FX 60mm 2.4 Macro

[milandro]

the X-E2 was an expensive camera and now is a much cheaper one. In Dutch shops the body costs the same as a X-10 body and they tell me at the shop where I normally buy my things that nobody is buying X-E2 bodies.

[marcelo_valente]

the X-E2 was an expensive camera and now is a much cheaper one. In Dutch shops the body costs the same as a X-10 body and they tell me at the shop where I normally buy my things that nobody is buying X-E2 bodies.

I bought the X-E2 the week it came out. I guess sometimes it's good to wait.

 

The camera is great. I guess it's been forgotten.

 

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk

[milandro]

it is not but the new kid on the block is getting all the attention, sooner or later it too will be come yesteryear news.

 

One day ( maybe soon) my X-T1 won’t be the most advanced camera of the system. Will still take the same pictures of when it was the most advanced cameras though!

 

Just enjoy it and have no spite for something that would bring you no more joy.

 

I used to like having up to date clothes, now, I don’t care all that much anymore. I am still happy to wear shoes which I’ve bought 15 years ago and are still very nice.

[Enzio]

...

 

XE211527 by Enzio Harpaintner, auf Flickr

[gordonrussell76]

Lets not turn this into a shoudl the X-E2 be upgraded thread. I say this as someone who fervently wishes it were so, but there are several threads where my, Milandros and many others opposing (but repectful and considered) views are documented in some detial, some might say too much detail

 

Just a thought and not having a go at anyone.

G

[milandro]

yes, let’s wait few more months 

 

reading any comment though is not compulsive and can be easily skipped as if it weren’t there, my comments were a direct answer to a problem and a question directly related to the X-E2 en the performance of the macro lens on this camera which hasn’t, yet, received any improvements in its performance.

 

Meanwhile, to appreciate any improvement in the 60mm performance you need the new software, otherwise one cannot see any improvement.

 

Although some people say that there was no improvement even with the software I beg to differ. Having the benefit of the new software, I am under the impression that its performance was improved.

[gordonrussell76]

Milandro

 

I agree you intial comment was bang on point and very relevant, if you are buying the 60mm you need to seriously think about it in terms of the X camera you own.

 

I have a small confession, much as I hate to admit it I have bought an X-t1, there was a warehouse deal as part of Amazon prime day where you got a further 15% discount on warehouse returned items so I got a heavily discounted X-T1 even further discounted and could not resist.

 

The really nice thing about Amazon is I can return for full refund, so I am going to put it through its paces and see how things go.

 

Why have I done this given how much I LOVE the X-E2, several reasons.

 

1) I bought a Lumix Lx100 for video, fantastic video, but I hated it, and I am trying to simplify my kit not add to it so I sent it back. I can live with the video from the X_trans sensor for my needs, but I can't live without Manual control over it. I suspect that the X-E2 firmware update will not include video as they are trying to demarcate the product. I think that is sensible as most X-e2 users would rather have better AF than Manual video (gun to head so would I) however with the points below it started to add up.

2) I wanted to simplify my rig from 27+35+18-55+55-200 down to just  27+35+18-135mm for travel (why no wide prime, maybe one day but I am striving for intimacy in my shots and 27mm IS my wide angle, and for the rare occasions I need something wider its normally cheesy holiday pics where the wide end of the 18-135mm should be perfectly adequate. The deal I mention above was for an X-T1 with 18-135 included. It was such a good deal that I think I will be able to sell X-E2 plus the 18-55/55-200mm lens and the whole thing will end up near enough cost neutral assuming the auctions go for same prices I have observed over the last couple of weeks.

3) 60mm prime I have been looking at adding either the 56mm or 60mm prime to my kit for some time. I prefer the look of the 60mm over the 56, I find that the 56mm can look incredibly clinical and very modern (which is great and I know you can process in post etc) and I just find the 60mm shots I have seen on the web intiate a gut response. The only thing holding me back is all the negative feedback on AF speed with that lens. If the X-T1 firmware 4 has resolved this, then it opens up that lens to me

 

So none of the above is about the X-E2 being inferior, its just that a combination of financial opportunity mixed with changing requirements means the X-t1 is the better cam for me personally right now.

If I won the lottery I would keep the X-E2 and in fact that 55-200mm as I love that lens, but I just don't use it enough to justify keeping it. I also have set myself a limit of 4-5 lens. I only ever take 3 out with me at a time or less, usually 2 day to day, and 3 when travelling. I don't want a lot of lens sat on a shelf gathering dust and mold that would be wasteful when someone else could be shooting them.

[milandro]

I am not sure that you can say that the firmware update has made a new lens out of the 60mm. Probably not. It has made it more pleasant to use to me, but I owned the lens already.

 

If I had to buy it again I would, also for its “ macro” capability which the 56 doesn’t possess but I am not a member of the bokeh club.

[T-Man]

I own both the 56 and the 60. Although they are close in focal length, they are different enough in other ways to justify owning both. In good light, I find the 60 with its close focus ability to be more versatile. And being smaller and lighter, it is much easier to carry.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I concur. Sharpness, compression and distortion, all are significantly different among the two. The lenses that I have a hard time differentiating among are the f1.2/56mm and the f1.2/56mm APD (should be called t1.7/56mm, but that is another discussion.) Have both but I may trade-in the APD towards the new f2/90mm.

[azmmount]

I am considering this lens. As I've converted over to Fuji I have found the macro to be one lens that I miss quite often. I had immediately snubbed this one because it did not offer 1:1 magnification. Instead I grabbed extension tubes (which also do not get me 1:1) but have found them to be difficult to use effectively (requires more planning and patience than I have).

 

I have never owned a macro that didn't offer at least 1:1 magnification. So, I am wondering if anyone that has it can comment on whether they find the lack of 1:1 to be limiting.

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

[milandro]

the thing is, what are we talking about? Unless you are shooting pin heads ( I have a friend of mine who does) this lens is more than adequate when it comes to its “ macro” possibilities.

 

if you want more you can ADD the macro tubes ( and a close up lens too) to this lens and increase its range 

 

This I just shot, on the fly, I may have shot even a little bit closer ( I published only the relevant bit of the image) I think, if I had put a little bit more attention

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[azmmount]

I assume that is centimeters and not inches As such, being 'merican, I will have to do some research to relate to that image If I remember my school days properly this picture is something around 1 3/4 inches?

 

I seem to have an automatic bias against any macro that isn't 1:1 (my brain tells me 1:2 isn't really a macro). But, thinking past my gut reaction, I realize that when I use a macro I rarely am at minimum focus distance - so it is entirely possible that I don't shoot even 1:2 most of the time. However, I don't really know.

 

I'm just wondering if, having never shot a 1:2 macro, I would find myself occasionally cursing because I didn't feel like I could get close enough to get the image I wanted. (I do not intend to photograph pin heads btw - probably just the occasional bug or flora).

[marcelo_valente]

I am considering this lens. As I've converted over to Fuji I have found the macro to be one lens that I miss quite often. I had immediately snubbed this one because it did not offer 1:1 magnification. Instead I grabbed extension tubes (which also do not get me 1:1) but have found them to be difficult to use effectively (requires more planning and patience than I have).

 

I have never owned a macro that didn't offer at least 1:1 magnification. So, I am wondering if anyone that has it can comment on whether they find the lack of 1:1 to be limiting.

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

Hey Mike, I really like the lens. What I do to get 1:1, when I want, is to put the raynox 250 on it. Easier to use then the extension tubes. The legs is slow to focus. I have an album with shots taken with it on my Flickr.

 

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk

[azmmount]

The legs is slow to focus.

 

It's okay. My legs is slow to focus too

 

Are any of the pics in the 60mm album taken in combination with the Raynox?

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

[milandro]

Yes, I thought that by now you too had gone metric   , after all, the American Revolution was supported by the French who gave you Lafayette and ( though much later ) lady Liberty and gave us (with the exception of the Brits who were the champion of the “ Imperial" system) the decimal and metric system.

 

I am sure that using some Raynox ( or other cheaper) close-up lenses would give you the possibility to count how many devils (or angels) can sit on a pin-head.

[marcelo_valente]

It's okay. My legs is slow to focus too

 

Are any of the pics in the 60mm album taken in combination with the Raynox?

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

Hahaha I'm sorry...I wrote on my phone and did not notice.

 

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk

[marcelo_valente]

It's okay. My legs is slow to focus too

 

Are any of the pics in the 60mm album taken in combination with the Raynox?

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

I need to try to remember if I used the raynox or not as there is no indication.

Also, when you put the raynox on, you also need to get much closer to get focus. If you are shooting a bug, it might be long gone when you get that close.

 

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk

[milandro]

which is one of the reasons to want the 120mm macro

[marcelo_valente]

which is one of the reasons to want the 120mm macro

I used to have the 100mm on my Canon.  It was 1:1 and longer, it does make a big difference. 

[marcelo_valente]

This is a shot with the 60mm, but not the Raynox.  This flower is pretty small. 

 

First shot with the Fuji XF 60mm 2.4 Macro by Marcelo Valente, on Flickr

 

 

Here is where the 1:1 and longer reach was missed.

 

DSCF5655.jpg by Marcelo Valente, on Flickr

 

I think the one below was with the raynox.  The next one is without.

 

FXE22248.jpg by Marcelo Valente, on Flickr

 

FXE22243.jpg by Marcelo Valente, on Flickr

 

I'll do some test shots over the weekend.  So you get an understanding.  Using the raynox on the 60mm requires you to buy a 39mm filter..which can be very cheap because you will remove the glass, and a step up ring so that you can fit the Raynox.  This is because when you turn off the lens the focusing element (I don't know what it's called) goes back into the lens and the step up ring will hit the side of the lens and might ruin it.  So the 39mm works as a spacer to avoid this.

[azmmount]

I was all ready to buy the 60 and changed my mind at the last minute. Decided to go "vintage" instead and grabbed a 50mm f/4 Macro-Takumar. It also only does 1:2 but this one came with the extension tube set (3 tubes) and a bellows.

 

Despite what someone said earlier on this thread, I was having a hard time justifying another 60mm(ish) lens (I have the 56/1.2). I figured I would use it only for under 3 feet. And I would probably just use it in manual focus so why not save a few hundred dollars and get an older lens? Time will tell if my logic is flawed

 

Thanks for your insights none-the-less.

 

Mike

[drb]

What are some of the alternatives to the 60mm macro? Would be good to see some comparison. For some reason not convinced about the 60mm price/performance ratio.

[marcelo_valente]

There is a 50mm Zeiss that is 1:1 but I think it is more expensive

 

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk

[azmmount]

I believe that Samyang/Rokinon make a 100mm that is also 1:1 for close to the 60mm price. But, it just has the fuji mount - it was not made for mirrorless.

[marcelo_valente]

I believe that Samyang/Rokinon make a 100mm that is also 1:1 for close to the 60mm price. But, it just has the fuji mount - it was not made for mirrorless.

i forgot about that option.Don't know how good it is. Does anyone?

 

Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk