Fuji 23mm f1.4 or f2

tijuana taxi

tijuana taxi

Messages
15,484
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
Thinking about adding a 23mm lens to my outfit and would be interested in your views please on the two variations.
Not usually a big fan of primes, but got an idea of a project that this focal length would suit very nicely.

I have read about them and therefore know about price difference, weather sealing, size, weight, etc
What I really want is actual user views on the output quality and how it varies between the two and any glaring cons with either

Thanks
Rich
 
F2 soft wide open sharpens up by f2.8. F1.4 copy I had was sharp at 1.4 and all the way through.

Obviously you gain a stop of light with the 1.4 and it's built like a tank so it's heavier. You also get manual focus pull/push if you want to use MF.

I sold my 1.4 to buy the f2 as I wanted something smaller for everyday, then sold the f2 for something totally different. If I was buying again I'd buy the 1.4. :)
 
I've only used the 23/1.4 and it's my favourite of all the X series lenses I've owned or used (14, 18, 27, 23/2.8, 35/1.4, 55-200). From what I know of the lenses, the 1.4 is optically a far superior lens but the f/2 has superior focus capabilities and makes up for slightly poorer optical performance with digital corrections through the LMO.

I'd get the 23/1.4 if you can afford the difference.
 
Thanks, pretty conclusive thus far.

I had both variants of the 35mm, still got the 1.4 and it seems like this is the same story. F/2 was decent enough, just not quite as good although a lot quicker to focus and quieter too
 
The only thing that might tempt me towards the f/2 was if I was shooting with either the -Pro1 or Pro2, I believe the primary reason for Fuji producing the smaller f/2 primes was to manage the intrusion of the lens into the field of view of the OVF. But then again having briefly owned a -Pro1, I'm not keen on the OVF anyway :)
 
Thank you, will keep my eye out for a secondhand one, even with the upcoming cashback new is nigh on 700 quid
 
I think they stopped the free filter with refurb lenses, but with the 12 month Fuji UK warranty it's as good as buying new :D
 
Last edited:
I've had both on my X-Pro2 - the 1.4 was too big, too heavy and too clunky and I didn't like the manual focus ring. The f2 was better for me - smaller, lighter, quicker, cheaper and didn't protrude so far into the OVF - the IQ seemed fine to me.
 
Last edited:
Probably my next lens is the 23mmF2. This is because I am a street photographer and the smaller size, focusing, and wr - which doesn't do that much but I have used my wr gear in the p***ing rain and it was fine for a short period of time.

I find F2 is fast enough for street photography, as much as I like the look of the F1.4, the F2 suits my needs better.
 
Biggest con I can see with F2 is that (unless you need WR) you should buy a X100 variant.

I used a friend's F1.4 and it's great, the extra 1 stop is really important. I'd prefer to have my X100 (classic) over the F2 lens any day of the week. X100 is smaller, lighter than the F2 + camera combo and it frees up the camera for a mid-tele.
 
Rosedalelad said:
I've had both on my X-Pro2 - the 1.4 was too big, too.heavy and too clunky and I didn't like the manual focus ring. The f2 was better for me - smaller, lighter, quicker, cheaper and didn't protrude so far into the OVF - the IQ seemed fine to me.
Click to expand...
:agree: :plus1:
 
Still undecided, comments have swung back to the f2 version, really need to try them out to compare, but that's unlikely to happen.
 
Have to say the 23mm f2 was the least impressive Fuji lens I've ever tried. Maybe, I was hoping for too much but it just wasn't as sharp as other Fuji primes, the 35mm f2 is much sharper imo.

But I'm no professional !
 
I just didn't like the 23/2. It looked weird, IQ was ok but nothing special. Sharp enough provided you weren't REALLY close to the subject. Did focus fast though!

The 23/1.4 I owned previously just had something more IQ wise - stunningly sharp and a similar in/out focus transition to the 35/1.4 (which I love). But the 23/1.4 does feel big, certainly on the smaller bodies.

BTW, the 23/2 gives a slightly wider view if I remember correctly, closer to 21mm?
 
I had the 1.4 and sold it. It was too big & heavy for me for street photography and was too slow to focus. I was never satisfied with zone focussing on it either as the lock wouldn't push in where I wanted it. Leaving it loose was a no-go as well as it would just move while I was carrying it. In terms of sharpness and quality, it was superb, but I found I was never using it. I'm going to be getting the f2 for street photography. Smaller, lighter and better AF as mentioned above.

For your uses though, the 1.4 sounds like the best option.
 
wuyanxu said:
Biggest con I can see with F2 is that (unless you need WR) you should buy a X100 variant.

I used a friend's F1.4 and it's great, the extra 1 stop is really important. I'd prefer to have my X100 (classic) over the F2 lens any day of the week. X100 is smaller, lighter than the F2 + camera combo and it frees up the camera for a mid-tele.
Click to expand...
Can't subscribe to that view, isn't an X100 about triple the price?

Having been using the Fuji system for a few months now, I realised I was becoming proficient at abusing wide apertures. Shallow DoF does not a good shot make!
 
Anyone have a 23 f1.4 on an XT10 or 20? How does it handle? Is it too big and heavy for the smaller body?
 
I tried one and sold it and bought the f2 instead. It feels a lot better IMO.
However, my intended use for the 23 is group portraits, where thin depth of field is not normally needed.
 
Going out this morning for a wander and will set my zoom at 23mm to see just how much I want/like that focal length.

Had a good look through my photos and have to say not that many at 23mm, most are wider which surprised me a bit
 
UKmitch86 said:
Can't subscribe to that view, isn't an X100 about triple the price?
Click to expand...

Second hand X100S can be had for not much more than 23mm F2. X100 is less, it's my favourite camera of all time, but to some people it's too quirky.

tijuana taxi said:
Going out this morning for a wander and will set my zoom at 23mm to see just how much I want/like that focal length.

Had a good look through my photos and have to say not that many at 23mm, most are wider which surprised me a bit
Click to expand...

Then have a look at 18mm F2 or X70 :)

Or go the full hog like me and get the brilliant 10-24mm F4 (replaced my Canon 17-40mm when I switched). I never bought any normal focal length lens until recently. Always rocked X100 + 60mm on X-E2 combo, or 10-24 + 60mm lens combo.
 
Not that keen on the 18mm, 14mm, 60mm and 10-24mm are already in the house, just fancied trying a faster prime
 
tijuana taxi said:
Had a good look through my photos and have to say not that many at 23mm, most are wider which surprised me a bit
Click to expand...
If you've got a zoom you'll generally find that focal lengths cluster against the stops, so shooting with an 18-55mm most people will naturally tend to shoot at either 18mm or 55mm. So unless you've got a zoom that starts or ends it's range close to 23mm, don't expect to find many images clustered around that focal length in your archives. Which is interesting, because most people will also describe a zoom as covering the full range of focal lengths of the lens when in practice it's closer to being the equivalent of carrying two primes, one at either end of the zoom range.

The 23/1.4 is a fantastic lens, the image quality is outstanding, it's a really useful focal length, but it is bulky. The size/weight is the trade-off for the image quality and being a fully optically corrected lens. For a "pocket prime" I use the 27mm, and to be honest it's the pancake prime that lives on my X-E2 most of the year. I generally keep the L-bracket fitted to my X-E2 if I'm shooting regularly with anything other than the 27mm because it helps the balance with the larger lenses.
 
The Fuji X100 lens is rather soft compared to the XF lenses I believe.
 
pete s said:
Anyone have a 23 f1.4 on an XT10 or 20? How does it handle? Is it too big and heavy for the smaller body?
Click to expand...

I've got the 1.4 for my XT-10. It's certainly front heavy, but there again, so is the 18-55. I have managed to pick up a second hand metal Fuji grip and that helps balance things out when using these bigger lenses.
 
I've the 23 1.4 at the moment and love it, but to offer another idea, was thinking of getting the 27 2.8 due to its size. Nice small compact cheap prime and the reviews seem to painting it in a good light.
 
Alastair said:
If you've got a zoom you'll generally find that focal lengths cluster against the stops, so shooting with an 18-55mm most people will naturally tend to shoot at either 18mm or 55mm. So unless you've got a zoom that starts or ends it's range close to 23mm, don't expect to find many images clustered around that focal length in your archives. Which is interesting, because most people will also describe a zoom as covering the full range of focal lengths of the lens when in practice it's closer to being the equivalent of carrying two primes, one at either end of the zoom range.

The 23/1.4 is a fantastic lens, the image quality is outstanding, it's a really useful focal length, but it is bulky. The size/weight is the trade-off for the image quality and being a fully optically corrected lens. For a "pocket prime" I use the 27mm, and to be honest it's the pancake prime that lives on my X-E2 most of the year. I generally keep the L-bracket fitted to my X-E2 if I'm shooting regularly with anything other than the 27mm because it helps the balance with the larger lenses.
Click to expand...


That bit about zooms is very true Alastair, have to admit though even with the 10-24 I didn't find many at the long end.

Went out today and mainly used 23mm, took a few either side for comparison, to be honest think I preferred the 35mm view.
Anyway just to satisfy my curiosity I found a cheapish open box copy of the f2 lens which can be returned for a refund if not wanted. Don't like to take advantage of buying a new one just to try and then sending it back, seems like a cheek.

Like the sound of the f1.4 albeit size and weight is a drawback, but this opportunity presented itself so will give it a go
 
Alastair said:
If you've got a zoom you'll generally find that focal lengths cluster against the stops, so shooting with an 18-55mm most people will naturally tend to shoot at either 18mm or 55mm. So unless you've got a zoom that starts or ends it's range close to 23mm, don't expect to find many images clustered around that focal length in your archives. Which is interesting, because most people will also describe a zoom as covering the full range of focal lengths of the lens when in practice it's closer to being the equivalent of carrying two primes, one at either end of the zoom range.

The 23/1.4 is a fantastic lens, the image quality is outstanding, it's a really useful focal length, but it is bulky. The size/weight is the trade-off for the image quality and being a fully optically corrected lens. For a "pocket prime" I use the 27mm, and to be honest it's the pancake prime that lives on my X-E2 most of the year. I generally keep the L-bracket fitted to my X-E2 if I'm shooting regularly with anything other than the 27mm because it helps the balance with the larger lenses.
Click to expand...
Very true in my case except for the 10-24, which I use all over the range.
 
I don't think the size is THAT big, sure, compare to the lens on my iPhone, it is massive. It is larger than the 23/2.0 but is it so big its s prohibitive?

It's not 200mm/1.8, it's about the same size as the 56/1.2 and coming from DSLR, which I think the majority people here are, the 56/1.2 is a small lens. It's about the size of the Nifty Fifty isn't it. Nobody ever say that is a big lens.

Larger than the 23/2.0. Yes.
So big I find it uncomfortable and can't pick it up? No............
 
Raymond Lin said:
I don't think the size is THAT big, sure, compare to the lens on my iPhone, it is massive. It is larger than the 23/2.0 but is it so big its s prohibitive?

It's not 200mm/1.8, it's about the same size as the 56/1.2 and coming from DSLR, which I think the majority people here are, the 56/1.2 is a small lens. It's about the size of the Nifty Fifty isn't it. Nobody ever say that is a big lens.

Larger than the 23/2.0. Yes.
So big I find it uncomfortable and can't pick it up? No............
Click to expand...
It's more intrusive into the OVF of the X-Pros. I don't come directly from DSLRs but m4/3, and I find comparison with NiCan lenses irrelevant. Mind you, most things are tiny compared with my Bronica!
 
Stephen L said:
It's more intrusive into the OVF of the X-Pros. I don't come directly from DSLRs but m4/3, and I find comparison with NiCan lenses irrelevant. Mind you, most things are tiny compared with my Bronica!
Click to expand...

It's finnnnnne :)

6QT9Doy.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top