35mm battle Nikon Z 35 vs fuji?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
OP vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 2,487
Re: Tributes to Sonnar

tadhoge wrote:

Thank you for comparison.
But I feel a bit strangeness about straight evaluation,
because the Z35/1.8 is one of the most up-to-date lense,
whereas XF23/1.4 is designed as classical type.

Fuji didn't recreate 23mm, but they chose to modify XF35/1.4
by adding wide conversion elements.
This is explaned in Fuji's official ad site.

And, XF35/1.4 is basically 35mm version of Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5,
which is originally invented 90 years ago.
Although Planar got more popularity at that focal range,
some people have been preferring Sonnar. Even today it is still available.

As well, XF35/1.4 and XF23/1.4 are tributes to classical Sonnar.
I am not able to explan visual effect precisely, but apparently
they are for those who love the air of Sonnar.
(C Sonnar 50/1.5 example shots are shown in site below.
https://papacame.com/cosina-carl-zeiss-c-sonnar-50-zm )

I appreciate todays in-detail comparison, but I think classical
type lense should be evaluated by some whole picture method.
In that point of view, XF23/1.4 is not as bad as some might think.

One of the main reasons I left fuji is the lenses choices for prime wide lenses.

The 16 f1.4 was nice but a bit too wide for me, the 18 f2 is  a very sexy pancake lens but it's a purple fringe mess, the 23 f2 is sharp only from f4, you can forget bokeh with it as even bokeh balls are full of onion rings...

-- hide signature --

For lenses reviews and tutorials about Fuji Raf editing https://fujiandstuff.wordpress.com/
My shutterstock https://www.shutterstock.com/g/jeffmerheb
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/147690104@N02/

 vegetaleb's gear list:vegetaleb's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow