Anyone have a SLR magic 23mm 1.7?

[nongfuspring]

I just tried one out today and was quite impressed, it felt really good in the hand and worked nicely on the X-E1. From what I saw I think compared to Fuji lenses it isn't quite as sharp wide open and didn't have as much contrast overall, which depending on how you like to PP may not be such a bad thing. The bokeh was really smooth, and it was fast to manually focus.

Anyway, I'm trying to decide between getting one or either a second hand 35 1.4 or 18-55. At $400 bucks it's not exactly cheap, especially with Fuji's lens specials on at the moment, so I'm keen to hear if anyone has any opinions on it.

 

[rhl-oregon]

I bought mine in a generous offering by another RFFer, and love it. Very close focus + short well-damped throw from 1-2m/infinity for quick street focus. It balances sweetly on the XE; I now have 2 XE models so I can keep XF lenses on one, and use the other for lenses like this (including a Zuiko 25 2.8, a Serenar 100 3.5, CV C-Sonnars, and Zeiss G lenses).

On the other hand: If you (by which I mean the next reader, not OP) like click-stop aperture, this lens is not for you. Aperture ring is silent as the ninja outside your bathroom door...

Additional edit: If choosing between the XF 35 and the SLR-M 23-->my original choice was the 35 1.4. It's the most versatile XF lens. If I had to start over, or make a one cam/one lens decision, the XF 35 1.4 would prevail. But I love the 23 1.7 for its size, speed, and manual operation.

 

[nongfuspring]

Thanks Robert, that helps. I think I will probably go along with the 35mm 1.4, at least for the time being with the 23 1.7 following close behind

 

[agoglanian]

I wish the Fuji XF 23mm was the same size as the SLR magic version... The XF is SO big for a mirrorless lens. Even if they matched the size of the XF 35 it would have been perfect.

I love the XF 35, that would be the one lens I'd keep if I had to sell the rest.

 

[back alley]

the xf 23 doesn't seem all that big when in use…to me, anyway. and it's pretty light.

 

[nongfuspring]

Thanks guys. I ended up finding a new 35 for 350 USD which I just couldn't pass up. I absolutely adore it and the images are incredible, though the AF isn't much to write home about and it could sure do with a distance scale. Shooting with it a while makes me feel a 23mm wouldn't be so useful a partner to a 35 as an 18 or 14, considering there are a few photo-essay projects later this year that will probably be mostly indoors (makeshift underground houses, bunkers, ultra compact housing units etc.). I actually ended up buying a cheap Olympus Mju I for a 35 equiv, which is turning out to be a pretty fun camera.

 

[rhl-oregon]

I support the premise about 28/50 pairing when 50 is your base focal length (using standard focal lengths, not APSC numbers). The XF 18 and 18-55 are more affordable, too, than the newer 14 and 23. Still, a lot can be done with the 35 1.4 as long as you're willing to take 10 steps forward and 10 steps back.

 

[noimmunity]

the xf 23 doesn't seem all that big when in use…to me, anyway. and it's pretty light.

After using another APS-C camera, the SD1M, for a few weeks, I can say that the Fuji lenses like the 23 are tiny featherweights by comparison.

(Now, it's a shame that Sigma doesn't make lenses for XF mount and that Fuji doesn't make lenses for Sigma SA mount!)