Great Job, Darren. 👌🏼

Chose this lens instead of the 18- 55mm ‘kit lens’ and never regretted it.

I just ordered mine. just here to validate my purchase haha. i am so excited!!!

I was surprised how snappy the focus is on my Xt-1. I use it for documentary work.

Awesome review Darren. Yeah, the "Fujicrons" definitely have quicker focus than the older f/1.4 lenses. Love the linear motors.

Great review Darren, thanks. This 35mm, the 18/2, and the 56/1.2 are the three lenses I would get if I ever switch to Fuji from Olympus.

Don't forget about the XC 35mm f/2. Same lens but, less metal and no aperture ring for 1/2 price.

I only recently purchased the 35/2 and I can only completely agree with your assessment. I was so cheap I purchased a warrantied second hand version saving about 25% on the already ridiculously cheap price. One compensating argument about the f2 stop - on newer bodies like the X-T4 the IBIS allows you to shoot down to 1/30 or even 1/15 meaning you can keep a low iso in certain situations. This lens is a no-brainer for any Fuji owner.

Hats off to still kicking it with the xt3!

If like me you don't have a wr body to mount this lovely lens on just go for the xc35 f2 for half the price, they have the same formula glass, on the other hand if you do have a wr body it makes sense to go for wr version Darren has.

Nice call!

consider the price, got a 35mm f1.4 of ttartisan for my A6600,i think images by these lenses are really nice even when comparing to the native lenses. :)

hi thanks your video. could you let me know your lens hood's name?

I've done plenty of low light shooting at f/2, including on ISO (called ASA back in the day) 400 film. I really don't understand the caveats, qualifiers, and kvetching. Light has direction, intensity, and color (even in monochrome) and if there's no worthwhile light, there's no worthwhile photo. I'm not arguing with anyone who wants f/1.4 or f/0.95, or whatever. I'm only saying there needn't be so much hand-wringing over f/2. I like the compact size, lower weight, and lower cost. "Fast," to me, starts at f/2.8. Also, here's a secret: people _expect_ low light shots to be a bit grainy: not consciously, but they do. We've all seen a bunch of low light photos and a bunch of low light scenes in movies, and our natural vision renders a similar effect in low light. The first photo I ever licensed for money (most of my client work is for non-profits with which I'm associated, and I don't charge them) was made with a Nikon F100, 24mm f/2.8 Nikkor, and Kodak Tri-X 400 pushed to ISO 1200. I'd gone back to film after my initial foray into digital proved disappointing. A publisher saw the photo online and contacted me about licensing it. Clients are NOT going to pixel peep images of their events.

How to get ISO 80?