Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
petergabriel

14mm f2.8 close focusing any good?

Recommended Posts

So, I have found a used 14mm f2.8 and can't decide whether to buy it or pay more for the 16mm f1.4. Resolution wise the 14mm  should be quite a bit better than the 16mm, but the f1.4 and close focusing abilities of the 16mm appeals to me.

 

One of the positives that is most often mentioned about the 16mm is its close focusing ability at 15cm, which if you subtract the length of the lens amounts to like 6cm's from the front element. Quite impressive.

 

BUT, the 14mm is supposedly able to close focus at 18cm's, which if you subtract the length of the lens amounts to approx. 12 cm's from the front element. Plus the fact that the lens has a wider view. That is not so bad, right?

 

What are your thoughts on this and would you mind showing some samples of the close focusing abilities of the 14mm? Preferably with people in them.

 

Thanks.

 

Tests:

http://www.lenstip.com/387.4-Lens_review-Fujifilm_Fujinon_XF_14_mm_f_2.8_R_Image_resolution.html

 

http://www.lenstip.com/449.4-Lens_review-Fujifilm_Fujinon_XF_16_mm_f_1.4_R_WR_Image_resolution.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've pondered on the two for sometime.

 

Here's my personal summary.

 

For photographers veering more towards landscape, 14mm should be better.

 

For photographers interested in wide angle "macro", the 16mm is better. However, for that kind of photography, there's also the Venus Optics LAOWA 15mm F4 Macro. The 16mm is also better for the some wide angle portrait.

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/venus-laowa-15mm-f4-wide-angle-macro-impressions-and-samples

 

At this point, I'm inclined to go 14mm and the 15mm Laowa combi.

Edited by Aswald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are shooting people, then the 16 is excellent. 24 (35 equivalent) is one of my favorite focal lengths. Not only can the 16 focus close, it is also a reasonably forgiving focal length. Wider than that and the distortion becomes more of a problem (only my opinion of course as it is all subjective). I love super wide angle, but for people, unless I need it for tight spaces, 16 is great.

 

Shooting people with the 14 also works well... you just have to keep them more in the center. The 16 has a bit more compositional freedom. Again this is all my subjective preference.

 

I also like the 1.4 of the 16 because you can get some nice out of focus effect when shooting close up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why you would think the 14 has better resolution than the 16.  But, I do know, as I own the 16 that it focus's so darn close I have to remove the lens hood so it doesn't interfere with the subject.  

There.  Take that!

 

LOL

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why you would think the 14 has better resolution than the 16. But, I do know, as I own the 16 that it focus's so darn close I have to remove the lens hood so it doesn't interfere with the subject.

There. Take that!

 

LOL

J

I know nothing, but tests (e.g. the two links in op) state that the 16mm's sharpeness is very good, but the 14mm apparently blows it away.

 

The 16mm's close focusing abilities sound awesome though.

 

Anyone up for some samples of your best work with either lens. Preferably with people in them.

Edited by petergabriel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know nothing, but tests (e.g. the two links in op) state that the 16mm's sharpeness is very good, but the 14mm apparently blows it away.

 

 

 

 

My guess is that is comparing the 16 at 1.4... the 16 at 2.8 vs the 14 at 2.8... I doubt there is very much difference at all. The 16 is a sharp lens

Edited by deva

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By shaby
      Hi,
      I own th XT-1.
      After searched for opinions and "way of mind" all over - I want to advice with the FUJI'S.
      I am A photography is A hobby for me.
      I like taking shots at streets - people And , situations happen at street , interesting buildings , abandoned buildings.

      At the moment I using the XF-18-55.
      So thinking of buying A wide-angle short lenses

      And want to advice with you which is the best suits me.
      35? 23? ..... or any other else?
      If possible - offering option A and B.
      Thank you very much! 
    • By yukosteel
      After moving to Fuji X system I extensively used large number of Trans-X bodies and XF lens. Most of them perform excellent optically and very good mechanically. I think Fuji is doing great job designing and supporting gear.
      The only thing is bothering me all the time - if the electronics is dead lens typically becomes fully unusable. There are numerous third party or adapted fully manual lens that solve that concern. But what if I want to keep using my favorite Fuji optics mechanically? I've performed numerous attempts and discovered potential of converting XF 35mm F1.4 and XF 27mm F2.8, and recently found highly satisfying result of adapting Fujinon XF 27mm F2.8 that requires relatively low effort.
      Here's resulting article explaining what can you do with electronically dead Fujinon XF 27mm F2.8 lens to bring it back to life in much more compact frame of Industar 50-2.
      Alternatively you can also use adapted Fuji XF 27mm F2.8 lens on other APS-C cameras like Sony or Canon.

       

       

    • By yukosteel
      Modern Fujinon lens have electronical parts that may fail due to water damage or other reasons. In most cases it worths pay for repair, but sometimes repair costs are too high and its cheaper to just buy another sample. This Fujinon XF 27mm F2.8 sample was electronically broken, so I've found relatively simple way to convert it into fully manual focus lens.
      More details in related article: Fujinon XF 27mm F2.8 lens - true manual focus mod



       
       
       
×
×
  • Create New...