Ive been looking at the 23mm f2 and the 35mm f2 for my X-T3. People say 23mm is the classic street length but others claim the 35mm is sharper and better for the price. Im torn.
- Budget: $400 max
- Use: Fast candids in Chicago
- Must be weather sealed
Which one actually feels more natural for quick shots?
Just saw this. I've used both and honestly, they're both fantastic for the price. The Fujifilm XF 35mm f2 R WR is definitely the sharper lens technically, especially wide open. But the Fujifilm XF 23mm f2 R WR feels better for environmental stuff. Real quick though... do you usually like to get right in the middle of the action, or do you prefer keeping some distance between you and the subject?
I'm super satisfied with the Fujifilm XF 16mm f2.8 R WR. It's cheaper, weather sealed, and works well for fast city shots. No complaints from me, fits the budget perfectly, tbh.
Go for the Fujifilm XF 23mm f/2 R WR! I absolutely love using it for fast street shots because it feels so natural. Honestly, for Chicago sidewalks, that wider field of view is amazing for quick candids.
- super fast autofocus
- tiny and weather resistant
- classic street look You really cant go wrong with it for your X-T3, its a total game changer!
> Which one actually feels more natural for quick shots? Saw this today and wanted to chime in. If you are really torn between those two, have you looked at the Fujifilm XF 27mm f2.8 R WR? Its basically the perfect middle ground between the 23 and 35. I find that 40mm equivalent field of view feels very natural because it mimics how the human eye focuses on a subject without losing the environment. Since you are in Chicago, weather sealing is non-negotiable imo. The wind and spray near the lake or that sudden slushy snow can wreck a lens without gaskets. The 27mm has solid WR and its incredibly low profile. This is a big deal for safety and candids... when your setup looks like a point-and-shoot, people tend to ignore you. It makes those fast shots much easier to grab without feeling intrusive. On the budget side, a brand new one might push your $400 limit depending on sales, but you can easily snag a mint used one for around $325. That leaves you some extra cash for a good wrist strap or a spare battery. Reliability has been great for me, though the autofocus motor is slightly louder than the f2 primes. Honestly, for the size and the do-it-all focal length, its a steal. Just double check that its the version with the R WR markings so you get that weather protection and the manual aperture ring. Its a really solid choice for city life.
Ive spent a lot of time with the f2 primes and honestly, I was pretty disappointed with how they performed in the field. I had issues with the 23mm f2 being way softer than expected at close distances, which is a real letdown for the price. Before I can really point you in the right direction, I have two questions. First, are you strictly sticking to native Fujifilm glass, or are you open to third-party brands that might offer better optics for your $400 budget? Second, since you are shooting in Chicago, is a physical aperture ring a dealbreaker for you, or would you sacrifice that for a faster lens that handles low light better? Those native f2 lenses just dont always cut it when the light gets messy...
