Fuji 35mm f/1.4 lens... Your comments?

ZlatkoBatistich said:
Thanks for the link. Both lenses look truly fantastic but the Leica looks a bit better, as it should for the price. I'm honestly not seeing KR's claim that the Fuji is better in these examples.

The Leica is showing a bit more detail for things that are in focus, but then it should as the magnification of a 50 is greater than that of a 35mm when mounted on the same camera. At f/1.4 the Leica is also showing shallower depth of field than the Fuji, so its out of focus areas look less sharp than those of the Fuji 35. It's still a good comparison, showing that the Fuji 35 offers superb quality.
Click to expand...

Did you look at the edges and corners?
 
BobYIL said:
Did you look at the edges and corners?
Click to expand...

Yes, but it's not a clear comparison there as the subject matter along the edges and corners is different due to one being a 50 and the other a 35. It is very clear that the Leica 50 is not focused on the wall, but rather a few inches nearer. Look at the vine near the center (where it crosses over the black pipe) and the leaves at the bottom left. So it's not going to show the wall in focus anywhere. At the same time, the Fuji is showing a little greater depth of field as it is a 35. It is not an exact comparison, and I'm not sure it is possible to make an exact comparison.

I think it's fair to say that the Fuji is great for the price. It's just that KR's claim is not worth discussing without some direct evidence, and he doesn't offer any. His method is to make bold statements, truth be damned. But the only thing reliable in his reviews are the manufacturers' data, such as the size and weight of a lens. He is defiantly unreliable. On his About page, he describes his web site as his "aggressive personal opinion," and not a "logical presentation of fact." As he says, "I occasionally weave fiction and satire into my stories to keep them interesting. I love a good hoax."
 
The fact that people are even discussing this lens in relation to one of Leica's best tells you something. It doesn't matter if it is as good or better when pixel peeping. It's enough for it to be even close IMO (which I have no clue if it is).
 
They also said x100 is a leica killer and has the best 35mm eq lens ever. Until I see it side by side:

http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/styled-3/x1.html

So until I see a side by side comparison with ASPH+M9, I cannot be sure.

Interestingly, the test result of the Panny 25/1.4 on the lowly m4/3 is better than 50/1.4 ASPH on M9P, so perhaps it is easier to make sharper lens for smaller format than for 35mm.

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/leica25f14dg/tloader.htm
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/leica50f14m/ff/tloader.htm
 
I was out having a chat with a photo friend yesterday and he brought along his M9 with a Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH (not digital), and while we switched cameras and talked (he's going to buy an X-Pro1, he usually takes his X100 out more than the M9) I snapped these two pics.. mind you they are not scientifically metered in anyway, just shooting like people take photos!

M9 with Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH, 200 ISO f1.4 1/25th

XP1 with Fujinon 35mm f1.4, 1250 ISO f1.4 1/148th

I've got some more shots taken with the M9 and a Summilux 50mm f1.4 non-asph i'll put up later, for fun... I used the same ISO with those shots.. It's very fun shooting both, obviously, even better when you can talk light-hearted about both and enjoy shooting.
 
lam said:
I was out having a chat with a photo friend yesterday and he brought along his M9 with a Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH (not digital), and while we switched cameras and talked (he's going to buy an X-Pro1, he usually takes his X100 out more than the M9) I snapped these two pics..
Click to expand...

Obviously a comparison to an M9 image is a tough comparison.

The Fuji image looks excellent, and it was at ISO 1200.

Thanks for the sample!
 
lam said:
I was out having a chat with a photo friend yesterday and he brought along his M9 with a Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH (not digital), and while we switched cameras and talked (he's going to buy an X-Pro1, he usually takes his X100 out more than the M9) I snapped these two pics.. mind you they are not scientifically metered in anyway, just shooting like people take photos!

M9 with Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH, 200 ISO f1.4 1/25th

XP1 with Fujinon 35mm f1.4, 1250 ISO f1.4 1/148th

I've got some more shots taken with the M9 and a Summilux 50mm f1.4 non-asph i'll put up later, for fun... I used the same ISO with those shots.. It's very fun shooting both, obviously, even better when you can talk light-hearted about both and enjoy shooting.
Click to expand...

Just judging by the shutter speeds used, I don't know if it is an apt comparison.
 
fireblade said:
right there ^^ is where you undid yourself ..... you bought price into the factor ..... so your subconscious mind is not happy that Fuji is so much cheaper yet just as good ???
Click to expand...



What a load of Bollocks!

He's just saying the Leica lens is a bit better for (a lot) more money.

A problem every engineer knows.
 
As I said earlier the XP1 with a 35mm - it definitely compares quite favorably to an M9 with a Summilux 50mm. As you can see it does a nice job of reproducing that Leica look. In fact at this point, on occasion the XP1/35mm combo will produce a better photo but I'm not sure it will do it consistently. The thing is at 15% the cost, it certainly is a more than viable alternative for a lot of folks.
 
skibeerr said:
What a load of Bollocks!
He's just saying the Leica lens is a bit better for (a lot) more money.
A problem every engineer knows.
Click to expand...


lol...read what i wrote carefully and slowly..... its not about the lenses in question....its about his thought process...whether leica is better, whether fuji is better, dont care.
understand now....he wants leica to be better 🙂
 
jsrockit said:
You've tested both and come to this conclusion? 🙄
Click to expand...

I have!
At one point i had the capability of doing just that.
i tested them both in extremes and using a Collimator and again using pointed sources of light and again focus testing using aperture control as well as visual testing, and again by actual use, and in every single test the Fuji 35/1.4 came out "better".
Same with the 18mm vs the 28 Summicron and the 28 elmarit.
At this point its just sour grapes between Leica and everyone else when it comes to sitting down and making really high performance lenses, almost all of the manufacturers out there now, when they choose to, make lenses that are exceptional and brilliant.
Zeiss's new 55 lens for $4000 look to make that Leica 50 f2 lens look a little less brilliant and at half the price.
To my mind Leica are rapidly becoming boutique equipment manufacturer and their belief in them making "the very best there is" is rapidly becoming challenged across the board.
 
New Fuji Xpro1 owner

New Fuji Xpro1 owner

My Xpro 1 and 18mm and 35mm lens came in last night ...updated all of the firmware ....camera is amazing ...I have owned an original x100, Pentax K-10s, 20's and K-5 cameras with limited glass. I have Canon 5dmk II's and all L glass plus Leica M6 and Summicron glass and I have to say the Xpro1 is outstanding from some of the test shots I did yesterday. The lens and camera are not as heavy or solid feeling as the Leica stuff but what the camera can do does not leave you wanting. I am very excited about this camera. A big improvement over the x100 I use to own. The way things are going I might sell my Canon gear and buy the next Fuji x pro model that comes out to do my photo work with. I think people do too much testing and pixel peeping instead of shooting photos. The 35mm 1.4 Fuji lens is very sharp and works well. I do not regret buying the 35mm lens. I think it works and looks just as good as any other lens I have. I know each lens has a different character to them but as far as image quality it seems very good to me.🙂
 
intheviewfinder said:
As I said earlier the XP1 with a 35mm - it definitely compares quite favorably to an M9 with a Summilux 50mm. As you can see it does a nice job of reproducing that Leica look. In fact at this point, on occasion the XP1/35mm combo will produce a better photo but I'm not sure it will do it consistently. The thing is at 15% the cost, it certainly is a more than viable alternative for a lot of folks.
Click to expand...

I guess it's safe to say....

Fuji can do Leica better than Leica can do Fuji 😛
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jamie Pillers
One camera, one lens?
2 3
Replies
48
Views
1K
38Deardorff
38Deardorff
AusDLK
Wobbly Canon LTM 50mm f/1.4 Lens
Replies
12
Views
607
AusDLK
AusDLK
A
Fuji GSW 690 Lens hood
Replies
0
Views
192
Alpsman
A
Yokosuka Mike
Voigtländer Color-Skopar 18mm f2.8 (Fuji X-mount) lens - Images
2
Replies
25
Views
4K
Duofold RF
D
B
Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 flange problem
Replies
3
Views
402
Sonnar Brian
Sonnar Brian
Back
Top Bottom