Stealthy Ninja

Awesome. But at first I thought your website was German for "Light Licker" I thought to myself, "Oh you wacky Germans".

Fuji lenses wouldn't cover a full frame sensor, let alone a Medium format.

Both. I have the 90mm and I asked in another thread if getting the 56 is redundant. To me they both have a place and I'm gonna buy the 56 soon too. Here's why (for me). 90mm great for tight portraits and when you have a bit more space upper body etc. It also focuses really quite closely so it can be a pseudo macro lens if you're not too fussy. 56mm is great for upper body portraits. It's also a great partner to my 23mm for low light event shooting. When in the studio I tend to (from past experience) switch from 85mm to 135mm (on full frame) depending on how tight I want to be. Thr compliment each other, but if you must get one, what do you want? A semi-tele, semi-macro, tight crop (unless you can back up a lot) portrait lens? Then the 90mm is for you. You want a great low light event and upper body and wider portrait lens. Then the 56mm is right for you.

LOL I never take all my lenses out at once, you just take what you need. Unfortunately I'm not a world famous top tier photographer so I'll buy what I feel I need for what I shoot. Ken Mullins takes 3 bodies and 5 lenses to shoot weddings. That's not a small amount.

Thanks guys. Very helpful. I will definitely get the 56 and the 10-24 both seem useful for different things for me. The two lens (23 and 56) combo on two bodies to compliment the 16-55/50-140 zoom combo seems great. 90mm f2 doesn't really give me much of a speed boost over the 2.8 lenses and at an event, if I'm going to give up the flexibility of a zoom it'll be for the lens that let's me have the greatest light gathering capacity (that's the 56). Also the 56 and 90 seem to couple well in portrait/studio shoots (talking from experience using a 85mm and 135mm combo). As for the 10-24, I can see how useful it would be for video and when you want to go wide, the wider you can get the better. Of course you don't always want to go fish eye. So yes the 10-24 is definately a lens I'll get later

Dang it, I never considered video in the equation. I plan on doing a lot it video with th Fuji system too and for events especially 10-24 (15-35 approx equivalence) with OIS is ideal. Now I have to get the 10-24 ha. Now the debate comes down to the 56 or not. Dang I might just need to yet them all. Ok I've decided. I will get the 56mm as that's slightly more useful. I'll get the 10-24 later as I don't have an immediate need for it (no videography events booked).

Thanks mate. Yeh I'm like you, I don't do super wide much. Usually when I do I just stitch. I think I might hold off on the 10-24 for a bit. 56 1.2 I believe has a bit more use for me. I'll probably get that.

I just want to add: I shoot nearly everything, but for money I mainly do events and portraits (mainly corporate stuff, but some for individuals and families). Landscapes and cityscapes for fun. I don't really do sports, I enjoy shooting sports, but I don't shoot them very often. Animals and wildlife I hardly ever shoot.

Hi dudes. You might know me from the Fuji rumours comments section. Anyway, I thought this forum was a better place to put my query. I currently own: X-Pro 2 (will buy a XT-2 later this year for sure). 8mm Samyang Fisheye (because it's cheap and fun) 16-55 2.8 (event shoot and family outing lens) 23 1.4 (low light event shoot lens) 35 f/2 (my main daily lens) 90 f/2 (portrait and "good enough for me" macro lens) I have enough money for the XT-2, 50-140, 100-400, 10-24 and 56 1.2... however it's always good to save a $ here and there so.... Definately will buy: 50-140 (this is to replace my old 70-200 lens, an absolute must have for me, it'll be my main event shoot lens) 100-400 (I've wanted a lens like this for years, nothing can stop me buying this lol) Not too sure about: 10-24mm (for ultra wide landscapes and cityscapes when I don't want a fisheye effect). 56 1.2 (for shallow DOF upper body portraits, Edit: and possibly for a second low light event shoot lens to go with the 23 1.4) About the 10-24: I want something ultra wide that isn't a fish, is it redundant with the 16-55? Will a Samyang 12mm be good enough for occasional ultra wide shots? I do some landscapes, but I'm not a huge landscape guy (I will mainly shoot this stopped down FYI). Less distortion is great for cityscapes (I live in Hong Kong). About the 56 1.2: I am impressed with upper body portraits from this lens. I definately use the 90mm for tighter headshots in the studio and on location shoots. I can use LED lighting and get some really nice shallow DOF shots in the studio with the 90mm. However I'm not 100% convinced I NEED a 56mm. In studio situations I am thinking I can switch to this for the typical upper body shot. However is it made redundant by the 50-140? I also think perhaps this might make a nice compliment to the 23mm as a low light event combo, (I used to have a 35mm and 85mm combo for this when I shot Nikon, I do like this combo). Your thoughts on these things are appreciated. Also, anything I've missed?

I own both. Get both.