35mm f2 vs. 35mm f1.4 after firmware

[Ketaha]

Hi there - just picked up a used XE2 and am looking at both of these lenses.  From what I've read, the f2 has significantly better autofocus capability.  Also read that firmware updates had much improved the f1.4.  Is the difference still significant after the firmware update?  Used 1.4's seem to be going for less money.  Thanks!

[frod]

The difference is slight. I'd wager it depends more on your requirements. The f/1.4 is optically better corrected and obviously wider. The f/2 is smaller, lighter and a bit less expensive. Both lenses are excellent.

 

As ever, I'd say if ultimate AF speed is your main requirement you're in the wrong system.

[Sluw]

Yes I'd focus on the other aspects as well. AF is fine after all the updates.

 

Since your camera isn't weather sealed the weather sealing isn't a very high priority although it might be interesting when buying a new camera. I think a weather sealed body with this lens is a great combo if you need it.

 

I'd say go with the 1.4, it's rendering, extra light and better bokeh are great.

Edited August 26, 2016 by Sluw

[petergabriel]

The f1.4 is optically better. AF wise they are very close. The f1.4 AF motor however is quite noisy. I can live with that because of the superb IQ.

[frankinfuji]

As an X-E2 user you'll not need the water resistance of the f2 lens - so I reckon the f1.4 is the better bet.  Wider aperture and a 'special' optical quality.

 

Personally I like the focus motor noise - it's a natural feedback system that lets you know what it's doing.  Would be an issue if I shot video with the X-E2, but that's not likely.

[johant]

Each time I look at the photos I made with the 35/1.4 I am impressed with the rendering of that lens (e.g. wood grains). I have not tried the f2 but I am very happy with the 35/1.4 lens!

[arty]

I would advice to get 1.4 first, for not to regret of a slower aperture of the 35/2. And then after some time to get 35/2 and compare your feelings. For me, I prefer 35/2 because of its bokeh tracery first. 35/1.4 has a nervous, little suicidal bokeh (for my eye), and 35/2 has a joy, festive bokeh. Other advantages are AF speed, better retro-look, WR, light eight and significally smaller size. That's it

[Tom H.]

F1.4 to f2 is not that big a leap in dof as most people think. And I'll take 9 aperture blades over 7 any day.

[Sluw]

F1.4 to f2 is not that big a leap in dof as most people think. And I'll take 9 aperture blades over 7 any day.

Why? That's no guarantee for better bokeh. In my personal and most reviewers opinion the 1.4 still has better bokeh. 

 

Plus the difference is a stop... iso 1600 vs 3200 or for example a shutter speed of 1/60 instead of 1/30. That can make a difference. 

 

I don't say one of them is bad but I think it strange to say it makes no difference. 

Edit: I've had both.

Edited September 23, 2016 by Sluw

[arty]

Why? That's no guarantee for better bokeh. In my personal and most reviewers opinion the 1.4 still has better bokeh. 

 

Plus the difference is a stop... iso 1600 vs 3200 or for example a shutter speed of 1/60 instead of 1/30. That can make a difference. 

 

I don't say one of them is bad but I think it strange to say it makes no difference. 

Edit: I've had both.

 

The bokeh of the 35/1.4 could be a little nervous and look like "lensbaby" effect in the corners of a photo, when you have a busy backgroung like the leaves.

Some examples, just what I found in haste

Untitled

Angel of death

 

But it depends on your subjects and maybe you will never see it on your photos.

 

And contrariwise 35/2 make the funny, joyfull balls of the leaves or so on

 

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!

(not mine)

Edited September 23, 2016 by arty

[Tom H.]

Why? That's no guarantee for better bokeh. In my personal and most reviewers opinion the 1.4 still has better bokeh.

 

Plus the difference is a stop... iso 1600 vs 3200 or for example a shutter speed of 1/60 instead of 1/30. That can make a difference.

 

I don't say one of them is bad but I think it strange to say it makes no difference.

Edit: I've had both.

Just 1 stop is not enough of a difference in my book and I've also handled both and bokeh wide open on both is very nice. Preferences are merely subjective at best. And I think the f2 flares better when shot into the light. On top of that the f2 adds lower price, wr and better autofocus to the package, at the cost of only 1 measly stop. I'd say the argument for most users should go firmly to the f2 version.

[arty]

Do we really need f/1.4?

Today's shot with 35/2, f/2.8 for more DOF

 

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!

Edited September 23, 2016 by arty

[Sluw]

Do we really need f/1.4?

Today's shot with 35/2, f/2.8 for more DOF

 

^85856B0D4FFEA4E0A6F66278FBAB3DB702B99E9DF9B2C57007^pimgpsh_fullsize_distr.jpg

 

Do you really need f/2.8?? Get closer and use f/5.6

[Tom H.]

Fuji needs to make the next 35 faster, like the much requested 35 f1 to make the difference in speed significant again.

[Tikcus]

when I shot events the F/1.4 over F/2 makes a difference to me

When light is poor the extra stop can be the difference between getting a shot and not!

 

Also remember DOF is not just about the Aperture, but also the distance between the object and the back ground

[JackParrish]

I am finding the 35 f2 to have superb IQ.

 

I mixed up a bunch of my images shot between the two and have had some very good photogs try to separate whitch was taken with which lens. Not only can they not "weed out" the f2 images against the 1.4, but more than once I've heard "this must be the 1.4 because the broken is better" only to find it was the f2.

 

If great photographers cannot pick out a real difference between the two in a blind sample, I'm not going to spend any time worrying about it. F2 is a great lens that cannot functionally be separated from the 1.4 when you're assessing final images.

 

I think everything else is just handwringing and nitpicking.

[frankinfuji]

I am finding the 35 f2 to have superb IQ.

 

I mixed up a bunch of my images shot between the two and have had some very good photogs try to separate whitch was taken with which lens. Not only can they not "weed out" the f2 images against the 1.4, but more than once I've heard "this must be the 1.4 because the broken is better" only to find it was the f2.

 

If great photographers cannot pick out a real difference between the two in a blind sample, I'm not going to spend any time worrying about it. F2 is a great lens that cannot functionally be separated from the 1.4 when you're assessing final images.

 

I think everything else is just handwringing and nitpicking.

..... everything else except the extra stop on the 1.4 and the water resistance of the 2.0. Either of these could be critical for some users.

[gordonrussell76]

Its all subjective.

 

I love the rendering of the 35 F1.4, its my favourite lens in the system, its on my camera about 90% of the time. The AF improved massively on X-E2/X-T1 after Firmware 4 and it improved again with X-T2. Basically you will have to pry that lens from my cold dead hands unless they release a Mkii that is WR, and slightly better build quality int eh saeme vein as the 90mm.

 

It just does nice stuff I think it renders and has bokeh on a par with the 90mm, only its more practical as you can use it in a wider range of scenarios.

 

 

 

 

G

[Vedox]

I have the 35mm 1.4 and fuji xt10

I can get action shots of my doughters running around just fine i miss here and there but i do have 32Gb memory card so if i miss the focus there is lots of room for the next shot

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!