Simply the best Fujinon 35mm

RTJR wrote:

Super compact lens that fits well with the logic of a compact system (weight and size).

Pros:
Built quality
Weight and dimensions
Image quality and clarity from f / 2 (The peaks are reached at f / 4 and f / 5.6)
Well-notched aperture ring
WR

Cons (annoying points):
Sunshade included too small and not efficient

An excellent normal focal lenses to consider without hesitation

Compare to f/1.4

With a SLR camera, a large aperture offers an undeniable advantage of brightness in the viewfinder, of course, but this is not an argument with an electronic viewfinder where you can see clearly regardless of the light conditions.

Why pay more for a larger lens, which sorely lacks edge / center sharpness, with slow AF, and which, moreover, is not even WR?

This lens achieves a certain uniformity only at f / 5.6, but without ever reaching the sharpness of f / 2 ...! (All tests prove it)

Be advised !

I disagree with everything you said from the "Compare to F1.4" implied conclusion (don't get the 35/1.4 NO point, all test have shown this)

Do I read you correctly here?

What about low light, bokeh, general rendering? Not everybody is a lab-rat and follows MFT charts. There is far more to a lens than just MFT - or a brighter viewfinder.

You see to be quite new so I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you simply didn't know that this has been discussed here at nauseum, close to Nikon vs Canon//APPLE vs PC.

What people that use the 35/2 often lack - you might be different who knows - is to provide some examples, their shots and not just conclusions based on MFT charts or youtube trail-blazers alleged findings.

All the same to you with a strong bias towards the 35/2 you think?

Would you mind showing some of your shots then? You know what they say: a picture is ...

Deed