Jump to content

Velvet 56 vs 56mm 1.2 (vs 35mm 1.4)

jamesbernard

By jamesbernard
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

jamesbernard Apprentice

jamesbernard

Posted
Posted

Hey friends, this comparison is very rushed and won't be of much use to many of you, but since both of these lenses are hard to find in stores for most people, here is a little comparison to help you avoid wasting $500 to $1000 on either of these.

 

This is the Fujinon XF 56mm f/1.2 compared to the Lensbaby Velvet 56mm f/1.6 with an honorable mention of the Fujinon XF 35mm f/1.4

 

 

Side by Side:

 

 

20028378610_0c153f0901_z.jpg

 

 

20190136826_fefa99bc60_z.jpg

 

 

They honestly are about the same size and weight, which is surprising since the fuji is faster and has autofocus.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jamesbernard Apprentice

jamesbernard

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Heres a few more random shots with the Velvet 56mm

 

F/1.6

20028437470_d0b70abe35_z.jpg

 

F/2

20222185001_5e1e2ed96b_z.jpg

 

 

F/4

20216461075_5974351e7c_z.jpg

 

 

All of these are SOOC from a boring day at work.

 

Not a big surprise but the Lensbaby 56mm is definitely a specialty lens, and I think there will probably be very very few people who will put it to good use. $500 for such an atypical piece of glass is a lot for something that will probably be collecting dust most of the time unless you LOVE soft focus and macro work, which is definitely not many of us.

 

The 56mm f/1.2 is great, but I like the OOF areas better with the 35 than either of the other lenses honestly. Anyone else want to share some photos or opinions feel free.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
Splodger Apprentice

Splodger

Posted
Posted

On the strength of some gorgeous images I've seen shot with this lens, I'm getting one.

 

Check out these real world images shot by dpreview.com and see what you think. Also most of these images, taken by Kathleen Clemons, were shot with a Velvet 56 and I think they are stunning.

 

I am lucky enough to have the XF 56mm and several other XF lenses and I love them all, but there are possibilities with this lens that simply cannot be realized with any other lens that I've heard of. 

 

I'll have my copy in a few days, and I'm really excited about it. It takes practice to get good with any new lens, and I believe the learning curve with the Velvet 56 is a steep one. Perhaps when I've spent enough time, and taken enough pictures to have a decent understanding of what one can do with it, I'll post a few of my own. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 years later...
Matt Sweadner Newbie

Matt Sweadner

Posted
Posted
On 9/23/2015 at 8:38 PM, Splodger said:

On the strength of some gorgeous images I've seen shot with this lens, I'm getting one.

 

Check out these real world images shot by dpreview.com and see what you think. Also most of these images, taken by Kathleen Clemons, were shot with a Velvet 56 and I think they are stunning.

 

I am lucky enough to have the XF 56mm and several other XF lenses and I love them all, but there are possibilities with this lens that simply cannot be realized with any other lens that I've heard of. 

 

I'll have my copy in a few days, and I'm really excited about it. It takes practice to get good with any new lens, and I believe the learning curve with the Velvet 56 is a steep one. Perhaps when I've spent enough time, and taken enough pictures to have a decent understanding of what one can do with it, I'll post a few of my own. 

I just found this old thread and am curious how your journey with the Velvet 56 went. 

So far, i'm not sure I've seen anything that can't be pretty much replicated in Photoshop.

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

    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      The backslashes you are referring are just symbols denoting path.  Once you import into these LUTS into Davinci Resolve those backslashes are removed by default and you only see is the true file name which has no backslashes.  Convince yourself of this by opening the LUT folder from the Davinci Resolve Project Settings.  Do you see any backslashes in those LUT names? Of course not.  The only name you see is the one that has the underscores and the periods. These LUTS work as designed without having to change any path names.  However, they need to be set up properly through CSTs and by what is supported in Davinci Resolve.  Hence, the FLog2C film simulation LUTS cannot be used because Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut color space and the FLog2C gamut. Alternatively, Davinci Resolve does support Flog2 film simulation LUTS because the color space for FLog2 is Rec 2020 and there is an FLog2 gamut. If all you are doing is changing the path names then you are not getting the correct results.
    • PoorAlchemist
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By PoorAlchemist · Posted

      I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Don Barar
      LUT doesn't works on resolve

      By Don Barar · Posted

      Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • crazyfields
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By crazyfields · Posted

      Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • George_P
      Please save me from insanity 23mm f2 vs F1.4r

      By George_P · Posted

      I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
×
×
  • Create New...