Table Of Contents
Fujifilm 35mm f1.4 vs 35mm f2 Lens Comparison
When deciding between the Fujinon 35mm f1.4 and the 35mm f2, there is a lot to consider and a lot to compare. Both lenses have very different builds and produce very different results. Should you upgrade to the 35mm f1.4 or just stick with the f2? Or is each lens unique enough to justify owning both?
Each lens is catered for different environments and different styles of shooting and one lens isn’t necessarily better than the other because they each provide a different set of features. In this comparison, I’ll go over the pros and cons of each lens to help you decide which lens is best for your style of shooting.
To sum it up, the 35mm f2 is really more of a casual adventure lens, while the 35mm f1.4 is more of a pro portrait lens.
| Lens Stats – 35mm f1.4 | Lens Stats – 35mm f2 |
35mm Equiv – 53mm | 35mm Equiv – 53mm |
Fujifilm 35mm f2 / 23mm f2 Metal Lens Hood – Amazon / Adorama / BHphoto
Build Quality
Internal Focusing / Weather Sealing
Buying and using lenses isn’t always about bokeh and low-light performance. Some really cool features come along with the 35mm f2 that make it very appealing.
For one, it uses an internal focusing system and is weather-sealed. This means there are no external moving barrels or elements, and the lens is less likely to suck in dust and moisture. Pair that up with the weather sealing and you have a really nice travel lens.
Most lenses get dusty over time, and while weather sealing is nice on the 35mm f2, it doesn’t make the lens invincible. But, if you are traveling out to deserts or dusty environments, you will really appreciate this lens.
If you only ever use autofocus, you could even put on a UV filter and tape up the focus ring to get even more protection.
That being said, my 35mm f2 has some pretty big specs of dust inside. I’m not sure if the dust was already in the lens, and it came loose and found its way onto the element, or if it sucked it in somehow over time.
Size & Build Quality
Both lenses are about the same size, but the 35mm f1.4 is 17g heavier or about .6 ounces. This pretty much means they are about the same weight.
When looking at size alone, I can’t really say there is much of an advantage to the 35mm f2 over the f1.4. Both are small and light enough to be comfortable on any Fujifilm camera.
The 35 mm f2 is nicer when looking at build quality alone. It’s a single barrel with internal focusing, so nothing moves. The 35mm f1.4 has two barrels, and the outer barrel dances around when focusing. I’ve dropped the 35mm f2 from waist-high on concrete by accident once, and everything is still fine. Most lenses wouldn’t survive that.
You’ll also notice that 35mm f2 takes advantage of the mirrorless flange distance, which is more than 35mm f1.4. Look at how the rear element protrudes out so it can get as close to the camera shutter as possible, then compare it to the 35mm f1.4, where the rear element is more recessed. The only other Fujinon prime lenses that share this feature are the 56mm f1.2, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, and the 23mm f2, but of all the lenses, the 35mm f2 and the 56mm f1.2 stick out the most. This is a hot topic in the Canon and Nikon communities because of their larger Z and RF mounts, so I thought I would mention it. Fujifilm has already been designing lenses like this for years.
Lens Hoods
Lens hood designs are very different between these two lenses. The 35mm f2 comes with a cheap plastic lens hood that screws onto the filter threads. To use a UV filter with the lens hood, you screw the filter into the hood, or you can screw the filter onto the lens and then screw the lens hood onto the UV filter. I personally don’t like this design, and I’ve stopped using the lens hood altogether and just use a UV filter.
If you’re like me and don’t like this plastic lens hood, Fujifilm has made an all-metal vented lens hood that attaches to the barrel of the lens rather than the filter threads. It’s a really nice improvement in both design and aesthetics, and I highly recommend it.
The 35mm f1.4 has a metal lens hood that is not rounded. I don’t know the purpose of this design other than that it makes it more difficult to use the standard lens cap. To compensate, the lens comes with a plastic cap that fits over the top, but it comes off easily, and you’ll likely lose it.
Build Quality Winner: Fujinon 35mm f2
While I would dock a point because of the plastic lens cap on the Fujinon 35mm f2, Fujifilm offers that metal lens hood, which is really nice.
Auto Focus
It’s always hard to discuss autofocus in a written review. The best I can do is share my personal experience because the AF capabilities change depending on the camera you’re using.
Overall, the Fujinon 35mm f2 is faster and more reliable at focusing. When dealing with slower or older cameras, like the X-T100 or the X-Pro2, you’ll notice this performance gap much more than with a new camera like the X-T3. On the X-T3, I’m finding focus fast enough on the 35mm f1.4 for even the most hyper kids.
On those slower cameras, the autofocus has to adjust the element to fine-tune the focus, so you end up getting this pecking action with the 35mm 1.4. Since the 35mm f2 focuses a lot faster and quieter, this happens in a fraction of the time. On the X-T3, the pecking action is mostly eliminated, and the 35mm f1.4 can focus as fast as the lens can throw that element, which is pretty fast.
If you shoot a lot of AF-C with face or eye tracking, the 35mm f2 will still have a noticeable advantage. It will also be a lot smoother and quieter, even on the X-T3.
Since the 35mm f2 focuses silently, it is the best option for video. The 35mm f1.4 chatters a lot more with the aperture and focus motors.
I still like to use the 35mm f2 on my older or entry-level Fujifilm cameras when going out with my daughter, simply because I like the faster AF. With kids, I shoot a lot with AF-C with eye or face tracking as well. As I shoot more videos with my Fujifilm X-T3, the 35mm f2 proves to be a very valuable lens.
Autofocus Winner: Fujinon 35mm f2
Sharpness
Center Sharpness
The center sharpness of the Fujinon 35mm f1.4 and the f2 is very close. The Fujinon 35mm f1.4 is sharper than the f2 at faster apertures like f1.4, f2, and even f4.
The sharpness at f4 and f5.6 is very close. It was so close that I couldn’t tell with the regular chart and had to shift to the Japanese Yen, which has more of that luscious fine detail. When looking at the bill, you can see there is overall just more detail and slightly better sharpness with the f1.4 lens at those mid-apertures.
Edge Sharpness
The 35mm f1.4 lens is slightly better in the edges until about f5.6, when it is very close in sharpness. This means the 35mm f2 is actually pretty good.
Corner Sharpness
When looking at corner sharpness, there is an obvious advantage to the Fujinon 35mm f1.4. Corners are a bit soft on the 35mm f2, but they seem mostly isolated to just the corners. With many lenses that I test, the corners are usually bad because there is a sharpness fall-off that moves out from the center to the edges, and it’s the worst in the corners. This lens is fairly correct except for those extreme corners, so I would say this corner performance shouldn’t be a deal breaker since the weak performance is mostly isolated to the corners and mostly at apertures under f5.6.
Overall, the 35mm f1.4 performs better in the center and much better in the corners and even in the edges at those faster apertures. At higher apertures like f8, the difference isn’t as extreme, except the 35mm f2 still has some corner issues that never resolve.
Sharpness Winner: Fujinon 35mm f1.4
Bokeh
Both lenses produce similar bokeh in terms of quality; they both swirl slightly, but the 35mm f1.4 does produce slightly creamier results with better separation and falloff. The 35mm f1.4 also has a slightly more visible field curvature, so you see more of that creamy bokeh in the center, and it falls off towards the edges.
These samples have not been color-treated and are mostly straight out of the camera. The cameras had matching settings except for the shutter, so exposures often came in slightly differently. I nudged the exposure in Lightroom a little to match, so they should give a good representation of contrast and saturation when wide open as well.
In terms of brightness, the f1.4 lens is, on average, about a full stop brighter than the f2 lens, as shown by the shutter speed.
To see if the 35mm f2 had a shallower depth, I tested each lens at f2, and the results were very similar. The field curvature of the 35mm f1.4 may be changing the depth throughout the frame at f1.4, so the depth isn’t consistent across the frame. This is likely why some images from the 35mm f1.4 at f1.4 look like they have more depth than others. Here, they both look very similar, as expected.
Coma Minimum Focus Distance
Here, you can see how the minimum focus distance is a little closer to the Fujinon 35mm f1.4. It produces a nicer background blur because you’ll get even shallower depth when this is closer.
Coma | Same Distance | 7 Blade vs. 9 Blade Aperture
Here, I matched the distance from the doll. It looks like the 35mm f1.4 is a little wider than the 35mm f2. So, the bokeh is a little smaller on the f1.4 lens, but you can still see the coma shape.
The Fujinon 35m f1.4 has a 7-blade rounded aperture where, whereas the 35mm f2 has a 9-blade rounded aperture, so you do get superior bokeh with the 35mm f2 when shooting at higher f-stop values.
Bokeh Winner: Fujinon 35mm f1.4 until about f2.8, then the winner is the Fujion 35mm f2
Vignetting
When you shoot with Fujinon lenses, the RAWs and JPGS are loaded with built-in lens profile corrections. When you load the images into your editing software, they are corrected.
There is a way you can remove the built-in lens profile corrections, but you have to use Iridient Developer. It’s important to know what a lens true vignetting looks like because if you plan on using the lens for Astro or landscape work where you often need to lift the shadows if the edges and corners are already corrected a half or full stop, this will limit how much shadow information you can pull out of those areas if it’s already been lifted.
When looking at the vignetting charts, you can see that the 35mm f2 has significantly more vignetting at f2 and f2.8, but by f4, they are all very comparable.
You can also see a slight color shift in the Fujinon 35mm f2 vignetting.
Vignetting Winner: Fujinon 35mm f1.4
Distortion
The 35mm f1.4 will not be corrected with the built-in lens profile correction. What you see is what you get.
The 35mm f2 built-in lens profile correction does correct it.
After they have been corrected, the 35mm f1.4 does have some subtle barrel distortion, and the 35mm f2, once corrected, produces some pincushion distortion.
In these samples, when the built-in lens profile is corrected, the 35mm f2 has a pretty nasty mustache barrel distortion.
Distortion Winner: Fujinon 35mm f1.4
Chromatic Aberrations
I am not noticing any serious issues with Chromatic Aberrations. It’s all standard and what you would expect with any modern lens design from an experienced company like Fujinon.
If you stress test each lens, you can find some CA, but in daily photos, it’s pretty much non-existent.
When stress testing, you get more CA with the 35mm f1.4 especially in the background and foreground Bokeh.
Chromatic Aberrations Winner: Fujinon 35mm f2
Art & Character
I wasn’t going to make an Art & Character section because both lenses are very similar, and most of the differences are only seen at f1.4 with the 35mm f1.4 lens. But I’ve looked deeper into the differences.
Most of the differences in the lens’s art and character happen at f1.4. The XF 35mm f1.4 can do things and create a look the 35mm f2 cannot. It’s not a huge jump, though, and it’s not as big as you would think, but there is a little magical quality to it that’s difficult to explain.
Contrast & Micro Contrast & Color
I struggle with this one. Some of my samples look like the f2 lens performs better than others, and the f1.4 lens performs better. The f1.4 lens is sharper, which can throw off the eye when looking at micro contrast and contrast, especially when it’s this close.
I would call this a tie, or so close it doesn’t matter. The 35mm f1.4 is often sharper, so it creates a nicer image overall. However, I find the 35mm f2 is better at hitting that focus. So, although the 35mm f1.4 is sharper in a controlled environment, images from the 35mm f2 often come out sharper because of focus.
Flaring
These lenses don’t flare much if you keep them clean and don’t use UV filters. If you shoot into a setting sun, you can sometimes get a few flares, but the conditions have to be just right, and overall, it isn’t easy to make these lenses flare. In my recent tests, I was not able to produce any results.
Focus Falloff
The Fujinon 35mm f1.4 does something interesting that initially threw me off. Its shallow depth at the f1.4 aperture mostly happens in the 50% center of the lens, then it quickly drops off and performs closer to the f2 towards the edges. This is why the bokeh can look similar if the subject is blocking that 50% center. You’ll end up not seeing that glorious depth that happens in the center of the lens; you’ll only see the weaker dof along the edges.
But, this has an advantage – focus falloff.
This phenomenon should technically increase the effects of focus falloff as it occurs along this boundary, this gives the image more depth with an almost 3D effect.
My exposures are not all exact here, so only judge bokeh and falloff with these samples.
This is one big thing the 35mm f1.4 has that the 35mm f2 does not, and you can see it in this next sample. Look at how the depth is much greater in the center with the f1.4 lens, as it forms almost this cone-like depth that pulls you into the background. It creates this illusion of more depth and adds more of a 3D effect. A lot of fast lenses have more uniform depth in the background, and they don’t create this cone of depth that pulls you in.
It seems like lens designers are using this trick to generate nice-looking focus falloff because I’ve noticed my good falloff lenses, like the Voigtlander 35mm f1.7, do the exact same thing.
Art & Character Winner: Fujinon 35mm f1.4
While the contrast, micro-contrast, and color are very nice with both lenses, the effects of that focus falloff with the 35mm f1.4 are unique. It can really enhance the transition between what’s in focus and what’s out of focus for an overall added sense of depth.
Personal Thoughts
First, I must start by saying both lenses are really nice. I prefer the 35mm f1.4, but that doesn’t mean the f2 is a bad lens. About 20% of my photos taken in 2016 were all done with the XF35mm f2. It is my family travel adventure lens, and I use it constantly.
For my personal photography, like when I’m trying to make art rather than take a photo of a backyard BBQ, I like the 35mm f1.4 a lot more, and that is the lens I would choose if I could only have one. Yes, it’s not weather-sealed, and it’s slower at focusing, but it’s still very easy to work with, especially with the fast AF of the X-T3.
These lenses produce about a 50mm field of view, an incredibly useful focal length for portrait photographers. Since both lenses are fairly close in price and size, it’s really hard to justify not upgrading to the f1.4 if shooting art is the goal. However, there are many reasons to still choose the f2 over the f1.4 because of the more robust build and improved autofocus.
The f1.4 lens is also better in low light and has a shallower depth, which is more useful with a 50mm field of view than a 35mm FOV. A 50mm FOV lends itself to portrait photography, and f1.4 will help you produce better-looking portraits with better subject separation.
The f1.4 also has nicer corners, so your landscape photos will have no flaws when stopped down to f5.6 or f8.
The bokeh’s look (not the effect) on the f2 is surprisingly similar. Regarding the artistic quality of the bokeh, these two lenses share many of the same characteristics, except the f1.4 has that extra bit of magic with how the focus falloff works. This effect makes that subject separation look much nicer, adding extra dimensionality to the image. The f1.4 lens is also a full stop brighter, so you can keep your shutter faster to help freeze the action while not digging too deep into your ISO.
Fujinon 35mm f1.4 vs 35mm f2 | Bottom Line
When looking at these two lenses, the clear winner regarding raw image output is the 35mm f1.4. It produces better bokeh and nicer corner sharpness, and a full stop more light.
However, the 35mm f2 is a very important lens in the Fujifilm lineup because of what you can do with it and where you can take it. It’s a more rugged design that is fairly resistant to the elements. For the hiker or backpacker, boaters, and spelunkers, the 35mm f2 is going to be the way to go. If you like to shoot with continuous AF with face and eye tracking or shoot video, the 35mm f2 will run circles around the 35mm f1.4.
Unfortunately, neither of these lenses is jaw-dropping, and the 35mm f1.4 is a little expensive compared to the full-frame Canon and Nikon 50mm f1.4.
35mm f2 Advantages – Weather Sealed, Internal Focus Design, 9-blade aperture which produces better bokeh at tighter apertures, faster AF, silent aperture and focusing.
35mm f1.4 Advantages – Full stop brighter, shallower depth (somewhere between 1/2 and 3/4 of a stop), overall better performance with sharpness, beautiful focus falloff, vignetting, and distortion.
Fujinon 35mm f1.4 & 35mm f2 Sample Photos
When looking at these sample photos, you can see they are almost indistinguishable in color and contrast when I edit them in the same style. But with the 35mm f1.4, I can play a little more with that depth.
Fujinon 35mm f1.4 Sample Photos
Fujinon 35mm f2 Sample Photos
| **This website contains affiliate links. We will earn a small commission on purchases made through these links. Some of the links used in these articles will direct you to Amazon. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. |
Great Article? I can’t tell you how many times the question of which 35mm Fuji to get, gets asked on Fuji Forums…this answers that question quite extensively. I usually answer the question, chime in and say, ” If you want sterile, clean and technically good photos, needing weather sealing, then go for the F/2, If you want character and that extra special sauce – go for the f/1.4. This is my favorite lens since I am primarily a 50mm shooter.
I am glad though that most mirrorless users haven’t discovered the beauty of adapting vintage lenses(keeps used prices down) – I can’t believe poeple are buying Mitakons, Meike and & Artisans for the price when they can adapt Zeiss, Takumars, Minoltas, Helios, Jupiter and other vintage lenses that can be had for $5-50 average. Fuji lenses are expensive! With Focus peaking, I have learned more artistically in 3 months manually focusing, than shooting 9 years with AF. You guys are really missing out on some wonderful vintage glass…with LOADS of character! For the price of 1 XF 35mm f/1.4- I have amassed 20 vintage 50mm F/1.4 lenses, all mint!
Thanks Reiner.
I was on a vintage glass buying binge for awhile but it got more difficult once I moved to Japan, there is a lot of great stuff but it can be a little hit and miss with quality. I’ve had some develop mold after only a year, and others completely freeze up after only a month, another one is pretty hazy, so I stopped buying them to check out these Chinese lenses. They’re more expensive but have a few less issues. I’m going to go for some of the old Minolta lenses next I think.
One of my fave lenses on my arsenal the Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4
lol. I’m literally listening to Ken Wheeler talk about how amazing you are when then comment popped up in my email. Go check out his latest vid.
That 35mm f1.4 is such a pretty lens. I’ve been shooting with it for a year and a half now and still haven’t posted a review.
Are you in Fukuoka? I live in Fukuoka.. I noticed what looks like Tenjin and Nakasu areas in your photos.
Please DM me on IG @alex.photo.fukuoka or alex.on.streets
See you soon?
I am yes! And I’m also from California.
Thank you so much for this comparison. Out of all of the Fuji line, which lens would you suggest for family portraits? 35 1.4, 50 f2, 56 1.2, or the 90 f2? Or even any of the zooms? Thanks !!
For individual family portraits I always use the 56mm f1.2. If you’re shooting groups you’ll want something wider, 35mm f1.4 would be my second choice.
Hi Alik, thanks for the review! I just got a X-T10 and I’m still confused whether to buy the F2 or F1.4. I’ll use the camera for product photo, portrait, and traveling. Which lense do you suggest for me to buy? Thanks
Hey Cornelius, sorry fo the late reply. Crazy last week and a half. First time I got to my email. Anyway, you can’t go wrong with either, I use both lenses probably equally. I would go with the f2 is fast paced autofocus is very important. I use the f2 lenses mostly for street where I need that instant focus, but for slower shooting, travel, portrait, the f1.4 is amazing. It’s slower at AF but having that extra stop and some is really nice for bokeh and low light.
I have recently bought Fujifilm XT 3 camera along with 16-55mm f 2.8 lens. Now I planning to buy another lens which will be ideal for Portrait and Streets photography. In that case do you really suggest 35mm f 1.4 Fujifilm lens ? Regards
You can definitely make it work for street it’s just not weather sealed. It will chug a little bit more than the f2 when engaging with contrast detect autofocus. So I would say it depends on what type of street you do. I like to shoot pretty active street photography where people are moving a lot and these older Fujifilm lenses are totally manageable, but I often miss a few more shots that I know the f2 lenses would have had in tougher lit situations where the camera tries to use the contrast detect system.
If you shoot portraits the f1.4 is a no brainer over the f2 as long as you shoot at f1.4. If you’re shooting pro client shoots for like movie posters you probably won’t be shooting wide open.
And for me personally, I got called in to LA for work for who knows how long and I brought the 35mm f1.4 instead of the f2 this time. It’s been a fun setup walking around Hollywood blvd at night and I haven’t really had any regrets in my decision with it. That’s actually why I chose it over the f2. Hollywood Blvd is dark and I’m not sure the f2 would have cut it at night.
Hello, which lens would you recommend to take pictures of a newborn / toddler? I have a X-E3 and a 18-55 kit lens and now would like to complement it with a prime. I’m trying to decide – 35mm f/1.4 or 35mm f/2.0? I plan to take pictures both indoors and outdoors. I think I’ve read all the existing threads and I’m leaning towards 1.4, the only thing that’s bothering me about it is autofocus speed. Is it really hard to make it work, especially with a toddler?
I would go with the f1.4. I have two kids and I always used those older lenses with them without any issue. The thing is, they will still throw focus quickly with phase detect, where they struggle is with the contrast detection. So if there isn’t a lot of light they take a little longer to fine tune the focusing. I’ve been using those older lenses since the X-T1 and never really though it was a bad experience. I still use the 56mm f1.2 on most of my portrait shots with my kids and still use the f1.4 around the house a lot with family stuff. It’s on m X-T3 right now actually. The only time those older lenses will hurt you with autofocus speed is if you’re shooting fast paced stuff. Like the f2 lenses are nice when doing quick street photography. The f1.4 limits what you can do a little bit.
Thanks a lot!
No Prob!
Dear Alik,
I am just in awe of your site and reviews.
It just provides that quintessential information I am seeking when being interested in a particular lens.
I started photography three years ago and soon switched from an entry level Canon to a Fujifilm X-T10 with 35mm F1.4 due to the recommendation of a friend. The pictures I took are my favourites until today. Due to our modern human issue to always feel like we are missing out when not having this or that I bought a Sony A7II with Zeiss 55mm f1.8 and took clinically speaking “better” photos but somehow they didnt relate to me as much as the Fuji 35mm f1.4 pictures did. I was unhappy and again switched to Fujifilm but due to buying used tried the 35mm f2.0 and the results were good but somehow lacked this special special something I just got by pressing the button with the 35mm f1.4 setup. Being again unhappy and thinking Sony FF must be the answer another time I shot a cheap bargain this time the Sony A7 and guess what, I am unhappy and since then browsing the web and YES reading YOUR reviews and listening to Ken Wheeler regarding lenses that have micro contrast or “character” while being reasonable sharp/quality assured for having a no brainer yet art creating lens.
Guess what I am on the verge of going there now where I was exactly almost 3 years ago – Fujifilm (probably now X-T20 used) and Fujinon 35mm f1.4 (briefly tried 28mm FOV and 35mm FOV and didnt like it as much as my nifty-fifty FOV).
Thank you very much for making such great reviews and creating art on the fly – your samples are pure joy to look at and the way you frame your shots and edit is completely incredible.
Also I find it funny how all my favorite know-how giver are coming together (referencing Benjamin Kanarek commenting on here whom I discovered by watching Ken Wheelers videos and you answering him also hearing him on Kens YouTube).
I hope you can teach us and give us a clue on how to edit this tastefully and become better artists. I dont want to buy presets and experiment a lot on my own but I am right now in a creative mess having to many different influences where I am never satisfied with the edit either to less or too much in the wrong direction etc etc.
P.s.: I have a 2 month old daughter and my photography is now family and a bit of traveling with my family. I Just want to creatively document our family life for my personal albums and prints and try to create art and learning the true ways of photography.
KR,
Seb
My suggestion, Get the XF35mm f1.4. It’s kind of a must have lens for the Fujifilm system. But there is a new XC 35mm f2 lens that’s only $200. Wait till that goes on sale at the end of the quarter or next, or try to find it used. So you can have both. You’ll probably eventually see it for $150. And also try to buy the 35mm f1.4 on sale. The XC is the same lens as the XF 35mm f2 but just has some cheaper components (no weather sealing, polycarbonate mount, no focus ring). That lens will be what you use for video or when you need faster autofocus tracking. Documenting my family and kids it’s all about that 35mm 1.4.
I prefer 35mm to 23mm. 35 is easier to use with portraits and kids and the 23 you have to get too close with kids and lenses generally struggle more when trying to focus on close distant subjects that are moving. Like a 2 year old.
Another option is get the XC 35mm f2 now, and wait for reviews on the new Viltrox or Tokina 35mm f1.4 that are coming later this year to see if they are any good. They probably will be and they’ll be cheaper than the Fujifilm 35mm f1.4 and will likely have improved mechanics. But we donno how they will fully compare yet.
Similar to your situation, I shoot Sony and Nikon. None of those systems have the magic look you get from Fujifilm so I only use those for utility like event and landscape photography or video. You can get cool looks with the Sony though, you just have to use the right lenses but they are expensive. The Zeiss 35mm f2.8 is my most used lens on the Sony, (not worth the price) and it would be better to go with Rokinon but there are some nice character lenses for Sony. But if you want to go full utility with the best bang for the buck Nikon Z system is the way to go currently. But I still struggle to get that special look I get with Fujifilm with Z6 and their f1.8 lenses.
I would say that the XF35mm f1.4 won’t be too friendly for video shooting, it’s a little clunky with its focus and it’s kind of noisy. If you’re doing simple locked off stuff it’s fine. It may give you less than ideal performance for video but this depends on what you are doing of course. If it’s just documenting family stuff it will work fine.
Don’t be tempted by Full Frame unless you’re doing photography that really requires the full frame like Wedding or Landscape) APS-C is great and all most people need. Fujifilm is doing a lot of great stuff right now and they’ll be releasing some faster lenses like the 50mm f1 soon. So you’ll eventually be able to match all the bokeh and performance of the full frame system.
So for me, Fujifilm is the best system right now for making art out of daily life, they give you the best tools for this with their lenses and in camera JPG options and they have the best general look in my opinion.
But if you want to go with the best utility hybrid system that can do everything, I would say currently Nikon is going in the best direction with their Z system. But they still don’t have the magical look you get from Fujifilm.
I still almost always use my Fujifilm system for daily life stuff with my kids.
Thank you very much for your detailed reply 🙂
I bought the X-T2 + 35mm F1.4 second hand and couldnt be happier. I already created some shots we are going to frame of my daughter.
Best photography gear related blog I have ever found!
Thanks Sebastian.
Late to the party. But wondering why you think the Fuji wont do landscape well? I am considering switching out my FF in favor of an X-T4 paired with my 500CM
Hi Alik,
I’m a little late to the party but your reviews are so good I was hoping you could help me with something. I’m new to photography/videography and recently bought an X-T3, mainly for videos.
I am planning on buying 2/3 primes straight away and I’m already set on the 50mm f/2.0
I have been in doubt about the 23mm vs the 35mm focal length, but from everything I have seen the 35mm seems to appeal to me the most. In that regards, I also notice something magical about the f/1.4 every time I see footage of it. Same goes for this review.
I am therefore kind of set on the 35mm f/1.4 already, but since I will be using it for video I’m a bit skeptical. Do you think this will be a good choice if I will use autofocus a lot? I will mainly shoot travel videos, there will definitely be subjects in it to follow along. Occasionally I might use it for shooting action sports like snowboarding or wakeboarding, mostly from the side but with snowboarding I might actually try and follow along.
I know it is not WR, but that magical touch just pulls me in so bad. I’m just a bit worried about the autofocus. Do you think it will suit my needs?
What is your opinion on this?
*edit: I’m not necessarily using this lens for the occasions mentioned, but that’s what I will be using my camera for in general so you have an impression of what I’m trying to do. Also I don’t care about the AF noise, just the speed.
What a well written thorough review. Thanks
I read this thinking, it would make my decision easier…It didn’t but I had a awesome time reading this. Thank you for sharing
No problem, thanks for commenting!
I know this article is old but I was hoping to learn the model of the lens hood that you were recommending for the xf35mmf2. Thanks!
I use the metal lens hood, and there is a link to the top of the articles. It’s been out of stock at B&H but you might be able to find them at amazon.
It also works on the 23mm f2.
First of all, nicely written and not too complicated article. No MTF etc. to confuse 😉
Started with photography from interests in Physics and with a Minolta X-300s SLR and MD 28-70 in early 90’s. Then Canon P&S digital and later Sony A mount.
Am a Fujifilm user since 2013 but was limited to a X-E2 with XF18-55, XF55-200,XF100-400(late addition in 2018) and 60mm Macro. Last year sold 55-200 snagged a brand new X-T2 sealed in box and a new 70-300.
When my wife with her AI photography on Samsung S23 started bugging me with her portrait photos with creamy backgrounds, thought of getting XF35 f1.4. But manual focusing bug from Minolta days led me to get one of those TTArtisans 35 f1.2. Not a bad lens for that kind of money but now progressed to Voigtlander 27mm f2. Wow!!! what a lens!!! Rediscovered the joy of MF (auto zoom of focus area on X-T2, on X-E2 still have to manually zoom to check focus peaking. ) excellent colors, and superb sharp centers with decent bokehs and 40mm equivalent. Very good for everyday photos. Compact and light too.
A XF35 f1.4 definitely has advantage in low light over Voigt but otherwise what is your take on me getting it for family photos, travel photos etc?
I read about adapting old lenses in above comments. Have adapted Sony SAL16-80 CZ from my A-mount days. Easy to focus and it seems to be mechanical MF, Excellent sharpness and colour nearly same as Fuji (SOOC).
Minolta MD 28-70 also got adapted to Fuji. Not bad. Very old lens and might not have those exotic APO or Aspherical or non coatings.
Had these lenses been fast like f2, I need not have spent on Voigt 27mm!!