|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on August 04, 2023 Pros: Image quality, AF, construction, tropicalization Cons: Plastic hood Opinion: I will be very brief: excellent image quality already at TA, zero aberrations even in situations of high contrast, very pleasant bokeh of Fuji imprint. The AF is fast and precise, excellent construction. I use it on X-T5 and X-S10 and with stabilization I have no problem even using long times. The only flaw is the plastic hood: such an optics would deserve metal. The price is in line with the increases of the last two years. If you love this classic focal length (the equivalent of a 50 on FF), to take. |
  | sent on February 26, 2023 Pros: Good, fast and quiet AF. On X-T4, freehand, no shake problem. Sweet spot (best focus), f/4, 79 lp/mm, MTF = 0.5. Cons: On X-T3, prone to shake. Freehand, it is better to shoot with times less than 1/100 of s Opinion: Fujinon XF 33 mm f/1.4 R LM WR: built in 2021, modern design. Compact (67mm x 73.5mm) and medium weight (360 gr). Filter diameter ø58mm AF good, fast and quiet. On X-T3, prone to shake. Freehand, it is better to shoot with times less than 1/100 of s On X-T4, freehand, no shake problem. In the best focus, sharpness (MTF) excellent at full aperture (f / 1.4) and remarkable, about 0.48 at f / 16 even for high spatial frequencies (45 lp / mm). At the edge of depth of field, absolute sharpness with respect to full aperture (f/1.4) and up to f/16 for moderate-low spatial frequencies (15 lp/mm). For high spatial frequencies (45 lp/mm), at the edge of depth of field sharpness (MTF > 0.3) well above the limit of acceptability from full aperture (f/1.4) up to f/16. Sweet spot (best focus), f/4, 79 lp/mm, MTF = 0.5. Up to the frequency of 45 lp/mm it is never penalized by the sensor resolution of the X-T3 or X-T4, that is, for any aperture, the MTF of the lens is always lower than that offered by the sensor at the same spatial frequency. The MTF of the X-T4 sensor, evaluated at the spatial frequencies that experimentally characterize the isoMTF = 0.5 of the lens, is always larger than 0.5. Definitely a perspective to recommend. To be coupled to the X-T4. |
 | sent on November 10, 2022 Pros: AF finally level, excellent construction, indisputable optical quality Cons: dimensions... Opinion: Optics that finally combined with a recent fuji body seems to say "I'm like sony!". In fact, the feeling will be the same, and I also want to say: it was time. Unfortunately, however, all this is paid with dimensions not really "contained", unlike the previous 35 1.4 which on balance is about half. Personally, in fact, I preferred to keep the old model (not yet understanding if both will remain in production or will tend to replace it), since the dimensions are priority over the AF. I do not doubt, however, that to some matrimonial players such a lens could be extremely convenient, so they will have pondered that a few more cm was expendable. On optical quality, I do not particularly pose the problem, I use the XF system always with film simulations, I do not notice the optical subtleties. For that, I have other machines and other lenses, and so it should be for everyone. If you look at the edges of the frame, you have the wrong system. However, nothing to complain about, we are probably a step above 35 1.4. |
 | sent on November 03, 2022 Pros: Image quality, aperture, construction, size, there is everything! Cons: Just to ask for the moon: stabilization. Opinion: I don't know what more could be asked of a lens. The image quality is indisputable, at all apertures. The autofocus is fast and accurate. The construction is impeccable, the diaphragm ring perfect. Maybe only the hood is not level, but it doesn't suck at me. The dimensions all in all are acceptable, even the weight is not excessive. Let's not forget that it is also tropicalized, although as far as I am concerned it is not a feature that makes the difference, especially on such a lens. In short. He lacks nothing. Does it cost a hair more than you might expect? Yes, but it gives you everything you need. All. |
user213929   | sent on September 29, 2022 Pros: Angle of view , versatile , fast af , silent , videocentric , resolute , pleasant bokeh , colors Cons: Lens hood Opinion: For the price proposed on the market, it is close to sigma art but with yield on Fuji colors, so it is a 50 mm all-rounder that qualitatively brings each photo back to high standards, it is very reliable, it can also become the only optics of the kit without worries. It offers much more than the viltrox and its predecessor 35 Xf 1.4 which marries a different philosophy but technically on paper it is inferior, in the practical side with tropicalization and af worthy and made Fuji . For me there were no doubts, not having an xh2s with updated af I preferred to take a normal lens to a super telephoto one that should be accompanied by a very evolved body in terms of af for naturalistic and sport, preferring the portrait and the street I preferred to complete the backhoe of the bright |
 | sent on April 23, 2022 Pros: Build quality, ergonomic rings, silent AF, waterproofing, sharpness superior to the competition. Cons: Standard hood that comes off easily and plastic, made painful in macro with extension tubes. Costicchia. Opinion: I made the transition from 35 1.4 to 33 not because I was unhappy with the optical rendering of the 35 but for the hope of having a better autofocus for example in the hook in the detection of the eye in portraits. Often the 35 with AF on single point in S mode in the bursts mistakes the MF, and leaves a bitter taste in the mouth knowing that it has lost the fleeting moment. But I finish complaining about the 35 to talk about the 33. I compared it with its brother and I find it very similar in the qualities such as blurred and plasticity, improved in all the defects of the previous one such as TA sharpness both at the edges and in the center. Well done Fuji! I would say, but there is a caveat that I also found with the 56. They are lenses with many lenses and bright, and sin of a constitutional factor, they are not for macrophotography. I used extension tubes and did some tests not very detailed but sufficient to see the exaggerated field curvature, let's say that they are not planar in focus, and no one on the internet detects the thing as if it were obvious that you need the dedicated macro to make macros. At the time analog was not quite like that, just a cheap 50ino with its tube to get not miracles, but at least a decent yield. In this I find myself better to use other smaller lenses such as the XF23/2 or the 50/2 with a macro ring to get excellent results. This is also thinking of those who hope to rephotograph film negatives instead of scanning them. |
user63757 | sent on March 12, 2022 Pros: Perfect construction, fast and accurate AF, very high sharpness. Cons: Hood, slight chromatic aberration at maximum apertures only very light nothing dramatic easily to correct, larger cluttered than the 35 1.4 Fuji. Lens hood? I don't like that metal rectangle better. ( ghosting flare ) with loss of contrast against the light we recommend using the hood. Opinion: Arrived today as proof. Done a can quick surface tests to get an idea. If to recommend ? for me very difficult the answer certainly from record opticS-c focal 33mm optical perfection even if some weak points such as vignetting and slight chromatic aberration at f1.4/2.0 compared with the 18 1.4 practically zero chromatic aberrations. Hood I find it not good but I think this in general for what concerns Fuji hood with that price 33 1.4 Fuji a rectangular metal hood could also be there. Side light not dramatic but always to recommend the hood loss of contrast and flare nothing dramatic always better than many other optics, unfortunately it becomes even larger than a Fuji 35 1.4 really a much more compact appearance the 33 1.4 with hood mounted looks three times the 35 1.4 Fuji. Af nothing to criticize very fast and precise silent perfect mechanics perfect focus ring attracts less dust. Interesting also diaphragm ring a can too the 33 1.4 if I compare with the 18 1.4 exactly the affixed ?. Finally price to recommend ? I do not know a real (Fujiisti) prefers metal construction and bezel marked with Retro Look aesthetics certainly very personal my agreement with that price optics from third parties cost much less equally valid this a can be evaluated sometimes you pay much more to have some more perfection maybe chromatic aberrations really very well corrected these new fixed Fuji optics also perfection sharpness at maximum apertures. And here I come to my reflection not everyone loves these shots of sharpness at maximum apertures but maybe prefer the old Look of the 35 1.4 Fuji softer even if as bokeh difficult both theirs because it is the new 33 1.4 but also the older 35 1.4 Fuji. Maybe and I do not know with future Fuji 30/40 MP camera bodies from something more reason kept excellent angles, also excellent the great aperture yield and what matters when you continue to increase the mega pixels the AF for video etc. definitely a lens to recommend. I wonder if the price justified as well as weight and bulk then I say exist on the FF optical system type Otus Zeiss or Sigma Art weight very high bulk but made particular extreme here Fuji to did something similar but on APS-c optics. |
 | sent on December 22, 2021 Pros: Optically frightening, engraving, microdetail, perfect in the center and edges Cons: At the moment not found Opinion: I was a happy owner of the famous XF35mm 1.4, a lens that gave me great satisfaction... but since I am looking for optical perfection I decided to sell it to take this new XF33mm 1.4. The quality of the materials, the construction, the super fluid fire ring, the diaphragm ring that has now become a drug make you appreciate this optics before even mounting it. Once mounted you will hate all the XF lenses you own and it was like that for me... in kit I have one of everything, from 16-55, to 56 1.2, to 50-140 and also the 90 2 ... all high quality optics but the work that Fuji has done with this 33 is a completely different story ... never written reviews on the optics I own and now I will do it after buying and thoroughly testing this 33 ... the 16-55 that so many praise for me has become a "glass ass" if compared to the optical quality that offers the new 33 (it must be said that they are 2 projects 5 years apart ... very true). The thing that struck me most is not only the engraving and the microcontrast in the center of the frame, but the quality that can also give you at the edges ... there is perhaps a loss of quality of less than 10% compared to the center. The maf is very fast and silent, in tracking mode with almost non-existent lights I lose 1 photo out of 10 and, believe me, it is really a lot of stuff. For the rest I am very happy with the purchase that I recommend to everyone ... the question is... is it worth buying this lens? Absolutely... is it worth switching from the old 35 to the new 33? No, if you do not work in af-c and you are not interested in that slight optical quality I do not recommend the purchase ... but having to make up for an aps-c sensor that is still far from the ff... I, personally, look for any optics that give me even that 10% more quality. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
