Jump to content

Fuji 56mm F1.2

paulga

By paulga
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

paulga Newbie

paulga

Posted
Posted

I already have the 90mm F2 and uses it to shoot wildlife/portraiture, very satisfied with the IQ, sharp in focus and creamy bokeh out of focus. During a trail I constantly need to switch between the 10-24 mm and 90mm lens. 

I'm considering adding one lens. 56mm is highly praised for portraiture shooting and its samples are stunning. But would the 56mm kind of redundant when I already have 90mm even though it's faster at F 1.2? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
merlin Mentor

merlin

Posted
Posted (edited)

I have both, and only rarely use the 56 since I got the 90 three years ago.   But I do not shoot many portraits, mostly landscapes, nature, flowers, cats, and headshots.  I also have the 18-55, and paired with the 90 it is perfect for my hikes.

Edited by merlin
Link to post
Share on other sites
Nero Rising Star

Nero

Posted
Posted

I have the 56mm and love it, but when people ask me about buying one, I always try to throw the 55-200mm out there as a second option to consider for a smaller budget. While the 56mm is my first choice for portraits, the 55-200mm has decent bokeh when shot wide open, is fairly versatile for longer focal lengths, and you can find a good used copy of it for under $500. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
paulga Newbie

paulga

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 hours ago, Nero said:

The 23mm f/1.4 is one of my top 2 lenses, but it does overlap with your 10-24mm. If you're thinking you'd like another prime lens and you don't want it to be redundant, I'd say look at the 35mm.

i already have 35mm. here is what i thought. i would take a wide for senery (10-24) and a tele for wild life (90) in my trip. 

23mm 1.4 is large. though it can create some magic that 10-24 cannot, most probably i will not carry both in travel. 10-24 is more essential for landscape.

16mm 1.4 can shoot some interesting photos due to its fast aperture. maybe i can pick it instead of 10-24mm in a travel because 16mm is more versatile.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...