Not a lot of love for the 14mm

[NorAndFey]

I don't really understand what you're trying to tell with those ancient pictures. 

 

 

this is probably closer to 100 years ago ( 1913). He was pretty moody and artist.

 

You are posting pictures that could have been taken with a cell phone nowadays. Or maybe a paper-piece with a hole and some light. 

 

It's not about the gear, but the photographer who captures the photo, with the equipment he or her had at that time. 

 

This photography of human movement is great in many ways. It's great because it's creative, well composed, shows some human movements. Ahead of it's time. Imagine how good this picture could have been with todays technology. And even if you do not like it the new way, you could have made it close to this old photo-look in your software. 

 

Maybe we can agree to disagree

[Roozle3]

Jeanloup Sieff, the French fashion photographer made many marvelous photographs shooting with the 21mm lens (35mm)... the equivalent of the Fuji 14mm.

Check out his work... it's fantastic....

[mjrod1985]

I loved the 14mm. 2 things I didn't like was the extremely loose aperture ring and the way it rendered Light Burst (I prefer the star effects for the lack of a better word)

 

I sold mines to fund my 16mm as I like the WR feature and the 2 extra stops of light gathering...

[milandro]

We can certainly agree to disagree.

 

You mentioned:

 

 

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.

 

 

Implying that you need the things that you mention otherwise gear would be unusable.

 

The pictures that I’ve posted show exactly that it is not about the gear ( so one doesn’t need a 1.4 lens or a very fast film) but that indeed it is all about the photograher and that over 100 years ago there was no need for a lens to be f 1.4 or the emulsion to be rated at 3200 ISO to shoot, poorly lit indoor pictures of more than one nervous artists ( one is Picasso, the other one is Anton Giulio Bragaglia).

 

As they say, it is not the equipment that you’ve got but what you do with it.

 

Be well. 

 

I believe we both made our points although I am not certain that you really got mine.

 

Let’s leave it to that!

[Maurice]

Jeanloup Sieff, the French fashion photographer made many marvelous photographs shooting with the 21mm lens (35mm)... the equivalent of the Fuji 14mm.

Check out his work... it's fantastic....

 

Indeed, i don't nearly have enough photography books, but i have on of his. Didn't know the guy at the time i bought it.

[olli]

I would very much love it but can't really afford it given that it would be a bit of an indulgence. I've been watching the used departments and KEH in the hope that it will start appearing in sufficient numbers to drive the price down as owners swap it for the 16 but no luck so far.

[milandro]

oh but give it time it will!

 

In the NL there are a couple of secondhand copies for about €650-699 and there are also shops making this part of a kit ( NEW camera and NEW lens) with the X-Pro 1 ( it will be raining these cameras in kit form soon).

[Maurice]

Lol, raining 14mm's ? I doubt it !

[milandro]

X-Pro 1’s,   any shop will be given many to get rid of 

[aceflibble]

I doubt the 14mm is going to drop in price or come up second hand much any time soon. Maybe once the X-Pro2 is out, but right now there's a lot of people who are still saving up for the 16mm and not already to ditch their 14mm yet, or they're just plain not impressed enough by the 16mm to switch. The two shops here have reported absolutely ZERO orders for the 16mm.
Haven't seen many X-Pro1s around, either, now that I think about it, though I suppose there will be a flood of those once the Pro2 hits.
 

 

You mentioned:

[other quote removed to save space!]

 

No, just to be clear: the examples you posted are nowhere near representative of the conditions I was talking about. I won't derail this thread with more images unrelated to the 14mm lens being discussed, but suffice to say, you are severely overestimating the amount of light I'm saying is available and massively underestimating the motion of the subjects and the need to keep things sharp. Suffice to say, the heavy metal scene is not a place for people relying on vintage techniques

[Trenton Talbot]

Suffice to say, the heavy metal scene is not a place for people relying on vintage techniques

 

Just ask them beforehand for the permission to clamp a few of your own lights (strobes to be exact) to their ramp; most bands are very open to the idea of better photographs. Then use a rear sync… Oh wait, it doesn't work with Fuji 

[aceflibble]

Categorically not an option. Other than flash looking horrible for live music—and, as a musician myself, horrible to have going off as you play—these are people who are so used to total darkness that any lighter brighter than the end of a lit cigarette will blind them. (And being the 'tortured artistes' that they are, you better not dare suggest they do something as 'mainstream' as using a lightswitch.  )

[milandro]

...  indeed!

[Alan Sircom]

We are a fickle bunch.

 

The 18 is an excellent lens. It is fast and light.

 

Then, along comes the 14. The 18 is an excellent lens. It is fast and sharp and light. Suddenly, there's not much love for the 18.

 

Then, along comes the 10-24. The 10-24 is an excellent lens. It is fast and sharp and light and it has IS. Suddenly, there's not much love for the 14.

 

Now, along comes the 16mm...

[Marc G.]

Yep, and the 16 is responsible for me selling the 10-24  

 

There's a big difference between lenses that just work, do their job and deliver good results, and lenses that get us all excited with specs, look and behavior. That's what the 16 1.4 is to me. I wouldn't want to go back to slower and wider lenses.

[citral]

Yep, and the 16 is responsible for me selling the 10-24

 

There's a big difference between lenses that just work, do their job and deliver good results, and lenses that get us all excited with specs, look and behavior. That's what the 16 1.4 is to me. I wouldn't want to go back to slower and wider lenses.

YES! Three times yes! Oh god someone got it at last, all hope is not lost faith in humanity restored.

[Wizi]

...

 

Then, along comes the 10-24. The 10-24 is an excellent lens. It is fast and sharp and light and it has IS. Suddenly, there's not much love for the 14.

 

...

 

Except for the people (like me) who have never ever seen a reason for using a zoom lens

 

And not to be offtopic - IMHO the 14mm Fujinon lens is simply put in one word: stunning. Producing amazing sharp images right from f/2.8 and being usable even handheld at the speed of 1/20. Went last summer to Rome with my X-E2, 23mm f/1.4, 56mm f/1.2 and the 14mm... and my wife... I ended up mostly shooting with the 14mm lens and then some 56mm. Probably my only negative feedback that I could leave is the easily rotating aperture ring which is also to be seen on my 23mm lens but other than that I really can't think of any reasonable drawback.

[Warwick]

I really liked my 14mm but I sold it to buy the 16mm.

The 14mm is small(ish) and light and very sharp. But I wanted the extra couple of stops and the water-resistance of the 16.

Here are some pictures I took with my 14mm:

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[fstop]

We are a fickle bunch.

 

The 18 is an excellent lens. It is fast and light.

 

Then, along comes the 14. The 18 is an excellent lens. It is fast and sharp and light. Suddenly, there's not much love for the 18.

 

Then, along comes the 10-24. The 10-24 is an excellent lens. It is fast and sharp and light and it has IS. Suddenly, there's not much love for the 14.

 

Now, along comes the 16mm...

I am not sure why 18 would be replaced by the 14. Similarly, I am not sure why 14 would be replaced by 16. They are different focal lengths.  Based on the order of release, perhaps you meant the following instead?: 

 

18 fixed --> 18-55 ois/10-24 ois

14 fixed --> 10-24 ois

16 WR fixed --> ????

[Warwick]

I had the 18 and replaced it with the 14.

Then I replaced the 14 with the 16.

They all, broadly, can be used to take the same kinds of pictures.

And they each have their own strengths and weaknesses.

The 18 is the smallest and lightest, but the least wide.

The 14 is the widest but the slowest.

The 16 is fastest and weatherproof, but it's the bulkiest and heaviest.

It's about finding the one that works best for your style.

For me it's the 16

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Hans K Aspenberg]

In my opinion, the XF14 is about perfect. Sharp across the field, little vignetting, no distortion.

[bradleyhanson]

I have never heard anyone complain about the 14mm. I know the 16mm is amazing, especially if you need the extra two stops, but they aren't really designed for the same purpose. The 18mm is Fuji's least impressive lens optically, but it's a good lens if you want a tiny and inexpensive wide angle and don't mind a little distortion on the edges of the long dimension, which can be can be corrected with LR or any RAW converter, and are corrected automatically by Fujifilm with it's OOC JPEGs. 

 

Trenton might be referring to my post about the 14mm lens from a couple years ago? Optically, this lens is stunning (better than the Zeiss 12mm, too) and as it come out prior to the 23 and 56, was their first real 2nd generation lens with internal focusing and push/pull clutch mechanism for manual focus, which I love and wish was on all of their lenses. Essentially zero optical distortion and essentially zero chromatic aberration (purple or blue/green color fringing in backlit edges and highlights). I find the 14mm rarely sees use, but when I need it, it's amazing. I don't find it renders tonality any differently from the other Fujinon XF lenses, but it does seem to be sharper at the edges, especially compared to Fujifilm's softest lens, the 18mm (which I still like but no longer own).

 

Attached is an extremely low light wedding image from the X-Pro1 and the 14mm f2.8 lens, taken while the restaurant staff was prepping the room for the reception. ISO6400 at f2.8, grain, contrast and B&W conversion from LR6.

 

The only real caveats with this lens are shared by any ultra wide: prone to perspective distortion when off axis (you'll see this as trees or buildings leaning inward when lens is tipped up) and putting people at the edge of the frame is unflattering unless they like looking wider. ;-)

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!

[drb]

So what's the consensus here?

 

16mm over 14mm even though 16mm has a 40% higher price tag (where I'm shopping). Is is worth it?

[CRAusmus]

I'd give the WeShootFuji Podcast a listen.  Episode 3.  Also keep your eye on Marco's Blog, http://fujixfiles.blogspot.com, as he's gonna be posting a review about it.  He has stated that he is going to sell the 14 and keep the 16 though.

[Saibot]

Granted I haven't gotten my paws on the 16 yet, the 14 has been a great little lens for me, fast and light. And at 14, it's the right tool for the job when I need that kind of focal length.

 

When I saw the light writing pictures posted with the 21/14, it remided me of this picture I took with my 14.

 

I know that we lump the 14 and 16 into the same category, but at the end of the focal length, there is quite a bit of difference. Sometimes you can't back up anymore, and the 14 *is* wider, so perhaps have both? The right tool for the job and all.

 

Just as an example, I'm not sure I'd like this image as much if it were taken with the 16.

 

 

Just a quick note about this picture. My daughter was frightend by a thunderstorm, so we hid from it under a blanket. I was surprised at how much light that little iPad was putting out and grabbed my camera to snap a picture of my thunder buddy.