Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone!

I'm currently using both 35mm f2 and 23mm f2 and I have recently started thinking about upgrading one of them to the f1.4 version. And I was wondering on which of these lenses I will feel most difference after upgrade? Because currently I can't afford both:/


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you talk image quality (sharpness across the frame, chr. aberrations, contrast...) the 23/f2 has most room for improvement. It's not a bad lens, but nothing special either. Wide open it has quite soft edges and corners. Both in sharpness (line pairs) as well as in contrast. The lens also suffers a bit from longitudinal chr. aberration (color fringing). The 23/1.4 MkII is much better in terms of IQ, but bear in mind it is also larger and heavier and if you use it with an X-Pro body, it blocks a fair part of the optical viewfinder.

The 35/f2 and 33/f.14 are much closer in terms of IQ. It's just that the f1.4 is a stop faster. One difference though (apart again from size and weight and OVF impact): the 35/f2 has significant focus breathing whereas the 33/f1.4 doesn't. That could be important when you do video work.

The great thing about both the 23/f2 and the 35/f2 (and the 50/f2 as well) is their compactness and usability for street photography. Robust little pocketable lenses, weather resistant, decent performance at a reasonable price. Though the f1.4 are still not large lenses, you don't put them in your jeans pocket that easily... Next to that, they're pricy. 

Edited by Herco
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

I use the 23 f/2 and the 35 f/2 all the time. Having tried the f/1.4 versions, for my mind on X-T30-II bodies they are too large and in my opinion not worth the cost delta. I have heard the 23 f/2 is a little soft at the edges but I must admit I'm very happy with my copy. I think there are likely some production differences or differing ideas of good IQ here, as some people like me think the IQ is quite good and some that are not so convinced. I use the 16mm f/2.8 as well and I quite like that. Next I think it will be a 50mm f/2 rather than "upgrading" the 23mm or the 35mm. My opinion is that the compact primes are all decent enough IQ for what they are and I'll give up the possible IQ improvements of the f/1.4 versions for f/2 version's compact size and light weight (and significantly lower price). Likewise, I bought the XF 55-200 zoom over the 100-400 lens, sacrificing reach I'll rarely use for a much more compact lens, with decent enough quality, at a significantly lower price. If you take into account the loss you will make selling one of those 2 compact primes, coupled with paying considerably more for the extra aperture, to my mind it isn't worth it. The f/2 aperture is much wider than that on any of the zooms which many people use as their primary glass every day.Your mileage may vary of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Sometime a short break can help to phrase things so that they do not sound annoying, Well that is the hope anyway, so here goes. Having that meter would be nice as well as having the histogram. But having them or not is a minor consideration in terms of what you are wanting to do because the app does not work with intervalometers. The only way you can get a time lapse sequence using the app is to manually click the shutter button, wait then click it again and so on. Even if the meter were there, you would need extremely fast reflexes to see and react to a lighting change by changing the settings and then going back to clicking the shutter button. Doing that for hours would be a feat indeed. The equipment you mention does this by analyzing several past images and predicting what settings to apply to the next incoming image. Right now the app has the live view which will tell you if an area is over or under exposed, but as far as what you are wanting to do without being able to connect the app to an intervalometer, well …
    • I want to check with you guys on how image stabilisation is meant to work on the XT4 and whether I might have an issue. I was out with the camera yesterday with the 80mm macro lens, which has OIS, and the 1.4 Teleconverter and did some tests to see how good the stabilisation was performing by pointing at random objects/general landscape.  On the lens I had the OIS switch turned on and I selected the stabilisation to be always on in the menu option and was suitably impressed with how much camera shake was reduced.  However, when I went in the menu and selected Shooting Only for stabilisation I noticed something odd.  My understanding with this mode is that when you half press the shutter release the OIS is meant to turn on and stabilise the image just before completing the shot.  With the focus switch set to Continuous AF this is exactly what happened - shaky image, half press, stable image.  But, if the focus selector switch is set to Single AF I half press the release and I get no stabilisation.  The focus locks and the exposure locks but the image is still shaky in the viewfinder. I swapped out the lens for my 16-80mm kit lens and this performs exactly the same - no image stabilisation with Single AF selected, so it appears to be something to do with the body and not the lens. Is this normal?  I would be surprised if stabilisation only kick in when you fully press the shutter release because some shots are taken with tiny fractions of a second of exposure and the mechanism will still need a finite time to engage.
    • Thats an interesting question - there appear to be two different remote access interfaces to the camera : Bluetooth/Wi-Fi and USB - the USB interface does have a way of accessing a shutter count - I haven't seen any report that its available via Bluetooth/WiFi.
    • Jerry. We're really travelling in circles here (please refer to my original post). I know what tethering is and how to use it. I use the TL Plus View to trigger a Zeapon system for Time Lapse and the two together work perfectly fine. However, it would be nice to work occasionally without this rig and simply use the Fuji app. The workaround you're describing is unworkable for any serious Day to Night timelapse as, apart from anything else (such as camera touching and therefore unwanted movement) you are constantly looking in the rear view mirror as to what it is you're metering, not to mention that the space between intervals would have to be unusably long. (sigh) All Im asking is that the app displays the exposure when using ANY intervalometer. There may be no serious workaround, but I thank you for your thoughts.
    • Nope the exposure indicator meter only shows when using an external intervalometer, it does not show when using the internal one or when using the app. The work around is time limited, a variation of what I have described above, tethering the camera or grab an image using the app. Open the image in Raw Studio or an editor and look at the histogram, etc, You will see if it is over/under exposed. Tethering or connecting via usb to grab the image is fastest, the remote app is okay. If clouds are rolling in, it can be tricky at first. studio shooters use tethering a lot.
  • Create New...