Fujifilm XF 33mm F1.4 LM WR Review (vs. the Fujifilm 35mm F1.4)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 авг 2024
- We review the new Fujifilm XF 33mm F1.4 lens and also compare it to Fujifilm's own 35mm F1.4, which has a similar specs and will remain on the market at a lower cost. Find out how they stack up and which one is right for you.
Our Fujifilm XF 33mm F1.4 sample gallery: www.dpreview.com/sample-galle...
0:00 - Intro
0:29 - The XF 35mm F1.4
1:20 - Size and weight
1:52 - Flare and sunstars
2:50 - Autofocus
3:21 - Video performance
4:25 - Bokeh
5:35 - Sharpness
6:26 - New 33mm or old 35mm? Which is best?
Music provided by BeatSuite.com
www.beatsuite.com
Rental equipment provided by The Camera Store
www.thecamerastore.com
-----------------------
DPReview.com is the world's largest digital camera review website. Welcome to our RUclips channel! Subscribe for new feature videos, reviews, interviews and more.
Discover the world's most in-depth digital camera reviews at www.dpreview.com 
Наука
I switched to Fuji for the compactness so I'll be keeping my 35 1.4, I love that lens!
I've had my 35mm f1.4 since early 2012. it was my first fuji XF lens and I will be the last one I hang on to... and I own a lot of XF lenses, That is saying something.
I knew nothing about the Fuji ecosystem. Saw a video with X-T4, had to have it, and got the 35mm f/1.4. I knew nothing about the lens before I bought it. Used it to shoot my daughter’s college graduation. Had the most fun and took the best photos of my life. LOVE that lens!!!
As an xpro3 owner i can see why they keep the old one. Without the lenshood you can still use it with the optical viewfinder- i‘m pretty sure this wouldnt be possible with a bigger lens. This is the only f1.4 in the lineuo where this is possible and i love it. i made 40x60cm prints of the old one and they are perfectly sharp as well- as far as i can tell however
Great review, thanks! I love the character of the old 35mm and as it has made me thousands with critical technical studio work I didn’t sell it but keep in on my ‘Walkabout’ Fuji X-E4. The new 33mm is my new benchmark lens that does EVERYTHING perfectly and is now my main studio lens for critically sharp product, commercial and multi GigaByte stitched images of artworks.
What I love about the older lens: Less weight. It matters a lot to some of us.
Wait what do you mean slightly heavier? It's exactly twice the weight as the old 35.
great review and comparison. I love my 35 though, its almost glued to my camera.
Size & weight matter. That’s why I moved from Leica to Fuji X. My eyes got tired by rangefinder manually focussing over the years, but I wanted by all means keep the small and lightweight pocketable gear, so the XF 35/1.4 was the lens that steered me to Fuji, a move I’ve never regretted. Where on the market do you find a fast 50mm equivalent so small and lightweight, particularly in conjunction with the XT-20/30 or XE-3/4? Plus I like the more analog Image rendering of that lens. In quite a number of cases you’re less seeking the punchy image but the more lyrical one.
makes sense. BTW canon m6ii + ef-m 32mm 1.4 is similar in weight/image quality if not better
@@juehengzhu4495 quite so, and I in fact considered investing in Canon as the 6D was my working horse and the EF 50/1.4 as fast and tiny as XF35/1.4 or the EF-M 32/1.4 for that matter. However the viewfinder on the hotshoe didn’t do it so well for me, but a decisive matter was the lack of interesting lenses and Canon‘s obvious lack of interest in the APS-C lineup in general
the f2 fujicron was the main reason I switched :D seriously you dont see that size in other companies lense lineup....
Indeed. Im baffled by this approach. 187g vs 360g is a huge difference. No way im getting the 33 mm.
@@JHL1994 exactly along with the price difference, new 1g ~ $1 :)
$200 increase to a $600 price is a lot IMHO, that's a 1/3 increase.
That's a 1/4 increase.
@@adomolis The old lens costs 1/4 less than the new but the new lens costs 1/3 more than the old one.
Ok and you don’t think the LM and weather resistance isn’t worth the price jump? Think about it the 35mm f1.4 is an almost 10 yr old lens the focus is much slower with the line by wire focus system and it has less glass. IMO I think Fuji is justified in this price point.
@@adomolis how is 200 on 600 a 1/4 increase? It definitely is 1/3 increase. And yeah, it's a lot.
After going through the video and looking at examples, I think I should get the older 35mm 1.4 . Smaller and considerably lighter and cheaper by 200$. Loss is weather resistance and slightly improved corner sharpness. Not big deal for a body like XE4 which is not weather sealed.
Double videos today. C and J are on fire 🔥
Lovely portraits of your daughter! Thanks for the review too 😊
Interesting video Chris thanks and a good promotion of both. Apart from weather sealing on the 33 the optical differences are so minor that they are irrelevant to me except for the added weight for walk around. So I’m going to buy the old 35 and really will enjoy it. The 33 is rumoured to be compatible with the new 42mpx cameras expected this May so will be interesting to see how the old 35 handles these.
The 33mm lens seems to render with more contrast. But I love my 35mm and won't part with it. Together with the X-Pro1 they were my entry into the Fujifilm XF world. Love the sensor, love the camera and lens - especially love the aperture ring!
Love my 35mm 1.4. Absolutely my favourite lens in my collection.
Jordan always does Chris a favor when he shoots with a Fuji. Chris looks great
I agree. Very nice. I'm curious if that's Eterna profile or another that Jordan graded.
Very informative video (as usual) From your personal perspective, would you prefer the new 33mm 1.4 vs 18mm 1.4 as a first Fujifilm prime?
Perfectly happy with my 35mm paired with XT20 for walking around city type shots, never disappoints
Great comparison. Although I think the real test is comparing it to the viltrox brand one. At such a cheap price point I don’t see this selling too much except for the hardcore fuji only users. (And even a lot of them are heavily impressed with viltrox like I was)
The new lens seems like a brilliant bit of glass. The challenge isn't so much comparing which lens to buy for many of us...it is rather a question of 'Does the new lens justify upgrading from the XF35/1.4 we already have and love?" For ME, the answer is "No...the XF35/1.4 is still every bit as wonderful as it has ever been and the XF33/1.4 doesn't offer me enough of an improvement to justify the additional cost. IF I had NO 'normal' prime currently, then yes, the XF33 looks to be the smarter purchase.
I hear though from several reviews, that the the 35mm tracks/hunts for focus quite slowly, especially in low light. Your thoughts please Sir?
Hoping there's a square lens hood for this one 🤞🏻
well this is even faster than the rumors website. Great vid!
I heard the 23mm F1.4 is gonna get updated! I am soo pumped up if the 23mm F1.4 version 2 (WR) gets better then we could expect the 35mm 1.4 version 2 to be good cant wait!
will stick with the 35 f2 as that already has water resistance and living on the coast the 1.4 would never be needed - low light? Flash or tripod solves any problems for me.
I'd be interested to see an objective review between this and the viltrox 33 1.4
This new lenses has LM autofocus motor for better AF in video. Fuji is in the proces of upgrading their lens lineup with lenses using the Liniear motors.
I just got my 35mm 1.4f. I returned the 23mm f2 for this. I don’t think I’ll need the 33mm if I have the 35mm. The small difference in quality can’t justify another £500+ purchase for me. Only difference is the 33mm is described to have faster and quieter AF.
I think if you don’t have the 35mm (f1.4 or 2) the 33mm maybe a suitable option for you!
Exactly!
I have a 35 mm f2 and wanna upgrade to this new 33 mm f1.4 for the added aperture...I do a lot of night shots
@@tayyabpirzada146 won't make as much difference as you expect, plus what shots are super usable at f 1.4....
33mm should be better for video, but 35mm is already great for photography. I think the difference in price is quite justified.
@@tayyabpirzada146 go for it, if you don't have an f1.4 lens, either will be magical :)
It's bigger, it's twice the weight, it costs 1/3 more and doesn't really do anything better. But it's great for those who want a video friendly lens with weather sealing.
They literally say in the video that the 33 outperforms the 35 in every conceivable way.
@@TerraMagnus slightly and only if you pixel peep. In real world use, the only noticable benefit is the WR
@@perfectly_boring username checks out.
@@TerraMagnus ...every conceivable way nobody will notice in your photos and you won't notice handling it, except, as I said, WR and silent AF. And probably, though I don't know, better MF. They couldn't possibly make that any worse. I don't do video and thus there's obviously no point in replacing my 35mm. It's small, light, brilliant.
@@adrianguggisberg3656 And if people notice those tiny little things on the photo, then the photo probably sucks xD
I think the even tougher comparison is actually to the 35mm f2. Similar focus speed, quiet, WR, IQ. For most people, is the substantial size/ weight/ price difference worth the 1 stop benefit?
Less sharp, hella distortion
@@Tekkytekky Incorrect. You must not own the 35mm f2 or any of the new F2's. I own them all. Really sharp, no discernible distortion. Go troll elsewhere.
@@WarpedTrekker Yes, I said something you dislike which means I am trolling, whatever makes you feel better dude.
@@Tekkytekky Prove it. Show a difference between both lenses big man. And I'm not a dude. And you didnt say anything i dislike. You said something that is just blatantly false.
@@WarpedTrekker
i.imgur.com/7ue1rcC.jpeg
Here you go, big man :) Since you insisted. As you can there this is a sharpness increase in fine detail when nearing edges, and a distortion reduction, and very a minor sharpness increase at center. Along with not shown, the one stop increase to aperture wideness and a different look at wider apertures from vintage style fringe, and light flaring. As you can see, distortion and sharpness along with a fairly significant lens edge sharpness decrease like I said. As typical with lenses designed for lower budgets.
They are not the same, both will yield good enough results, but one has objectively better glass though and a one stop increase of light input for low light.
the thing with the 35 f1.4 being that old is that you can get it for WAYYY cheaper on the used market, and there is ton of them. In France there is a lot of those between 350 and 450€, compared to the 800€ price tag of the 33mm 1.4, if you want a lens that produce similar results, but are willing to make a few compromises to pay half the price, well I'd say that's still a good option.
no point of buying it brand new though
Wondering why you didn't talk about the aperture ring lock. This is my main reason to replace the older lens.
Wow that was fast.. love this focal length but I'm stickin with my 35 f2 for now.. too many other needs.. There's a 23mm mark2 comin also, isn't there?
As someone who only has a 23 F2, I think I might grab the 33mm as my next lens.
I'm pretty sure fuji is aware of the famous "magic" that the og 35mm produces. Theres a reason they had to make it a very clinical 33 1.4 instead of replace the 35 1.4. that lens is sorta the legacy lens of the x mount, and there's no way they'll replace it. Who knows probably even the engineers prefer the 35 over the 33
Nothing “clinical” about the new 33mm, unless you consider being slightly sharper in the corners “clinical”. If anything, with the increase in aperture blades it improves on bokeh which is the opposite of “clinical”
How about a comparison between the Fuji 33mm and the Tokina 33mm f/1.4 ? That would be cool !
It is nice that if you want a 50mm equivalent, Fuji now has options in $200 increments. The 33mm looks nice though, would love to see a comparison with that Viltrox 33mm 1.4.
THIS
The viltrox is trash. No need for a comparison.
@@keithdunnivan8099 cool
The 33mm Viltrox is their worst. Although it has some unique character, it is pretty soft wide-open and you need to stop down quite a bit. And lots of purple fringing.
Disclaimer: I only tested the V1 version (gold text). Supposedly the V2 has much better coating, reducing fringing, glare and improving contrast.
It's a great move by Fuji to keep the 35mm alive.
XF35/1.4 + X-Pro1 is my prefered combo until 2012, and it will remain like that. Results are just unique, and when there are not, it is my fault.
I just do modest video projects - even so, I wonder if my standards are too high. What I mean is, I have the inexpensive XF 35mm f2, and the focus breathing on it is excessive enough that I just avoid the lens lately (the 50mm f2 is very good, though). In this review, at about 3:40, where it is said that the focus breathing on the 33mm f 1.4 is not too bad, the example being shown while that is being said is, to me, very noticeable and would result in a shot I would not want to keep. Am I too "focused" on focus breathing? - Dave
Just as a side note: Chris and Jordan should do a podcast. As much as I love watching their reviews/videos, I could just listen to their voices for hours. Love your work, keep it up!
Those four letters man… LM WR. So exciting!
The 35mm f/1.4 suits better the smaller cameras like the X-T30 or X-T200
It was a pleasant surprise to see Pictou lead off the photo gallery.
These new fast lenses are looking very similar with each other, same story as the "slow" primes Fuji is making, so I'm just curious: are these new lenses made of metal or plastic?
I own the old 16mm 1.4 and it is almost fully metal, I think, it's a beauty!
This is the comparison we needed! Thanks guys. Really tempted by the wr but disappointed they made it bigger and heavier, that rules it out as a walk-around lens I'd say. (Also corner sharpness is the most irrelevant thing ever lol)
I have the 18-55 which has similar weight and dimension as the 33. Carrying it all day long with the XE3 is just fine. You hardly notice the weight.
Yeah it's like Fuji is saying we'll make it WR so you can walk around but we'll also make it so heavy you won't want to 🤪. But jokes aside the rain never hurt my 35mm 1.4.
What lens should I get for my Xt5 as my first? Street photography mainly
I feel like with fuji's ibis and incoming budget primes from sigma sony aps-c will have a hard time competing. Unless we get a budget full frame.. either way that's some exciting stuff and hopefully the whole industry will benefit from it!
Sony has far better AF and lens selection, while Fuji appeals on retro styling, controls, and video.
@@HappyHubris well I don't use fuji personally and to be fair I didn't try it, but it doesn't appeal to me that much. The good thing about fuji is that they move in right direction, adding ibis to their bodies (xs10) and allowing 3rd party lenses. And they develop some new tech in aps-c world. I hope they will come up with more innovative stuff to force sony respond, that way all of us will benefit from it. Sounds good to me ;p
An XT4 with this new 33mm 1.4 lens would weigh 30g more than a Sony A7III and Zeiss 55mm 1.8, the Sony combo giving you greater subject separation too.
@@joewellham1 well yeah, unfortunatelly fuji options are too expensive to justify it over sony EF (for me personally). They seem to be doing well though and come up with some exciting stuff, which is always a benefit for us to have a more competitive market :D
Is it me, but the newer 33mm seems to have better color contrast. One reason I used the Zeiss Touit 32mm over the Fuji 35 mm lens in the past.
Wonder how this compares to Viltrox 33mm f1.4.
They may use the older 35 as a kit lens. In my country, Fuji offers a X-E4 bundled with the 35 for 300 usd extra for the lens. Pretty good.
Could you give a link please ?🙂
probably better for the more dedicated and professional portrait shooters, but I feel like I'll stick w my 35 1.4 hahah
Me too!
Love 35f1.4
Size, weight, character - 35 f/1.4 is the keeper
Fuji is going to keep the old lens because people are convinced it is magical. It has a dedicated cult following so Fuji isn't going to touch it. I am not here to speak of magic in lenses. However, I will say that the pursuit of corner to corner sharpness is what you end up with when people complain about clinical rendering. The more you correct a lens the flatter an image becomes. That distortion, those softer corners, and those other defects and the way not everything is sharp contributes to 3D perception. Furthermore, the poor corners of the 35mm f/1.4 are exaggerated. The lens has field curvature and in most cases when you photograph real scenes there is no issue with corner sharpness. These tests are fine but they are limited. You don't get a true feel for a lens until you actually spend time with it and use it in various situations. Only then can you truly judge a lens.
I really like the 35mm1.4. If they could perhaps make a mark 2 version like the 27mm. Same optics but perhaps linear autofocus and weather sealing
Apparently that's not possible. The 'magic' character of the 35mm is a result of the focus design that enables all lens elements to move at the same time as a single unit. The new linear motor design doesn't work that way so would result in a different 'character'. I suspect that's one reason why they supplemented the line up with a 33mm rather than another 35mm.
@@MrSamoDude Thank you, this is interesting to know. I really do like the Character of the 35mm and wouldn't want it to change.
Perhaps one day, they may make a larger lens to house the optics but with the linear motors
I was never a wide angle person, but I love Fujifilms 14Mmm. I don’t know if they’re gonna redo it but the one I got is I’m happy with.Scott
Great!
I have the Fuji 35mm/1.4....Not enough change for me to switch. I'm staying with the original 35/1.4
Wow quick review drop
The original 35 1.4 was my first Fuji lens with my old XE-1. You'll have to pry it from my cold dead fingers before I let it go.
One thing not mentioned... what if we already have the 35mm, worth the upgrade?
Interesting FB post by Carl Hare of the Fujicast a short time ago showing a stark difference in sharpness and chroma ab between the 33 and 35 1.4. It’s startling. Link isn’t shareable, sorry but worth seeking out.
Hi, I notice there is focusing sound for my xf33mm, is it normal
The 35mm f/1.4 has been my ‘go to’ lens for commercial work since day one. It is so sharp and distortion free that it gets regular use digitising large artworks in stitched sections creating 2m, 300ppi multi gigabyte reproduction images. I will be interested to test the 33mm but can’t see how it would be better for what I do. Thanks for the great review guys. Your camera studio test shots provided the evidence that got me and my company photographers to switch from Nikon to Fuji years ago!
I hear though from several reviews, that the the 35mm tracks/hunts for focus quite slowly, especially in low light. Your thoughts please Sir?
@@tribzman3977 Auto Focus - what’s that?🤣 Seriously though, yes it is a bit slow but many users don’t know to set their cameras to the ‘Boost’ setting as the default so a lot of such claims are irrelevant. My work is studio and technical stills so AF is not used much anyway.
@@dummatube Thank you for taking the time to reply. Really appreciate it!
$800 for this or $279 for the Viltrox? Only you can decide.
Do you guys have an XF 23mm LM WR on hand?
Love mine 35mm F1.4 !!!!!
Must be a very complex optical design to have the same weight as a 16/18mm 1.4 . This 33 field of view is suppose to have a simple element formula. Not here for that much heft. Hopefully Zeiss releases an updated 1.8 planar 32mm.
You look like Richard Karn. Thanks for the video
Great, they don't even touch on the one thing I was interested in, close focus - both distance-wise and performance, if the 33 focuses closer and maintains decent sharpness wide open at CFD then it's definitely worth the extra.
can't help but notice, is it the sound of motorcycle crushed at 3:59 ?
Maybe the 33/1.4 will handle the higher megapixel cameras introduced in the near future, more so than the older 35/1.4 (Resolution)
what does the 1/10th and 1/6th Noct mean?
No LoCa test? If I remember the old 35mm had nasty loCa
Why don’t Fuji update their roadmap anymore? I did not know this was coming. Would be cool to see a comparison between this and the Laowa 33mm 0.95.
Literally everybody and their aunt knew this and the new 23 were coming. We have known for about a year now.
@@liamriley9816 well I guess I’m just a dumb fuck then…
Are you sure you’re not confusing this with the 33mm f1 lens that they were developing but they changed into a 50mm instead?
Is it a re-branded Viltrox like the Tokina?
Underrated comment
Not sure, old lens has a little more pop and character, I’m actually leaning more towards the older lens - which is not what I wanted, nor expected.
Compare to sigma 33mm F1,4?
Those “strange rainbow patterns” are the points of light from the sun hitting the color filter array, bouncing back against the exit pupil, and back into the sensor. I see this sort of thing on lenses that have been well-corrected for sharpness and aberrations and with the sun directly in the picture - it shows up often with my GFX 50R and the 50mm f/3.5. The older 35mm f/1.4 wasn’t as well corrected, which has other potential image quality downsides, but its imperfections do, inadvertently, alleviate reflection issues such as this.
XT4 + 33/1.4WR vs Z6II + 50/1.8S would be an awesome comparison video given that both setups hit almost identical price points.
Z6ii for sure
What about the weight between those two setups?
@@jsurfin1 funny enough, the weight is pretty similar.
And size. Fuji has its advantages, but I'd choose the Z6II for sure.
@@sedosan17 I’d rather a bigger size if it’s the same weight as I find my XT4’s grip too small and have to add a L bracket with grip thereby making it heavier than a Z6II+50f1.8 combo.
I can see a number of people keeping the older 35mm f1.4 for now. I do wish they made a 33mm F1.2. Small difference however would grant me what I would want to move over. For travel the 16-55mm F2.8 and a 33mm F1.2. In the future a 45 megapixel aps-c sensor for travel photography would be perfect setup.
hey amazing!!! i LOve Fuji
The one thing I wanted in an update is faster AF. This one is a pass, I’ll be sticking with the 35mm.
I will pick this new and the news pz lens
I think you are missing some points. The 35mm f/1.4 can be found for half the price, even when both are used. It also weights nearly half as much (187 g vs 360 g). Both are light, but that's a big difference either way.
I will try the 35 first. I did consider the f/2, but the f/1.4 only costs a bit more, weights about the same, and I don't need fast autofocus or weather sealing for a few portraits of family members. When I use it for architecture, I will stop it down to f/5.6 or so anyway. Still, I do get the appeal of both of the other 33/35mm lenses.
The same can't be said for the 23 and 50/56mm lenses in terms of weight. Still, the f/1.2/1.4 variants can be had for just a bit more, and about half of the new versions. Here, I find it very hard to choose. I think, I will go with 23 f/2 and 50 f/2, as they are about half the weight, and I don't need more lenses faster than f/2.
I want Fuji to update their 14mm. It can be made both smaller and lighter; something similiar to the 16mm f/2.8 and 23/35mm f/2 lenses. I would pair it with the 8mm f/3.5, 23mm f/2, 35mm f/1.4, and 50mm f/2 for architecture and some occasional family meetings. Of course I won't bring every lens every time, but mix it a bit up. When it comes to tele, I think the 70-300 will do the job.
I'm more interested in the new 23mm 1.4 ...
Ill buy the old one just for the lens hood
My New dream lens 🥺
How does it compare to something like the excellent Z 50mm f1.8 S?
I’m super curious on this as well, total system cost wise they’re almost identical. Also, the Fuji setup isn’t really any smaller either.
@@thisisbenji90 reading around, the 33mm isn’t any sharper than the 35mm in the centre. From my experience, the Z 50mm f1.8 is quite a bit sharper than the XF 35mm f1.4 wide open and you get more bokeh with the Z lens.
There was a good argument opting for the XF 35mm f1.4 due to the significantly smaller size and weight. With the XF 33mm the size advantage is lost.
Dang it, I was just about to bite the bullet on the 23mm f/2 and 35mm f/2... Now I just want the new f/1.4 variants.
I bought the 35mm f1.4 a year ago after meticulously reviewing shots taken with the f2 equivalents. The f2 lenses are nice, a great price and faster focussing, but most photos I reviewed I preferred the f1.4 equivalent. I couldn't often figure out why, they just looked a little better to me, even in blind tests where I didn't know which lens was used I preferred the 1.4's. For me the 1.4 was 100% worth the extra money, but I wouldn't choose my 35mm f1.4 to shoot fast movement, the focus is too slow and unreliable for that, the new 33mm focus for that purpose however should be a lot better.
The 35mm f2 is a very good lens and an aperture of f2 is still a fast aperture !!! The limitations of this lens will only make you a better photographer!!! And It’s size is it’s biggest strength, I just love how stealthy it is and people don’t really notice the camera.
I hope someday Fuji will release primes with image stabilization as well
I hope they won‘t.
@@bl00me18 lol why?
@@quite1enough nobody does stabilised fast primes ….. I suspect the floating element has issues with shallow depth of field …. Probably very had to manufacture as the tolerances would have to be tight. IBIS is becoming more standard these days, so lens stabilisation is less of an issue except for telephoto where lens stabilisation seems to work better than IBIS, and having both is even better.
@@grantnewton5705 but canon has fast stabilized primes
@@quite1enough because it just makes the lenses terribly big, heavy and pricey. Just get a camera with ibis and you have your stabilizer (in case you really need it and not just for the spec sheet). Then the primes can stay resonably sized and priced.
😍
"slightly bulkier" - 360g vs 180g, lol. Just a tiny bit indeed. What's the point of having aps-c system if lenses weight like bricks :'(
The classic XF 18-55 lens weighs 330g for context. Both lenses are extremely light and suitable for the APS-C Cameras
I cant believe that people cry about 180g difference, we are spoiled to the core at this day and age. Will you get tired and wither down after walking whole day from that extra 180g. Holy moly go chop some wood, carry your girl a cross a freezing stream... be a man
@@ivankrgovic8443 oh dear ivan, if it was just extra 180g in my backpack i wouldn't have notticed for sure. But extra 180g in the lens ruins the balance - it becomes too hard to hold the camera with one hand., especially considering that fuji cameras rarely have big grip. Also it looks huge and looks like a pro lens, and can draw too much atttention if you use it on the street... So much to pay for great image quality...
He was reviewing a Canon full frame setup the previous day
@@nsavch I have the 33 mm on my xe4 and balance is perfect, but of course with 2 hands…😉 but yes you feel the difference with the 27mm f2.8.
I'm happy with my small 35mm f2
the question not raised in the video is if you already have a 35 f1.4, should you get the 33mm f1.4. From what I have seen in this review and elsewhere, the answer is a no.
Oh goodie
For 50mm FOV what is the need of corner sharpness.?
I can live with old 35f1.4 for it size and of course price and also its more beautiful with the square hood.
The 33mm is ridiculously big and stupidly expensive
I was supposed to buy the 35mm one. But after watching this review, it makes me want to buy the 33mm instead. From what I've seen, the "character" is still there.
The images with newer 33 is a little more neutral and more perfect, at least because of the lack of a green outlining in the background.
Look at those stars!!!!
Looking at the samples, I'm very surprised that it's not clinically sharp. It really feels like the 35mm 1.4 color, out of focus roll off.
Check out the Jonas Rask review of the same lens. It's probably closer to what you were expecting.
I'd go for the older lens anyway. I don't care about balls or AF "smoothness"..
1:25 She's got a commanding presence, but her mom's still got those cheekbones ;)