Fujifilm 35mm F/1.4 vs F/2

kiwidad wrote:

deednets wrote:

akin_t wrote:

f/2 has WR, is slightly more compact and faster/quieter autofocus; that's where the differences end.

Image quality is a wash, all the talk about "magic" can be attributed to f/1.4; and if money was no object, I would get the f/1.4

Let's be real here, all Fuji lenses have passable autofocus, most of us on this forum are not shooting in the rain, and the size difference is also a wash for most "should I take it" considerations.

I'm not saying the f/2 is bad, but the f/1.4 has f/1.4, there's nothing that can replace that.

I see you don't own the lens?

I originally didn't have any desire or application in my mind with regards to this lens but then I borrowed the lens for a little while (30 or so minutes at a model shoot) and decided I wanted one of these ...

I like the gentle falloff of this lens. Had the 35/2 as well for more than a year, but bought the 1.4 again because of the rendering ...

Deed

I see only one pic at f1.4 and the subject distance would nullify and DOF difference... perhaps a comparison side by side of the two lenses on a body on a tripod and lenses swapped at f2 and other apertures. Personally with modern ISOs the difference between f1.4 and f2 is

I don’t take photos for charts sake. I also rarely ever have 2 lenses of exactly the same focal length but different speed. But had the 35/2 for a year. Left me somewhat puzzled as to what she would bring to the table.

The 35/1.4 is ... different. Love it.

I never liked the 50mm, neither wide nor close. But get images I find far more pleasing than with most other 50mm I have used, including the 35/2.

Deed