Fuji 23 f2 or 1.4

Hello All

 

I have been saving up for the Fuji 23 f1.4 prime for a while now. The main purpose of this lens is to accompany my 56 f1.2 & 35 f2 shooting small live music venues that usually have minimal lighting. Now logic says get the f1.4 version but then the f2 version appears at 60% of the price. Would you go for superior focusing (that's what the reviews say) over an extra stop of light? Both are important but no use having f1.4 available if I might miss the shot because the lens cannot attain focus in low light conditions. I did read the f2 version is soft at f2? I don't care if the edges are soft as long as the center is sharp.

Note that I have not shot with either lens before. .

 

Comments appreciated

 

Thanks

Shane

I think my Fuji cameras look great at ISO 6400, especially in B&W, so my opinion F2 lens is more than fast enough for concerts.

I have the 23mmF2 and it is not soft at F2. Soft? What lens is sharp wide open? Slight vignette yes, but all lenses vignette wide open. You already have the 56mmn 1.2 for speed, F2 is not so slow to niggle with. The Fuji XF23mm F2 at 5.6 and f8 is scathingly sharp and in the center the lab tests show it being sharper than the 1.4. We're both confused as to how a lens so good should be priced as it is, its amazing! No, there's nothing soft about the 23mm F2.

One stop is not going to make or break its use on a digital camera, considering the wide range of ISO settings available. A shallow depth of field will give better isolation of the subject, even with a 35 mm equivalent lens, but never as good as a fast, longer lens. Fuji makes superb lenses, so you won't be burned either way. It all depends on what you want and are willing to pay for.

 

For me, it boils down to image quality, which you must extract from experienced users and trustworthy reviews. You can tell something from MTF curves, but only from the same manufacturer. In the past, last, top of the line lenses tended to be designed and constructed better than their cheaper sisters. Notably the Nikon 50/1.4 is sharper throughout than the much venerated (and cheaper) 50/1.8. Zoom lenses with an f/2.8 aperture were consistently better than f/4 or variable aperture lenses.

 

I sense that the old wisdom is obsolete. Users of mirrorless cameras demand better lenses than needed for a generation of 12 MP or less cameras. In the absence of generalities, refer to Plan A, and do your homework.

I have the 23 1.4 and it is a wonderful lens, no complaints. Its bigger, but not bothersome to me. I also purchased a 50 f2 for using for the kind of folk concerts I sometimes get a chance to shoot when I need a little more length. Its also a fabulous lens. The build quality is no less than the 23 1.4, plus its weather sealed should that be an issue. I wouldn't switch my 23 1.4 now, but if I was buying a new lens now, the 23 f2 would be very attractive. On the new Fuji cameras, the cameras do very well at relatively high ISOs. I've been using the f2 in fairly dim places though there were stage lights that helped in some occasions. I think for the price, the 23 f2 is a really great deal.

Also, I think Fuji saw something regarding their place and continuance to provide a camera in a light smallerish package. Many Photographers see that opting for mirrorless over DSLR's for its stealth has value particularly when the IQ is as good or better. The new series of F2 lenses from Fuji have a small profile on the camera enhancing the point of the platform in the first place.

I think that's enough for me to go for the f2 version! Even with my 56f1.2 I try not to go below F2 which it shoots fantastic at. The price of the 23F2 being a lot cheaper than the F1.4 version allows me enough wiggle room to get a second body (XT-20).

 

Cheers for responses.

Shane