XF35mmF2
USA: AmazonUS / BHphoto / Adorama / EU: AmazonDE / PCHstore / AmazonUK / AmazonITA /
FIRST LOOK: XF 35mmF2 WR at the X-Pert Corner
It’s a pretty hot discussed question in these days: XF35mmF2 WR Vs. XF35mmF1.4.
Recently ePhotozine assigned to the new XF35mmF2 5 out of 5 stars here… and the more we read, the more this high rating seems to be justified.
Let’s start with the inital thoughts of FXF member Stonehorn we can find at the dedicated XF35mmF2 FXF thread, who compares build quality, IQ, AF and makes his conclusions. Click here to read it.
Also admiringlight posted a comparison between these two lenses. And we have a winner: the new XF35mmF2 WR, especially due its better edge sharpness and AF-speed. Admiringhlights conclusions:
“Both lenses are quality optics, but it’s clear to me that the 35mm f/2 shows some clear improvement in optical quality over the 35mm f/1.4. Both will do a great job, and the f/1.4 lens draws beautifully while providing that extra stop of speed, but the 35mm f/2 shows what Fuji can do with an extra few years of lens design for the X-Series”
The Full Comparison at Admiringlight here.
USA: AmazonUS / BHphoto / Adorama / EU: AmazonDE / PCHstore / AmazonUK / AmazonITA /
16 Responses
Subtle but real improvements, it’s ready for higher megapixel sensor 🙂
Why?
With better resolution power it will maintain sharpness even on tiny photosites of a 24Mpix sensor
I doubt it actually has more resolution power than the 35mm f/1.4. My suspicion is that even those early lenses are more than up to the task of resolving for 24+ mp sensors.
Respectfully, i still cannot see the reason why the need to increase the number of pixels. I print 20×30 photos that are as sharp as you want them to be. So, for me personally, that is not a reason.
I thought you all knew by now: 16 megapixel does not hold for magazine spreads (300 dpi), especially not with “bleed”. You need about 20 megapixel for that. If you want to crop a little, 24 megapixel is even better. When you say “print”, don’t you mean print as in press-print for magazines? That’s what I been thinking all the time…
I never printed in a photo-printer for home use though, so I don’t know much about the requirements for that.
Hi Lilla Lalla. Not sure about magazine printing these days. I do know that i did a feature for Scoop magazine numerous years ago using a Canon 450D, which from memory was 12mp, including an A3 spread. Either way, in this instance i did mean prints for the home. Thanks for your input.
I beg to differ. From what I saw the real improvement is autofocus and WR. Size/weight/optical differences are negligible. For the sake of people photography, the old 35 1.4 still reigns supreme.
A reviewer on B&H writes that the AF of 35/2 is about the same on X-T1 and actually worse in low light (which is not surprising).
So it’s just WR… to me at least. I’ll pass on the f/2 and wait for the f/1 then.
I tried both lenses. The AF of the f/2 version is in a league of it’s own. Faster than 16-55 or 90 or even the 14mm. I’d call it the fastest fuji lens yet.
However I stayed with the f/1.4 version because there is nothing more important than a fast aperture for me right now. If Fuji was to bring a 33mm f/1.0 I’d buy it on the first day
Nightcrawler? 😉
I have the 35 f2 and recently sold the 1.4 I like f2 way way more. It’s a better lens but you have to actually try it out and process some picks with it.
Speaking, about this test on admiringlight: honestly, it is very hard to believe that the 35/1.4 is so terrible at the edge at f/2.
http://admiringlight.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/35_edge_close.jpg
The blur also looks unidirectional, like a handshake or shutter shock, not usual blur from lens aberrations.
Although it might be due to curvature of the field, probably only the center point was used for the focus.
Not sure why this is an f2, why not a 35 1.4ii anyway, i really hope this lens handles flare better than the original.
I think it’s an f2 because they can make it smaller so that it should not be in the way of the optical viewfinder of the X-PRO. I hope we will see some more small and less bright lenses soon, like a 23/f2 and a new (sharp) 18/f2. And how about a 56/f2? – smaller, lighter and cheaper but just as sharp!