Fuji Prime lenses

Mike G

All-Pro
Location
West London
Name
Mike Gorman
I have just returned from a holiday and took only four primes, 16 1.4, 23 1.4, 56 1.2 and the 90 2.0 and no zooms. This experience has left me gobsmacked by the quality of these lenses, most used was the 23mm, least used the 90mm and the other two a bit more, but by far and away the star of my four bits of glass is the 23mm f1.4. I love the POV of the the 23mm. The quality of the results with the lens is superb!

DSCF1176.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


The number 11 tram in Basel. X-T2 + 23mm 1.4 @ 1/450 f5.6 ISO 200
 
I have just returned from a holiday and took only four primes, 16 1.4, 23 1.4, 56 1.2 and the 90 2.0 and no zooms. This experience has left me gobsmacked by the quality of these lenses, most used was the 23mm, least used the 90mm and the other two a bit more, but by far and away the star of my four bits of glass is the 23mm f1.4. I love the POV of the the 23mm. The quality of the results with the lens is superb!

View attachment 31983

The number 11 tram in Basel. X-T2 + 23mm 1.4 @ 1/450 f5.6 ISO 200

Since I have 3 of these (not the 23mm), your post has gotten me interested in resurrecting my X100S with its 23/2.0 fixed lens. Thanks, and excellent shot!

Sad, though, to see the inexorable and execrable intrusion of McDonald's even in Basel! :(
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've had the 23 1.4 for 3 years now, I think. And if I could do it all over again, I feel like I'd go for the f2 version. The 1.4 is a little soft wide open (which has become shocking for Fuji lenses, even though it should be expected), I've grown to dislike the focus pull clutch from accidentally engaging it, and the lens is so much bigger than the 35 1.4 that I find myself making excuses not to use it.

Having said that, at 2.8 and up it's incredibly crisp. The focus is quickish, and the FOV is the most usable for a prime, period. I'm always glad I have it, but I wish I were as happy about it as you are. If I had a magic wand, and could trade it for the f2 version, I'd do it.
 
The reason I went for the 1.4 version because I read that the f2.0 has the same faults as you ascribe to the f1.4 version, how odd is that, I suppose it depends on who's review you read.

Another reason I went for the f1.4 was I didn't like the looks of the f2.0 version. :hiding:
 
I know about the X100-series lens - I still have the original model, and yeah, it's a little "dream-like" wide open. Good for portraits but not so good for things that need crispness. I wonder if the separate XF23 f2 lens itself is the same?
 
Last year, we went on a month long vacation and all I took was four of my manual primes; Rokinon 21mm f1.4, Rokinon 12mm f2.0, Rokinon 50mm f1.2, and Bower 8mm f2.8. I found that I used the 21mm, which I prefer to my 23mm f1.4, around 95% of the time and almost had to force myself to use the other three. This year, on a month long TransAtlantic cruise, all I took was my X100T with the WCL-X100 wide angle conversion lens. The amount of use between 23mm and 19mm was probably 70/30% only because I was being too lazy to remove the conversion lens once I put it on the X100T.

Digital photography has brought two things for sure. Zoom lenses, which in my opinion, make photographers lazy, and cameras that seem to need to be replaced with a new model every two years. in over 55 years of using film, I rarely owned more than one camera and rarely had more than one lens for it, plus I'd keep it for 10 years or so. Now in a little more than four years of digital and I've owned 10 different cameras and easily three times as many lenses.
 
Back
Top