Jump to content

XF56 vs XF90 - Your thoughts apprecaited

Toon

By Toon
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

Robin Apprentice

Robin

Posted
Posted

In all my years of studio photography I have never been asked what camera I use, which lens, what focal length, how many blades I have, its the work that counts.

So if the your doing outdoor portraits go for the 90, studio and indoor the 56, if your a wedding photog 50-140, your 90 will sit in the bag because you wont have time to faff about.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Maurice
Maurice

You guys have seen this side by side?     https://ivanjoshualoh.wordpress.com/2015/05/18/please-to-meet-you-mr-bokeh/

milandro
milandro

it is really funny that so much attention has been dedicated to the fuji newborn, the 90mm, which, as it has been said by many, equals the 135mm on a FF or 35mm format camera.   I am old enough to r

abjurina
abjurina

If I may add to the conversation: I have shot entire weddings with the 56mm (non APD) for any shot of less than 3 individuals and all candids at a reception. I never felt the need to want "more bokeh"

Posted Images

migl Newbie

migl

Posted
Posted

I think we're trying to compare apples and oranges here. The two lenses have nothhing in common, except the mount. You need to compare their respective 35mm-equiv. focal lengths to make that more obvious: One is a 85/1.8, the other a 136/3.0 and that's that really.

 

I dont't think anyone of You had bothered to compare these focal lengths in full format, right? Right. It's the same sort of thing when you compare f/1.4-lenses to their f/1.8-counterparts in full format systems. The only thing you can compare a f/1.4 lens to is another f/1.4 lens.

 

As for the example picture given (56 APD vs. 90), at least to me it's astounding how clearly the 56 APD shows it's "dollar value" for creamy and wonderful bokeh. No outlines to light sources. If You like that sort of bokeh (I do) the 56 APD delivers, the 90 doesn't. Even more interesting: the comparison between the 56 and the 56 APD.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Aswald Mentor

Aswald

Posted
Posted

No, the nice thing about employing apodization to improve the bokeh of a sharp, well corrected lens is that it will still be quite sharp within the plane of sharpness, yet produce a rather pleasant, creamy bokeh both in front and behind that plane.

 

That's good to know. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bluemanta Rookie

Bluemanta

Posted
Posted

I still own the 135L F2 on my 6D and this lens is amazing. If you want to shoot portrait during a wedding when people are talking it's the perfect focal lenght. In a day to day use, it's sure that 56mm (equ 85mm) will be more useful and versatile.

 

On the Canon system, I chose the 135 because it was an excellent tele but also because the 85 1.2L was really expensive. On the fuji system, I guess I'll go for the 56 for sure because the prices are quite the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites
GluonDeFuji Newbie

GluonDeFuji

Posted
Posted

For a quite small amount of money (considering XF56 and XF90's cost), you can have the **excellent** XF60! It can produce very nice and sensible portraits. The 90 is for shy photographers: too long, you will loose the contact with your model. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dis Collaborator

Dis

Posted
Posted

The 90 is for shy photographers: too long, you will loose the contact with your model. 

 

Don't say for everyone. I use telephoto lenses in portraits for real closeups and for narrowing perspective outdoors. And these are quite often situations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PhilippeVdp Apprentice

PhilippeVdp

Posted
Posted

I had the opportunity to put the 90mm on my x-t1. I liked the lens a lot. It's much easier to blow the background out (blurred) compared to the 56mm. But I have to admit, twice I was struggling because I didn't have enough room to do the shot I wanted ...So my opinion, I'll use this (when my lens will arrive in the shop) more than the 56mm because , yes, I'm a shy photographer. But I will always have the 56mm with me so I don't miss a shot when the 90mm is too long.

For street it's big, but not too big. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
lxcellent Newbie

lxcellent

Posted
Posted

In all my years of studio photography I have never been asked what camera I use, which lens, what focal length, how many blades I have, its the work that counts.

So if the your doing outdoor portraits go for the 90, studio and indoor the 56, if your a wedding photog 50-140, your 90 will sit in the bag because you wont have time to faff about.

Really?  Sheesh.  I get this all the time.  In fact, it bugs me that viewers/clients always chalk good photography up to the equipment, as in "Wow!  Great shot!  You must have a great camera..."

Link to post
Share on other sites
lxcellent Newbie

lxcellent

Posted
Posted

Wow. Done deal. The 56mm is great, but the 90mm is quite stunning. Can't wait!

I am confused.  Do you REALLY think the 90mm has a better bokeh rendering than the 56mm APD?  Look at the sharp distracting edges to the highlights in the 90mm sample...Now, I understand that beauty is the in the eye, etc., but typically bokeh fiends talk about smoothness.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
drb Contributor

drb

Posted
Posted

Bought the 56mm and perhaps a bit disappointed and feel I should have bought the 90mm now. It feels I should have gone for more of an extreme difference from the existing 35mm and gone for the 90mm instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SoulKey Newbie

SoulKey

Posted
Posted

Bought the 56mm and perhaps a bit disappointed and feel I should have bought the 90mm now. It feels I should have gone for more of an extreme difference from the existing 35mm and gone for the 90mm instead.

 

I find the difference to be really dramatic. Excited to see comparions between the 56mm and 90mm though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
m2usa Apprentice

m2usa

Posted
Posted

Thanks for this. Good read.

 

So, Toon, did you make a decision given that the rebates are about to end? I really want a 70mm lens, but I ended up getting the 56mm f/1.2 with the discounts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Toon Contributor

Toon

Posted
  • Author
Posted

So, Toon, did you make a decision given that the rebates are about to end? I really want a 70mm lens, but I ended up getting the 56mm f/1.2 with the discounts.

 

Yes I did! After carefully reading everyone's comments, I decided on the 56mm for now. I like to get close (not too close) to my subject so (bokeh prefs aside) working with the 56 should be ok. Also, after playing around with my friend's Canon 135mm F2L lens (going back to FF felt...heavy haha), I found it a bit far for me. I kinda felt detached from my subject and that felt a bit off to me so....the 56mm should work out better :D .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
milandro Grand Master

milandro

Posted
Posted

It’s a street shot in Hong Kong :huh: . Pardon me & my frankness, it is just a picture though... nothing special. Not in terms of subject, composition, execution.

 

Some parts that aren’t in focus but without any real reason for it, some bits cut out left and right, the remnant of a blurred head of a passer by on the bottom of the picture... . What is there to say about it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • thelostkiwi
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By thelostkiwi · Posted

      I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...