35mm comparison

[lleo]

Camera on tripod. f/1,4 vs f/2.

It's quite clear one of the two is not really 35mm

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!

[milandro]

the focal length in all lenses is always been and always will be an approximated value.

 

Clearly one is approximated per excess and another per defect of 35mm or the angle of view can be slightly different even at the same focal length.

 

The same slight difference of angle that you have s “ discovered” is clear to see also on the pictures by Fuji itself. Curiously they too had a 35 1.4 which produced a darker image than a 35mm 2 and this shows also that , as it is always been, these values are approximated too.

 

Edited September 10, 2017 by milandro

[johant]

Indeed not really the same ... I prefer the look of the 35/1.4 photos, by the way.

[lleo]

I already saw the pics by Fuji. However I tend not to believe too much to "official" photos taken by companies since there's always the doubt regarding the business. Which lens do they want to sell more at that time? So, take those kind of pics not as the "holy truth".

I also think those pics are kinda fake. Not been taken who knows how, but surely not in the correct way.

My ones are much more trusty. I tried to change the lens as soon as I shot the first pic, with self timer at 2 secs, and you can see there isn't a huge difference in light as in the ones taken by Fuji.

[milandro]

actually I see the exact same smaller field and aperture differences that your pictures have.

 

Anyway there are no revelations there that Fuji didn’t dislclose

Edited September 11, 2017 by milandro

[Mistik-ka]

actually I see the exact same smaller fiend and aperture differences.

 

Anyway there are no revelations there that Fuji didn’t dislclose

 

I don't recall them disclosing the different fiends in their lenses. When I stumble upon one from time to time it always comes as a surprise. 

[BillSnell]

Hi, Maybe it is image correction either in camera (jpeg) or in whatever software you may use (Raw). There would be more lens distortion to correct in the f1.4 than the f2 I would think.

[milandro]

this is not a distortion but a difference of field view (or angle or view).

 

As I wrote before,  the nominal focal lens is always an approximation (and it is always been throughout the history of photography)

 

They have published this pictures that I’ve shown above and the difference in angle of view is to see in plain sight. And, to me they are absolutely consistent with OP’s pictures above.

 

They show one lens having a little wider field of view (and a difference in exposure consistent in both examples, Fuji’s and Op’s).

 

So they have never made any mystery of this.

 

The declared ( in the lens specifications by Fuji) angle of view of the 1.4 is 44.2º and the one of the f2 is a 44.1º and this is clearly what we see in their pictures too.

 

One is minutely wider than the other. That’s it. No big deal.

Edited September 11, 2017 by milandro

[lleo]

Hi, Maybe it is image correction either in camera (jpeg) or in whatever software you may use (Raw). There would be more lens distortion to correct in the f1.4 than the f2 I would think.

 

Bill, if I remember well, the f/1.4 has the correction of the distortion directly inside the lens (the optical scheme), while the f/2 has it through the in camera software

[lleo]

actually I see the exact same smaller field and aperture differences that your pictures have.

 

Anyway there are no revelations there that Fuji didn’t dislclose

 

It's about the light, not the field of view. It's impossible for one lens being as much darker as the other, compared to the pictures I took. Unless one of the two as an issue. But haveing seen the sky, I rather think they took the picture while the sun was covered by a cloud. A mistake not to do if comparing lenses or cameras or other.

[milandro]

But your original comment was about the angle not about the light difference ( which is present and consistent in both your and their picture alike).

 

However we are repeating ourselves.

 

We made our point. I have no reason to argue with you.

 

People can judge for themselves.

 

 

Camera on tripod. f/1,4 vs f/2.

It's quite clear one of the two is not really 35mm

Edited September 13, 2017 by milandro

[lleo]

Not arguing but it seems to be in school with "...my pen is better than yours..." or "...my solution to the problem is better than yours..."

I guess it's clear when I posted my pictures you haven't posted yours yet, or am I wrong? So I couldn't see the light stuff.

Then, once you posted those samples, I noticed it and I wrote that.

It's as simple as that. But, related to the next posts, let me know because every time I'll post one I might add "...this is my post, but Milandro will surely arrive with the right one".

[milandro]

If it pleases you I will tell that you are right in having made your discovery.

 

I don’t have a horse in this race.

 

Be well and enjoy all your lenses. 

Edited September 14, 2017 by milandro

[lleo]

Thank you, same to you.