redisred

Hey that's a great idea, with the link and all! Thanks a bunch, I'll give it a try.

Yeah, I was really surprised too! They didn't say sand, they said "abrasive material". I never noticed dust in my lens, never did anything that would have made me worry about dust getting in, but obviously I wasn't concerned enough! I'm still pretty puzzled by the whole thing honestly, so just keep your 23 away from dust or dusty wind or anything like that.

After 1+ year of weekly use, i sent in my 23 for an alignment fix. Turns out it's so full of "abrasive material" they won't even repair it, not worth while. So, I've got a paperweight 23 apparently. Can't say I'm blown away by fuji's new jersey center, but they were all very nice otherwise. Be warned folks, when they say it's not weather sealed, they really mean it. I didn't do anything crazy with this thing. Disneyland, park with the kids, etc. Dad stuff. Always had a filter, always used the caps. Seriously reconsidering whether fuji is ready for prime time, which is sad because until this point it's been my favorite system in my 10 year career. But no canon or Sony ever came back unfixable due to dust getting in!

I have both the 23 and the 35, as well as the 56 and I personally use the 35 the least. The bokeh is noticeably worse to my eyes. It's busier and it's less shallow as it approaches the edge of the frame. You only notice it at father distances though, like a nearly full body portrait at 1.4. I know everyone falls over themselves over this lens and it is great, especially for the price, but to me the 23 is in another league. However, it's more expensive and heavier, so you can't have it all I guess!