Jump to content

Tough choice between 32 and 35mm

collectunderpants

By collectunderpants
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

collectunderpants Newbie

collectunderpants

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hello,

 

I am facing quite tough choice, I want to buy roughly 50mm equivalent for my X-M1 which serves me well after reading plenty of reviews I decided to buy FUJINON 35mm f/2 WR.

 

However, while searching for the specific offer I stumbled upon Zeiss Touit 32mm f/1.8 for about 80USD more.

 

Both factory new and Zeiss with free Zeiss filter.

 

Since the Zeiss was released few years ago I haven't found any comparison of two (only Zeiss vs 1.4 and 1.4 vs 2).

 

What are your opinions? Which one should I choose?

 

I shoot only street, will replace body if current get destroyed ;)

 

I will appreciate you help.

 

Regards

Edited by collectunderpants
Link to post
Share on other sites
Vidalgo Community Regular

Vidalgo

Posted
Posted
I would pick Fuji because they are supplying a lot of firmware updates. Since born, 35/1.4 had half-dozen of updates. The lens becomes better and better.

 

While Zeiss had 1 update only. I can't believe their lenses were so perfect from born.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nick05 Collaborator

Nick05

Posted
Posted

I have not used the Zeiss so I cannot really say anything for or against it from my own opinion. I have the Fuji 35mm F/1.4 and the F/2. They are both nice lenses. The F/2 feels more solid, is weather sealed, and has a much faster quieter AF. I saw a lot of mixed feelings about the Zeiss and chose the Fuji. If fast, quiet AF is important, the F/2 is probably the best option.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nero Rising Star

Nero

Posted
Posted

I would go for the Fuji. I haven't used the f/2, but the f/1.4 is one of the best lenses I've ever used. It's by far my favorite lens. Zeiss makes good lenses, but Fuji has them beat. In my opinion, I would tend to pick the f/1.4 over the f/2. That's just personal preference though. I think that being optically corrected instead of digitally corrected gives the f/1.4 an edge in image quality, but in most cases you may not be able to tell the difference. In other respects, the f/2 wins out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
starwatcher Rookie

starwatcher

Posted
Posted

I had both, but the IQ, colour, sharpness, almost everything seems to be better on the Fuji 35mm, so I ended up selling the Ziess 32mm for the new Fuji 23mm f2.0.

Very happy since the 23mm is perfect for street photography and the 35mm for generally everything else.

 

I'm not a big fan of Ziess lenses, since I owned a few before, for Nikon cameras and always ended up selling them. A better choice for 3rd party lenses for me is Voigtlander - not all their lenses but some of them are amazing, specially for Fuji.

 

My opinion anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
triton76 Rookie

triton76

Posted
Posted

If you wear glasses forget the Zeiss, you will be fuzzing too much with focus and miss shots. I sold my Rokinon 85 which otherwise renders beautiful images for that reason.

why that? Toit has (one out of the rare) autofocus ... my only concern would be the rubbermade focus ring ... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Peterm69uk Apprentice

Peterm69uk

Posted
Posted

I'd suggest trying them both, that may not be possible but I was lucky to have that opportunity and much preferred the Zeiss, in fact I liked it so much I sold my 10-24mm Fuji to buy the 12mm Zeiss. I love these lenses but it's just my preference, yours may differ, both are great.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Henry0125 Newbie

Henry0125

Posted
Posted

Forget about CZ.

I've read so many comperison reviews about CZ32 Vs XF35 1.4 in different Chinese websites and forums.

And the results are all the same: XF35 wins overall.

Since the new XF35 has a similar image quality as the old one (Some say it's even better than the old one), I can say XF35 should be better than the CZ32, especially the speed of autofocusing.

And also, the new XF35 is much more suitable for your X-M1, as it has the same retro-style looking and compact size.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      The backslashes you are referring are just symbols denoting path.  Once you import into these LUTS into Davinci Resolve those backslashes are removed by default and you only see is the true file name which has no backslashes.  Convince yourself of this by opening the LUT folder from the Davinci Resolve Project Settings.  Do you see any backslashes in those LUT names? Of course not.  The only name you see is the one that has the underscores and the periods. These LUTS work as designed without having to change any path names.  However, they need to be set up properly through CSTs and by what is supported in Davinci Resolve.  Hence, the FLog2C film simulation LUTS cannot be used because Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut color space and the FLog2C gamut. Alternatively, Davinci Resolve does support Flog2 film simulation LUTS because the color space for FLog2 is Rec 2020 and there is an FLog2 gamut. If all you are doing is changing the path names then you are not getting the correct results.
    • PoorAlchemist
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By PoorAlchemist · Posted

      I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • crazyfields
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By crazyfields · Posted

      Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • George_P
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By George_P · Posted

      I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
×
×
  • Create New...