 and 35 1.4 head to head and reviewed the photos at one point, preferred the colors and look of the 23 1.4 better, it seemed lower contrast also and just a smooth/crisp look to it
Click to expand...
I can see how it's lower contrast. I've used both and the f/2 stood out to me as more but not excessively contrasty. But I didn't do any formal tests for it.
jjz2 said:
I didn't ever see that, it does have a different "drawing" and maybe more micro contrast going on, but again, I like the look of the 23 1.4, to me it had better skin tones and colors I preferred, and is a more useful focal length, for me. The only thing I don't like is the size, and sometimes it misses focus in high contrast situations...
Click to expand...
In high contrast is misses focus? That's the opposite of what I would expect. Never noticed myself, but I'll have to see if I can repeat that with mine.
Click to expand...
I've had it miss a few times when I thought it was spot on somebodies face, the back scene was really busy or bright though and guess it locked on to something behind them.
Click to expand...
I always that the tendency to lock onto the wrong thing wasn't lens specific? Do you think it's worse with the 23/1.4 than other lenses?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top