Move from 56mm 1.2 to 60mm 2.4

[jlmphotos]

I realize I'm late to the party here but I will say this:

I owned the 56 1.2.  I returned it within two days.  Reason:  I had two back to back christenings in a church.  Well-lit, Skylights, Large windows down both sides of the church and around the altar.  Still th 56.12 hunted and hunted without locking focus.  I was so frustrated I swapped out to my 18-55, or 35 1.4 and had no further issues.  Very strange behavior -- Like I said, well lit, My ISO, on auto, never went about 640, aperture was around 2 to 2.8, Shutterspeeds hovered 1/50-125th second depending on clothing color, and/or clouds coming over the skylight.  

 

IF I had had the 60 with me, IMHO I think it would have worked better in this particular case.  As I said, I promptly returned it for full credit.

[cug]

Haven't had that problem yet. I have used the 56 mostly indoors in a badly lit living room (just before the flash fired). I find the 56 a nice compromise between the 35 and the 90. I have all of them now, will see how the 90 turns out once I get to use it a bit more.

[mmaklakov]

I have both the 56mm f1.2 and the 60mm f2.4. I love the 56mm for portraits, and the 60mm for studio/macro shots. When I focus the 60mm for macro shots, I don't use the AF at all. I move the camera back and forth until my subject is in proper focus. It's much easier. That is also the technique I used with my Canon and Nikon DSLRs  before I switched to Fuji.

[frod]

Swapped out my faulty 60mm (dodgy aperture ring contacts) for the 56mm. In use, it seems an absolute night and day difference. The 56mm focuses just like the 23mm. The overall handling (besides the focus clutch of course) is very similar.

 

On my x-e2 and x-Pro1 the 60mm wouldn't even do what I would call 'hunting', it often gave up before it got anywhere near the correct focus, and this was including on firmware 4 with the automatic macro stuff. I'm not going to miss that lens at all.

Edited February 27, 2016 by frod

[deva]

I have both lenses and shoot a lot of street photography, including at night. The 56 is super sharp, fast, focuses well in low light... a fantastic lens. The 60 is way too clumsy in that situation. Actually, it could be decent focussing manually. 

 

I use the 60 for portfolio work shooting drawings, paintings etc. I use it in MF and it is suitable because it can easily do small pieces and details all with one consistent lens. 

 

I'm happy to have both.

[Hauxon]

I had the 60 few years back and optically it's fine and still provides shallow enough dof for portraits.  It was slow to focus but secure and it's probably much better now with the latest firmware upgrades.  I kind of miss having a macro lens ..but he 56 is just osom, and I can't justify having both.  It's got a beautifully made metal lens shade and I wish Fuji would supply those with the newer lenses. 

 

Here's a macro shot with the 60 macro.  It renders beautifully.  I also wish they made it 1:1 so if you want to shoot smaller insects (subjects) you will need to buy the tubes.

Edited February 29, 2016 by Hauxon

[vilts]

Swapped out my faulty 60mm (dodgy aperture ring contacts) for the 56mm.

 

How was it behaving? Few weeks I started to have troubles at f/2.4 and 2.8 settings, it just goes into auto mode and doesn't set the aperture. Works again from f/3.2 and upwards.

[frod]

Exactly like that!

[khollister]

I have both the 56 and 60. I actually prefer the way the 60 draws better than the 56, I don't think the AF is that much worse outside of macro distances (the 56 isn't a AF speed demon either) and it is a lot lighter/cheaper. The 56's main justification is it's speed and somewhat lower contrast rendering (a feature for portraits, a possible bug otherwise).

 

I always seem to feel the 56 is a bit sterile compared to many of the Fuji primes (60 included). I would sell it except A) I always regretted selling my 85/1.4 when I had the Nikon kit and I haven't gotten my hands on the 90/2 I ordered yet, so I'm not sure if that will scratch the limited DOF itch.

 

The 60 is a fantastic lens optically - it's mechanicals are a bit dodgy.

Edited March 29, 2016 by khollister

[Immanuel]

Damien Lovegrove made a bokeh test of these (and some more) lenses. Mind you, this is not a sharpnes comparison, as he states that focus on the woman might not be exactly 100% on all af the shots, and motion blur is possible. Still the 60 mm is definitely sharp where it has to be, and beautifully blurred, where it has to be.

http://www.prophotonut.com/2015/01/05/fuji-x-series-portrait-lenses-compared-inc-56-apd-50-140-zoom/

I just ordered it last night as my first prime. I have the X100T with the TCL and the 18-55 zoom for my X-E2. So this was my first personal choice for a prime. My other candidates where the 35mm 1.4 and the 90mm.

[greatwhite]

I have the 60mm and find it to be very sharp with great colour and contrast even at f2.4. I purchased it for macro but since owning it have used it for landscape and some portraiture and I have found the results excellent on everything.I think at its current price it is excellent value and is a very versatile lens.

[PhotoDan]

Had both at one point and really didn't use either much for portraits (don't do a lot of portraits). I had a chance to sell the 56 and even though it was a beautiful lens and very sharp, I haven't missed it. The 60 is terrific but a bit slow focussing but with the later firmware updates, it is alright. The 56 is no speed demon in the focussing department either. I would look at what the primary use is - if closeups the 60, if portraits the 56.