Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Hello from someone you may have thought was long gone (if you know me from the past) ... but here I am back at least for a bit. I may not post much, but I will be checking in more than once every three years. 
I've made my decision regarding adopting a "real" digital camera/system. As a loyal Olympus/OM and Oly RF user for decades, I naturally have been inclined to put Olympus and m4/3 at the top of my list, but I just can't do it. Fuji got the camera controls right, and the size and weight seem to hit a sweet spot.
Naturally the sensor and in-camera processing had to be right, and no one I know of really complains about those elements. And of course, the Fuji XF lenses are excellent. (I've used Fujinon glass on 4x5 and in the darkroom, and they have never let me down, so I'm not surprised in the least.)
So before I make my final decision between the X100T and an interchangeable X-mount body, I'd like opinions on the 23/2 on the X100T and the 23/1.4.
Assuming the sensor/in-camera processing to be equivalent, are there any substantial differences between the lenses?
Just to be clear, I am not concerned with any differences in functionality of different camera bodies -- i.e., yes the X100T is fixed lens with "only" auxiliary lenses and X-mount bodies provide greater choice and flexibility. That doesn't enter into my decision. If I were to go X-mount body and 23/1.4, the 23 would be stuck on the body 100% of the time for a long time.
Final note: I'm not giving up film. I will keep one or two OM bodies and a couple of lenses, a Konica body and two lenses, one Oly RF and my Chamonix 45. All the rest of the analog gear will be sold. I have too much of it, and a bit of spare cash to go toward the Fuji purchase will be welcome.
Cheers!
Earl
I've made my decision regarding adopting a "real" digital camera/system. As a loyal Olympus/OM and Oly RF user for decades, I naturally have been inclined to put Olympus and m4/3 at the top of my list, but I just can't do it. Fuji got the camera controls right, and the size and weight seem to hit a sweet spot.
Naturally the sensor and in-camera processing had to be right, and no one I know of really complains about those elements. And of course, the Fuji XF lenses are excellent. (I've used Fujinon glass on 4x5 and in the darkroom, and they have never let me down, so I'm not surprised in the least.)
So before I make my final decision between the X100T and an interchangeable X-mount body, I'd like opinions on the 23/2 on the X100T and the 23/1.4.
Assuming the sensor/in-camera processing to be equivalent, are there any substantial differences between the lenses?
Just to be clear, I am not concerned with any differences in functionality of different camera bodies -- i.e., yes the X100T is fixed lens with "only" auxiliary lenses and X-mount bodies provide greater choice and flexibility. That doesn't enter into my decision. If I were to go X-mount body and 23/1.4, the 23 would be stuck on the body 100% of the time for a long time.
Final note: I'm not giving up film. I will keep one or two OM bodies and a couple of lenses, a Konica body and two lenses, one Oly RF and my Chamonix 45. All the rest of the analog gear will be sold. I have too much of it, and a bit of spare cash to go toward the Fuji purchase will be welcome.
Cheers!
Earl
Frontman
Well-known
I have been using the X100T for several month now, and had used and X-Pro with the 23mm lens before. I sold my X-Pro system as I find the X100T to suit me better. I didn't find the extra speed to be of any real advantage, though both lenses performed well. I use the X100T primarily to take family photos, and it is probably the best camera I have ever used for this purpose.
If you are going to be using only a single lens, the X100T is probably the best choice you could make. I love mine.
If you are going to be using only a single lens, the X100T is probably the best choice you could make. I love mine.
As this is presented, I'd go 23/2. There is no 'wrong' answer, but I really like the handling of the camera and the rendering of the lens, and the size, compared to a 23/1.4 setup.
GaryLH
Mentor
23f1.4 permanently on an x body or the 23f2 of the x100t. Unless u need the one stop better speed or eventually buy other lenses, I would go w/ the x100t... Plus silent leaf shutter... Only the electronic shutter of the xt series is quieter (though w/ potential jello issues).
Personally, I hate changing lenses in the field.. There is something to be said about having the x100t's 35fov and an x camera body w/ a different focal length.
Gary
Personally, I hate changing lenses in the field.. There is something to be said about having the x100t's 35fov and an x camera body w/ a different focal length.
Gary
trisberg
Established
Another vote for the X100T, just love this little camera. As the icing on the cake consider getting the Instax share printer for give aways.
-Thomas
-Thomas
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
PEOPLE!!!! - You are awesome! This was my gut feeling, I guess I just needed a bit of reinforcement, or convincing contraindication. (Don't you just LOVE six-syllable words?)
I'm not precluding an X-mount interchangeable in the future, but I will order an X100T from Popflash soon. Thanks all!
I'm not precluding an X-mount interchangeable in the future, but I will order an X100T from Popflash soon. Thanks all!
gavinlg
Mentor
The x100's 23mm is like a classic lens. It has it's own little aberrations unique to it, and generally everyone that uses it loves it. The x100 itself is a beautiful camera to use. The 23mm f1.4 is much more like a canon/nikon 35mm f1.4 in use - more 'perfect' in character. Personally I think it's a better lens than either the canon or nikon equivalents, and the clutch manual focus mechanism is just sublime (much nicer than the olympus clutch MF mechanism which almost always has lateral slop in the actual movement).
Honestly, as I'm a 35mm guy, I'd have both. The x100 is just so good at what it does. However, get the 23mm f1.4 if you want 35 you can shoot wide open at f1.4 all day reliably.
Honestly, as I'm a 35mm guy, I'd have both. The x100 is just so good at what it does. However, get the 23mm f1.4 if you want 35 you can shoot wide open at f1.4 all day reliably.
willie_901
Mentor
I have used both lenses.
The 23/1.4 is superior optically.
The 23/2 comes with a camera.
As others mentioned the 23/2 appears much smaller (and it is smaller) because most of the the lens body is recessed into the camera. The 23/1.4 is heavier and is almost too bulky for the X-Pro1. It's much easier to carry the X-Pro1 in a small bag with the 27/2.8
The reason I prefer the 23/1.4 is because the 23/2 will often render odd, asymmetrical flare around bright, point source lights. These artifacts are most common at night. In my experience they are highly dependent on the light angle and independent of aperture.
The AF technology in the 24/1.4 is quick and reliable. Of course the X100S/T AF is quick as well.
The 23/1.4 is superior optically.
The 23/2 comes with a camera.
As others mentioned the 23/2 appears much smaller (and it is smaller) because most of the the lens body is recessed into the camera. The 23/1.4 is heavier and is almost too bulky for the X-Pro1. It's much easier to carry the X-Pro1 in a small bag with the 27/2.8
The reason I prefer the 23/1.4 is because the 23/2 will often render odd, asymmetrical flare around bright, point source lights. These artifacts are most common at night. In my experience they are highly dependent on the light angle and independent of aperture.
The AF technology in the 24/1.4 is quick and reliable. Of course the X100S/T AF is quick as well.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Willie - thanks. I've given some thought to the 27/2.8 on the X-Pro1 as well. I may have to go to a shop that carries the line and handle the various combos. Sadly, in Rochester that's NO SHOP. Hamilton/Burlington or Toronto might be closest unless someone in Buffalo has Fuji X in stock. I doubt that.
It sounds like the flare issue might be hard to control unless one is very careful. I'll have to look for some images that exhibit that and see how distracting/distasteful it is.
Gavin - good observations, I appreciate that. Having both would be great, but at the moment it's not in the budget.
It sounds like the flare issue might be hard to control unless one is very careful. I'll have to look for some images that exhibit that and see how distracting/distasteful it is.
Gavin - good observations, I appreciate that. Having both would be great, but at the moment it's not in the budget.
F6Roger
Established
As said, there is no 'wrong' answer. For me it would be the 23/1.4, a lovely lens. In fact I'm getting a second X-Pro1 body so's I can have a permanent X-Pro1 - 23/1.4 and X-Pro1 - 56/1.2 pairing, I don't like changing lenses in the field. I hope the X100T works out for you, but don't forget that the X-Pro1 body is getting cheaper by the month (at least here in the UK). Enjoy
squirrel$$$bandit
Mentor
Hey Earl, welcome back! I recently returned too. I haven't used the 1.4 and can't comment on the difference between the two, but I think you'll love the X100T. It's a great digicam for the film fan, fun to use and produces amazing pictures.
narsuitus
Well-known
This year, I selected a Fuji X body with a 23mm f/1.4 lens to replaced my Olympus micro 4/3. I have been extremely happy with the performance of the 23mm; even wide open.
Since I needed the light gathering of the f/1.4 verses the f/2 on the X100T and the interchangeable lenses verses a fixed lens, I never considered the X100T. Therefore, I cannot tell you how the 23 f/1.4 compares to the 23 f/2 because I never used the X100T.
Candid Wedding Cameras by Narsuitus, on Flickr
FrankS
Registered User
Welcome back Earl! If you're coming to the Toronto meet on Nov.14, and I hope you are, you'll be able to handle some of the gear you're interested in.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Frank, I will be there with bells on! I'm bringing an M3 with DR Summicron as well.
willie_901
Mentor
The thing is it is impossible to control. In my experience it is extremely dependent on the angle of light. The flare is highly localized and is often asymmetrical. I have never seen this artifact in daylight.
I am seriously considering selling one of my X-T1 (or X-Pro1) bodies and the 27/2.8 (or 35/1.4) lens and picking up a X100T. So the this bright point-source flare is not a show stopper for me.
Here are some examples.
Fairmount Park Race Track 3292 by william hutton, on Flickr
The Boulevard, St Louis 0047 by william hutton, on Flickr
MaxElmar
Well-known
Willie - thank you for posting examples - very helpful. Seeing the flares, I can see where they might really bother some. But for others they may be a "feature" not a "bug." I'm leaning towards the latter.
Regards,
Regards,
Was there a filter on the lens for these shots?
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Those are really strange flares. I don't do a lot of work at night or under those conditions, but I can imagine not being pleased with that if the shot was once-in-a-lifetime or otherwise singular. *scratches head*
willie_901
Mentor
No filter (I don't even own a filter for that lens) and I did have the OEM Fujifilm lens hood attached.
willie_901
Mentor
They are very strange. Not every bright light source in the images has them.
I speculate they are cause by a internal reflections due to a combination of two things.
First, the lens rear element is extremely close to the sensor. The X100 Fujinon is much longer than one would think as most of it is recessed into the camera.
Second, the color-filter array micro lenses differ as one moves from the center of the frame to the edges. This design minimizes vignetting and color shifts caused by the short lens-to-sensor distance.
They are always present. But only become apparent in scenes with extreme dynamic range due to strong over exposure of the point-source lights. Otherwise (another speculation) they are weaker than the noise and essentially are below the ADC threshold. Anyway, I have never seen them except in situations similar to the examples I posted.