Zeiss Touit 32mm f/1.8 Planar vs. Fujifilm Fujinon XF 35mm f/1.4 R

Bokeh

The last thing we’ll look at today is how each lens renders out of focus areas.  As I mentioned earlier, I took crops from two areas: the crystal decanter and the wooden sticks in the vase.

Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 vs Fuji 35mm f/1.4, 100% Crops, Bokeh @ Maximum Aperture (click to enlarge)
Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 vs Fuji 35mm f/1.4, 100% Crops, Bokeh @ Maximum Aperture (click to enlarge)

With both lenses wide open, you can see that, as we’d expect, the Fuji shows considerably more blur due to the larger aperture.  However, it not only shows more blur, but the bokeh is significantly more pleasing as well.  Specular highlights on the decanter are very smooth and soft, while the busy sticks area shows soft blobs of color.

The Touit on the other hand, has some harsher rings around specular highlights, while color rings and fringes show in a much more busily rendered scene with the sticks.

Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 vs Fuji 35mm f/1.4, 100% Crops, Bokeh @ f/1.8 (click to enlarge)
Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 vs Fuji 35mm f/1.4, 100% Crops, Bokeh @ f/1.8 (click to enlarge)

With both lenses at f/1.8, the Fuji continues to show superior bokeh to my eye, with a much more neutral rendering and softer specular highlights.  The Zeiss simply shows some nervousness at this wide aperture, though it’s not a terrible showing.

Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 vs Fuji 35mm f/1.4, 100% Crops, Bokeh @ f/2.8 (click to enlarge)
Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 vs Fuji 35mm f/1.4, 100% Crops, Bokeh @ f/2.8 (click to enlarge)

At f/2.8 and smaller, something interesting happens: the Zeiss softens up in the out of focus areas.  Bokeh becomes much more neutral at smaller apertures, and to my eye, is extremely similar to the Fuji.  This continues for the f/4 and f/5.6 crops, seen below.

Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 vs Fuji 35mm f/1.4, 100% Crops, Bokeh @ f/4 (click to enlarge)
Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 vs Fuji 35mm f/1.4, 100% Crops, Bokeh @ f/4 (click to enlarge)
Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 vs Fuji 35mm f/1.4, 100% Crops, Bokeh @ f/5.6 (click to enlarge)
Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 vs Fuji 35mm f/1.4, 100% Crops, Bokeh @ f/5.6 (click to enlarge)

In the bokeh challenge, I have to give a nod to the Fujinon XF 35mm f/1.4.  The wider aperture not only allows for more blurring and subject separation, but the lens renders out of focus areas much more smoothly than the Zeiss does at wide apertures.  At smaller apertures, the lenses are extremely close to one another.

Conclusion

So who wins?  Well, unlike the comparison I did between the Touit 12mm and the Fuji 14mm, there isn’t a clear-cut winner.  Which lens is better really is going to come down to how each person will use it and what aspects they value more.

Both lenses are tack sharp in the center at all apertures.   The Zeiss has a significant advantage on the edges and corners at wide apertures, but the Fuji has a clear advantage on the edges and corners at small apertures.  Bokeh is a little better on the Fuji to my eye, but that’s a very subjective measure.

I personally would give the edge to the Fuji 35mm, as I find the better larger aperture bokeh and superior stopped down edge and corner resolution to fit my style of shooting much better.  However, if you’re someone who shoots in limited light situations and needs sharpness across the frame at wide apertures, then the Zeiss may be the clear-cut winner.

The $1,000 price tag for the Zeiss Touit may be the deciding factor, as it really is difficult to see an extra $400 in value simply for better larger aperture edge performance, though again, that will be up to each individual shooter.

Check out my full review of the Zeiss Touit 32mm f/1.8.  That review features shooting in a variety of situations and a much more in-depth look at the Touit 32mm.

Tags:

Comments

12 responses to “Zeiss Touit 32mm f/1.8 Planar vs. Fujifilm Fujinon XF 35mm f/1.4 R”

  1. david blanchard Avatar
    david blanchard

    Nice write up! I’m really debating on getting this lense since I’ve read its sharper wide open and lusting to try a Zeiss lense on my xe1. Are you seing better color, contrast then the Fuji with that signature Zeiss look everyone seems to say. I love the 35 also witch I used for almost a year exclusively, i like also its slightly wider view then the fuji.

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      IMO, it doesn’t have what I consider to be the ‘typical Zeiss look.’ Not that it’s bad. It’s a very good lens, and it’s quite sharp at f/1.8 for an f/1.8 lens. As you can see, though, it doesn’t sharpen up a whole lot beyond that though, which is rather unusual. I associate the ‘Zeiss look’ with extremely high contrast and microcontrast with high color saturation. This doesn’t have that. It is also downright bizarre that it never sharpens up across the frame completely.

      Having tried and owned a bazillion different lenses over the years, I just have to say…don’t buy a lens because of the name on it. There are Zeiss lenses that are downright incredible (and some are among my favorite lenses of all time, such as the 85/2.8 Sonnar). And there are Zeiss lenses that are a little disappointing. IMO, unless you like busy bokeh or really need that extra corner sharpness at maximum aperture, the Fuji 35mm is the better lens. For wide aperture work, I care much more how it performs in the middle 75% of the frame, and the Fuji does very well there…plus it has nicer bokeh and is 2/3 stop faster. Then, you put on top that it’s tack sharp across the frame when stopped down and has little to no CA, where the Zeiss falters a bit, and for Fuji buyers, I don’t think the Touit 32mm makes a lot of sense. You’re paying $400 more for better corners at wide apertures but worse performance stopped down, 2/3 slower aperture and worse bokeh.

  2. […] « Zeiss Touit 32mm f/1.8 Planar vs. Fujifilm Fujinon XF 35mm f/1.4 R […]

  3. Fred Livingston Avatar
    Fred Livingston

    Thanks for doing this evaluation. Very interesting. To me, in the pictures here in your review, and in other reviews, the Zeiss has a richer color to it, and is more contrasty. Given the current sale on the Touits, I went for them!

  4. Brian Barrett Avatar
    Brian Barrett

    Obviously old Fred above has more money than sense Mr Livingstone.

  5. kenneth Avatar
    kenneth

    OK, I a digital Neanderthal who has decided to cross over to the darkside due to the pending birth of our first grandchild. I use Summicron optics on my Leica M6’s so I am tempted to buy the C Zeiss Touit 32mm 1.8 with my new Fujifilm camera as I favour German optics, having used both Japanese and German ones. I read Ken Rockwell’s comments on the Fuji 35mm 1.4, he reckons it to be as good as Summilux lenses which is an amasing recommendation to going for the Fuji version, but, I am not sure?

  6. Michael Avatar
    Michael

    Great comparison! With the new Fuji 35mm WR f2 lens and the price adjustments of the Zeiss 32mm f1.8 and Fuji 35mm f1.4, what are your thoughts on the best all around lens at this focal length for the x-mount? I have an XT-1 and basically see them all as a wash with balance of different features and performances unique to each. Any thoughts or will there be upcoming head to head comparisons?

    1. Dmitrii Avatar

      I had a similar situation. I select the first lens on the XT-1. And it was WR f2.0. I think the lens of the Fuji completely without character. Because before that I had a Canon with Planar 1.4 ZE and it was fantastic lens. Tests is good, but the main thing is the result. And if a good result, you will be comfortable working with Zeiss, why not buy it? 🙂

  7. Kristiyan Avatar
    Kristiyan

    In the Conclusion where you say “… the comparison I did between the Touit 12mm and the Fuji 14mm…” it would be helpful to put a link there, pointing at that review.

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      The link is in the opening paragraph.

  8. Brandon Avatar
    Brandon

    Very helpful review, that Fuji 35mm 1.4 is a beautiful lens! In the end I went with the Zeiss (though I got it used for like $450) because of the way it renders color & contrast. In future reviews I would recommend talking g about this because through your images the Zeiss is a lot more contrasty with richer colors and you never addressed it.

    At any rate I enjoyed the read and you helped me out, thank you!

  9. Leo Avatar
    Leo

    I have never seen a sharp Plannar. Looking at blue lines on paper it proves. Every photo Fuji is better. Autofocus Zeiss probably better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Search


Categories


Recent Posts


  1. This article got me thinking… Why does Canon make RF S lenses starting with 18mm when most full frame RF…

  2. Great review. I shoot Nikon and may try an old Nikon D200 and see how it compares with the new…

  3. Your article brings back some very fond memories. I had exact setup you describe. The 15-85 lens on the 30D…