Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I have wanted to add a 35mm (full frame equivalant) fast prime  to my kit as I have the 24mm/1.4 and 50mm/1.4 (full frame #'s) ... but can't justify the $ for 1.4 with the two I have ... but if this F2 is priced competitively like the new 50mm/F2 (full frame again) ... I will be tempted!

 

... sorry .. I always talk full frame numbers with others as it is kind of the universal focal length numbers when we compare our different manufacturer's gear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A compact 23mm f 2 probably means “ smaller” lens as the 35 f2 is smaller than the 35 f1.4 .

 

But we shall see! 

 

Fuji has a fantastic 23mm f/2 aspherical lens on X100 series, a pancake design. If I were Fuji, I would choose to modify an existing lens rather than develop an entirely new formula. But...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuji has a fantastic 23mm f/2 aspherical lens on X100 series, a pancake design. If I were Fuji, I would choose to modify an existing lens rather than develop an entirely new formula. But...

 

That lens is notoriously soft at closer focus distances though. 

 

Not that there is really such a thing as a new formula these days; however there are levels of compromise for size, weight, distortions etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

there is a very nice Dutch expression.

 

“ het moet uit de lengte of uit de breedte komen” 

 

“ It has to come form the length or the width "

 

 

As for anything with a balance between the two dimensions, if you pull one direction you will affect the other dimension. In other words, making a small lens comes at a compromise and the amount of compromise is determined by the amount of “ pulling”.

 

You know this is another form

 

You can have a lens that is Cheap, Small, Good ( and I will add light efficient too), but you can only pick two characteristics simultaneously. Anything else is wishful thinking and I don’t do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That lens is notoriously soft at closer focus distances though. 

 

Not that there is really such a thing as a new formula these days; however there are levels of compromise for size, weight, distortions etc.

 

I have a X100T also and I never noticed "soft[ness] at closer focus distances," even with tele and wide lens attachments. However, I do see diffraction kicking-in at f/8. But hey, we all have different thresholds.

 

Cheers.

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

    • 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.
    • How does one make sure that Fuji's image correction is turned on to correct barrel and pin-cushion distortion on a GFX 100 or GFX100S when using the GF20-35? Is it only applied to the jpegs and not to the raw files? (I was surprised to discover the barrel distortion on the GF 35-70mm lens.) I normally shoot in raw with jpeg back-up and use the raw files, which I convert either in Affinity Photo 2 when editing with that program or in Raw File Converter Ex 3.0 by Silkypix if I wish to process the image in Photoshop CS6. (Adobe DNG is also a possibility.) Thank you for the help. Trevor
    • Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

×
×
  • Create New...