(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.) Links in this post may be to our affiliates sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Original contents copyright 2019 by Michael C.
FUJI 35MM 1.4 FOR FREE
Given that the slower lens came to me used in a trade and the faster lens came to me for free along with the gift of a camera, I'm going to be indulgent in this case, not make a decision, and keep them both. So far the ƒ/1.4 has found itself on my camera more of the time. But I'm unlikely to sell the ƒ/1.4 ($599), because I like it so much. Of the two, I'd recommend the Fujicron first, for its handling and operational advantages, slightly smaller size, and lower cost. The bottom line? They're both lovely lenses. Yes, as Internet says, the ƒ/2 lens is just ever so slightly sharper and more contrasty, but I don't think you'll be able to tell unless you're peering at direct comparisons at 100%.not the way sensible people look at pictures. I'm not sure I myself could tell which was which blind-and I'm good at that kind of thing. But variable ISOs make it easy to do, and I feel comfortable with that way of working.Īnd yet, objectively, I have to say that almost any sensible person could use the ƒ/1.4 and the ƒ/2 lenses interchangeably, and just choose any aperture based on need. I've generally simply been using it by avoiding the apertures between ƒ/2 and ƒ/4, and just using either ƒ/5.6 and ƒ/8 or opening up all the way to ƒ/1.4 under appropriate conditions-that is, either stopping down or slamming it open-this because the bokeh is ever so slightly dodgy at the apertures I'm avoiding. When I look at pictures, I find myself thinking how could it get better than this? Which has happened with me before when all is to my tastes with equipment and technique. Which, come to that, it certainly is.ĭespite my pixel-peeping, the ƒ/1.4 lens (above) still seems, to my perceptions, to have a very nice character or quality that the slower lens doesn't quite have. The bokeh of the ƒ/1.4 is a little better, by my personal definition of "better." The ƒ/2 lens is just slightly sharper.which came as a big surprise to me, because the faster lens gives the impression of being just beautifully sharp with excellent contrast. At wider apertures the faster lens is a bit worse in the corners, and, overall, the ƒ/2 is sharper than the ƒ/1.4 at ƒ/2. What the direct comparisons showed me is that the two are almost indistinguishable at smaller apertures in the middle of the field, to the limits of my biological and computer systems. This using my new eye (about which more is upcoming, after my next appointment), and my new computer glasses optimized for said new eye and 18 inches.
In the article " A New Favorite Lens?", I wrote, "I went around the neighborhood and took two dozen pictures twice, once with each lens." I just wanted to report that I did follow through and scrutinize direct comparisons between the files taken with the Fuji 35mm ƒ/1.4 and the newer ƒ/2 "Fujicron" version of the same focal length (52mm-e).Īll with the same camera, within the same minute or two, same settings, etc. I can tell this is something that's going to fall through the cracks if I don't just splat it out there, so:
0 kommentar(er)
