The Fujinon XF23mm F1.4 R is a fast prime for Fujifilm's X system of mirrorless cameras. It offers a moderate wideangle field of view equivalent to a 35mm lens on full frame (the same as the company's fixed-lens X100S). It has traditional aperture and manual focus rings, and the latter has distance and depth of field scales too. Like the company's XF14mm F2.8R, the 23mm is fully optically-corrected for distortion.
Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R Lens
Already own this?
This item is in your gearlist!
|Lens type||Prime lens|
|Max Format size||APS-C / DX|
|Focal length||23 mm|
|Lens mount||Fujifilm X|
|Number of diaphragm blades||7|
|Aperture notes||Rounded blades|
|Special elements / coatings||1 aspherical element, High Transmittance Electron Beam Coating|
|Minimum focus||0.28 m (11.02″)|
|Full time manual||No|
|Weight||300 g (0.66 lb)|
|Diameter||72 mm (2.83″)|
|Length||63 mm (2.48″)|
|Filter thread||62 mm|
Choosing between xf35mm and xf23mm?
Hi guys, I'm having trouble deciding between these 2 lenses and would love to hear what you guys have to say. I own the xf18-55 mm and after taking a look at my most used focal lengths (using Exposureplot), I found that I use both almost equally, with 35mm slightly more. That being said I use the 35mm the most among all focal lengths, although the difference isn't far from the 23mm. I feel that I tend to favor the 35mm more, but I really want the new manual focusing ring that they have on the 23mm (here I assume that it would allow for a faster manual focusing). According to a review i've read, the 35mm also tends to make a louder noise when focusing, also something that I take into consideration. Currently, I couldn't find any reviews on the differences between these two lenses optically, at least both in resolution and color rendition, but I expect one to not be too far from the other. Please advise.
I own the 18-55 and if I could have only one of these two primes I would go for the 35mm. The reason is that since it is a longer FL the ability to blur background is significantly enhanced relative to 23mm. Also, the 35mm seems superb for portraits and separating subject from background. So I think the 35mm compliments the 18-55 better. You mentioned that you incline a little more to 35mm vs 23, so there you go. Continue Reading
23mm is more versatile. The 35 has a magic quality though Continue Reading
I really don't think you should let the technicalities decide this. Everything I've read and seen of those two says they are fine lenses. What is much more important is how you see your photographs. It is very sensible to look at which focal lengths you actually use, as you have done. But more than that, which focal length(s) have helped you make your favorite pictures? If you select your best pictures (let's say a portfolio of 20-30) what focal lengths did you use there? I'm sure you won't go wrong with either, as long as it suits your way of seeing. HTH, Antony. Continue Reading