35mm battle Nikon Z 35 vs fuji?

Started 6 months ago | Discussions
vegetaleb
OP vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 2,510
Re: Side-by-Side wide-open Comparison

beatboxa wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

beatboxa wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

Just out of curiosity, anyone has or had both Fuji XF 23mm f1.4 and Nikon Z 35mm f1.8?

If yes is the bokeh better on the fuji? I mean is it creamier or both can be busy with some background?

I have both of these lenses. The Nikon is better, no question.

From a technical sense, the Nikon has a larger aperture (19mm vs. 16mm) and the same angle of view--so the Nikon already starts with a thinner DoF and less busy background. Don't let the F-number fool you--it's about the absolute aperture = "equivalent f-number" (which would make the Fuji equivalent to a Nikon 35mm F/2.1).

I don't define bokeh as being just about out-of-focus areas--it's the difference between what's in focus and what's out of focus. So sharper lenses tend to have better bokeh. And the Nikon is clearly sharper wide open.

The Nikon is clearly better. If you want, I can post some comparisons later.

Thank you

Yes it would be nice

Here you go. BTW, I didn't have much time, so this is quick & dirty. These are both wide open (F/1.4 on the Fuji and F/1.8 on the Nikon). I did some quick brightness adjustments on the Nikon to come close to matching the Fuji. I took these from the same spot (roughly 1-2 meters from the tree in the foreground), though afterwards, I noticed there is a slight angle difference. Shouldn't make a huge difference though.

Fuji

Nikon

Obligatory side-by-side zooms:

(Center of frame). Fuji = left; Nikon = right

(Top left corner of frame). Fuji = left; Nikon = right

And even more zoomed in, individually:

Fuji

Nikon

Fuji

Nikon

Fuji lovers (and I was one, perhaps again later), base their claims that their lenses are the best on old reviews dating from 4 to 7 years ago, I agree that at that period these lenses were excellent, but photography like any other technology evolve and now Z lenses are just better and resolve more details (unless it's the FF sensor), the newest Fuji lenses are better than the old ones in terms of sharpness, take the 23 f2 for example,  I found it much sharper at f5.6/f7  than the 16 f1.4 and I had both, but it lacks bokeh and DOF because it's soft wide open on near objects + the minimum focus distance is 35cm. When I said Fuji needs to release new quality wide angle lenses in Fuji forum I was attacked like a vermin and traitor, because they still base their claims on old reviews

-- 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
sirkhann Regular Member • Posts: 330
Re: Side-by-Side wide-open Comparison
2

I agree... For some reason, pointing out the obvious on *any* Fujifilm specific forum, or around Fuji fanboys, can quickly get you into trouble. It is a very biased crowd and I feel uncomfortable at the Fuji forum on DPreview. Mods can also put you into the corner for saying that Fuji's lacking behind other brands in certain areas.

Just ignore these people and shoot with whatever makes you happy. No brand is perfect.

Plus - it's very hard to make a lens that pleases everyone. Over-correcting a lens makes it perform good on reviews, but also kills character. On the other hand - making an expressive lens can make people complain about performance, e.g. Nikkor 105mm/1.4E or Nikkor 58/1.4E. The problem in this case is that Sigma Art 50 blows away the Nikkor 58 in all reviews, and being half the price, people just can understand why is that.

If producers are more honest and direct about the intended purpose of the lens, I think that will make the life easier for everyone. Very few lenses are truly universal, but most lenses are being sold as such...

That's my personal view on the matter

tadhoge New Member • Posts: 16
Re: Side-by-Side wide-open Comparison

IMHO, the most important thing is how well a lense fits to
one's photography. (Hence design philosophy has importance.)

For example, dpreview picked up FE28/2 as 28mm prime recommendation for Sony fullsize E,
(https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/buying-guide-best-lenses-for-sony-mirrorless/3)
but as far as I experienced, it has relatively huge LoCA so it adds non-existent color everywhere near the subject.

Cropped from my FE28/2 pic. Two dummy belts show apprently different color.

On the other hand, as most happy users know, XF18/2 enough neatly corrects LoCA and render cleanly center subject, even though it gets color fringe on the contrasty corner.

So at least for environmental portrait, I can say XF18/2 is better
than FE28/2, about which dpreviews says 'optically excellent balance'.

I wish comming compact Z28mm will be such reasonable one too, rather than  FE28/2 type.

vegetaleb
OP vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 2,510
Re: Side-by-Side wide-open Comparison
2

tadhoge wrote:

IMHO, the most important thing is how well a lense fits to
one's photography. (Hence design philosophy has importance.)

For example, dpreview picked up FE28/2 as 28mm prime recommendation for Sony fullsize E,
(https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/buying-guide-best-lenses-for-sony-mirrorless/3)
but as far as I experienced, it has relatively huge LoCA so it adds non-existent color everywhere near the subject.

Cropped from my FE28/2 pic. Two dummy belts show apprently different color.

On the other hand, as most happy users know, XF18/2 enough neatly corrects LoCA and render cleanly center subject, even though it gets color fringe on the contrasty corner.

So at least for environmental portrait, I can say XF18/2 is better
than FE28/2, about which dpreviews says 'optically excellent balance'.

I wish comming compact Z28mm will be such reasonable one too, rather than FE28/2 type.

Call me crazy but I feel dpr is biased toward sony. The 35 f1.8 from sony has obvious purple fringing at f1.8 while the Z 35 f1.8 is super clean in that matter but they didn't want to see it, they kept defending the sony lens while the nikon one is superior in many ways

-- 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
vegetaleb
OP vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 2,510
Re: Side-by-Side wide-open Comparison

beatboxa wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

beatboxa wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

Just out of curiosity, anyone has or had both Fuji XF 23mm f1.4 and Nikon Z 35mm f1.8?

If yes is the bokeh better on the fuji? I mean is it creamier or both can be busy with some background?

I have both of these lenses. The Nikon is better, no question.

From a technical sense, the Nikon has a larger aperture (19mm vs. 16mm) and the same angle of view--so the Nikon already starts with a thinner DoF and less busy background. Don't let the F-number fool you--it's about the absolute aperture = "equivalent f-number" (which would make the Fuji equivalent to a Nikon 35mm F/2.1).

I don't define bokeh as being just about out-of-focus areas--it's the difference between what's in focus and what's out of focus. So sharper lenses tend to have better bokeh. And the Nikon is clearly sharper wide open.

The Nikon is clearly better. If you want, I can post some comparisons later.

Thank you

Yes it would be nice

Here you go. BTW, I didn't have much time, so this is quick & dirty. These are both wide open (F/1.4 on the Fuji and F/1.8 on the Nikon). I did some quick brightness adjustments on the Nikon to come close to matching the Fuji. I took these from the same spot (roughly 1-2 meters from the tree in the foreground), though afterwards, I noticed there is a slight angle difference. Shouldn't make a huge difference though.

Fuji

Nikon

Obligatory side-by-side zooms:

(Center of frame). Fuji = left; Nikon = right

(Top left corner of frame). Fuji = left; Nikon = right

And even more zoomed in, individually:

Fuji

Nikon

Fuji

Nikon

Btw did you edit the Fuji photos with LR or Capture 1?

-- 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
beatboxa Veteran Member • Posts: 7,471
Re: Side-by-Side wide-open Comparison

vegetaleb wrote:

beatboxa wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

beatboxa wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

Just out of curiosity, anyone has or had both Fuji XF 23mm f1.4 and Nikon Z 35mm f1.8?

If yes is the bokeh better on the fuji? I mean is it creamier or both can be busy with some background?

I have both of these lenses. The Nikon is better, no question.

From a technical sense, the Nikon has a larger aperture (19mm vs. 16mm) and the same angle of view--so the Nikon already starts with a thinner DoF and less busy background. Don't let the F-number fool you--it's about the absolute aperture = "equivalent f-number" (which would make the Fuji equivalent to a Nikon 35mm F/2.1).

I don't define bokeh as being just about out-of-focus areas--it's the difference between what's in focus and what's out of focus. So sharper lenses tend to have better bokeh. And the Nikon is clearly sharper wide open.

The Nikon is clearly better. If you want, I can post some comparisons later.

Thank you

Yes it would be nice

Here you go. BTW, I didn't have much time, so this is quick & dirty. These are both wide open (F/1.4 on the Fuji and F/1.8 on the Nikon). I did some quick brightness adjustments on the Nikon to come close to matching the Fuji. I took these from the same spot (roughly 1-2 meters from the tree in the foreground), though afterwards, I noticed there is a slight angle difference. Shouldn't make a huge difference though.

Obligatory side-by-side zooms:

And even more zoomed in, individually:

Btw did you edit the Fuji photos with LR or Capture 1?

Neither.  These were the OOC JPEGs.  The Fujis always seem to have more muddled fine details--I think this is likely due to XTrans debayering.

vegetaleb
OP vegetaleb Senior Member • Posts: 2,510
Re: Side-by-Side wide-open Comparison

beatboxa wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

beatboxa wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

beatboxa wrote:

vegetaleb wrote:

Just out of curiosity, anyone has or had both Fuji XF 23mm f1.4 and Nikon Z 35mm f1.8?

If yes is the bokeh better on the fuji? I mean is it creamier or both can be busy with some background?

I have both of these lenses. The Nikon is better, no question.

From a technical sense, the Nikon has a larger aperture (19mm vs. 16mm) and the same angle of view--so the Nikon already starts with a thinner DoF and less busy background. Don't let the F-number fool you--it's about the absolute aperture = "equivalent f-number" (which would make the Fuji equivalent to a Nikon 35mm F/2.1).

I don't define bokeh as being just about out-of-focus areas--it's the difference between what's in focus and what's out of focus. So sharper lenses tend to have better bokeh. And the Nikon is clearly sharper wide open.

The Nikon is clearly better. If you want, I can post some comparisons later.

Thank you

Yes it would be nice

Here you go. BTW, I didn't have much time, so this is quick & dirty. These are both wide open (F/1.4 on the Fuji and F/1.8 on the Nikon). I did some quick brightness adjustments on the Nikon to come close to matching the Fuji. I took these from the same spot (roughly 1-2 meters from the tree in the foreground), though afterwards, I noticed there is a slight angle difference. Shouldn't make a huge difference though.

Obligatory side-by-side zooms:

And even more zoomed in, individually:

Btw did you edit the Fuji photos with LR or Capture 1?

Neither. These were the OOC JPEGs. The Fujis always seem to have more muddled fine details--I think this is likely due to XTrans debayering.

Yes used to have many times muddled bushes for exemple, though using raw in capture 1 is a bit better

-- 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
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads