Fujinon 23mm f1.4 vs f2 character

[petergabriel]

I own the f1.4 and love the image quality. But what are the differences between the two lenses if only judged by image characteristics? I find the f1.4 very neutral. What is the image character of the f2. Warm, cold, neutral, magical?

Edited April 12, 2017 by petergabriel

[jlmphotos]

Besides the fact the 23 F2, the 35, and the 50 are all butt ugly (IMHO) I own the 23 1.4 and to me it's very neutral, and clinically sharp.

 

[petergabriel]

I don't care about looks and own the f1.4 myself, as stated, I'm interested in their image characteristics. How they differ.

[petergabriel]

Or I could rephrase, which of the two has the most soul? As a reference I find the 35mm f1.4 to have more soul than the f2 version which apparently blows the f1.4 away in MTF charts, but sharpness isn't everything.

[jlmphotos]

Or I could rephrase, which of the two has the most soul? As a reference I find the 35mm f1.4 to have more soul than the f2 version which apparently blows the f1.4 away in MTF charts, but sharpness isn't everything.

 

Agreed the 35 1.4 is oh so much nicer.  I feel good shooting with my 23 1.4  It feels solid, it's fast, and it's heavy which I enjoy.

[petergabriel]

That's what she said ;-)

[GateCityRadio]

The f2 lenses are not bad or lacking of character...I wouldn't call them ugly, but I guess that is subjective. They look very good on the rangefinder style bodies, not so sure about the slr style ones though. The Size and AF speed are also a plus. Aperture isn't the end all be all of lens quality.

[renes]

Or I could rephrase, which of the two has the most soul? As a reference I find the 35mm f1.4 to have more soul than the f2 version which apparently blows the f1.4 away in MTF charts, but sharpness isn't everything.

 

Both 23mm do not have that "sould" 35/1.4, 60/2.4 and 18/2 have (+ 90/2). I found all new f2 WR primes bring ordinary rendering (excluding sharpness) to boring regarding character and "soul". I am selling my 35/2 and buying again 35/1.4. I am also affraid future 35/1.4 mk2 will lose "soul" of the mk1.     

[GateCityRadio]

The 35/2 I have is one of the best lenses I've ever owned. Better than the Pentax limiteds I had (which if you don't know about the FA Limiteds, they are up there with Zeiss and Leica in their rendering) and better than some of the Zeiss lenses I had when I shot sony (only the 55/1.8 being better). 

 

A lens isn't the only thing that gives a picture character or soul, the photographer has to know what they are doing as well. I for one find the rendering of the f2 primes very pleasing. Sharp, but great character, especially in the bokeh.

 

To each their own.