Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That's quite a wide pick, it's like deciding if you prefer apples or watermelons more...

 

Both lenses don't serve the same purpose, the XF 90mm is clearly the sharpest of both, but you really need enough space to use it fully, the shots are really coming out tight.

 

The 35mm is a more all generalist lens, you can do a bit of everything with it. It doesn't really matter if you prefer the F1.4 or the F2.0 version, the differences are an f-stop and WR. Between the both, you just need to check if you prefer something usable in low light or rather have a lens on a X-T1 that can take some wet weather conditions.

 

If you have an X-T10 then, then it's just low light consideration. 

 

I haven't had the chance to test the 35mm F2 yet, but from the tests seen, the F2.0 is a tad bit sharper but you really need to go into pixel peeping to see the differences. The WR could be an argument for me since I do travel to tropical countries and having a trusty 35mm WR could be handy at times instead of always using the 18-135.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't know yet, I would go for the 35mm. It is a very useful focal length, and not as specialised as the 90mm.

 

I would go for the extra stop of light, and the optically corrected lens, but I'm sure the f/2 will suit you well too.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm asking myself similar questions about what prime to get - 23, 27, 35. Since I have an 18-55 kit lens I was able to preset the zoom (with help from a piece of electrical tape) at, for instance, 23mm and take photos only at that focal length for a day or two. Then I did  the same for the other focal lengths I was considering.

 

While it didn't help me compare size, weight, and wide open f-stop performance of those various primes, it did help me get used to the various view angles and which came closest to the type of photos I want to make. I know that won't help you with your 90mm decision, but maybe you could lock down at 35mm for a couple of days and see how you like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 90 (to me) is 90% portrait lens - the other 10% is when I need some telephoto assistance (ie, bird watching, nature, etc).  I find it very limiting in everyday use as it is equivalent to 135mm in 35mm format which is pretty close up - most of the time I don't have room to walk backwards enough to get all I want in the photo - and then generally when I do get back far enough, there is something in the way that prevents me from getting just what I want in the picture.  That said, it remains on my camera a lot more than most other lenses.

 

The 35mm lens (either 1.4 or 2.0) is a more general purpose lens.  It is wide enough to get lots of territory into a frame.  With the 35 one can get up close and lock in on a specific target (a face for example) or wide enough to shoot a landscape.  In addition, either of the 35's are fast enough to shoot in low light  - A very general, all-purpose lens!! 

 

But I might suggest you also look into the 18-135 lens - while it is not particularly fast, I find it does a very good job - especially when traveling where one might be limited in changing lenses, yet, the environment might require fast changes for close up to very telephoto.  This zoom can handle close up and far away with plume.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with this. The 35mm is a lot more versatile than the 90mm, unless you are very specifically needing a telephoto length for sport or portraiture only. 

 

 

If you don't know yet, I would go for the 35mm. It is a very useful focal length, and not as specialised as the 90mm.

I would go for the extra stop of light, and the optically corrected lens, but I'm sure the f/2 will suit you well too.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 90mm lens is an absolutely stunning lens, but its not the first prime to buy unless you are 100% a portrait guy, and even then I would buy the 35mm first as it does a good job at portraiture but its versatile as you can use it for street. Its also a great indoor lens. The 90 is bright enough for indoors but unless you regularly hang out with people who own mansions you are never go to have enough space for it to be working at its best. Even if you manage to not crop someones face, you are not going to have enough depth to get the compression and bokeh that makes that lens so outstanding. Outdoors is where that lens belongs (or in a big studio)

 

I would buy the 35mm 1.4 no questions, its a bit older, but on a X-Trans 2 sensor (X-E2/T1/T10) its plenty fast enough. Its a magical do everything lens and if I had to sell all my lens and only keep one it would be the 35mm 1.4

 

 

ps although on reflection I have high hopes for the 33 F1.0 lens, we will see, but if that is coming out this year ,mayb that is the only reason to buy the 90mm because you are waiting for the 33, but to my mind thats just another good reason to buy the 35mm F1.4 first you can get used to it, and second hand its very reasonable and you will probably shift it for what you paid. The F2 version not so much as it has not market corrected yet and is still enjoying new kid on the block status.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you have experience and a need for shooting at 90mm (~135mm equiv mainly for portraits), one of the 35mm is likely you're best choice. 90mm is very tight, so if you are not used to that it will be a challenge. 

 

Or buy both online from someone with a good return policy and keep one. Better yet, find a local dealer and try a few. 

 

I had both the 35mm f2 and f1.4, but I sold both just because I dont shoot 50mm equiv very often. Both lenses are very good.

 

If I only could buy one lens it would be the 35mm f1.4 (assuming you don't shoot sports and don't need weather sealing).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Thank you. I will research it.
    • Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...