Not a lot of love for the 14mm

[benjaminthomson]

I've talked to a fair few Fuji x photographers, and there seems to be a consensus that the 14mm isn't very good or at least sub-par.

 

I own it and quite like it, but appears to render differently to the 23/35/56 lenses, maybe less contrasty?

 

I enjoy the weight and build though as I always stop down for wide shots and often have it in my bag just in case there's a shot I can't get with the 23mm.

 

I'm interested in hearing about other people's experiences with it.

[Trenton Talbot]

Wut?!   Once upon a time there was a fanboy post about XF 14mm titled "The best Leica lens Fuji ever made" or something like that… still true. Tack sharp, very clever construction (you don't have to worry about vignetting and internal reflections with filters), light and fast. Love this little gem.

 

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!

_{(X-T1, XF 14mm, 26 seconds from tripod; air temperature is around -22F)}

[milandro]

is the crispiness of the image due to the -22F ( -30C) temperature?

[Trenton Talbot]

is the crispiness of the image due to the -22F ( -30C) temperature?

 

Possible. In post I've noticed some strange artifacts that looked like typical oversharpening halos. Got me puzzled for a few minutes until I realized that it's a snow and frost… 

[Maurice]

I've talked to a fair few Fuji x photographers, and there seems to be a consensus that the 14mm isn't very good or at least sub-par.

 

This is the first time ever for me to hear that. You must be confusing it with some other lens, the 18mm maybe? Because i hear (and see) nothing but good or great things about the 14mm.

[milandro]

never heard of the 14mm being not highly thought of, the 18mm yes, plenty of reservations about it... but if you feel that way I will be glad to dispose of this sub-par lens for you at no charge from my side 

[citral]

I think OP refers to the 18mm. Which due to its pancake design is not optically but software corrected, that's the main reservation.

[milandro]

well, all OP has to do is to tell us if he has a 14 or an 18. Perhaps he has a 14 but the “ fair few Fuji photographers that he spoke to” referred to the 18 and not to the the 14 and he has suffered from inverse placebo effect ever since (it is called either ways subject-expectancy effect )

[aceflibble]

I like the 14mm, I just rarely have much use for it. f/2.8 may be fast in general terms, but when you're shooting other primes at f/1.4, ISO 3200 and 1/60th and still getting an underexposed image, f/2.8 becomes totally useless. My 14mm will be sold soon and replaced by the 16mm, 'cause with two extra stops I might actually get a chance to use it more than once every other month.
That's my use, though; I'm very rarely outdoors and not allowed to use flash in most circumstances, whilst also needing to catch motion sharply. Other people would probably get much more use out of the 14mm than I do. It's certainly sharp enough and I've not noticed any particular difference in contrast compared to the other primes. Not heard or seen anybody else complain about it, either. Its niché application is its only downfall, just as with any extra-wide prime lens.

[milandro]

Makes you wonder how did we ever ever manage, for almost 100 years, to shoot pictures on films which simply never possessed the capability to be sharp without showing tons of film grain if exposed and developed at 3200 ASA and with lenses that were no way as light efficient.

 

And yet we all did.

[NorAndFey]

I really like my 14mm f/2.8. It's a really great companion for the 18-55mm f/2.8-4. It's noticeably wider (but not too wide), compact, and do have the same filter-diameter and lens hood. It's also tad sharp wide open. 

 

Thoug. Would I bought it if it was a little bit bigger and heavier, and f/2 instead? Yes. Probably. 

[milandro]

if my grandma had wheels ...she would have been a bike

[Marc G.]

mmh... I chose the zoom over the 14mm in the beginning and now that the 16mm is out and I sold the zoom I still don't feel any need for the 14mm. It's quite good but I never wanted it..

 

Kinda never appeared on my "want-it-list".

[NorAndFey]

if my grandma had wheels ...she would have been a bike

 

Grandmas more often ride wheelchairs than bikes... 

 

Of course, I see your point over there, but when we now got the ability too shoot at ISO 3200 with great results. Why not take advantage of it, in combination with fast primes? Instead of thinking of how impossible that was 20 years ago. 

[milandro]

Perhaps I didn’t succeed in making my point clear. If it was perfectly possible to shoot at lower speeds and with lenses not as fast back then, should still be possible to-date.

 

According to your paradigm, if it were true, using my 10-24mm f4 should be impossible.

[NorAndFey]

Yes. It would be impossible, if you needed 1/125s to stop action in dimmed light, and didn't want to, or could, use flash. With the ability to up your ISO some steps it's not quite that impossible anymore. 

 

My point is, Welcome every advantage we can get with new technology, instead of talk about the past. The past is gone. Now is now. 

[aceflibble]

Makes you wonder how did we ever ever manage, for almost 100 years, to shoot pictures on films which simply never possessed the capability to be sharp without showing tons of film grain if exposed and developed at 3200 ASA and with lenses that were no way as light efficient.

 

And yet we all did.

Well, 100 years ago, people weren't trying to shoot moody artists in sticky-floored goth metal clubs with nothing but a dying fluorescent strip light from the next room lighting the scene. 

 

But yes, to put it in a less snarky fashion, I'm never going to cripple my own shooting if a more suitable option is available. I delayed moving to digital because I preferred shooting film (and I went back to film a few years ago), and I have a lot of experience shooting medium-format and large-format film. I know what it means to have a slow system with strictly limited ASA!

It's the year 2015, though, and we have lots of advantages now which we might as well make use of. For me, that most often means using a faster lens wide open, which is where the 14mm starts to have issues. It's sharp as a wide-angle gets and f/2.8 is fast by general standards, but when even f/1.4 isn't quite giving you enough light, f/2.8 starts to feel like a real hinderance. But like I said, that's just me. It doesn't mean the 14mm is an incapable lens for most people, and it absolutely should find a place in most peoples' kit bags.

 

Now, a 14mm f/2? I'd be all over that. Gimmie gimmie gimmie. That'd be enough, I could get use out of that. That's one of those few lenses I'd really pay top whack for.

[milandro]

I am not so sure they didn’t ( not 100 but some time ago)

 

Not bad a picture. Made LIFE magazine! Of course they were supermen back then!

 

[milandro]

Anton Giulio Bragaglia, one of the founders of the futurist movement ( 1913). He was pretty moody and artist.

[x-tc]

Wut?! Once upon a time there was a fanboy post about XF 14mm titled

_{(X-T1, XF 14mm, 26 seconds from tripod; air temperature is around -22F)}

I love how you carefull composed the corners.

[Trenton Talbot]

I love was you did with the corners.

 

This is not a composite 

[x-tc]

This is not a composite 

Sorry

[citral]

Must be some kind of voodoo.

[Trenton Talbot]

Must be some kind of voodoo.

 

It's called "91º field of view" 

[benjaminthomson]

To reiterate, I personally am a big fan of this lens and find it incredibly sharp. But I'll be the first to admit it renders differently to most other Fuji x lenses. Not better or worst, just different. Which can be an issue when you're trying to make a multi lens shoot look consistent.

 

I'm not confusing it with the 18 either.