Anyone have all three? 23mm, 35mm & 50mm F2

Hi all,

Does anyone here own all three of the F2 R WR lenses? I now own the 23mm and am thinking of picking the other two up so I have a complete lightweight walk around setup.

Do you use all three or have you found better alternatives for some? I'm very tempted by lenses like the 56mm 1.2 but ultimately I am keeping my FF gear for shallow DOF. I am more hoping for some excellent quality/sharp lightweight lenses.

I have the 23/2 and 35/2 and love them both. But rather than add the 50/2, I added the 60/2.4 for a bit more reach and close-focus capability. I changed out the native lens hood on it, which is ridiculously large, for a third-party (overpriced) square hood designed for the 35/1.4. It uses the same sized bayonet attachment. While the 60/2.4 is a bit slower at autofocusing, it’s fine for me, and I prefer the 90mm equivalent field of view to the 75mm equiv. fov. I am confident that optically the 50/2 is great. It was simply an issue of wanting a bit more reach that pushed me to the 60/2.4. With the square hood it is quite compact, especially compared to the 56/1.2. Since mt x-t20 is not WR the absence of WR on the 60/2.4 wasn’t a factor.

Matt

The Fat Fish wrote:

Hi all,

Does anyone here own all three of the F2 R WR lenses? I now own the 23mm and am thinking of picking the other two up so I have a complete lightweight walk around setup.

Do you use all three or have you found better alternatives for some?

Yes, I use all three, but I have to admit that I prefer my X100F to the 23mm F2.  I only bought the 23mm F2 because it was $250 when I bought an X-E3 and I wanted to complete the trifecta.  I prefer the 35mm F2 and then the 50mm F2.  But all are good enough for photography.

I have the 23 and 35, I'm not sure a 75 equivalent (the 50) is a good choice for me.

I'd probably go for the 56, 60 or even 80 or 90 instead (they definitely aren't Fujicron form factor though) if I wanted a short tele or portrait lens for my small Fuji kit.

I'm eagerly awaiting the 16/2.8 which is of a similar style and spec to the other Fujicrons.

I tend to shoot wider than longer, so I use my 18/2 more than the 23/2 anyway.

Have owned both 23 and 35

they ‘re both beautiful lenses in design and optics

I just need one to sport my XE3 all the time so keep the silver 35

the 23 being a bit too long physically even though it’s my preferred focal

Have not considered the 50 since I have the 50-140 for that

May get the 56 one day when I own  a body with IBIS

I have the 35 f2 and the 50 f2 but didn’t get the 23 f2 because I bought the X-100F instead. The Fujicrons are great lenses.

I have all 3 and I usually use 23 F2 and 50 F2.

I have all three. I use the 23 and the 50 more, but I like them all. But I don't think about "covering" mm, like most people here. I just put a lens on the camera and try to do something with what I have. I only put a specific lens on the camera when I know I will need a specific look. I'll buy the 16 2.8 and I hope for a 70F2. I really like my camera small.

I've tried nearly all the Fuji primes in the 14mm to 60mm focal range and I decided to keep the 16/1.4, 35/2, and 56/1.2.

I wasn't a fan of both the 23's. The 23/2 I felt was too soft at F2 from MFD to around 1.5m. The 23/1.4 was slow focusing for a wide-angle and I preferred the 24mm FOV of the 16/1.4 with it's brilliant IQ, AF speed, and WR.

The 35/2 is also a bit soft wide open at close distance, but sharpens up quite a bit at F2.8. It's tiny and I prefer the build quality and silent AF over the 35/1.4. I'll probably get the 35/1.0 when it comes out but for the time being the 35/2 is a keeper.

The 50/2 was brilliant optically but a little to close to the 35mm FOV (same could said for 23 and 35) and I prefer a bit more DOF control as a portrait lens, so I opted for the 56/1.2.

I use zooms for other focal lengths.

I didn't think your landscape images mediocre!

I'll make an alternative suggestion.  Stick with what you've got for a bit longer.  Very soon I think you'll tread my path of getting rid of the full frame stuff (D800 in my case, with a good number of good lenses) and buying more into Fuji; then you'll know more what you really will use.  I've just ended my transition by trading the remainder of my stuff for a 23mm/X-E3 kit, but I suspect my main "out and about" gear will be the X-E3 plus 16-55, with a macro and a tele-zoom for more specialist use.

I personally wouldn't pick up the 35 if I had the 23; just to close in focal lengths. I would go for the 50 instead.

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:

I personally wouldn't pick up the 35 if I had the 23; just to close in focal lengths. I would go for the 50 instead.

Another argument to support this is that the 35mm is (according to lenstip and photozone) optically the weakest with abnormally high distortion.

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:

I personally wouldn't pick up the 35 if I had the 23; just to close in focal lengths. I would go for the 50 instead.

A lot of people says this... and I always feel they are very far apart and used for different purposes.  This is a personal thing (as you noted).

jgbbxl wrote:

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:

I personally wouldn't pick up the 35 if I had the 23; just to close in focal lengths. I would go for the 50 instead.

Another argument to support this is that the 35mm is (according to lenstip and photozone) optically the weakest with abnormally high distortion.

But in actual use, it is a great lens with fast AF.

John Gellings wrote:

jgbbxl wrote:

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:

I personally wouldn't pick up the 35 if I had the 23; just to close in focal lengths. I would go for the 50 instead.

Another argument to support this is that the 35mm is (according to lenstip and photozone) optically the weakest with abnormally high distortion.

But in actual use, it is a great lens with fast AF.

Yep. I have both 35s, and in day to day shooting the f2 takes very nice photos.

DidierV wrote:

I have the 23 and the 50 f2, I skipped the 35.

I may do the same. The 35mm is the least appealing for me and chances are if the 23mm is too wide, I’ll be wanting something telephoto like to 50mm anyway.

These light primes are the reason I left Canon for Fuji. I cut the weight and bulk in half.

Ive kept my Canon 6D and my Canon 16-35mm F4 L IS USM for landscape work but there’s no way I’d buy another Canon if their attitude doesn’t change. My main goal with the Fuji is to have a lightweight system for when I don’t want to carry the full frame setup.

Yes, I have all three of them.

The 50mm is the less used of the trio. Not that it's not up to par with the other two (au contraire) but it's a focal length that suits my kind of photography the least.

The 35mm is the one I like the most. It's razor sharp and the AF is lightning fast.

In my opinion the IQ of the 23mm is the lowest of the three. At close range and at larger apertures it's a little soft.

Nevertheless when I check my keepers, I see that they are almost evenly distributed over the 23mm and the 35mm.

Widelanken