fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              6              end
  

Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?

  
 
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #1 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


Geoff D F wrote:
So anyone who chooses a slow shutter speed to allow some motion blur in the subject is automatically making a worse photo than if they chose to freeze the action? Far to many absolute claims in this thread considering most of what anyone will like in a photo is subjective.


This is turning into quite the straw man thread. I don’t think anyone said the thing that you are arguing about here.



Jan 27, 2026 at 12:07 AM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
[X]
p.7 #2 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?




gdanmitchell wrote:
This is turning into quite the straw man thread. I don’t think anyone said the thing that you are arguing about here.


Which, has nothing to do with the OP's question, does it GDan? Like you gripe at me for.



Jan 27, 2026 at 01:49 AM
gyoung143
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #3 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


Geoff D F wrote:
So anyone who chooses a slow shutter speed to allow some motion blur in the subject is automatically making a worse photo than if they chose to freeze the action? Far to many absolute claims in this thread considering most of what anyone will like in a photo is subjective.


Not if it's for artistic reasons as per the post I quoted. My point was for a more usual, professional situation, picture editors will be looking for what the general public will appreciate, and I suggest the general public will see motion blur as a failure to get a sharp photo. And it also has nothing whatever to do with lens sharpness which this thread is about?

Gerry



Jan 27, 2026 at 02:57 AM
Geoff D F
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #4 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


gyoung143 wrote:
Not if it's for artistic reasons as per the post I quoted. My point was for a more usual, professional situation, picture editors will be looking for what the general public will appreciate, and I suggest the general public will see motion blur as a failure to get a sharp photo. And it also has nothing whatever to do with lens sharpness which this thread is about?

Gerry


Your statement was quite definitive that lack of best sharpness will do nothing absolutely nothing to make a picture better. Now to be clear, I like sharp lenses and i mostly prefer sharp photos, but I think your statement is just silly. There are plenty of times one might use motion blur, shoot in foggy conditions, use a diffusion or pro mist filter or any number of other reasons to produce a better image than one that was as sharp as could possibly be.



Jan 27, 2026 at 05:12 AM
gyoung143
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #5 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


Geoff D F wrote:
Your statement was quite definitive that lack of best sharpness will do nothing absolutely nothing to make a picture better. Now to be clear, I like sharp lenses and i mostly prefer sharp photos, but I think your statement is just silly. There are plenty of times one might use motion blur, shoot in foggy conditions, use a diffusion or pro mist filter or any number of other reasons to produce a better image than one that was as sharp as could possibly be.


And I think you are being at least 'silly' if you think motion blur has got anything to do with the 'best iq from a Fuji lens'.




Jan 27, 2026 at 08:30 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #6 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


We could end this little detour pretty quickly by agreeing that motion blur used intentionally for creative reasons can be creatively effective but that unintentional motion blur causes by accidental camera motion generally is a flaw.

Can we move on now?



Jan 27, 2026 at 11:44 AM
SGinNorcal
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #7 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


gdanmitchell wrote:
I dislike the way the term is used, in particular (where I started this) the common use of the term to contrast lenses that have “character” with those that are “clinical.” It is a implicit shorthand for “virtue” in this and other cases.

“Character” can apparently mean whatever the user wants it to mean. Apparently saying a lens has “character” can simply mean “i like it.” Or it could mean that it has objective faults — excessive vignetting, soft corners, etc. Or it might be a particular characteristic that the owner regards as a virtue, such as smooth, soft bokeh.

Better to,
...Show more

Now you didn't answer my question I said how would you define character. Not what you think others mean by it. But I get what you mean, there is no universally accepted usage, one persons character is another's crap. When one says "clinical" its a compliment, to others criticism. If think if both are read in context the meaning comes through. In my other passion pursuit, I'm a winemaker for my small production label. I can't but help but think of ways people describe taste and it makes the terms people use for photography seem pretty reasonable. If "unctuous" bugs, you should avoid wine tastings and reviews, its massively overused. At least there is no photographic equivalent of a sommelier, wait, maybe that's a YouTube reviewer! Along those line, in both cases its best to align yourself with a reviewer who appears to see/taste as you do. Then the adjectives become more meaningful. In the end, best not to forget we are supposed to be enjoying these pursuits, lol!



Jan 27, 2026 at 12:53 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #8 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


SGinNorcal wrote:
Now you didn't answer my question I said how would you define character. Not what you think others mean by it. But I get what you mean, there is no universally accepted usage, one persons character is another's crap. When one says "clinical" its a compliment, to others criticism. If think if both are read in context the meaning comes through. In my other passion pursuit, I'm a winemaker for my small production label. I can't but help but think of ways people describe taste and it makes the terms people use for photography seem pretty reasonable. If "unctuous"
...Show more

You are kind of coming full circle here. I've said that I don't like the way the term is used. in part because its meaning is so nebulous and confused.

So asking me to define the term that I think is unuseful and amorphous and which I don't use is kind of backwards.

Regarding "clinical," I've heard it used regularly as a criticism of lenses, but I don't think I've ever heard it used in photography as a compliment.

I love good food (I'm a cook and I like to eat out) and we like and collect wine... and every time I hear that term "unctious" used in those contexts I cringe just a bit. ;-)

I'm not sure where your advice to me to "enjoy these pursuits" is coming from... ;-)

Edited on Jan 27, 2026 at 05:04 PM · View previous versions



Jan 27, 2026 at 02:55 PM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

Geoff D F
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #9 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


gyoung143 wrote:
And I think you are being at least 'silly' if you think motion blur has got anything to do with the 'best iq from a Fuji lens'.



I don't think that and you seem to be trying to misrepresent my views.



Jan 27, 2026 at 04:41 PM
Geoff D F
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #10 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


gdanmitchell wrote:
You are kind of coming full circle here. I've said that I don't like the way the term is used. in part because its meaning is so nebulous and confused.

So asking me to define the term that I think is unuseful and amorphous and which I don't use is kind of backwards.

Regarding "clinical," I've heard it used regularly as a criticism of lenses, but I don't think I've ever heard it used in photography as a compliment.

I love good food (I'm a cook and I like to eat out) and we like and collect wine... and every time
...Show more

I tend to think of clinical as being a bit like the look dentists get when photographing someone's teeth with a macro lens and ring flash. Technically perfect in terms of being able to see detail everywhere you look and leaving nothing to the imagination.

I don't think there is a universal definition of 'character' in a lens, but I normally think of it as having nice interesting bokeh (not nervous, harsh or distracting, possibly with some swirl), some vignetting wide open, and a pleasing transition between the zone of focus and out of focus areas.

In terms of modern versus older lens designs, modern lenses often use asperical elements and especially in zooms this can often produce nervous bokeh. The lenses will be sharper and free from CA, but bokeh may suffer as a result.

Modern lens designers seem to be aiming mostly for nuetral bokeh these days, and when they pull it of you get bokeh that on the one hand is not distracting, but on the other not interesting.



Jan 27, 2026 at 04:54 PM
SGinNorcal
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #11 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


gdanmitchell wrote:
You are kind of coming full circle here. I've said that I don't like the way the term is used. in part because its meaning is so nebulous and confused.

So asking me to define the term that I think is unuseful and amorphous and which I don't use is kind of backwards.

Regarding "clinical," I've heard it used regularly as a criticism of lenses, but I don't think I've ever heard it used in photography as a compliment.

I love good food (I'm a cook and I like to eat out) and we like and collect wine... and every time
...Show more

Not trying to stir you up, just trying to understand your perspective. You said you don't like how others often use the term "character" and my question was "what does it mean to you/how would you use it?" Perhaps you don't use it all, that's fine.
My comment about "enjoying these pursuits" was simply my suggestion that we all don't take it to seriously. There is so much negativity in the world without adding more via photography forums.



Jan 27, 2026 at 05:07 PM
Geoff D F
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #12 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


I found this guy's take on Leica lenses interesting in the context of our discussion of character verses technical image quality, though I wouldn't say I agree with him exactly.



In his view Leica lenses are not technically perfect and some of the stuff he espouses sounds like techno babble to me. Though I probably do agree that Leica lenses have a somewhat signature look. I don't own any myself and Leica doesn't seem to perform exceptionally well on Optical Limits bench tests.

As a related aside, I have been testing some lenses myself as I have too many and need to downsize my collection. I haven't been conducting technical tests but rather just shooting stuff and seeing which lenses produce images I like the most. Lenses have been from Fujifilm, Viltrox, TTArtisans, Meike and Sigma. While, I couldn't discern huge differences in sharpness in any of them (they are all good) I mostly found myself liking the images from the Fujifilm lenses better, with a Viltrox lens next best. I can't rule out confirmation bias, but my process was to look at the pictures, compare and then look at the Exif data to see which lens was used. This result surprised me a little.

Describing why I like the Fuji images more is a little tricky. I would say the colours looked a bit more saturated without blocking up, and also the macro contrast seemed to be better tamed, while the micro contrast still held up. The Youtube video mentions this as a property of Leica lenses, though I'd be the first to admit from a physics and lens design point of view I don't see how such a theory could make sense. I could also say the rendering of the Fujis was more pleasing, but I don't know if there is any measurable aspect to 'rendering'



Feb 03, 2026 at 11:35 PM
gyoung143
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #13 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


Geoff D F wrote:
I found this guy's take on Leica lenses interesting in the context of our discussion of character verses technical image quality, though I wouldn't say I agree with him exactly.



In his view Leica lenses are not technically perfect and some of the stuff he espouses sounds like techno babble to me. Though I probably do agree that Leica lenses have a somewhat signature look. I don't own any myself and Leica doesn't seem to perform exceptionally well on Optical Limits bench tests.

As a related aside, I have been testing some lenses myself as I have too many and
...Show more

I can remember the satisfaction I got when I bought my Leica M3 and lenses in 1968. Of the lenses the 35mm Summicron was sharper at corners and edges than anything else I had tried then. There weren't many 35mm f/2 lenses available and certainly the Pentax and Nikon ones struggled with the slr backfocus to get any where near as good in any respect. The 50mm Summicron I got later too was by some margin sharper at corners and edges at wider apertures than Nikon and anything else I owned in film days. The 90 and 135 were at least as good as others. And much later the 21 2.8 aspheric was better than the 20 Nikkor, both for sharpness at wider apertures and low distortion, the 35mm aspheric Summicron I had showed improvements in sharpness at corners etc at wider apertures over its ancestor..
But where all the Leica lenses I had stood out from the others in that era was in rendering, both tonally in b&w and in colour, much better and more subtle, less contrast but clean highlights and more detailed shadows. The Zeiss lenses for the Hasselblad 500 were similarly much nicer than the Nikkors on the Bronica.
I haven't had any Leica lenses produced in very recent times, they are beyond my price range, but the Fuji and Nikon ones I have owned are very nice, a distinct improvement over the years, I presume at least partly due to availability of different glass types, as well as computer aided design. I particular like the Fuji ones, no complaints.

Gerry



Feb 04, 2026 at 06:09 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #14 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


SGinNorcal wrote:
Not trying to stir you up, just trying to understand your perspective. You said you don't like how others often use the term "character" and my question was "what does it mean to you/how would you use it?" Perhaps you don't use it all, that's fine.
My comment about "enjoying these pursuits" was simply my suggestion that we all don't take it to seriously. There is so much negativity in the world without adding more via photography forums.


Honest answer: I never use that term to describe lenses.



Feb 04, 2026 at 10:01 AM
mdude85
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #15 · Is there a Best IQ Fujifilm Lens?


"Character" might be a fuzzy word but there are other such words in the context of photography: bokeh, artistry, atmosphere, balance, mood, creamy, visual weight, even sharpness (that least one can at least be measured quantitively, though it is simultaneously subjective). I define "character" as a euphemistic term for a sort of imperfect or eccentric visual feature, attributed to the lens, that adds visual or interest to the photograph. But I don't use it much either -- I'd rather just try my best to describe what it is about the lens that gives it character.

On the other hand, unctuous is a word with a pretty definite meaning...



Feb 04, 2026 at 12:03 PM
1       2       3              6              end






FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              6              end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account