Jump to content

Get the 56mm f1.2 lens or wait for the 50mm f2?


hjalmarg1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have been hesitant about geeting the 56mm f1.2 because its steep price compare to other Fuji lenses. I know is a terrific lens for portraiture but also seems to be slow to fucus and a bit larger than other lenses.

I am mostly about street photo but occasionally I want to take portraits so I'd like a lens with fast AF and capable of producing good bokeh.

 

What would you do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or go for the 60mm which is also available. It will not do just a single eye in focus unless you are extremely close. I am far more concerned about that part that is in focus, rather than that which is out, but people do frequently praise its bokeh. It has great sharpness wide open which only gets better when stopped down a couple of stops. Its close focusing ability and flatness of field are to be appreciated. With the long range in macro mode, it is not one of the fastest to achieve focus, but a half-press will pre-focus eliminating the issue. (Develop a pre-focus habit and I am sure the f/1.2 problem would go away as well.) As a short telephoto, it is easy to use and very handy—lightweight and compact. Above all, it is highly affordable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please someone explain to me what SLOW to Focus means, ALL Lens I own focuses faster than I could time with a stopwatch.

 

Some Lenses are slower than others on paper, but in reality I find all Lenses focus almost instantly.

Lenses missing focus is a bigger issue, but can easily be corrected if you have auto + manual selected.

 

The only lens that can be slow that i own (although very rarely) is the XF60 F/2.4, and that is only if focus is missed and it goes through entire range (and only happens on macro photography where speed doesn't matter)

 

 

As far as DOF goes the look of the Out of Focus areas is different between lenses but the amount of Out of Focus area is easy to find on any web calculator

 

Based on the Object Distance being 2 meters away photo'ing wide open (of the 3 lenses discussed)

 

56 F/1.2 has shallowest DOF, then 60 F/2.4, then 50 F/2

 

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Edited by Tikcus
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Please someone explain to me what SLOW to Focus means, ALL Lens I own focuses faster than I could time with a stopwatch.

 

Some Lenses are slower than others on paper, but in reality I find all Lenses focus almost instantly.

Lenses missing focus is a bigger issue, but can easily be corrected if you have auto + manual selected.

 

The only lens that can be slow that i own (although very rarely) is the XF60 F/2.4, and that is only if focus is missed and it goes through entire range (and only happens on macro photography where speed doesn't matter)

 

 

As far as DOF goes the look of the Out of Focus areas is different between lenses but the amount of Out of Focus area is easy to find on any web calculator

 

Based on the Object Distance being 2 meters away photo'ing wide open (of the 3 lenses discussed)

 

56 F/1.2 has shallowest DOF, then 60 F/2.4, then 50 F/2

 

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Don't know if this helps but if you are shooting moving subjects, say a new puppy running around, the 56mm f/1.2 af struggles to keep the dog in focus. The 90mm f/2 or 23/35mm f2 could probably keep up. It isn't that it is 60mm slow, but just not snappy enough to use for moving subjects.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know if this helps but if you are shooting moving subjects, say a new puppy running around, the 56mm f/1.2 af struggles to keep the dog in focus. The 90mm f/2 or 23/35mm f2 could probably keep up. It isn't that it is 60mm slow, but just not snappy enough to use for moving subjects.

 

but you wouldn't use a portrait or macro lens to photo a running puppy, in the street things don't move that quickly

 

I have tested the 60mm on an X-T10 tracking a walking person across a garden and only 1 out of 18 photos using continuous auto focus, was not in focus (shooting at 3FS).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think XF 50mm F2 vs XF18-50mm would a tougher dilemma than vs 56mm.   In camera (or in LR) optical corrections reduce the optical advantage of the prime.  The prime would still have the advantage of weight, size and aperture, however the aperture advantage is partly removed by the OIS function of the zoom.

 

 Vs the XF 56 f/1.4 the issue depends the subject matter and the user's need/desire for shooting in very dark situations or when a very narrow DoF is desired or especially nice out of focus blur.  These are pretty specific properties -- if they are needed/desired without compromise only the F1.4 will do.  I they are not, then it would just be a waste of money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but you wouldn't use a portrait or macro lens to photo a running puppy, in the street things don't move that quickly

 

I have tested the 60mm on an X-T10 tracking a walking person across a garden and only 1 out of 18 photos using continuous auto focus, was not in focus (shooting at 3FS).

I wasn't saying it was an ideal lens to photograph a running puppy. You asked what was meant by slow AF. The 90mm would keep up, the 56mm isn't as quick and would likely result in more missed focus shots. It isn't that it is slow, just not at the same level as the 90mm. The 23 and 35 F/2 versions also focus very quickly. That is what people are talking about. I don't think any of the lenses focus that slow, except for that 60mm (but that is to be expected). If I go from the 35mm F/1.4 to the 35mm F/2, there is a noticeable improvement in AF speed. That is where the comparisons are being made. I am more than happy with the Fuji lenses and am not complaining as all. My 56mm F/1.2 is much quicker in focusing that my Canon 50mm F/1.2.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I use my 56 at f2 or greater anyway most of the time, because otherwise the dof is too shallow

 

i love this lens - even & especially wide open

If you ask me: Decission point would be size & WR - price tag is not such a diffenence (same with XF23F2 vs XF23F1.4

With X-E2 focussing speed is fairly ok (I had to upgrade from X-E1 - there XF56 was useless due to accuracy & Speed)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I suppose that it is, as we’ve often seen, the good old half empty or half full glass.

 

The glass is half full (and I am happy with this quantity) when it comes the 60mm. I don’t need it to be any fuller.

 

I don’t have a problem with the 60mm at all. It is a very versatile lens and I personally don’t understand the complaining about speed or hunting.

 

But it must be because I like the lens as is, not for what it might be and it is not, nor it would ever need to be for me.

 

If it would be any better it would be scarier than it is already, it is THAT good!

 

You know, the good old : “ If my grandpa or grandma had wheels they would be a bike!”. This lens is what it is and as such I like it very much! One of the best macro lenses that I’ve ever had, and I have had many since 1976.

 

I personally think that it is more versatile than a 50mm f2 could ever be and a completely different league as compared to the 56mm.

 

I have a lot of stuff in this focal range if I include all my adaptive lenses too. The all excel at doing something but nothing does everything so I need a lot of lenses.

 

However my first lenses were the 10-24 and the 60mm ( when I bought it I did consider buying the 56mm but didn’t buy it because of the €400 difference which I couldn’t justify. I’ve employed that kind of money to buy a soft focus lens such as the Petzval 85mm and a focal reducer for example, so I am not cheap, I try to think rationally according to my needs...) . I no longer have the 10-24, but I still have and use the 60mm.

post-106-0-83513400-1484314375_thumb.jpg

Edited by milandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please someone explain to me what SLOW to Focus means, ALL Lens I own focuses faster than I could time with a stopwatch.

 

Some Lenses are slower than others on paper, but in reality I find all Lenses focus almost instantly.

Lenses missing focus is a bigger issue, but can easily be corrected if you have auto + manual selected.

 

The only lens that can be slow that i own (although very rarely) is the XF60 F/2.4, and that is only if focus is missed and it goes through entire range (and only happens on macro photography where speed doesn't matter)

 

 

As far as DOF goes the look of the Out of Focus areas is different between lenses but the amount of Out of Focus area is easy to find on any web calculator

 

Based on the Object Distance being 2 meters away photo'ing wide open (of the 3 lenses discussed)

 

56 F/1.2 has shallowest DOF, then 60 F/2.4, then 50 F/2

 

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

 

Buy or rent the 56mm f/1.2 lens and then you will know what a slow focusing lens is! (kidding) This lens really does take a long time to focus, and it can hunt sometimes looking for focus. The 35mm f/2 is much better, and also weather sealed. I could also do without the extra bulk. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, there is a HUGE difference in AF speed using the XF56/1.2 with the X-T1 vs. the X-T2! My XF56/1.2 coupled to my X-T2 is surely not the fastest lens I have, but the difference between the XF35/2 and the XF56/1.2 gets much smaller and it is really usable in most situations, especially in low light.

 

As I love the very special look at f/1.2 and stunning sharpness of the XF56/1.2 (see below, just as an example), I would never switch to the XF50/2. However,  I have to admit that I mainly use this lens for portraits. If fast AF tracking is really needed or I only had the X-T1 (or similar), I would at least think about the new lens. 

post-3965-0-22786000-1484374530_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

the question is whether the 50 f2 will be much better than what?... and more importantly at doing what exactly?

 

I understand that this series of these f2 lenses are target in particular to the public of the X pro 2 which  needs a lens with a front profile that won’t impede vision through the OVF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

this Meyer Goertz 50mm f1.8 costed peanuts and takes as good as an image as any 56 might produce. I don’t believe in autofocus for portraits

 

index.php

Autofocus has it's place in photography, whether you believe it or not.

 

Also, the OP asked for something small for occasional use and for other occasions than portraits. I'd say the 50 f2 seems like the perfect fit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're photographing fast moving subjects you'll get better results from learning to do zone focusing regardless of lens on fuji.

And if you like available light portraits, you'll usually end up at larger apertures and I find that modern autofocus systems have far greater hit rates with shallow dof than I'm able to achieve in manual, despite my experience with manual focus cameras...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been hesitant about geeting the 56mm f1.2 because its steep price compare to other Fuji lenses. I know is a terrific lens for portraiture but also seems to be slow to fucus and a bit larger than other lenses.

I am mostly about street photo but occasionally I want to take portraits so I'd like a lens with fast AF and capable of producing good bokeh.

 

What would you do?

 

On the cheap, 60 f2.8 if you are using t2, pro2 or e2 as bodies. The results is on par with the 56 most times except at closes distance, widest aperture.

For the best "realistic", studio grade portraits go for the 90 F2.

Go for the 56 f1.2 if you want some creative shots or play with composition and bokeh.

 

I own both the 60 and 56 (both versions) and I still feel the 90 is the most competent portrait lens Fujifilm has made so far. Besides, the 90 is best the lens to give you some working distance for that great street photography portrait.

Edited by Aswald
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have been hesitant about geeting the 56mm f1.2 because its steep price compare to other Fuji lenses. I know is a terrific lens for portraiture but also seems to be slow to fucus and a bit larger than other lenses.

I am mostly about street photo but occasionally I want to take portraits so I'd like a lens with fast AF and capable of producing good bokeh.

 

What would you do?

They are 2 different lenses, really.

 

I think you should be leaning towards the new 50mm f/2. For street with faster AF and good bokeh, it's got that all for you and for a lot less $$ than the 56mm f/1.2.

 

I have the 56mm f/1.2, but I did not hesitate to preorder the 50mm f/2 as well. The 56mm is a very nice lens, but it's quite big and heavy and not the fastest AF because of the big glass inside. I use the 56mm mainly for more serious portrait sessions.  I have tried the 56mm occasionally for street and more casual photos, but I would be lying if I didn't find myself cropping out more from a scene than I wanted because I did not have the space to back up..and even if I may have had enough space to back up, I might find a clear line of site to my shot I want to make obstructed, especially when it's busy with enough people around.

 

I know that a 50mm would have just given me that extra breathing room and closer distance to work and get some good bokeh and subject isolation.

 

I believe in doing what I can creatively to work a scene with the tools you have, BUT sometimes you just don't have the time and convenience to do all that and need to pick and bring a long the right tool, or lens, to get the job done more efficiently.. especially if you want to maintain the flow and casualness of taking a photo more or less on the go.

 

Have you read Ivan Joshua Loh's recent comparison? It's been referenced in Fujirumors.com recently, as well.

https://ivanjoshualoh.com/2017/01/26/50mm-vs-56mm-vs-60mm/

 

You can't go wrong with either one of these lenses, but for the price and advantages and similar very good IQ you can get with the 50mm f/2, it seems worth serious consideration. Forget any preconceptions you might have about what some consider an odd 75mm equiv. focal length.. I think if you compose, light and thoughtfully consider your subject and the story (hopefully there is one) of the photo you want to make, this 50mm can definitely do what you need it to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please someone explain to me what SLOW to Focus means, ALL Lens I own focuses faster than I could time with a stopwatch.

 

Some Lenses are slower than others on paper, but in reality I find all Lenses focus almost instantly.

Lenses missing focus is a bigger issue, but can easily be corrected if you have auto + manual selected.

 

The only lens that can be slow that i own (although very rarely) is the XF60 F/2.4, and that is only if focus is missed and it goes through entire range (and only happens on macro photography where speed doesn't matter)

 

 

As far as DOF goes the look of the Out of Focus areas is different between lenses but the amount of Out of Focus area is easy to find on any web calculator

 

Based on the Object Distance being 2 meters away photo'ing wide open (of the 3 lenses discussed)

 

56 F/1.2 has shallowest DOF, then 60 F/2.4, then 50 F/2

 

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

I suggest watching Big Head Taco's First Impressions of the 50/2 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSBUkVmFjpE

 

From a use case, he gives some good perspective on how the 50mm vs. 56mm focal lengths can be considered.  His impressions on the AF speed seems to be what I am expecting.  The 56/1.2's focus speed is a lot faster than my old Canon 85/1.2L II; but, it is not as snappy as some of my newer Fuji glass.

 

If you treat the 50/2 as a long normal lens rather than a short telephoto/portrait lenses, it makes a lot more sense to me.  The faster AF would make the lens more useful taking shots of moving subjects whereas the 56/1.2 might taking more anticipation/planning to nail the same shot.

 

Taking minimum focus distance and widest aperture:

56/1.2:  70cm @ f/1.2:  DOF is 0.68cm

50/2:  39cm @ f/2:  DOF is 0.42cm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...