Avotius
Some guy
A friend of mine was lucky enough to get a production copy of the Fuji 23 f1.4 for review and called me over to check it out since we are both Fuji X users. He has an X-Pro1 and I have the X-E1.
Unfortunately I don't have any pictures to share right now so we will have to get by with the images in our heads. I will try to put some pictures up in a day or so after I process them a bit.
The lens feels ok on the X-Pro1 with its more substantial grip, on the X-E1 the lens feels a little large but not as bad as some of the adapted lenses I have been using lately. Its a little shorter than the various 50mm SLR lenses I have adapted on my Fuji so thats not so bad but it is thicker. It does make the camera feel a bit front heavy.
When you add the ridiculous hood it felt really wrong to me though. The hood is not like the other neat Fuji metal hoods and stick out too much and feels like after a while it might jiggle around after being mounted and dismounted with time. Also the look of the hood does not connect with the design language of the lenses or camera, it feels out of place.
Auto focus speed on both cameras was good. Better than my old Olympus EP1 with the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 lens. Not as good as the best but good enough I think.
Image quality seems to be good too. We got really tired of the stupid looking hood and ditched it. After taking a handful of snaps in overcast weather it seems this lens will be really nice for black and white, there is a certain brightness to the images that keeps things from being dull even with our bad weather these days. Distortion and such seems to be good and we did not notice anything nasty. Later the sun came out and we shot some photos with sun and had some minor flare spots but none of the kind that drops global contrast, so it was good on that front.
On the X-Pro1 the lens looks really at home, on the X-E1 it still seemed a little large but manageable. The X-E1 might benefit from a accessory grip if you use this lens.
One question we kept asking ourselves though is about the price. The lens is a good 300 some dollars more than the 35mm f1.4....and what you get is nicer build, not very useful focusing scale (because there are not enough indications on the lens of how far you are focused) stupid hood, larger lens and a wider view. In our opinion it was a bit of a tough sale and we both agreed that if we were spending our own money the 35mm would be our choice, but if we had rich guy cash, the 23mm would be extremely tempting just because its wider. In the end I would have the 35mm and maybe a 18mm as a kit, which is a little more expensive than the 23mm but you got two lenses. My friend would take the 23mm, he seemed pretty won over by it.
Unfortunately I don't have any pictures to share right now so we will have to get by with the images in our heads. I will try to put some pictures up in a day or so after I process them a bit.
The lens feels ok on the X-Pro1 with its more substantial grip, on the X-E1 the lens feels a little large but not as bad as some of the adapted lenses I have been using lately. Its a little shorter than the various 50mm SLR lenses I have adapted on my Fuji so thats not so bad but it is thicker. It does make the camera feel a bit front heavy.
When you add the ridiculous hood it felt really wrong to me though. The hood is not like the other neat Fuji metal hoods and stick out too much and feels like after a while it might jiggle around after being mounted and dismounted with time. Also the look of the hood does not connect with the design language of the lenses or camera, it feels out of place.
Auto focus speed on both cameras was good. Better than my old Olympus EP1 with the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 lens. Not as good as the best but good enough I think.
Image quality seems to be good too. We got really tired of the stupid looking hood and ditched it. After taking a handful of snaps in overcast weather it seems this lens will be really nice for black and white, there is a certain brightness to the images that keeps things from being dull even with our bad weather these days. Distortion and such seems to be good and we did not notice anything nasty. Later the sun came out and we shot some photos with sun and had some minor flare spots but none of the kind that drops global contrast, so it was good on that front.
On the X-Pro1 the lens looks really at home, on the X-E1 it still seemed a little large but manageable. The X-E1 might benefit from a accessory grip if you use this lens.
One question we kept asking ourselves though is about the price. The lens is a good 300 some dollars more than the 35mm f1.4....and what you get is nicer build, not very useful focusing scale (because there are not enough indications on the lens of how far you are focused) stupid hood, larger lens and a wider view. In our opinion it was a bit of a tough sale and we both agreed that if we were spending our own money the 35mm would be our choice, but if we had rich guy cash, the 23mm would be extremely tempting just because its wider. In the end I would have the 35mm and maybe a 18mm as a kit, which is a little more expensive than the 23mm but you got two lenses. My friend would take the 23mm, he seemed pretty won over by it.
David_Manning
Well-known
Pretty good, user-centric, practical review. Thanks for taking the time.
I was waiting and waiting for this lens, but turned off by the size (more than the price, actually). I was hoping the X-Pro 1 kit wouldn't balloon the size of the basic camera, to keep to classic RF design.
I have the 35/18 combo, and it's great...but I'm always wrestling with which lens to mount when just carrying. A single 35fov (23mm in this instance) seems to solve this uncertainty.
I've moved on to an M9 and 35, so I'll probably end up selling a nice XP1 kit, but it is a nice kit, and so much more useful in the lower light (for color, anyway). I unfortunately had an itch that HAD to be scratched!
I was waiting and waiting for this lens, but turned off by the size (more than the price, actually). I was hoping the X-Pro 1 kit wouldn't balloon the size of the basic camera, to keep to classic RF design.
I have the 35/18 combo, and it's great...but I'm always wrestling with which lens to mount when just carrying. A single 35fov (23mm in this instance) seems to solve this uncertainty.
I've moved on to an M9 and 35, so I'll probably end up selling a nice XP1 kit, but it is a nice kit, and so much more useful in the lower light (for color, anyway). I unfortunately had an itch that HAD to be scratched!
Kwesi
Well-known
Funny, I also feel that the M9/240 is the logical upgrade path to the xpro1. It's almost as if Fuji is subconsciously grooming future Digital M users with their fantastic X line.
It's a real shame that they have dropped the rectangular hoods. It was a real touch of class.
It's a real shame that they have dropped the rectangular hoods. It was a real touch of class.
willie_901
Veteran
The cost is reasonable when compared to Nikon's newest primes. And the fast XF primes do not have the high degree of longitudinal CA that plagues Nikons fast G series primes. I have no issue with the cost as long as the lens performs well. Yes, you can buy a nice X100 for the price of the 23/1.4 lens. But this doesn't mean the 23/1.4 is over priced. It just means you have two very different options for this field of view.
The lens size is unavoidable because of the APS-C sensor. Smaller sensors mean smaller, less expensive bodies, but then you have to use larger lenses to compensate for the reduction in sensor surface area. You either need more sensor area or more glass area to maximize the signal to noise ratio and dynamic range. There is no free lunch when it comes to recording light.
I ordered two threaded hoods for my pre-ordered 23/1.4 on ebay for less than $20. One is a vented hood and the other is a simple circular design. I realize these hoods will not attenuate flare as effectively as the large petal hood, but they will have some effect and protect the front element.
Of course the petal hoods are ridiculous. Fuji seems to respond to customer input. Perhaps they will offer a square hood option in the future. Unfortunately their square hoods have flawed caps. I agree with Kwesi that Fuji needs to rethink their lens hood offerings.
The lens size is unavoidable because of the APS-C sensor. Smaller sensors mean smaller, less expensive bodies, but then you have to use larger lenses to compensate for the reduction in sensor surface area. You either need more sensor area or more glass area to maximize the signal to noise ratio and dynamic range. There is no free lunch when it comes to recording light.
I ordered two threaded hoods for my pre-ordered 23/1.4 on ebay for less than $20. One is a vented hood and the other is a simple circular design. I realize these hoods will not attenuate flare as effectively as the large petal hood, but they will have some effect and protect the front element.
Of course the petal hoods are ridiculous. Fuji seems to respond to customer input. Perhaps they will offer a square hood option in the future. Unfortunately their square hoods have flawed caps. I agree with Kwesi that Fuji needs to rethink their lens hood offerings.
GaryLH
Veteran
Thanks for the info... The 35f1.4 was never a lens I was interested in anyway, but I do think that it should be a great lens. The heavier lenses are the main reason that I always felt the xp1 was the perfect body because they will always balance better. I have both the xe1 and xp1. The xe1 just about has the 27 pancake semi-permanent on it...
There was a time when I had a itch for the Leica monochrom. But that was as close as I ever got.. Once I bought my first sigma dp Merrill and started shooting b&w, that went away for me.
One can say it both ways really
- upgrade from xp1 to Leica m digital for those who really want the true rf digital experience
- upgrade from Leica digital m to xp1 for those who are after af and high iso performance
Cheers
Gary
There was a time when I had a itch for the Leica monochrom. But that was as close as I ever got.. Once I bought my first sigma dp Merrill and started shooting b&w, that went away for me.
One can say it both ways really
- upgrade from xp1 to Leica m digital for those who really want the true rf digital experience
- upgrade from Leica digital m to xp1 for those who are after af and high iso performance
Cheers
Gary
aizan
Veteran
how bad is the focusing scale? i'd be happy with it as long as i could hit 3m, 2m, and 1.5m by feel.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
I just got one of these: http://www.ebay.com/itm/161098991388
BEAUTIFUL quality, lighter than the RRS and I prefer the grip's shape to the RRS as well. Far better than the Fuji-made one, too.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Um… no. Just, no.
The Fuji lens is a LOT smaller and lighter than the equivalent 35/1.4 lenses for Canon and Nikon FF DSLRs.
It is bigger than the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH only because Leica's sensors use eccentric microlenses to deal with less telecentric lens designs.
Spyro
Well-known
yeah but the equivalent is 35/2, not 35/1.4 (all other things equal, including sensor tech)
35/f2's for full frame are not bigger than this baby
35/f2's for full frame are not bigger than this baby
aizan
Veteran
dof "equivalence" is not a design parameter.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
It's not substantially bigger or heavier than a Nikkor 35/2 AIS, and it's smaller and lighter than the ZF 35/2.
What was your point, again?
Spyro
Well-known
My observation is that fuji lenses dont really represent a size saving compared to full frame lenses. There are some ff designs that are big, like the distagon you mentioned. But there are many other ff lenses which, on a ff camera will give you the same fov and dof as a fuji x lens on a fuji x camera, without being bigger.
The fuji bodies are smaller, the lenses no.
The fuji bodies are smaller, the lenses no.
gavinlg
Veteran
The difference is that it is still an f1.4 lens, and that the 35mm f2 lenses are crap in comparison, going by the optical quality of the other XF lenses. The 35mm f1.4 is the same size as a 50mm f1.4 for full frame cameras, but optically at f1.4 its the same as the full frame lenses at f2. Same goes with the 18mm f2. Also the xf lenses are far lighter.
Spyro
Well-known
Yep still an f1.4 lens but this becomes inconsequential when you get the same dof and shutter speed by bumping iso by one stop. Whether you can do that without a penalty in image quality depends mostly on sensor tech but also size.
Anyway now that my collection of fuji lenses is getting bigger and the bag heavier I'm starting to get pickier with size, especially for focal lengths I would normally use with OVF (which I'd like to get blocked as little as possible). I liked the first batch of lenses very much with the 35 and the 18, but now the 23, 56 and 10-24 start to look a bit huge. I reckon Fuji could do better in that department.
Anyway now that my collection of fuji lenses is getting bigger and the bag heavier I'm starting to get pickier with size, especially for focal lengths I would normally use with OVF (which I'd like to get blocked as little as possible). I liked the first batch of lenses very much with the 35 and the 18, but now the 23, 56 and 10-24 start to look a bit huge. I reckon Fuji could do better in that department.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
Wow the lenshade makes me question their sanity... what a turn off.
Avotius
Some guy
Very bad. If you take a look at the product pictures online you can see where the scale is and then the focus distance marks for infinity, 5 meters, then 1 meter. Also in Feet it goes infinity, 8 feet, 2.5 feet. There is too much in between those marks, they could have added a couple more indicators and it would have been good, as it stands now though, feels incomplete.
Yes. The Fuji lens is smaller than for instance the 35 f1.4 from Canon, but then again we would hope so since it is for a more compact designed camera system. Honestly if it was nor fod the hood I think the size would not be a deal breaker. Also because compared to other 35 f1.4 type lenses it is much cheaper, but still seems a bit of a premium for a lens with a few details that feel like after thoughts.
My thoughts exactly.
gavinlg
Veteran
That plastic lenshood is indeed disgusting. The metal rectangular ones on the original lenses were so much nicer, but I know some internet folks complained about them (for some odd reason)
BTW thanks for the thoughts Colin, this lens is no1 on my equipment list right now, so it is good to hear your thoughts. Looking forward to whatever samples you can throw up too..
BTW thanks for the thoughts Colin, this lens is no1 on my equipment list right now, so it is good to hear your thoughts. Looking forward to whatever samples you can throw up too..
Spyro
Well-known
emmef2
Established
How does the 23mm work with the X-Pro 1 optical viewfinder?
Does it maybe get in the way in the corner because of its larger size?
I am wondering this also for the upcoming 56/1.2 that seems relatively huge
Does it maybe get in the way in the corner because of its larger size?
I am wondering this also for the upcoming 56/1.2 that seems relatively huge
Avotius
Some guy
I would have this lens number 1 on my list right now if I did not value the smaller size of the 35 1.4 so much. I still think the lens is good though, just maybe not for me. Tomorrow I will have another chance to play with it, so I should have some pictures up soon, and also a "second chance" opinion.
Its ok. The finder defaults to its wide setting so with the hood it gets in the way a bit, without the hood the lens is still there but in the far corner and nothing to complain too much about. If you use one of those screw on vented hoods I think it might be a bit annoying as they tend to be quite wide on the end of the lenses but since they are shorter it might be better than the included hood. I would say no better and no worse than using a Leica M rangefinder. I would also hope that before Fuji starts mass shipping these things they will throw out all the hoods and bring us the nice ones from the other X lenses, but thats just me dreaming.