EPISODE 2 Old is Gold: - FujiFilm 35mm f:1.4 VS FujiFilm 35mm f:2  

I have both. The f1.4 hunts a bit for focus and is noisy. The f2 gains focus fast, is silent, and weather proof. I got the f2 first and bought a square lens hood for it because I like that aesthetic. Later I got the 1.4 because everyone raved about the low light and magic quality. In the end, I didn’t see much difference. Image quality was similar in both. The f2 bokeh is almost as nice as the 1.4. I enjoy both, but if forced to choose, I think the f2 with its weather sealing, silence, and quick autofocus stands out.

The f1.4 has a more 3D, spherical look to the image. I think this is due to the in focus area being less sharp, so that the falloff is more gradual. The f2 has a more 2d, flat representation because it goes from very sharp and then quickly to out of focus; it kind of sometimes looks like the person could have been pasted onto the background. With the 1.4 the subject looks a part of it.

imo, with Fuji, it s about color rendition, contrast, sharpness, 1.4 give much better shallow depth of field, with a cost of color and contrast, for that I wouldn't trade actually. 35 F2 is a winner to me.

broooo this was a really great and informed video! thanks! :)

Just a quick comment to thank you for doing an outstanding objective video comparing these 2 excellent lenses. I have the f2, and it's fantastic. But I wouldn't mind adding the 1.4 simply for the larger aperture in low light.

Brilliant video, as a newbie it helped me grasp the difference in bokeh between the 1.2 and the 2.

I got the 35mm 1.4 used for my x-t5. I couldn't be happier. It quickly replaced my sigma 18-50 as everyday lens

I couldn't see any difference between your f2 series and your f1.4 series, oh well. The 35mm 1.4 was my first Fuji lens and WOW! The images really have something. If I ever sell out of the Fuji system, I will keep this lens and my X-Pro2 because they are in my heart. I later bought the 35mm f2 and didn't like it one bit and couldn't wait to get rid of it Quite possibly my f2 was a victim of sample variation. Some Fuji lenses have kinda loose focusing or aperture rings, mine were good. I vaguely recall that the focusing ring on the f2 was fiddly to grasp, but it could be a false memory.

Thank you for the great review., very informative. One thing that I would have liked to see though is the image comparison with both lenses at f2. Anyway, everything else was very well explained.

There's no lens noise in the world (well, maybe with exception of the really old 1st gen AF lenses from Nikon & Minolta from the mid 80's) that will rival any standard shutter noise from the camera, period.

Thank you, I am outside in a street situation mostly, and live in the uk and it rains a lot So the f2 lens for me I think, having both would be great though for sure.......

I have the 1.4 myself and what i can see on the images is that both are pretty similar. But I would say that I prefer the 1.4 for the softness of the skin tones on portraits as well as the slightly better bokeh. The F2 seems a little bit too sharp and contrasty for my taste. That's why I like to use the 1.4 on my xpro1 which produces very organic pictures. I don't care about the slower autofocus, if I miss one or two shots it's not the end of the world. I am not a pro anyway !

I think the focus noise matters most for shooting video, especially when using either in-camera microphone or on-camera shotgun microphone.

I had both, returned the f1.4. Not sure if it was my copy but images wide open were no where near as sharp as the f2 version. Ended up with the f2 trinity. The difference is very small, the spherical effect of the f1.4 provides a more classic depth of field and it has very subtle softer tones. To get the best out of it, you have to shoot it in a specific way, such as using side light with depth behind the subject or in golden hour, then it really shows its strengths. The f2 has more punch, WR, is nicer to handle and a lot smoother to focus in my opinion. It's a better all-rounder.

Nice video!! And I love the style and colours of your pictures. Do you use film recipes? If yes which ones do you use? Thanks!! :)

I was really conflicted (fuji seems to be good at making it hard to choose). F1.4 lets in more light, but F2 isn't too bad. F2 is also sharp and is cheaper with WR but doesn't have edge to edge sharpness (which i don't mind but I also want to use for landscapes). In the end I decided I wanted more light, edge to edge and some level of softness wide open so I went for a second hand F1.4.

Hmm.. without reading comments or knowing the answer in advance, I'd say the left side is the f/1.4, with smoother bokeh, shallower DOF and slightly lower contrast. And if I'm correct the f/2 on the right is slightly sharper and has better contrast. It'd be a tough choice based on these observations.. since each excels in different areas.

Thank you for comparison

Great video!

I got first the 35mm f2 what I really love, for the WR, Autofocus and overall better build quality (in my opinion) After a while i picked up a second hand 35mm f1.4 in mint condition and i loved the retro legacy style and the soft/filmic rendering. If u can get both 🙏❤

13:05 I purchased Xpro3 , 3 years back Along with this camera i purchased 35mm f1.4 new. I was confused to choose between this two lenses but because of retro look of lens hood design and also this lens is made in japan i purchased this 35mm f1.4,since then i have never removed this lens from my xpro3. I find pic quality very good.

Today I had the opportunity to shoot portraits again with the f2. For me it’s an outstanding lens even using CH mode.

Hi Kim. Very good and detailed comparison. Personally I would go with the F2 lens.Thanks for this great video!

I asked my girlfriend which picture left / right or top / bottom she liked more regardless to model pose or emotion. And in every pair except for the one she preferred picture from f1.4.

Nice review! Totally agree on the sexy look of the 1.4 35mm... the new 33m is ugly as hell. And the "loud" AF is a joke. You are completly right. I don't think it is loud by any meaning....

I bought the X-PRO1 with the kit zoom and the 35/14 when the X-PRO1 was released. The X-PRO1 was a slow performer in all expects. The 35/1.4 was very unreliable if you tried AF-C. You had to use AF-S and really check that it nailed the focus. I now use it more on my X-T5 and X-H1. The focus on Fujis latest cameras are much more reliable and faster. Even AF-C works in most cases. However the 56/1.2 give me more keepers because the AF is more reliable. If you compare the 35/1.4 with the 35/2 the later needs the help of lens profile to get the bet result. I can compare the magic EF 85/1.2 lens for Canon. A fantastic lens for portraits but that sometime could kick your ass with peculiar optical effects. I later got the EF 85/.4 IS to get faster AF and IS. A lens that was presumably much better optically but lacked that special character that the (%/1.2 gave me. I feel that 36/1.4 have a little bit the same but you don't notice it in every pictur and yes AF-c still hunts a bit.

I have both lenses, and will always have both lenses. I tend to use the f/1.4 lens at full aperture just for the rendering. It has an intangible look, can't measure or quantify it, but can see it. I tend to look at the images as complete photos, not zooming in at the pixel level. I love the look for certain subjects from the faster lens. I had the f/2 lens for a couple of years before getting the f/1.4 and was very happy with it. It is small, light and fast to focus. The addition of weather sealing also makes it my go-to lens for outdoor shooting. I tend to shoot at f/4 or smaller with this lens for more moderate to deeper focus. I could be happy with the f/2 lens, but I'm happier having both.

Comparing f1.4 to f2 is of course going to have different looks. It would have been interesting to compare the older lens at f2 to the newer lens, as well as other apertures.

The f1.4 looks better. It's subtle. The skin tones look much nicer from the f1.4.

for this I solved the problem with a viltrox 33, faster, quieter and with a good blur

I sold Xc35 because I want buy XF35 F1.4. Now it is very cheap in second market.

1.4 on the left

I think the f2 is a better lens

I miss a side by side of the 2 lenses @ same apertures , it seems only normal that 1.4 is softer , has more prenounced bokey etc then a 2.0, ... question is are they quality wise as good on similar apertures ?

Jag gillade inte 35mmF2 speciellt mycket. Bilderna var för digitala och klara. Svårt att se skillnad på en youtube kanal när kvalitén är mindre än 2mp. Men 35mm1.4 har mjukare bokeh, snyggare falloff och i print påminner den mer om film jämfört med 35mmf2.

omg dude whta they mean by loud means when recording video on the camera the lens noise gets recorded. I like your video though just thought you really misunderstood that.

I have both but 1.4 is better in low light

The bokeh is not the only criteria. The micro-contrast and saturation are higher at f2 than at f1.4 but for micro-contrast and saturation it would be more fair to compare both the lenses at f2.0 or f2.8