I think the 35mm 1.4 is staying with me. The size, bokeh, center sharpness and color rendering are perfect to me. AF isn't as slow as it once was on older fuji bodies. With a used price of $400 its hard to justify double the weight and price of the 33mm 1.4. Plus I feel like the sharpness falloff in the corners somewhat adds to the character of the lens, much like vintage lenses.
I don’t know why 35 1.4 is not doing well in lens tests but the images are so nice and natural. I sold it a few years ago but bought it again last year. After many lenses, my favourites are 35 f1.4 and 18 f2. I even love the noise they make 😊
Do you shoot a lot of portraits? People often like portraits with a bit more blur and less contrast. Sometimes other pictures with less blur too. But these things can all be edited in post so I'd take the sharper lens.
Because objective sharpness tests can't adequately capture how pleasing a lenses "look" can be, which is highly subjective. Sharpness and perfect bokeh are important for commercial product and fashion photography, but less so for more artistic work
Completely agree with your take. I’ve had the XF 33mm f1.4 for about two months now and it has been reliably sharp across its aperture range and very fast focusing. It replaced the 23mm f1.4 which I absolutely loved. This one is perfect.
Yesterday I made the same transition. I had the 23mm 1.4 for a long while but the newer 33mm 1.4 for some reason spoke to me. I replaced the 23mm for the 33mm and will be shooting the 33mm all day today. After some tests after the purchase yesterday, I can tell my I won’t regret my decision
As expected, you’ve done a terrific job on this very demanding review video. These comparisons are so valuable I hope you’ll do more of them. Thank you!
I've owned the original 35mm f/1.4 for many years. I bought it with an X-T2 when that camera was released and have since used it on X-H1, X-T4, X-E3 and X-H2 bodies. Used mainly for low light shots at indoor events this lens has created thousands of excellent characterful images. No one has ever complained about the sharpness. The lens has been chucked in and out of bags for years and is bulletproof. An old friend! I thought I might refresh with the new 33mm but the difference is negligible so I opted to keep the old 35mm and spend the money on a new different focal length lens.
I would love to see the Sigma 30mm to be thrown into the comparison too! It would be very interesting to see if it’s worth going for the Sigma 30mm over the Fuji 35mm since the price is so close.
Worth mentioning that due to both the 35 f1.4 and XF 35 f2 having been out for many years and being two of the more popular lenses on the system, you can get them used for a pretty reasonable price. The XF F2 used is usually not much more than the XC version is new so overall i think a used 35mm f2 is a great buy for the money. i've owned the 35mm f1.4 before and i just couldnt get along with the noisy AF motor, it really is a thing of nightmares and it didnt justify the extra stop of light for me when the 35mm F2 is better in almost every other practical aspect. Definitely wouldnt recommend anyone paying 600$ for a new copy of it at this time. That 33mm is a beauty though, would love to own it one day.
I used the f/2 at a wedding, on several trips abroad and portraits, it's pretty solid. However, it has some horrible barrel distortion, so when you photograph up close it overcorrects to extreme pincushion. Its close focus performance is also quite horrible. It doesn't sit well with me, knowing the 50 and the 23 are corrected for distortion, but for some reason they didn't care to fix it in this lens. I didn't know these things when I bought it, so i switched back to the 1.4. I use it in conjunction with the 16-80, so if I need weather sealing, some flexibility and don't care about distortion I'll just use that.
@@stinkystealthysloth I ended up with the same 2 lenses in my everyday kit as you. I just adore the 35mm f/1.4. It’s my favorite lens, probably because I’ve used it to take photos at some happy occasions in my life, but also for the amazing color rendering. It seems to have the ability to read my mind and give me the shots I’m envisioning, and sometimes it gives me better shots than I could have even imagined.
Great video! I really like these kind of comparison video’s, certainly if there done so thoroughly as this one. I’ve bought the XF 35mm f2 last year (second hand) after having watched your full reviews. Keep up the good work! Thanks Chris.
My 35 f/1.4 is not as noisy as shown in the film.I have been very happy with it.I bought mine used in mint condition for £430 and I just use it for photos not for videos. Some of my favourite portraits have been taken with it. It does have a nice character.
Brilliant review, thank you! This confirms something I've noticed with the little f/2 lens, that it's bokeh is very smooth and has a very good transition zone. Also, I too found the 35mm 1.4 to have noisy corners, likely from the built-in vignette corrections.
Used to be that good looking lenses was much more common, look at canon and Nikon's old film SLR lenses, beautiful compared to today's black glossy plastic look
I had all of these but sold the older 35mm f1.4. The focus motor drove me nuts and the 35mm f2 always seemed to produce noticeably sharper images with better contrast so ended up using it instead. The 35mm f2 really holds its own, even against the new 33mm f1.4. Sure, it’s not as fast and not great up close but if you can work with that I think it’s a better option given it’s price and size. I will hang on to both the 35mm and 33mm for a few more months and see how I feel.
The 35mm f/2, due to its serious barrel distortion, yields extreme pincushion distortion when shot at its minimum focus, as the camera overcorrects for distortion at that focus distance.
This is the battle I've been waiting for from you. I actually thought there would be more of a difference in the 35 1.4 and 33. Perhaps it'll show more of a difference on the next sensor of 40mp (or whatever they make it). Maybe we can get the Viltrox 33 1.4 thrown in against the 33 Fuji next?
Excellent review and comparison. Applaud and appreciate the effort! I own the 35f1.4, and I get some great shots on my old XT-1. Id love to see how the newer 33mm lens performs. The lens I usually keep on the XT-1, is the original 23 f1.4! LOVE that lens, and it’s field of view. Very sharp! 👍👍👍👍✌🏻😀📷🙏
I love your reviews! I would actually really like to see a review for an older lens for Fuji, XF 90mm F2, if you get your hands on it, please make a review for it! Thanks for the videos!
They're all good. 🙂 I went with the 33 because it's more reliable & modern, and I expect to be satisfied with its overall performance for many years until it breaks.
Glad you made this video!!! It’s INCREDIBLE coincidence because for the past three days I’m exploring exactly this topic XF 33mm/f1.4 vs my 35/2. Not sure whether it’s worth switching to 33/1.4 🤔 And Chris, THANK YOU for your solidarity with Ukraine 🇺🇦 my home country 🌻
My rationale for switching from XF 35mm f/2 to XF 33mm f/1.4 (and not choose XF 35mm f/1.4, Viltrox 33mm f/1.4 or wait for SIgma 30mm f/1.4) was that I like the "normal" focal length, so I will probably shoot a lot with it and for a long time (next 10 years), so I want the best lens for that.
@@quikee9195 this might be one of the greatest answers ever. I'm convinced. 50mm is my favorite focal length. Wide angle zoom for youtube videos, and 50mm for occasional portraits. But the 33mm will be my daily driver. Thank you.
I traded the 35mm f2 in against the 33mm 1.4 and haven't regretted it for a second, even though the f2 is a great lens. The clarity and speed of autofocus are amazing, just watch out for the issue I describe above if you're shooting near the sun with a sensor older than the latest. There's a fix, just be aware before buying
Wow that 33mm f1.4 is impressive! I recently bought the XF 35mm f2 as for me it offers the best balance between quality/size/price. It's a beautiful lens and I'm very happy with it, although the 33mm f1.4 is the clear winner in image quality.
Thanks Chris, excellent video. I've heard the XC 35mm f2 described as a bargain and it is. It's a lens that people can afford and delivers excellent image quality for what it is.
None of the 3. I bought years ago the XF 35 f2 new for 350€. Nice built quality, weather sealing, softer bokeh were the reasons to chose it over the older 1.4. Maybe would still be my top pick today, as it is lighter, smaller and cheaper.
This is exactly wat Chris said, the XC and XF 35 F2 are exactly the same lens optically, so the XF 35 f2 offers you better build quality and weather sealing, although it's not optically superior to any of the f1.4 lenses. Although it's quite good. That was my first Fuji lens, but then I replaced it the 35 f1.4. I'm quite happy with it, I don't see myself upgrading it to the 33 f1.4, as I tested it and I found it too clinically sharp for my taste.
This is about the only source I can rely on to tell me whether the lens motor is noisy or not and therefore appropriate for video. So often this is barely mentioned.
I came to you while making this very decision ... your video was SUPER helpful! Thank you! :-D I decided to grit my teeth and order the nicer, new lens (33mm f/1.4). It will only hurt once. We are "old" now and have more income to spend. It will be used to do some portraits for one of our children and their family. Some stinkers from woodsy low light last weekend convinced me it would be worth the investment. When taking portraits with children and dogs in them, the faster, more accurate autofocus is worth a thought also.
These are three very distinct lens for three distinct users. The XC35 is of course more for an entry level, and given that it is optically the same as the XF35f2 is actually an amazing value. The XF35f1.4 is my favorite, as it has a very classic, vintage look to it, and while the af is the slowest, it has that bright aperture which makes it more versatile. The "magic" of this lens is apparent in its rendering, and is hard to technically qualify. The XF33 lens is spectacular optically, and is made for a more pixel-dense sensor, and probably for video-centric creative. Overall, what's amazing about the Fuji X system, is that they continue to give a lot of CHOICE to its users.
As always, love your reviews. This is just what I've been looking for. I have the XF f/2 version and curious what the jump would be like to the 33. Thanks a bunch!
Very good review. For my style of photography, often using strong grain and dreamy effects, the 35mm f2 is just fine and saved me money to justify the purchase of the 50mm f2. Weather sealing would nice but I do not often go out in inclement weather and if do so, I take out a different camera and lens system. Again, a good review.
I'm definitely getting the new 33mm for close image quality. I have to wonder if this isn't the same design as was originally going to be f1.0, but now just shrunk down a bit.
Great video as always well done I think I'll stick with my 35mm 1.4 it has a lot of character. That and I really can't justify that price for the 33mm 😭
I got both 33mm f1.4 and 35mm f2 wr. I didn't notice f2 is soft when shooting close objects, like food. I guess it's because food is not a flat object like a clock and depths of focus is very narrow with close objects. It does not appear to be a major issue for me.
You see a soft halo around the objects when close focusing, and the objects aren't as sharp. It's essentially the same issue as with the 23mm f/2 but the 23mm is criticised over it all the time, while most people with 35mm f/2 don't even notice it.. I wonder why.
Great review as always! I was just wondering why you left out the colour rendering as the old 35mm f 1.4 has always been known for its 'character', which is probably mostly due its rendering of colours. Any thoughts on that, thanks!
Thank you for the video. I've been contemplating getting the new 33mm to upgrade from the 35mm, but wasn't sure if it was worth the money and effort to do so. Frankly, I'm still unsure, because I really like the 35mm's old school metal box hood, and the improvements on the 33mm's optics are there, but then for an everyday shooter like me, I can probably do fine without. I do appreciate the linear motor on the 33mm though - I thought my 35mm was broken when I first got it because of that atrocious noise. Leaning toward keeping the 35mm.
Thank you for all your careful work on this splendid review, best of its kind I've ever seen. (I'll stick with the old 35mm I already have, since it works very well and I'm very far from a pro.)
Great summary and very useful, thanks! I've had my 35mm f/1.2 lens for six years now and am thinking of upgrading it to the new 33mm f/1.2. Looks like it'll be worth it if I can get a good price for my current lens on the used market.
I purchased and returned the 35mm because I found the focus motor extremely loud and frankly annoying. Given how modern lenses operate, I don't understand why Fuji is not interested in correcting this. I then purchased the 33mm and have used it for one year and find it the very best Fuji lens I own. It is everything promised in this review.
The other advantage of the older lens is secondary market prices! I've seen it sell for significant discounts from retail; whereas the newer lenses tend to not sway too far from retail
May I ask why there is difference in the sharpness tests of the 35mm f1. 4 between here and in the first review video of the lens? in the original review the lens had ghosting at 1.4 wide open but not here... was it fixed with firmware updates or something?
I’ll wait a few more years with my 35 1.4 and then maybe pick up a used 33mm. I’m not taking photos for anyone else so I don’t need that extra bit of performance
Many thanks for your work! I looked at pictures of the 33 on flickr and somehow dislike the bokeh. I really miss the cream from the 35 1.4. I might turn my back to Fuji just for that reason. The bokeh from the Nikon Z 50 1.8 is out of this world. I am not sure were to go... I am looking forward for the Tamron 20-40 on Nikon z. This would do the trick form my style.
Yea, 35mm f1.4 is older and not so clinical image quality but i still keep it in my bag although 33mm is optically superior but i still lean on the character that 35mm gives.
An excellent review, thank you very much indeed for all of your tremendous efforts - I trust your formula completely and refer to your vast library of data whenever I’m looking for an informative, reliable and scientifically based review of a lens! This review in particular was exactly what I was looking for, I’m currently trying to make up my mind on wether or not to sell my 50 f2 and get the 33mm along with a wide angle (Laowa 9mm or the Samyang 12mm) or to just go for the 16-55 2.8 to sit alongside my 50-140 (for a travel/landscape/portrait/occasional video set up) - I’d sincerely appreciate any advice on the matter! Thank you once again for all of your continual hard work and truly helpful archive of reviews
Have you noticed anything wrong with the performance of your f2? Are you in anyway disappointed with the images you have produced with it? In real world use what improvement would the 33mm f1.4 bring? And at what cost? This excellent review of the 3 lenses only focuses really on their optical performance and build. What about the ergonomics? The new 33mm is not only a lot more expensive but also a lot bigger and heavier than the f2 and much more indiscreet. I would hate to put it on a X-E3/4 , X-T20/30 0r XPro model. If you are going to predominately use the new 33mm inside as a studio queen or outside for astro photography, I can see the value in it, but otherwise the f2 is a very fine high performing lens with good AF in a compact body. It is ideal for general walk about use, travel, landscape and street. You might need the extra performance of the 33mm at the margins, but I reckon you would miss the f2 if you sold it to help finance its purchase. Opitically the only real fault with the f2 is the slight softness with close up images. But that is an issue that macro lenses are there to solve, and they do close up much better than a standard lens.
@@richardhale9664 Thank you ever so much for your response Richard, I completely agree! I absolutely love my little 50mm f2 and cannot say a bad word about it! The image quality, weather sealing, size & autofocus are excellent qualities and I would, no doubt, regret parting with it. The predicament I have is that I’ve doubled up focal lengths with the 50-140 & the 50 f2 (my initial lens purchase after moving over from Sony) and now I’m in need of something that bit wider to widen the focal length of my day to day "do it all lens". I predominantly use the 50-140 at around 70, 90 & 140 as I love the compression of those longer focal lengths but have found myself in need of something wider than 50mm, hence the 33mm/35mm, probably paired with an ultra wide 9mm for those infrequent interior/architectural/landscape shots. My current thought process is; I use an X-T3 with battery grip on most of the time which puts weight and ergonomics a little lower on the list (everything is lighter than the 50-140!!), that said, I understand the 33mm weighs the same as a coke can which does make the 35f2 all the more appealing, however, if I can get the same or improved image quality as my 50 f2 but with that marginally wider focal length, then it’s worth the slight compromise in weight… which is where the 16-55 2.8 enters the consideration - I’d have the wide and mid focal lengths covered and only need to carry the two lenses for pretty much all occasions (but with that there’s the sacrifice of the additional 1.4 aperture, though as you say, the excellent Fuji ISO deals with the problem of low light and the 50-140 tends to bokeh cravings - there is indeed a lot to be said for the little 35 f2, it really does tick most of the boxes doesn’t it! Thank you very much again for your advice, I shall hang on to my beloved little 50 f2 and get to the camera shop to try all of the aforementioned My warmest regards Ben
@@benbeattie4609 The difference between 33 and 35mm is tiny and likely to be unnoticeable in real world use. To get a noticeable widening of FOV you really need to drop to 30 or 27mm. Fuji's 27mm pancake is wonderful but has slow continuous AF. This does not bother me as I use mine only in single AF mode on my X-E3. A better choice for you may be Sigma's new 30mm f1.4. As a fan of the 40-45mm FF equivalent FOV. I am quite tempted by this lens myself for use on my larger Fuji bodies. Having re-read what you say, in your case, for something significantly wider than 35mm a 23mm f2 WR would be an ideal choice. It's not a lens I own, but it is basically the same idea as the others in the range, and if my 35mm and 16mm are anything to go, by a stunner. Walking around with the 23mm and 50-140mm you would have almost all subjects covered.
I have the 35mm f2, the old 35mm f1.4 but I've finally ordered the new 33mm f1.4 based on this review and how happy I am with the new 23mm f/1.4 R LM WR. Some people talk about the new lenses lacking 'character'. Well, I'd rather start with perfection and add 'character' (often euphemism for flawed) in post. On my new X-T5 this is an exciting leap forwards for me! Chris, you are my 'go to' reviewer. Thanks for all your great work and critique!
Great review as always, looking forward to the new 23 which for me is the most exciting one because the old 35 has something I really love and probably would not bother going for the new 33, 18 is nice but 28mm is not for me.
I’m have both the 35mm f1.4 & 2. At f1.4 Im looking for bokeh and not corner sharpness. Looks like same images at f5.6 and beyond. F2 not much more portable or lighter than the 1.4. 33 f1.4 not needed for me.
Maybe it's time for Fuji reviews to see how the lens is doing when shooting in a square format. And another thought, how the lens is doing when shot in the same ratio as say, the film, The Cranes Are Flying, which with it's moving camera, manages amazing detail across the frame, obviously using wide lenses, but the format, like television dramas from the period automatically cropped the sides. And the top and bottom, as all formats except square does!
@@sclogse1 I have to think what these words can be applied to (do you mean measuring actual MTFs or asking Fuji to build a multi-aspect ratio camera). This Soviet film I should watch.
If money was no object it would be the new 33mm all the way. With price factored in I’d skip all three and get the viltrox f1.4 and use the money I saved to put toward a good flash or some extra batteries. I’d put up with the possible CA and fringing to get better resolution and focus speed than the old 35mm, and better minimum focus performance than the f2, which otherwise is an awesome little lens. Honestly the old 35mm should probably be retired and the new lens should take its place at more like $500-$600.
The 33mm f1.4, might well be optically perfect, but it is still a lump to be sticking on your compact Fuji camera. OK for a X-T2,3 or 4 with a battery grip but not on a X-E or X-T10,20 or 30 model. In real world use my XF 35mm f2 is just fine and with modern high ISO performance who really needs faster than f2? There must be someone, but they are operating in a very small niche.
Great video again, but please do.test the 33mm 1.4 on an XT2/XH1 shooting toward the sun and see if you replicate the sensor-tiling issue I mentioned in the comments on your last video. Your legacy body users will thank you for it!
Any interest in doing reviews of vintage lenses? It's all I use when it comes to personal work. Love old Leica and Zeiss lenses. I could lend you some.
Actually, it is a myth that plastic lenses are less shock resistant, most of the time they would fare much better than their metal counterparts if dropped onto a concrete floor! There are two reasons for that: lighter weight so less force to dissipate at impact, the plastic is better at absorbing the energy of the impact than metal... So which lens would survive a drop better doesn't have a trivial answer.
Chris, I thought you Christians understood where the truth is. With your new avatar, you showed that I was wrong. You've upset me. Why touch on politics instead of reviewing photo? 🤷🏻♂️
I think the 35mm 1.4 is staying with me. The size, bokeh, center sharpness and color rendering are perfect to me. AF isn't as slow as it once was on older fuji bodies. With a used price of $400 its hard to justify double the weight and price of the 33mm 1.4. Plus I feel like the sharpness falloff in the corners somewhat adds to the character of the lens, much like vintage lenses.
Other than landscapes, how often is the corner in focus anyway? Good call, seems like a neat lens.
I don’t know why 35 1.4 is not doing well in lens tests but the images are so nice and natural. I sold it a few years ago but bought it again last year. After many lenses, my favourites are 35 f1.4 and 18 f2. I even love the noise they make 😊
Same here! Currently working on a photobook project with the XF18MMF2 @xftales
Only shooting in black and white and 1:1 crop for a year
Do you shoot a lot of portraits? People often like portraits with a bit more blur and less contrast. Sometimes other pictures with less blur too. But these things can all be edited in post so I'd take the sharper lens.
Because objective sharpness tests can't adequately capture how pleasing a lenses "look" can be, which is highly subjective. Sharpness and perfect bokeh are important for commercial product and fashion photography, but less so for more artistic work
@@CianMcsweeneyperfect ‘bokeh’ is absolutely not required in fashion photography lmao open a magazine
@@dva5610 fashion photography extends beyond just magazine work these days
Completely agree with your take. I’ve had the XF 33mm f1.4 for about two months now and it has been reliably sharp across its aperture range and very fast focusing. It replaced the 23mm f1.4 which I absolutely loved. This one is perfect.
Yesterday I made the same transition. I had the 23mm 1.4 for a long while but the newer 33mm 1.4 for some reason spoke to me. I replaced the 23mm for the 33mm and will be shooting the 33mm all day today. After some tests after the purchase yesterday, I can tell my I won’t regret my decision
@@davidgaritta9195 are we referring to the new 23mm 1.4 WR here? I love it but often have to walk a lot, am wondering if a 33mm will fit me better.
As expected, you’ve done a terrific job on this very demanding review video. These comparisons are so valuable I hope you’ll do more of them. Thank you!
I've owned the original 35mm f/1.4 for many years. I bought it with an X-T2 when that camera was released and have since used it on X-H1, X-T4, X-E3 and X-H2 bodies. Used mainly for low light shots at indoor events this lens has created thousands of excellent characterful images. No one has ever complained about the sharpness. The lens has been chucked in and out of bags for years and is bulletproof. An old friend! I thought I might refresh with the new 33mm but the difference is negligible so I opted to keep the old 35mm and spend the money on a new different focal length lens.
I would love to see the Sigma 30mm to be thrown into the comparison too! It would be very interesting to see if it’s worth going for the Sigma 30mm over the Fuji 35mm since the price is so close.
it is
Yeah.. Waiting for this comparison 🙌
Not really.
The sigma is better that both fuji 35mm’s. Especially agains the 35mm f1.4 … urgh.. there is nothing “Magical” about that lens. Just a lot of flaws…
@@recepuenel1 what sort of flaws your talkin' about?
I love my 35mm f1.4, cant put my finger on it but there is something special about the images from it
Worth mentioning that due to both the 35 f1.4 and XF 35 f2 having been out for many years and being two of the more popular lenses on the system, you can get them used for a pretty reasonable price. The XF F2 used is usually not much more than the XC version is new so overall i think a used 35mm f2 is a great buy for the money.
i've owned the 35mm f1.4 before and i just couldnt get along with the noisy AF motor, it really is a thing of nightmares and it didnt justify the extra stop of light for me when the 35mm F2 is better in almost every other practical aspect. Definitely wouldnt recommend anyone paying 600$ for a new copy of it at this time.
That 33mm is a beauty though, would love to own it one day.
The sound of xf 35mm f/1.4 reminds me of a dot matrix printer.
@@quikee9195 haha that is surprisingly accurate actually.
I used the f/2 at a wedding, on several trips abroad and portraits, it's pretty solid. However, it has some horrible barrel distortion, so when you photograph up close it overcorrects to extreme pincushion. Its close focus performance is also quite horrible. It doesn't sit well with me, knowing the 50 and the 23 are corrected for distortion, but for some reason they didn't care to fix it in this lens. I didn't know these things when I bought it, so i switched back to the 1.4. I use it in conjunction with the 16-80, so if I need weather sealing, some flexibility and don't care about distortion I'll just use that.
@@stinkystealthysloth I ended up with the same 2 lenses in my everyday kit as you. I just adore the 35mm f/1.4. It’s my favorite lens, probably because I’ve used it to take photos at some happy occasions in my life, but also for the amazing color rendering. It seems to have the ability to read my mind and give me the shots I’m envisioning, and sometimes it gives me better shots than I could have even imagined.
Great video! I really like these kind of comparison video’s, certainly if there done so thoroughly as this one.
I’ve bought the XF 35mm f2 last year (second hand) after having watched your full reviews. Keep up the good work! Thanks Chris.
My 35 f/1.4 is not as noisy as shown in the film.I have been very happy with it.I bought mine used in mint condition for £430 and I just use it for photos not for videos.
Some of my favourite portraits have been taken with it.
It does have a nice character.
Brilliant review, thank you! This confirms something I've noticed with the little f/2 lens, that it's bokeh is very smooth and has a very good transition zone. Also, I too found the 35mm 1.4 to have noisy corners, likely from the built-in vignette corrections.
I swear Fuji make the nicest-looking first-party gear.
Used to be that good looking lenses was much more common, look at canon and Nikon's old film SLR lenses, beautiful compared to today's black glossy plastic look
@@CianMcsweeney A good half of why I like shooting vintage Nikon glass. Looks good mounted to an a7III and a7IV and most of it holds up optically
I had all of these but sold the older 35mm f1.4. The focus motor drove me nuts and the 35mm f2 always seemed to produce noticeably sharper images with better contrast so ended up using it instead. The 35mm f2 really holds its own, even against the new 33mm f1.4. Sure, it’s not as fast and not great up close but if you can work with that I think it’s a better option given it’s price and size. I will hang on to both the 35mm and 33mm for a few more months and see how I feel.
Have you chosen the 35 f2 or the 33 f1.4?
@@Jgheiler still got both but I do use the 33 a lot more. Still, can’t beat the 35/2 size..
The 35mm f/2, due to its serious barrel distortion, yields extreme pincushion distortion when shot at its minimum focus, as the camera overcorrects for distortion at that focus distance.
Bought the 33mm recently. It’s fabulous and has me out shooting more than before.
This is the battle I've been waiting for from you. I actually thought there would be more of a difference in the 35 1.4 and 33. Perhaps it'll show more of a difference on the next sensor of 40mp (or whatever they make it).
Maybe we can get the Viltrox 33 1.4 thrown in against the 33 Fuji next?
Excellent review and comparison. Applaud and appreciate the effort! I own the 35f1.4, and I get some great shots on my old XT-1. Id love to see how the newer 33mm lens performs. The lens I usually keep on the XT-1, is the original 23 f1.4! LOVE that lens, and it’s field of view. Very sharp!
👍👍👍👍✌🏻😀📷🙏
I love your reviews! I would actually really like to see a review for an older lens for Fuji, XF 90mm F2, if you get your hands on it, please make a review for it! Thanks for the videos!
They're all good. 🙂 I went with the 33 because it's more reliable & modern, and I expect to be satisfied with its overall performance for many years until it breaks.
Great review, I needed this comparison to decide! thanks!
Glad you made this video!!! It’s INCREDIBLE coincidence because for the past three days I’m exploring exactly this topic XF 33mm/f1.4 vs my 35/2. Not sure whether it’s worth switching to 33/1.4 🤔 And Chris, THANK YOU for your solidarity with Ukraine 🇺🇦 my home country 🌻
LITERALLY ME RN! Haha, I'm also between the Fuji 16mm 2.8, the 16mm 1.4 and the 18mm 1.4. Did you decide one?
My rationale for switching from XF 35mm f/2 to XF 33mm f/1.4 (and not choose XF 35mm f/1.4, Viltrox 33mm f/1.4 or wait for SIgma 30mm f/1.4) was that I like the "normal" focal length, so I will probably shoot a lot with it and for a long time (next 10 years), so I want the best lens for that.
@@quikee9195 this might be one of the greatest answers ever. I'm convinced. 50mm is my favorite focal length. Wide angle zoom for youtube videos, and 50mm for occasional portraits. But the 33mm will be my daily driver. Thank you.
I traded the 35mm f2 in against the 33mm 1.4 and haven't regretted it for a second, even though the f2 is a great lens. The clarity and speed of autofocus are amazing, just watch out for the issue I describe above if you're shooting near the sun with a sensor older than the latest. There's a fix, just be aware before buying
Wow that 33mm f1.4 is impressive! I recently bought the XF 35mm f2 as for me it offers the best balance between quality/size/price. It's a beautiful lens and I'm very happy with it, although the 33mm f1.4 is the clear winner in image quality.
Love that you're testing Fuji stuff again 😁✨👌🏼
Thanks Chris, excellent video. I've heard the XC 35mm f2 described as a bargain and it is. It's a lens that people can afford and delivers excellent image quality for what it is.
None of the 3. I bought years ago the XF 35 f2 new for 350€. Nice built quality, weather sealing, softer bokeh were the reasons to chose it over the older 1.4. Maybe would still be my top pick today, as it is lighter, smaller and cheaper.
This is exactly wat Chris said, the XC and XF 35 F2 are exactly the same lens optically, so the XF 35 f2 offers you better build quality and weather sealing, although it's not optically superior to any of the f1.4 lenses. Although it's quite good. That was my first Fuji lens, but then I replaced it the 35 f1.4. I'm quite happy with it, I don't see myself upgrading it to the 33 f1.4, as I tested it and I found it too clinically sharp for my taste.
I started to dislike the 35mm f/2 because of the extreme focus breathing and soft close-focus performance is annoying (need to remember to stop down).
This is about the only source I can rely on to tell me whether the lens motor is noisy or not and therefore appropriate for video. So often this is barely mentioned.
This video is perfect.
Congratulations for your work. It is an indispensable tool when buying a lens.
Greetings from Brazil
What an excellent and useful comparison for us Fuji users! Thank you very much Chris.
I came to you while making this very decision ... your video was SUPER helpful! Thank you! :-D I decided to grit my teeth and order the nicer, new lens (33mm f/1.4). It will only hurt once. We are "old" now and have more income to spend. It will be used to do some portraits for one of our children and their family. Some stinkers from woodsy low light last weekend convinced me it would be worth the investment. When taking portraits with children and dogs in them, the faster, more accurate autofocus is worth a thought also.
These are three very distinct lens for three distinct users. The XC35 is of course more for an entry level, and given that it is optically the same as the XF35f2 is actually an amazing value. The XF35f1.4 is my favorite, as it has a very classic, vintage look to it, and while the af is the slowest, it has that bright aperture which makes it more versatile. The "magic" of this lens is apparent in its rendering, and is hard to technically qualify. The XF33 lens is spectacular optically, and is made for a more pixel-dense sensor, and probably for video-centric creative.
Overall, what's amazing about the Fuji X system, is that they continue to give a lot of CHOICE to its users.
As always, love your reviews. This is just what I've been looking for. I have the XF f/2 version and curious what the jump would be like to the 33. Thanks a bunch!
Very good review. For my style of photography, often using strong grain and dreamy effects, the 35mm f2 is just fine and saved me money to justify the purchase of the 50mm f2. Weather sealing would nice but I do not often go out in inclement weather and if do so, I take out a different camera and lens system. Again, a good review.
I'm definitely getting the new 33mm for close image quality.
I have to wonder if this isn't the same design as was originally going to be f1.0, but now just shrunk down a bit.
The corners of those newer Fuji lenses are F*ing incredible.
Excellent vid. Thanks Chris.
Great video as always well done I think I'll stick with my 35mm 1.4 it has a lot of character. That and I really can't justify that price for the 33mm 😭
Forget the 33mm and move on, you already have the sweetest lens🙂
I got both 33mm f1.4 and 35mm f2 wr. I didn't notice f2 is soft when shooting close objects, like food. I guess it's because food is not a flat object like a clock and depths of focus is very narrow with close objects. It does not appear to be a major issue for me.
You see a soft halo around the objects when close focusing, and the objects aren't as sharp. It's essentially the same issue as with the 23mm f/2 but the 23mm is criticised over it all the time, while most people with 35mm f/2 don't even notice it.. I wonder why.
Great review as always! I was just wondering why you left out the colour rendering as the old 35mm f 1.4 has always been known for its 'character', which is probably mostly due its rendering of colours. Any thoughts on that, thanks!
Great one. Own the old 1.4 and is very happy with it.
Thank you so much, really helpful review!
Thank you for the video. I've been contemplating getting the new 33mm to upgrade from the 35mm, but wasn't sure if it was worth the money and effort to do so. Frankly, I'm still unsure, because I really like the 35mm's old school metal box hood, and the improvements on the 33mm's optics are there, but then for an everyday shooter like me, I can probably do fine without. I do appreciate the linear motor on the 33mm though - I thought my 35mm was broken when I first got it because of that atrocious noise. Leaning toward keeping the 35mm.
Thank you for all your careful work on this splendid review, best of its kind I've ever seen. (I'll stick with the old 35mm I already have, since it works very well and I'm very far from a pro.)
Great summary and very useful, thanks! I've had my 35mm f/1.2 lens for six years now and am thinking of upgrading it to the new 33mm f/1.2. Looks like it'll be worth it if I can get a good price for my current lens on the used market.
I purchased and returned the 35mm because I found the focus motor extremely loud and frankly annoying. Given how modern lenses operate, I don't understand why Fuji is not interested in correcting this. I then purchased the 33mm and have used it for one year and find it the very best Fuji lens I own. It is everything promised in this review.
Yes the kind of review I want to see. Would like to see the older 16 vs 18/23 wr
The other advantage of the older lens is secondary market prices! I've seen it sell for significant discounts from retail; whereas the newer lenses tend to not sway too far from retail
Cracking video. The 33 seems a useful improvement in every way.
🇺🇦 thanks for the review, in this difficult time it's a little breath of fresh air to take your mind off it
I was able to get the 35mm f/1.4 from MPB for $244 because it has a little moisture inside it. I think it was an absolute steal.
May I ask why there is difference in the sharpness tests of the 35mm f1. 4 between here and in the first review video of the lens? in the original review the lens had ghosting at 1.4 wide open but not here... was it fixed with firmware updates or something?
I’ll wait a few more years with my 35 1.4 and then maybe pick up a used 33mm. I’m not taking photos for anyone else so I don’t need that extra bit of performance
Excellent comparsion, thanks!
Awesome video. Would love a similar comparison of the new 23mm lenses! :)
If anyone DOESN'T want their 35mm f1.4, please let me know! I could use an upgrade rover the kit lens 🥲
Many thanks for your work! I looked at pictures of the 33 on flickr and somehow dislike the bokeh. I really miss the cream from the 35 1.4. I might turn my back to Fuji just for that reason. The bokeh from the Nikon Z 50 1.8 is out of this world. I am not sure were to go... I am looking forward for the Tamron 20-40 on Nikon z. This would do the trick form my style.
Enjoying your recent Fuji content 👍
35mm 1.4 price should be reduced to $450 in my opinion. Of the 3, it’s the one I’d choose.
Yea, 35mm f1.4 is older and not so clinical image quality but i still keep it in my bag although 33mm is optically superior but i still lean on the character that 35mm gives.
A great review. Thanks for making this video. I appreciate the effort that goes into it.
An excellent review, thank you very much indeed for all of your tremendous efforts - I trust your formula completely and refer to your vast library of data whenever I’m looking for an informative, reliable and scientifically based review of a lens!
This review in particular was exactly what I was looking for, I’m currently trying to make up my mind on wether or not to sell my 50 f2 and get the 33mm along with a wide angle (Laowa 9mm or the Samyang 12mm) or to just go for the 16-55 2.8 to sit alongside my 50-140 (for a travel/landscape/portrait/occasional video set up) - I’d sincerely appreciate any advice on the matter!
Thank you once again for all of your continual hard work and truly helpful archive of reviews
Have you noticed anything wrong with the performance of your f2? Are you in anyway disappointed with the images you have produced with it? In real world use what improvement would the 33mm f1.4 bring? And at what cost? This excellent review of the 3 lenses only focuses really on their optical performance and build. What about the ergonomics? The new 33mm is not only a lot more expensive but also a lot bigger and heavier than the f2 and much more indiscreet. I would hate to put it on a X-E3/4 , X-T20/30 0r XPro model. If you are going to predominately use the new 33mm inside as a studio queen or outside for astro photography, I can see the value in it, but otherwise the f2 is a very fine high performing lens with good AF in a compact body. It is ideal for general walk about use, travel, landscape and street. You might need the extra performance of the 33mm at the margins, but I reckon you would miss the f2 if you sold it to help finance its purchase.
Opitically the only real fault with the f2 is the slight softness with close up images. But that is an issue that macro lenses are there to solve, and they do close up much better than a standard lens.
@@richardhale9664 Thank you ever so much for your response Richard, I completely agree!
I absolutely love my little 50mm f2 and cannot say a bad word about it! The image quality, weather sealing, size & autofocus are excellent qualities and I would, no doubt, regret parting with it.
The predicament I have is that I’ve doubled up focal lengths with the 50-140 & the 50 f2 (my initial lens purchase after moving over from Sony) and now I’m in need of something that bit wider to widen the focal length of my day to day "do it all lens".
I predominantly use the 50-140 at around 70, 90 & 140 as I love the compression of those longer focal lengths but have found myself in need of something wider than 50mm, hence the 33mm/35mm, probably paired with an ultra wide 9mm for those infrequent interior/architectural/landscape shots.
My current thought process is; I use an X-T3 with battery grip on most of the time which puts weight and ergonomics a little lower on the list (everything is lighter than the 50-140!!), that said, I understand the 33mm weighs the same as a coke can which does make the 35f2 all the more appealing, however, if I can get the same or improved image quality as my 50 f2 but with that marginally wider focal length, then it’s worth the slight compromise in weight… which is where the 16-55 2.8 enters the consideration - I’d have the wide and mid focal lengths covered and only need to carry the two lenses for pretty much all occasions (but with that there’s the sacrifice of the additional 1.4 aperture, though as you say, the excellent Fuji ISO deals with the problem of low light and the 50-140 tends to bokeh cravings - there is indeed a lot to be said for the little 35 f2, it really does tick most of the boxes doesn’t it!
Thank you very much again for your advice, I shall hang on to my beloved little 50 f2 and get to the camera shop to try all of the aforementioned
My warmest regards
Ben
@@benbeattie4609 The difference between 33 and 35mm is tiny and likely to be unnoticeable in real world use. To get a noticeable widening of FOV you really need to drop to 30 or 27mm. Fuji's 27mm pancake is wonderful but has slow continuous AF. This does not bother me as I use mine only in single AF mode on my X-E3. A better choice for you may be Sigma's new 30mm f1.4. As a fan of the 40-45mm FF equivalent FOV. I am quite tempted by this lens myself for use on my larger Fuji bodies.
Having re-read what you say, in your case, for something significantly wider than 35mm a 23mm f2 WR would be an ideal choice. It's not a lens I own, but it is basically the same idea as the others in the range, and if my 35mm and 16mm are anything to go, by a stunner. Walking around with the 23mm and 50-140mm you would have almost all subjects covered.
I have the 35mm f2, the old 35mm f1.4 but I've finally ordered the new 33mm f1.4 based on this review and how happy I am with the new 23mm f/1.4 R LM WR. Some people talk about the new lenses lacking 'character'. Well, I'd rather start with perfection and add 'character' (often euphemism for flawed) in post. On my new X-T5 this is an exciting leap forwards for me! Chris, you are my 'go to' reviewer. Thanks for all your great work and critique!
If they tell me, "you have only one channel to choose on UA-cam!" I would say, "it's definitely CF!"
I Would like to go with Cheap and Light, the XC 35mm f/2.
I'm also curious how these lenses compare to the Viltrox 33mm lens, in your opinion!
Thanks for the comparison!
Looking forward to the new 23, the old one disappointed me.
I prefer my 7artisans 35mm f1.2 mark ii to the Fujinon XF35mm f2. Way cheaper, brighter and better rendering
Great review as always, looking forward to the new 23 which for me is the most exciting one because the old 35 has something I really love and probably would not bother going for the new 33, 18 is nice but 28mm is not for me.
Viltrox has a 13mm 1.4 that also looks very nice.
I thought the 35mm f2 was the WR, a shame you did not included on the comparison
It's optically the same as the xc 35mm f2, as he stated in the video. They are just different in build quality.
I notice a different color rendering in the newer lens. Is it actually due to the lens itself?
I’m have both the 35mm f1.4 & 2. At f1.4 Im looking for bokeh and not corner sharpness. Looks like same images at f5.6 and beyond. F2 not much more portable or lighter than the 1.4. 33 f1.4 not needed for me.
I have a request for you, can you make a list of t stop values of these lenses? I also heard xt2 can calculate it for ypu in the menu.
Corner sharpness really depend on the particular copy of the lens.
Maybe it's time for Fuji reviews to see how the lens is doing when shooting in a square format. And another thought, how the lens is doing when shot in the same ratio as say, the film, The Cranes Are Flying, which with it's moving camera, manages amazing detail across the frame, obviously using wide lenses, but the format, like television dramas from the period automatically cropped the sides. And the top and bottom, as all formats except square does!
@@sclogse1 I have to think what these words can be applied to (do you mean measuring actual MTFs or asking Fuji to build a multi-aspect ratio camera). This Soviet film I should watch.
please review the old canon ef 28-70 2.8L and 28-80 2.8-4L lenses!!
Battle of first!
Hi! Excellent video, as always. Ps. Looks like sharpness at f2 on xc version is worse now than in the original xf review. Is that possible? Thanks
If money was no object it would be the new 33mm all the way. With price factored in I’d skip all three and get the viltrox f1.4 and use the money I saved to put toward a good flash or some extra batteries. I’d put up with the possible CA and fringing to get better resolution and focus speed than the old 35mm, and better minimum focus performance than the f2, which otherwise is an awesome little lens. Honestly the old 35mm should probably be retired and the new lens should take its place at more like $500-$600.
The 33mm f1.4, might well be optically perfect, but it is still a lump to be sticking on your compact Fuji camera. OK for a X-T2,3 or 4 with a battery grip but not on a X-E or X-T10,20 or 30 model. In real world use my XF 35mm f2 is just fine and with modern high ISO performance who really needs faster than f2? There must be someone, but they are operating in a very small niche.
I love my 35mm f/1.4 but would trade for the 33mm if I found one with a decent trade-in price.
35mm f/1.4, my beloved... Will never sell it!
missed the x100v, a 35mm equivalent focal range
Brilliant !!!
And now the winner new 33 vs sigma and viltrox. Would. Be the definitive comparison
I think if you were going to use this a lot , i would go with the newest lens . Sharpness is key .
XC 35 f2 remind me about canon 50mm F1.8II lol
Great video again, but please do.test the 33mm 1.4 on an XT2/XH1 shooting toward the sun and see if you replicate the sensor-tiling issue I mentioned in the comments on your last video. Your legacy body users will thank you for it!
Any interest in doing reviews of vintage lenses? It's all I use when it comes to personal work. Love old Leica and Zeiss lenses. I could lend you some.
the XF35 f/2 can cause havoc with portraits due to the huge distortion it has. Beware
How so?
11:24 "How to do Zoolander's Blue Steel"
The XF 35mm f/2 would have been a more comparable lens in terms of build.
"Hefty investment"...well take a good look to other systems and formats and than ask your self what is hefty.
Ok, now pit the $479 Canon EF-M 32/1.4 against the $699 Fuji 33/1.4. I would hazard a guess that the Canon is on par optically with the Fuji.
Actually, it is a myth that plastic lenses are less shock resistant, most of the time they would fare much better than their metal counterparts if dropped onto a concrete floor! There are two reasons for that: lighter weight so less force to dissipate at impact, the plastic is better at absorbing the energy of the impact than metal... So which lens would survive a drop better doesn't have a trivial answer.
The new one weighs twice as much and is twice as long. Why Fuji? Whyyyyy ?
I have the F2 version. I hope to buy the 33 f1.4 soon :))
Wish the sigma 30mm f1.4 was included in this battle.
Sigma 30mm f/1.4
@@quikee9195 thanks
Chris, I thought you Christians understood where the truth is. With your new avatar, you showed that I was wrong. You've upset me. Why touch on politics instead of reviewing photo? 🤷🏻♂️