Mastodawn

What about handling of contrast?

The first image is taken with the #Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4, the second with the #Zeiss #Touit 32mm f/1.8.

I think the Zeiss has captured more contrast than the Fujifilm lens.

Both images look perfectly fine to me, though.

As much as I love shallow depth-of-field, some scenes work better at f/4.0. So let's look at that.

The first image is taken with the #Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4, the second with the #Zeiss #Touit 32mm f/1.8.

The extra sharpness and saturation on the Zeiss is easier to see here.

The Fujifilm benefits from in-camera lens correction that the Zeiss doesn't have.

I think both work well.

Here's another depth-of-field comparison. I also want to talk about detail in these shots.

The first image is taken with the #Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4, the second with the #Zeiss #Touit 32mm f/1.8.

To my eyes, the Zeiss lens has rendered a little more detail in the wood grain.

That's not just down to the DoF difference. The Fujifilm lens is a little soft. Which adds to the charm 🙂

Next - depth-of-field.

The first image is taken with the #Fujifilm 35mm f1.4, the second with the #Zeiss #Touit 32mm f/1.8.

The Fujifilm lens produced a wonderfully dreamy background. That's one of the reasons to buy this lens 🙂

The Zeiss produced a wonderfully textured background.

It's just a matter of personal taste, I think.

Next up - focusing.

The first image is taken with the #Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4, the second with the #Zeiss #Touit 32mm f/1.8.

The Fujifilm lens struggled to focus on this road sign. Although my focus point was dead centre of the image, you can see that it missed.

By comparison, the Zeiss lens nailed it without fuss.

First up - colour.

The first image is taken with the #Fujifilm 35mm f/1.4, the second with the #Zeiss #Touit 32mm f/1.8.

There is *maybe* a small amount of extra saturation in the image on the right.

I can't see any colour difference that would make me prefer one lens over the other.