23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

Started Sep 12, 2018 | Discussions
Fezhat
Fezhat Regular Member • Posts: 431
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

"xf 23/1.4 vs xf 23/2.0 " [enter]

That's a good place to start.

Or type question into Fuji forum on dpreview. [enter]. Seems logical.

And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered. As well as giving a nudge as to how to use search terms. Some will do basic research, and then will have remaining questions, pointed one, that can be more readily answered. Some won't.

Nothing prevents you from providing your wisdom of experience with both lenses, either. If you have none, you can either use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond.

Thank you.

I have no experience of either lenses which is why I was interested in this post. This is a forum you do know that don't you? Is a place where people ask for opinions on gear. Why give a snotty response? Just ignore it if you don't like it.

Here is my advice to you don't buy either as there is a chance  that you will not like either lens and then you probably  blame the posters on this thread.

ms18
ms18 Senior Member • Posts: 2,753
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

terms of IQ sharpness ,

at F/2, F/1.4 lens shows slightly less vignette and it's slightly sharper. It's very much ignorable and don't choose one over other based on this because it's very much marginal and you won't even notice it. Also remember f/1.4 has the ability to shoot f/1.4 so If the DOF is enough you can always shoot wide open and reduce ISO / increase shutter speed.

focus speed?

F/2 is noticeably faster in focusing than f/1.4

If you want fast focusing lightweight weather resistance lens go with f/2.

If shooting faster than f/2 is important then choose f/1.4. If you don't want f/1.4 never choose f/1.4 go with f/2

I wanted subject separation and i bought f/1.4 version

-- hide signature --
 ms18's gear list:ms18's gear list
Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R +1 more
vegetaleb
vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 1,304
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

Yahooo a new battle

-- hide signature --

For lenses reviews and tutorials about Fuji Raf editing https://fujiandstuff.wordpress.com/
My shutterstock https://www.shutterstock.com/g/jeffmerheb

 vegetaleb's gear list:vegetaleb's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR
technotic Contributing Member • Posts: 510
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

sunhorse wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

"xf 23/1.4 vs xf 23/2.0 " [enter]

That's a good place to start.

Or type question into Fuji forum on dpreview. [enter]. Seems logical.

And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered. As well as giving a nudge as to how to use search terms. Some will do basic research, and then will have remaining questions, pointed one, that can be more readily answered. Some won't.

Nothing prevents you from providing your wisdom of experience with both lenses, either. If you have none, you can either use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond.

Thank you.

I have no experience of either lenses which is why I was interested in this post. This is a forum you do know that don't you? Is a place where people ask for opinions on gear. Why give a snotty response? Just ignore it if you don't like it.

Look at your own response to the OP. A tad condescending don't you think? Accusing Bob of being "snotty" is not helpful, but forgivable if you don't know his posting history.

Not sure what you're talking about as i never responded directly the OP. I was just responding to Tullis who seems to think he can shut down perfectly appropriate posts for some reason. This is a discussion forum and not a FAQ.

technotic Contributing Member • Posts: 510
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

Fezhat wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

"xf 23/1.4 vs xf 23/2.0 " [enter]

That's a good place to start.

Or type question into Fuji forum on dpreview. [enter]. Seems logical.

And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered. As well as giving a nudge as to how to use search terms. Some will do basic research, and then will have remaining questions, pointed one, that can be more readily answered. Some won't.

Nothing prevents you from providing your wisdom of experience with both lenses, either. If you have none, you can either use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond.

Thank you.

I have no experience of either lenses which is why I was interested in this post. This is a forum you do know that don't you? Is a place where people ask for opinions on gear. Why give a snotty response? Just ignore it if you don't like it.

Here is my advice to you don't buy either as there is a chance that you will not like either lens and then you probably blame the posters on this thread.

Not sure how you come to that conclusion.

Bob Tullis
Bob Tullis Forum Pro • Posts: 37,659
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f
2

technotic wrote:

sunhorse wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

"xf 23/1.4 vs xf 23/2.0 " [enter]

That's a good place to start.

Or type question into Fuji forum on dpreview. [enter]. Seems logical.

And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered. As well as giving a nudge as to how to use search terms. Some will do basic research, and then will have remaining questions, pointed one, that can be more readily answered. Some won't.

Nothing prevents you from providing your wisdom of experience with both lenses, either. If you have none, you can either use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond.

Thank you.

I have no experience of either lenses which is why I was interested in this post. This is a forum you do know that don't you? Is a place where people ask for opinions on gear. Why give a snotty response? Just ignore it if you don't like it.

Look at your own response to the OP. A tad condescending don't you think? Accusing Bob of being "snotty" is not helpful, but forgivable if you don't know his posting history.

Not sure what you're talking about as i never responded directly the OP. I was just responding to Tullis who seems to think he can shut down perfectly appropriate posts for some reason. This is a discussion forum and not a FAQ.

You can apologize at any time, with an explanation as to how you interpreted what I posted as trying to shut down the topic.   But first, apologize to SW77 for derailing the topic.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
http://www.bobtullis.com
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Fujifilm X-H1 Sony a7R II Fujifilm X100F Sony RX1R II Fujifilm X-T2
technotic Contributing Member • Posts: 510
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

sunhorse wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

"xf 23/1.4 vs xf 23/2.0 " [enter]

That's a good place to start.

Or type question into Fuji forum on dpreview. [enter]. Seems logical.

And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered. As well as giving a nudge as to how to use search terms. Some will do basic research, and then will have remaining questions, pointed one, that can be more readily answered. Some won't.

Nothing prevents you from providing your wisdom of experience with both lenses, either. If you have none, you can either use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond.

Thank you.

I have no experience of either lenses which is why I was interested in this post. This is a forum you do know that don't you? Is a place where people ask for opinions on gear. Why give a snotty response? Just ignore it if you don't like it.

Look at your own response to the OP. A tad condescending don't you think? Accusing Bob of being "snotty" is not helpful, but forgivable if you don't know his posting history.

Not sure what you're talking about as i never responded directly the OP. I was just responding to Tullis who seems to think he can shut down perfectly appropriate posts for some reason. This is a discussion forum and not a FAQ.

You can apologize at any time, with an explanation as to how you interpreted what I posted as trying to shut down the topic. But first, apologize to SW77 for derailing the topic.

Just how are we intended to interpret:

"xf 23/1.4 vs xf 23/2.0 " [enter]

That's a good place to start.

Robinje Junior Member • Posts: 26
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

Geez that was helpful...  NOT!

 Robinje's gear list:Robinje's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR Fujifilm 50mm F2 R WR Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R
Bob Tullis
Bob Tullis Forum Pro • Posts: 37,659
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f
2

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

sunhorse wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

"xf 23/1.4 vs xf 23/2.0 " [enter]

That's a good place to start.

Or type question into Fuji forum on dpreview. [enter]. Seems logical.

And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered. As well as giving a nudge as to how to use search terms. Some will do basic research, and then will have remaining questions, pointed one, that can be more readily answered. Some won't.

Nothing prevents you from providing your wisdom of experience with both lenses, either. If you have none, you can either use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond.

Thank you.

I have no experience of either lenses which is why I was interested in this post. This is a forum you do know that don't you? Is a place where people ask for opinions on gear. Why give a snotty response? Just ignore it if you don't like it.

Look at your own response to the OP. A tad condescending don't you think? Accusing Bob of being "snotty" is not helpful, but forgivable if you don't know his posting history.

Not sure what you're talking about as i never responded directly the OP. I was just responding to Tullis who seems to think he can shut down perfectly appropriate posts for some reason. This is a discussion forum and not a FAQ.

You can apologize at any time, with an explanation as to how you interpreted what I posted as trying to shut down the topic. But first, apologize to SW77 for derailing the topic.

Just how are we intended to interpret:

"xf 23/1.4 vs xf 23/2.0 " [enter]

That's a good place to start.

It's a good place to start.   No agenda or hidden message.  If I would have included - "until others with direct experience pass by"  that would be clearer as to my intent.   Sue me.  That you chose to read that in the most negative light and jump on me is all on you.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
http://www.bobtullis.com
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Fujifilm X-H1 Sony a7R II Fujifilm X100F Sony RX1R II Fujifilm X-T2
AndyH44 Senior Member • Posts: 1,308
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

Have both and prefer to use the f2 as it's much more compact and captures a bit wider.  Looking at images it is very difficult to tell them apart.

I'm keeping the f2 and selling the f1.4

 AndyH44's gear list:AndyH44's gear list
Olympus TG-5 Olympus E-M1 Fujifilm X-M1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Fujifilm X-T3
technotic Contributing Member • Posts: 510
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

sunhorse wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

"xf 23/1.4 vs xf 23/2.0 " [enter]

That's a good place to start.

Or type question into Fuji forum on dpreview. [enter]. Seems logical.

And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered. As well as giving a nudge as to how to use search terms. Some will do basic research, and then will have remaining questions, pointed one, that can be more readily answered. Some won't.

Nothing prevents you from providing your wisdom of experience with both lenses, either. If you have none, you can either use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond.

Thank you.

I have no experience of either lenses which is why I was interested in this post. This is a forum you do know that don't you? Is a place where people ask for opinions on gear. Why give a snotty response? Just ignore it if you don't like it.

Look at your own response to the OP. A tad condescending don't you think? Accusing Bob of being "snotty" is not helpful, but forgivable if you don't know his posting history.

Not sure what you're talking about as i never responded directly the OP. I was just responding to Tullis who seems to think he can shut down perfectly appropriate posts for some reason. This is a discussion forum and not a FAQ.

You can apologize at any time, with an explanation as to how you interpreted what I posted as trying to shut down the topic. But first, apologize to SW77 for derailing the topic.

Just how are we intended to interpret:

"xf 23/1.4 vs xf 23/2.0 " [enter]

That's a good place to start.

It's a good place to start. No agenda or hidden message. If I would have included - "until others with direct experience pass by" that would be clearer as to my intent. Sue me. That you chose to read that in the most negative light and jump on me is all on you.

It came across as passive aggressive to me and I responded with a little sarcasm. Then you responded with

"And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered."

Further implying you thought this a worthless post and one nobody should stoop to respond to. You then went further with

"use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond"

Wow I really have to know my place and speak when I'm spoken to don't I?

Bob Tullis
Bob Tullis Forum Pro • Posts: 37,659
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f
1

technotic wrote:

It came across as passive aggressive to me and I responded with a little sarcasm. Then you responded with

"And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered."

Further implying you thought this a worthless post and one nobody should stoop to respond to. You then went further with

"use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond"

Wow I really have to know my place and speak when I'm spoken to don't I?

That was a response to a snot-nosed buttinsky. I'm done here. If you have any further questions, I suggest you ask your parents.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
http://www.bobtullis.com
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Fujifilm X-H1 Sony a7R II Fujifilm X100F Sony RX1R II Fujifilm X-T2
Advent1sam
Advent1sam Veteran Member • Posts: 7,728
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

Sw77 wrote:

Hey,

i was was just wondering if anyone had info on the difference between these two in terms of IQ, sharpness and focus speed?

Check this out, about as thorough as it gets, me, if you can afford it and aren’t going to be shooting in the rain or adverse conditions then the 23 1.4is the better lens.

https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/x-mount-lenses/fuji-23mm-f1-4-vs-23mm-f2/

 Advent1sam's gear list:Advent1sam's gear list
Sony a6500 Sony E 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sigma 30mm F1.4 for Sony E Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS Sigma 16mm F1.4 DC DN (Sony) +3 more
stevo23 Forum Pro • Posts: 22,408
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

Sw77 wrote:

Hey,

i was was just wondering if anyone had info on the difference between these two in terms of IQ, sharpness and focus speed?

Personally, I don't see much advantage of the 1.4 over the 2.0. I bought the 2.0 for a family member and have used it and I own the 1.4 as well. Without question, the 2.0 produces great sharp images and is more contrasty and I like it's color rendering. Not that the 1.4 is a bad lens - both test out highly.

And there is very little advantage of 1.4 aperture in this focal length and frankly, it's a bit soft at 1.4-2.8 anyhow. IE, unlike the 16mm 1.4 that allows fairly close focus and a pronounced bokeh effect, the 23mm 1.4 isn't giving all that pronounced of a bokeh.

If I had it to do all over again, instead of owning 35 2.0 / 23 1.4, I would do it the other way around - 23 2.0 / 35 1.4. Much more pronounced blur with the 35 1.4.

 stevo23's gear list:stevo23's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR +3 more
technotic Contributing Member • Posts: 510
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

It came across as passive aggressive to me and I responded with a little sarcasm. Then you responded with

"And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered."

Further implying you thought this a worthless post and one nobody should stoop to respond to. You then went further with

"use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond"

Wow I really have to know my place and speak when I'm spoken to don't I?

That was a response to a snot-nosed buttinsky. I'm done here. If you have any further questions, I suggest you ask your parents.

Your childish response is a fitting end to this exchange.

ClaudiusTheGod Regular Member • Posts: 369
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f

markusw wrote:

DangerouslyCheesey wrote:

El Jeffe wrote:

The f/2 focus is very fast and quiet. This is the main reason for my purchase even though it makes the X100s redundant.

Smaller lens, less weight, weather resistant, and lower price tag. What's not to love?

I guess the f/1.4 can give you more blur, but a lens of this focal length is often used for the style of photography that requires greater depth of field.

I agree, I think a 35mm equivalent view is not an ideal big bokeh length anyway, so might as well go with the faster focusing, smaller, lighter and water resistant f2. There is also a not insignificant price difference which you would probably be better off putting toward a fast lens like the 56mm 1.2 or 90mm f2.

Disagree, somehow... A 23 is a perfect all-around-lens, and you may need some ability for subject isolation. Here, fast aperture helps a lot! Or you want to include some blurred foreground.

Had a 35mm f2.8 (FF) on the A7 and really wished it would be f2.

Exactly- the wider the lens the closer you can get in on the action or subject and the wider the aperture the more you can isolate that action or subject.

A wide aperture lens in those circumstances allows us to choose how much context we want to reveal, and how much we want to pop the subject.

Also a stop in not so good light can make the difference between an acceptable photo and an unnacceptable one.

 ClaudiusTheGod's gear list:ClaudiusTheGod's gear list
Fujifilm X100F Nikon D810 Nikon Df Fujifilm X-T1 Nikon D200 +22 more
Truman Prevatt
Truman Prevatt Veteran Member • Posts: 9,412
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f
2

ClaudiusTheGod wrote:

markusw wrote:

Also a stop in not so good light can make the difference between an acceptable photo and an unnacceptable one.

This is especially true on the street where a stop difference can mean shooting at 1/60 where subject motion won't be an issue to 1/30 where is can or at 1/30 where it can but may not to 1/15 where it normally will - that is the difference between getting the shot or not.  Low light street and subject motion is the very reason the push for fast glass by Leica, Nikon, Canon, etc. in the 60's and 70's.

-- hide signature --

Truman
www.pbase.com/tprevatt

 Truman Prevatt's gear list:Truman Prevatt's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R XF 90mm +9 more
Fuji Maine Contributing Member • Posts: 507
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f
2

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

It came across as passive aggressive to me and I responded with a little sarcasm. Then you responded with

"And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered."

Further implying you thought this a worthless post and one nobody should stoop to respond to. You then went further with

"use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond"

Wow I really have to know my place and speak when I'm spoken to don't I?

That was a response to a snot-nosed buttinsky. I'm done here. If you have any further questions, I suggest you ask your parents.

Your childish response is a fitting end to this exchange.

You guys ought to just whip them out and measure already and get it over with. Although, I think a thread about the 60mm macro might be better suited for you gents!

stevo23 Forum Pro • Posts: 22,408
Re: 23mm 1.4f v 2.0f
2

Fuji Maine wrote:

technotic wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

technotic wrote:

It came across as passive aggressive to me and I responded with a little sarcasm. Then you responded with

"And just look at the wealth of info that post garnered."

Further implying you thought this a worthless post and one nobody should stoop to respond to. You then went further with

"use the references provided or wait for others to notice the topic and respond"

Wow I really have to know my place and speak when I'm spoken to don't I?

That was a response to a snot-nosed buttinsky. I'm done here. If you have any further questions, I suggest you ask your parents.

Your childish response is a fitting end to this exchange.

You guys ought to just whip them out and measure already and get it over with. Although, I think a thread about the 60mm macro might be better suited for you gents!

Seriously?

 stevo23's gear list:stevo23's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR +3 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads