Jump to content

Have 35mm f1.4, want 23mm f1.4, but are they to close focal length wise?


petergabriel
 Share

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just bought the 35mm f1.4 used, and despite the noisy AF I just love the lens. Actually I find the AF quite decent on my x-pro 1. 

 

So, now I have the option of buying a used 23mm f1.4 to about half the price, and would really like to have it, but I wonder if the focal lengths are to close.

 

Would it be better to go for something wider or are there enough difference between the two to warrant a purchase?

 

 

As of now I have the 18-55 and the 35 f1.4 in my arsenal. The zoom only being used for snapshots. I like the rendering of primes better even though the 18-55 actually is quite good.

 

Look forward to your opinions/advice :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both and the difference is noticeable, if you see what I mean.

 

With the 23, I tend to take pictures of places and people in context. You have to get up close if you're photographing people. So you'd have to be comfortable with that. The 23 tends to be people and people with context. Not so much places.

 

The main difference is the depth of field when you're up "close". Clearly more depth with the 23.

 

The 23 is pretty sick. Super detailed and amazing rendering.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

For portraiture, I notice a pretty big difference. The perspective distortion on the 23mm can make things look very dramatic. For walking around/every day stuff, I find it's not a big a deal, and the ease of framing is the biggest factor. The 23mm is a lot closer to how I see things, so I don't have to think about framing much; with the 35mm, I always find myself having to step back because the field of view is tighter than I was expecting.

 

If you're getting a great price I'd say try it and see how you like it - if you don't use it much, you can always resell it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could also filter/check all your images based on focal length (Lr, Corel AfterShot, etc.). If you're using your 18-55 closer to 18 than to 23 then I'd think of getting 23.. unjustifiable. There would be high probability you will not like that focal length ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I own the 23 and the 35, as well as the 16.  I find myself reaching for the 35, or the 16 much more than the 23 1.4  It does have it's uses, but for some reason it is not my go-to lens.  

My "never leave home without" kit always includes my 18-55, and my 16mm when I know I'll be shooting landscapes.

 

Family and portraits, it'll be the 35 1.4

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have both and like most other posters consider them sufficiently distinct to keep both. You might also consider waiting for the mourned but fairly cerain arrival of the 23 f2 which will presumably be significantly cheaper than the current f1.4 model. I say this because for me the one downside to the 23 1.4 is that it is a bit bigger and heavier than the 35 1.4.  I might trade it for the 23 f2 when the latter finally arrives.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have both and like most other posters consider them sufficiently distinct to keep both. You might also consider waiting for the mourned but fairly cerain arrival of the 23 f2 which will presumably be significantly cheaper than the current f1.4 model. I say this because for me the one downside to the 23 1.4 is that it is a bit bigger and heavier than the 35 1.4.  I might trade it for the 23 f2 when the latter finally arrives.

 

I would too, but so far I don't like that Fujifilm's cheaper lenses are not optically corrected when it comes to distortion. I know they do it via software, but I don't like that. The 35 f1.4 and 23 f1.4 and 14mm f2.8 are optically corrected and actually rather well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Have had the 23 and 56 in my bag for a couple of years now and always felt like I was missing something in not having the 50mm FOV.

 

I shot a Canon body with a 50/1.2 bolted on it for several years, so I always framed things with that FOV in mind. Ultimately, when selling my Canon kit and moving entirely to Fuji I felt like having a prime that was a little bit wider wouldn't hurt especially when paired with the 56mm for portrait work. It's a gorgeous piece of glass.

 

That said, I recently caved and picked up the 35. The way it renders is really something special and IMO different enough to warrant having a space in the gear bag.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have had the 23 and 56 in my bag for a couple of years now and always felt like I was missing something in not having the 50mm FOV.

 

I shot a Canon body with a 50/1.2 bolted on it for several years, so I always framed things with that FOV in mind. Ultimately, when selling my Canon kit and moving entirely to Fuji I felt like having a prime that was a little bit wider wouldn't hurt especially when paired with the 56mm for portrait work. It's a gorgeous piece of glass.

 

That said, I recently caved and picked up the 35. The way it renders is really something special and IMO different enough to warrant having a space in the gear bag.

 

 

I think I will get the 23mm. Does any of the other Fujinon lenses render like the 35mm f1.4? I find it quite unique. Would love if the 23mm rendered the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I will get the 23mm. Does any of the other Fujinon lenses render like the 35mm f1.4? I find it quite unique. Would love if the 23mm rendered the same.

 

The 35/1.4 is very cinematic in its rendering, I really like it for exactly that. I think the 60/2.4 is of the same breed. Was it not the first generation of Fuji X-lenses that give a similar image (i.e. 18, 35, 60)?

The 23 is closer to the 56 in its rendering I think, more analytical (for lack of a better word), just like the 14.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 90mm is the closest in rendering to the 35mm imo. In my experience of the primes the lens fall into groupings where the rendering seems to match up.

 

Group 1 - 16/23/35 F2/56mm All seem to have similar rendering

 

Group 2 - 27/60 seems to be very similar in rendering.

 

Group 3 - 18/35/90 very similar (some may be surprised to see the 18 in there, but while is has sharpness issues corner to corner, those very issues give is a character and rendering that means in character I find it closest to the 35mm F1.4, the 90mm bokeh is very creamy and has that cinematic feel like the 35mm. All 3 of these lens seem to do nice things at high iso as well where the grain inherent with high ISO's looks filmic rather than noisy.

 

14mm is a little out on its own, its sort of halfway between group 1 and 3 in my opinion.

 

Full disclosure take comments on the 14/16/35 F2 with a pinch of salt as i have not owned those lenses only played in a shop and studied assiduously on Flickr.

 

G

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.

Guest
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.

Loading...
 Share

  • Similar Content

    • By AZWolf
      Hi All,

      I recently published a Fuji-centric article on the best lenses for infrared photography. Most of the lenses I tested and reported on are XF mount. I did include some Sony FF and Micro 4/3 as well. I include several images too, of course.

      You can see the article on PetaPixel or my blog

      Hope you find it useful!

      Happy shooting,
      Joel
    • By Ketsada UNs
      Post a picture of your Fuji camera !
      And tell me the reason that you use the Fuji camera.
      Thanks for your sharing ....

    • By Ketsada UNs
      Hi ! You thinking with New Lens fujinon 70-300mm? 
    • By Paluuul
      Hi,
      Forgive me for my English and the ignorance about cameras (I'm 19 and fell in love with photos since 2017, I'm a newbie to this world) 
      Here's the question, I have 2 old Fuji lenses I would love to use on my X-t10, but don't know how to adapt them, I'll post some photos of the 2s down below.
      I used them on my "Fuji AX Multi program". Please help me, you're my last shore 😱🤣.
       
      https://linksharing.samsungcloud.com/yyL5h9d2ZFzY
       
    • By Jack H
      The lens makes a rattling sound when shaken gently, sounds like a loose element. No image stabilisation so no idea what it could be. Is this normal? 
  • Posts

    • Thank you! This is great news. Fujinon XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 R LM OIS has got nice price, and its aperture in the range of 55-80mm is a little faster than on Fujinon XF 16-80mm f4 R OIS WR that I own, but at 200mm it's f4.8 which I can't tell is usable. I bought 16-80 for indoor sports but also for general purposes like landscape and architecture to complement my 35mm f1.4. For indoor sports, I used it in the range of 50-80mm so far, and I needed some more zoom, but I also know that at some other gyms that I've been before even the 35mm was fine when I could place myself near the court. Not sure if 55-200 is ideal solution for sports either, but it's much cheaper and lighter than 50-140. Heck I think even f2.8 is too small aperture for indoor sports. If I don't go for 50-140, I would most likely go for 55-200.
    • The push function on the rear-dials of the 'earlier' X cameras is quite prone to defects. I believe it was solved in the X-H1 and the X-T3 thereafter, but X-E3's have the earlier internal design. The push function could 'stick' in one function or between functions causing the rotate function not to work properly. If that happens, internal cleaning or replacing is the only option. Something that (most of) you can't do yourself.
    • Hi Milos, welcome. I'm too a Leica M user (M7 and M10-R) but I also use the X-Pro2. First, about the firmware updates. You can update straight to v5. Every firmware update contains the full firmware and not just the changed bits. As for the lens, Fuji has two zoom lenses that might work, but they are both a bit slower in terms of aperture. It's the 55-200 and the 70-300. Both have IOS (the X-Pro2 has not) so that is a benefit. Yet, I believe the 50-140 is the better choice for indoor sports even though the X-Pro2 isn't exactly fast in AF. Another option might be the long prime lenses. There are two in this category (I won't mention the 200mm): the 80mm macro is very sharp (allows for cropping) and has OIS but is is almost as expensive as the 50-140 and is not easily available as second-hand. The 90mm tele is one of Fuji's best lenses for portraits, is less expensive than the 80mm, but lacks OIS. It focuses very fast though. I loved that lens, but you need to learn to work with it esp. on an X-Pro2. The 50mm f2 is a very nice lens by the way and if the focal length works for you, you can crop by up to 30% (approx. 14-16MP) before quality becomes an issue.  The OVF of the X-Pro line doesn't work well with lenses longer than 50mm and the EVF of the X-Pro1 and 2 is a TFT-type that doesn't work well in low light and fast action (indoor sports). It has a poor refresh rate and in 'smears' a bit when you move the camera fast. You can however, learn to work with it even though it's not ideal. As for third-party lenses, I'm not aware of a fast 'long zoom' for X-mount. Tamron announced some lenses for X-mount (so did Sigma) but not in this category as far as I know. Their variable zoom lenses very quickly go to f4.5 or f5.6 once you zoom in. Viltrox and others focus on shorter primes for X-mount.
    • Fuji claims that it is exactly the same EVF (Sony-made OLED), but to my recollection the refresh rate of the X-T3 is a bit higher. The main difference (re. the EVF) is the processor of both cameras. The X-T3 has a later generation processor that allows for higher refresh rates. Make sure both cameras are in 'boost' mode when you compare them. Also other features (like brightness and color setting) can cause difference in EVF experience as well as minor changes in the optics in front of the EVF. Fuji isn't specific about changes re. this. I can't compare anymore since I sold both cameras and switched. From that experience I can tell that the same EVFs on paper can make a great difference in practice. So, always check the EVF yourself before you buy a camera. Esp. when you wear glasses or need to change the diopter.
×
×
  • Create New...