Contents
Fuji 10-24mm f/4 vs Fuji 23mm f/1.4
To compare the 10-24mm against the 23mm f/1.4, I thought it best to do two separate tests. The 35mm equivalent focal length is a useful one that is used for both landscape type work as well as more intimate shooting such as environmental portraiture and street shooting. For this reason, I did one test focused near infinity, and a second test (shooting only at f/4 to provide some background blur) with a focus distance of about 1m, to test closer performance.
Below is the full scene for the distance test. As with the 14mm test, only the lenses were changed on the tripod mounted camera.
Below are the 100% crops for the above image. Again, click to enlarge, then click on the green arrow to view full size.
Looking at the crops above, this one is a little more one-sided. The 10-24mm isn’t quite as strong at the long end of its range as it is at the wider end, and it shows here. The 23mm f/1.4 is notably sharper at f/4 and at f/8 both in the center and especially on the edges. The 10-24mm certainly creates a decent image here, but it’s no match for the outstanding 23mm f/1.4.
Now let’s look at closer performance. Below is the full shot for the close-shooting test:
And below are the 100% crops. Again, click to enlarge then click the green arrow to view full size:
Again, this is a decisive win for the 23mm f/1.4. The 23mm is slightly sharper in the center at f/4, but the 23mm f/1.4 is also sharp in the extreme corner at this aperture, while the 10-24mm just produces a soft mess. The 23mm also has much smoother bokeh at f/4 (in addition to having an extra 3 stops beyond this). In all, a clear victory for the 23mm.
Conclusion
Well, the results are largely how I expected them to play out. The 10-24mm is shaping up to be a very good ultra-wide zoom, but like most ultra-wide zooms, it’s not going to perform as well as a top-notch prime lens. To be fair, this is seriously stiff competition. The Fuji 14mm and 23mm are two of the best lenses in the X-System; both are among the best lenses in their range of any I’ve ever used. It’s unrealistic to expect a zoom with this range to match such great optics. That said, there is a lot to be said for convenience as well as versatility and the added capability of even further width with the 10-24mm. Come back soon for my full review of the 10-24mm, which should be ready in around a week.
Once again a nice review that will help a lot of us to decide between those incredible lenses… I would just have liked that you had the 18mm f2 to finish the competition… Maybe next time!
Thanks, Jordan. This a good start to another real world test and I am looking forward to the rest of it. It would also be interesting to see how the 10-24 compares to the 18-55 at common focal lengths. I think the lens it a very useful addition to the system.
Isn’t that relatively obvious? Weakest part of the range for the10-24 to the strongest part of the range for 18-55.
Did you try a second copy? My first 10-24 was horrible in the corners, even @ f/8. I returned it and received a new one. The second one is tack sharp and from f/5.6 there’s no noticeable difference between the 10-24 and my 14mm.
It’s too bad that Fuji’s QC is so so, i’ve seen bad copies from other lenses as well.
Take a look at this comparison, it’s the opposite from your findings. At 14mm the 10-24 is sharper at the very corners.
http://www.martin-doppelbauer.de/foto/fujixe1/1024mm-1/index.html
Only at 24mm the 10-24 corners are not that great compared to the 23mm prime.
Jordan if you have to choose 10-24 or 14mm + 23mm witch one do you choose for street photography?
Regards
For street photography, I prefer primes, so I’d take the 23/1.4 all day. But that’s me. I don’t do a TON of street photography, but I do shoot a bunch around the city. I think the 10-24 has a good use in a lot of bags when you need versatility. For landscape or architectural shooting, having this very wide range of wide angle focal lengths available is wonderful. One could easily shoot a wide variety of subjects with just the 10-24, the 35/1.4 and the 55-200. That said, the primes are better lenses and have other advantages, notably speed in the case of the 23mm. For me, I’m glad I have the 14 and the 23mm. That said, I could see myself adding the 10-24mm to my bag eventually for times I’d be shooting things that require more depth of field, or for times I want more width.
I just picked up the x-t1 and in the process of getting rid of my Nikon DSLR gear. I have the 56mm f1.2 and X100 right now and thinking of what makes sense. Right now the options are to get the 10-24 and the 35mm. the other option is the 14 and 23. I’d get a nice small normal lens in the 35 f1.4 and a good zoom. I’m not one for alot of landscape but will be traveling to south africa for a safari at the end of the year.
In general I like primes, but I’m wondering if the 10-24 is good enough to replace the 23 (35mm) and wide angle range with the IS, or if I should just get the primes and eat the additional cost
Nice review!
As a former Canon user I can say (and compare) that the 10-24mm impresses me and is in my opinion a better lens than my already sold 16-35mm II.
The image stabilisation of the Fuji rocks!
Thank you for the detailed review, your write up has helped me make my decision to go with the 14mm as my next lens purchase. I’m an extremely happy XF 23 mm and XF 56 mm user currently.
The picture quality with the Fuji lenses are so impressive ( Coming from a FF Canon user with a bag full of L series lenses). Keep up the good work!
These new concepts have been termed as “Modular Kitchen” and this is very much required just than a cooking
place. They borrow from the best, sleekest and most modern designers
all over the world, while asking of its customers a
reasonable investment. Closed kitchens are a good choice if
you have lot of space and lots of items to stock.