Jump to content
godspeed

35mm f2 vs f1.4

Recommended Posts

Trying to decide which 35mm should I get.

 

I mainly would be shooting documentary-style weddings and family sessions.

 

I have 35mm f2 at work that I use on daily basis. I love it's AF speed, silent operation, size, weight and image quality. But sometimes I wish for that extra bit of smooth bokeh. I tried 35mm f1.4 briefly at the camera store and generally I was pleased with AF speed and that extra shallow DOF, but I didn't have time to compare both 35mm head to head.

 

Basically it's about $100 difference between those lenses on used market, with f1.4 being more expensive.

 

I'm really interested in experience of someone who has/had both lenses and would love to hear why you decided on one or another.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I've seen these threads already before posting. I don't necessary ask people who HAVE these two lenses, but rather people who HAD or tested both of them. I'd love to hear why they chose one over the other.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not used the f/2 but, whilst I love the look of the 1.4, it is a bit slow and clunky to focus.

If you need to focus quickly, or need to track things around the frame the /1.4 has trouble keeping up.

Still I wouldn't change mine, the f/2 would result in about an f/3.2 depth of field equivalent on a 50mm. Not shallow enough for what I'm after.

I think it all depends on what you shoot!

 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with drandyperry's comments. I do actually have both lenses. The f1.4 is a beautiful lens when you can work in a slow and considered way, but after numerous failed shots of my dogs running through fields on their daily walks I bought the f2, and I find it excellent for anything where fast focus is required. It is also weather resistant, which is a bonus. My f1.4, which I bought used, is now very battered and full of dust, but I can't quite bring myself to sell it (and wouldn't get much for it, anyway). Images taken with the f1.4 have a certain subtlety to them; the bokeh is a little more pleasing than with the f2 and there's perhaps slightly better micro contrast. But there's not much in it. For events work I'd definitely go with the f2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decided to go for 35mm 1.4. It has this "zeiss-like" 3D pop that I absolutely miss since switching to Fuji last year. I tested both f2 and 1.4 on X-T2 and f2 is just a tad faster, but not by much. I think it might be a different story on older cameras. In low-light, however, 1.4 focuses way faster than f2. I heard people saying that f2 doesn't hunt, but I had 2 of these lenses and they do hunt a lot in low light. I tend to shoot wide open anyway. Some might not see a big difference in DOF and bokeh, but it is really noticeable to me. The price difference was only $75, so I decided to go for it. I think I will get f2 some time down the road though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love, love, love my 35 1.4   Those new 23, 35 and 50 F2 lenses may be faster focusing and (supposedly) sharper as told to us by all the paid shills on the inter webs, but I don't give a crap.  I LOVE my 35 1.4.  Won't part with it.  The images are just phenomenal, clear, and oh so "zen like"  Yeah.  I said it.  That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

Oh:  And those F2 lenses are BUTT UGLY.  and yes that does make a difference to me.

Edited by jlmphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

I started with 35 f/2 and was pretty happy with it, except for the huge amount of distortion in RAW and the AF, very fast, but often unreliable. I bought the f/1,4 and owned both for a few weeks. Finally decided to sell the f/2 and keep the f/1,4 because of the more reliable AF (even if it is not superfast), and for the overall rendering at f/1,4 which I found very pleasant. But both are very good lenses, "the" best one is a matter of taste. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

traded all my faster equivalents for the f/2 versions. They're sharper at the same apertures and much quieter, faster and more lightweight. Losing a soft extra stop is no real loss. Made a profit too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

traded all my faster equivalents for the f/2 versions. They're sharper at the same apertures and much quieter, faster and more lightweight. Losing a soft extra stop is no real loss. Made a profit too!

Sharper is just not true, especially with the 23 and 50/56mm ones. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you use AF the fuji cameras perform AF at the wide open aperture (they stop down when you half press the shutter unless you're using the preview DOF function)

 

This is why the 1.4 has faster AF in low light, it's got a stop more light gathering AF ability (even if stopped down on the aperture ring)

 

IQ is subjective. Sharpness is not equal across the image between the lenses, ie where in the F2 is sharper in the centre at F2 it's weaker in the extreme corners. The Fuji vs Fuji review stated that by F5.6 the 1.4 was sharper everywhere

 

So the strengths and minuses of each lens is well known. Unlike the two 23s or the 50/56 there's not a colossal cost or size saving to pick to one over the other

 

I own both. I personally prefer the 1.4, I might flip the f2 as I never use it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only people who never owned the F1.4 find the F2 better, they want to feel comfortable about their purchase which is understandable.

 

But look at both flickr galleries and you'll immediatly see where the keepers are.

 

Now the 50mm F2 is in a different league than the 23 and 35 F2 (which are "consumer lenses" imo. Not that it's bad, they are very good for the low price)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

reading is hard I guess.

 

No you said they are sharper (debatable) quieter (true) faster (true) and more lightweight (true).

 

The image rendering has been left out in your comparison

/uploads/emoticons/default_smile.png">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you use AF the fuji cameras perform AF at the wide open aperture (they stop down when you half press the shutter unless you're using the preview DOF function)

 

This is why the 1.4 has faster AF in low light, it's got a stop more light gathering AF ability (even if stopped down on the aperture ring)

 

IQ is subjective. Sharpness is not equal across the image between the lenses, ie where in the F2 is sharper in the centre at F2 it's weaker in the extreme corners. The Fuji vs Fuji review stated that by F5.6 the 1.4 was sharper everywhere

 

So the strengths and minuses of each lens is well known. Unlike the two 23s or the 50/56 there's not a colossal cost or size saving to pick to one over the other

 

I own both. I personally prefer the 1.4, I might flip the f2 as I never use it

Surely it only tries to focus when you half press the shutter button (or bbf).

I tried my heart out (including turning off depth of field preview) and I couldn't manage to shoot using Phase detect at f/11 during my recent trip to Le Mans. (see other thread). So if the focusing is done at the exposure aperture then it must be the motors that are speeding up the f/2 lenses.

 

If you, or anyone have a way of focusing wide open and then only stopping down to take the shot is love to know how you do it.

 

Andy

 

 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugly? This is UGLY....

 

jupiter.JPG

 

 

 

and my f2's are just gems!

/uploads/emoticons/default_biggrin.png">

 

DAMN brother.  That is hideous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only people who never owned the F1.4 find the F2 better, they want to feel comfortable about their purchase which is understandable.

 

But look at both flickr galleries and you'll immediatly see where the keepers are.

 

Now the 50mm F2 is in a different league than the 23 and 35 F2 (which are "consumer lenses" imo. Not that it's bad, they are very good for the low price)

I was considering the 50 F2 but instead went with the multi-purpose 60mm f2.4 macro.  Just an amazing tack sharp lens.  Does it hunt?  Yup. Is it slow?  Sometimes yup.   Would I swap it out for anything else in the Fuji line-up at the current timeframe?  NOPE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugly? This is UGLY....

 

jupiter.JPG

 

 

 

and my f2's are just gems!

/uploads/emoticons/default_biggrin.png">

 Ugly? That's a piece of art

/uploads/emoticons/default_cool.png">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it only tries to focus when you half press the shutter button (or bbf).

I tried my heart out (including turning off depth of field preview) and I couldn't manage to shoot using Phase detect at f/11 during my recent trip to Le Mans. (see other thread). So if the focusing is done at the exposure aperture then it must be the motors that are speeding up the f/2 lenses.

If you, or anyone have a way of focusing wide open and then only stopping down to take the shot is love to know how you do it.

Andy

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

The AF motors in the newer lenses are faster, and they're moving less glass too

 

I just tested my camera in single AF mode

 

X-Pro2 / xf56 APD

 

I set F16

 

The camera closed the aperture to f16 (nb my camera is not set up to auto adjust evf brightness)

I half pressed the shutter whilst looking down the lens

The camera opens the aperture whilst doing an AF run, the closes it once focus is acquired

 

The APD is a good test for this as it's slow and you get a lot of time to see what's happening

/uploads/emoticons/default_smile.png">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really loving my 35mm f21.4 so far! I find focus to be more reliable than f2 version which I also have. It's slower, but not by much. But IQ and rendering is what matters for me and 1.4 delivers! It might not be exceptionally sharp at 1.4 and close distances, but it's enough for me! I tend to shoot wide open, stopping down maybe 10% of the time. Took it for a short shoot few days ago. This photo says it all

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I own the 35mm f2. It was my first Fuji lens and remains my most used lens. That said, I borrowed my friend's 1.4 and what people say about the rendering of the images is true. I don't think you can go wrong with either, and there are clear advantages of the f2. But the character of the 1.4 is special. I've read others say they prefer the IQ of the f2, so like everything, it's subjective. Personally I hope to own the 1.4 someday soon. It's my favorite focal length and would complement, rather than make redundant, the f2.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...