I have both the 23 f2.8 and 27 f2.8 R WR and find them have very similar sounds. I don't find them loud, however, they do make a little more noise than other Fuji lenses I use. I have to confess that my wife often tells me I need a hearing test. I agree with fotografur, the 23 is sharp out to the edges. What a bargain as part of the XE5 kit.
gdanmitchell wrote:
The full image looks good… and makes me jealous, as we had to revise some upcoming east coast travel plans that _would_ have taken us to Maine but now won’t!
If you have the time and inclination to do it, it would be interesting to see some crops from different parts of the frame: center and some corners perhaps?
Thanks,
Dan
Bummer you aren't getting to visit Maine, great place. Here's a couple of crops of the center area and left bottom corner.
Just got the X-E5 kit and so far I like the 23 2.8 much more than my 27 2.8. The 23 focuses so much closer and has higher magnification, whereas the 27 often left me annoyed by the more limited MFD. I’ll need to test it, but initially the 23 seems to have better contrast and color wide open versus the 27.
The photos are in-line with my xf 27, which is to say -- pretty good for a pancake. You can catch the degradation in the corners if you look for it, but even that is pretty gradual; not obvious.
Still think the focal length is close enough to create an overlap with the 27. Still think that issuing a WR as a kit lens to a non-WR body sounds like a bad joke.
An 18 mark II pancake would've been the better choice for the lens lineup. But that's not capitalizing on the x100 hype, is it?
Evection wrote:
The photos are in-line with my xf 27, which is to say -- pretty good for a pancake. You can catch the degradation in the corners if you look for it, but even that is pretty gradual; not obvious.
Still think the focal length is close enough to create an overlap with the 27. Still think that issuing a WR as a kit lens to a non-WR body sounds like a bad joke.
An 18 mark II pancake would've been the better choice for the lens lineup. But that's not capitalizing on the x100 hype, is it?
I think that the 27mm versus 23mm question is going to be an either/or issue, and almost no one would want to own both.
I have a useful set for travel and street photography that combines 14mm, 27mm, and 50mm — close to 2:1 focal length relationships. With the 23mm, I can imagine a similar set with that new Sigma 12mm f/1.4, 23mm, and 50mm.
Another option is to combine these small aperture primes with some slightly different focal length primes with larger apertures. For example, I also have a 23mm and 50mm f/1.4 that mostly get used for night phtotography.
gdanmitchell wrote:
I think that the 27mm versus 23mm question is going to be an either/or issue, and almost no one would want to own both.
I have a useful set for travel and street photography that combines 14mm, 27mm, and 50mm — close to 2:1 focal length relationships. With the 23mm, I can imagine a similar set with that new Sigma 12mm f/1.4, 23mm, and 50mm.
Another option is to combine these small aperture primes with some slightly different focal length primes with larger apertures. For example, I also have a 23mm and 50mm f/1.4 that mostly get used for night phtotography.
Most Fuji primes wider than 80mm are compact enough for street/travel. Even the modern 1.4 trinity. (50/1 being an obvious exception).
Pancakes are a different category in the sense they let you put the camera in a jacket pocket (some cameras, at least). Which is why it would have been more useful to provide a wider range than the current either/or proposition. 23mm makes marketing sense, but it doesn't make practical sense.
Evection wrote:
....But that's not capitalizing on the x100 hype, is it?
I don't know if they are capitalizing on X100 hype or protecting the X100. I would have liked it to be a 23mm f2 pancake. That should be doable considering that we have in the past seen Canon 22mm f2, Samsung 30mm f2 and Panasonic 20mm 1.7 pancakes. But I suspect they don't want to go that route because it will cannibalize the x100 sales.
I'm not following why they'd be concerned about cannibalizing X100 sales with their own product. I'm presuming they just don't think a 23 f/2 X-mount pancake is a viable product for whatever reason. There are plenty of photographers who don't mind compromising a bit on aperture to get as small of a package as possible, and I don't think f/2.8 is going to be a barrier for them.
The new pancake is a perfect size for the X-E5. I think I'd probably lean toward the existing 23mm f/2 for most of the larger X-mount cameras, though.
Evection wrote:
Most Fuji primes wider than 80mm are compact enough for street/travel. Even the modern 1.4 trinity. (50/1 being an obvious exception).
Pancakes are a different category in the sense they let you put the camera in a jacket pocket (some cameras, at least). Which is why it would have been more useful to provide a wider range than the current either/or proposition. 23mm makes marketing sense, but it doesn't make practical sense.
There are innumerable ways to do street photography. It is sometimes done with zoom lenses, bit f/1.0 and f/1.2 primes, even medium format and large format gear. So from that perspective I suppose gigantic primes like hte 50mm f/1.0 and big f/1.2 lenses and the larger f/1.4 lenses _can_ be used for street.
But that’s not what most people do, in my experience. The tendency is to use smaller gear, cameras and lenses. From the street photography perspective there are multiple reasons for this. One is that the smaller the gear the less impact you are likely to have on your subjects. (I recall the first time I shot a Fujifilm APS-C camera with one of the small primes while standing in a crowd… and I was shocked that no one even seemed tois notice me.)
Another reason is a desire to work fast and light. And the really big apertures, generally speaking, are less useful for street, where it is often important to have a bit more DOF.
Travel poses similar issues — especially weight and build while flying, lugging your stuff around, and squeezing everything into available luggage space. BTW, the Fujifilm APS-C ILC cameras, while small, don’t really fit in pockets, even with pancake lenses. More likely we’re talking about some kind of small shoulder bag or similar.The difference between a kit with three small f/2 or f/2.8 lenses and three f/1.4 and/or f/1.2 lenses isn’t inconsequential.
I have several large aperture primes — 35mm f/1.4, 23mm f/1.4, 90mm f/2 — but I rarely would use them for street or travel.
curious80 wrote:
I don't know if they are capitalizing on X100 hype or protecting the X100. I would have liked it to be a 23mm f2 pancake. That should be doable considering that we have in the past seen Canon 22mm f2, Samsung 30mm f2 and Panasonic 20mm 1.7 pancakes. But I suspect they don't want to go that route because it will cannibalize the x100 sales.
The X100VI has an f/2 pancake because they could jam that mfer right up against the sensor and without having to worry about a lens mount.
highdesertmesa wrote:
The X100VI has an f/2 pancake because they could jam that mfer right up against the sensor and without having to worry about a lens mount.
I understand but like I mentioned others have made fast pancake primes for mirrorless mounts as well including Canon EOS-M 22mm f2, Samsung 30mm f2 and Panasonic 20mm 1.7
curious80 wrote:
I understand but like I mentioned others have made fast pancake primes for mirrorless mounts as well including Canon EOS-M 22mm f2, Samsung 30mm f2 and Panasonic 20mm 1.7
It looks like to me that these are all APS-C or even smaller form factors. Not as familiar with these other brands but I think the Fujifilm X100 is the only true APS-C. That’s a detail to get right in doing these comparisons.
swldstn wrote:
It looks like to me that these are all APS-C or even smaller form factors. Not as familiar with these other brands but I think the Fujifilm X100 is the only true APS-C. That’s a detail to get right in doing these comparisons.
Canon is APS-C and Samsung is also APS-C just like X100 and other Fuji cameras
curious80 wrote:
I understand but like I mentioned others have made fast pancake primes for mirrorless mounts as well including Canon EOS-M 22mm f2, Samsung 30mm f2 and Panasonic 20mm 1.7
I had a Panasonic 20mm 1.7 and it was good, but only m4/3. My son has it now and has no complaints but it's not relevant to aps-c really, not so wide.
highdesertmesa wrote:
The X100VI has an f/2 pancake because they could jam that mfer right up against the sensor and without having to worry about a lens mount.
Except that the X100 f/2 MFD performance is pretttttty crappy compared to some other good options. This has always been a weak point with Fuji 23mm lenses back to the 'cron, probably a limitation of the very small sizes.
RoamingScott wrote:
Except that the X100 f/2 MFD performance is pretttttty crappy compared to some other good options. This has always been a weak point with Fuji 23mm lenses back to the 'cron, probably a limitation of the very small sizes.
Wait a minute. I thought the “Fujicron” f/2 R WR lenses, at 23, 35, and 50mm focal lengths, all had pretty good IQ and acceptable AF for their smaller size. The lenses in the X100 cameras are not in the “Fujicron” family officially or unofficially since they have a different design with a leaf shutter.
