@@DustinAbbottTWI It all depends on who you are comparing them to. Just look at Leica or Blad MF bodies and lenses and Fuji MF gear immediately seems very cheap !
Great to see your review here! So what’s the best Fuji lens you have reviewed so far? And it would be great to see reviews of Fuji medium format gfx cameras and lenses on your Chanel
The best lens was the 200mm F2 - probably most shooters will never touch that one, though. I liked the 35mm F2 best of the small primes, and the 16-55mm F2.8 best of all the zooms.
Great review as always, much appreciated. Do you recommend this lens over the xf 35 mm f2, as a first prime lens (In term of optic performance). Thx a lot
I have the 23mm F2 and love it. It isn't as good as the 1.4 but it is just so small and light. On a recent trip to Japan a barely took it off but to get one or two wide shots.
I have both 35mm f1.4 and 35mm f2. For sure, f2 one is faster on autofocus, but for portraits f1.4 is always the best in my preference. So i go to my 35 f1.4 mainly for portraits specifics and 35 f2 for generic use. Im about to decide if i get 50 f2 or the 56 f1.2.. since i already own the 35 f1.4, i think 50 f2 is the way to go
The rotation be changed in the settings, at least in the XT4 they can. In the Button Dial Settings menu, Focus Ring Operation choose "Linear" or "NonLinear" to change the focus ring "style." Also I wonder if using the focus range limiter in the AF/MF settings would help to customize the focus throw when you know how / what you are shooting. thoughts ?
i dont know, my 50 f2 seems much sharper at f2 than the reviewed copy. From all fuji lenses i had (including 16 1.4) this one is sharpest. But of course, sharpness isnt everything! :)
Hi Erik, it is probably unlikely that you have formally tested your lens in the demanding way that I do lens tests (results examined at 200%). But what matters most is that you are happy with the sharpness of your lens.
@@DustinAbbottTWI What would you say are the disadvantages of the Viltrox other than size? - baring in mind, size is important too, I have a 35mm F2 Fujinon and 33mm F1.4 Viltrox. I usually grab the Fujinon as it's so light and fun, but for video (e.g. talking heads) I always grab the Viltrox. I got the 56mm Viltrox F1.4 recently and quite impressed with it!
The man is a sharp dresser. Does not use terms such as sexy, cool, etc. I like SOLID PERFORMER, as the best way he says this lens should be considered. I dig his benchmark tests, yes, but since I guess that this lens is made with the portrait in mind, I'd like for him to have included them. Maybe later, uh? Nice Lady, a cute pooch. A+ presentation.
That was roughly my conclusion. It's fine (gets the job done), but there's nothing special about the images it produces. Unlike you, however, I wasn't blown away by the 56mm F1.2
I really think that many people purchase the 16 1.4 in particular because of it's "name". The 16 2.8 has worked very well for me. That said, I do not tend to use for available light shooting and it's expensive.
@@robertcudlipp3426 I've already owned 16 f2.8 / 18-55 / 23 f2 / 35 f1.4 / 50 f2 and now 16 1.4 and 56 1.2 which serves me well and suits my needs. The 16mm is one of my favorites focal lengths which combined with a fast 1.4 aperture and semi-macro capability gives me an excellent tool for my projects. 56 mm fills the rest of my needs (mostly portraits). I'm waiting now for 27 f2.8 and 70-300 to complete my lens setup. :)
I have reviewed a 56 mm F1.2, but I can’t recall if it was a new one. I don’t remember the auto focus being exceptional in the one that I tested, but you could look at that review and see if it is the lens you’re speaking about
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks. you reviewed the older model (not WR which one way to tell the new one). The old one certainly is gonna be laggy AF I'm sure! thanks!
I imagine part of the issues with sharpness you had were probably due to using Lightroom to develop the photos. Adobe and Fuji X-Trans have never really gotten along...
I've noted that you have not reviewed any Fuji XC lenses. Yes, they are less robust, but, they are lighter, and from what I've seen in other reviews , are quite capable lenses. It would be great to see your take on these lenses. thanks. Oh, might I add affordable. Unfortunately not many 3rd party x-mount lenses, but overall they are much less expensive and can still take very good photos. Perfect for someone that is not a pro.
Though I’ve disembarked the Fuji X platform for professional work, I’m still using the X-Pro2 with the full set of f2 primes for personal travel and street work. These lenses are indeed the sweetspot for the Fuji X system. The entire setup fits in a small backpack and the visual IQ is very good. Instead of the 16/2.8 I’m using the 14/2.8. Though slower and noisier on AF, not WR and slightly larger, it is much better in terms of IQ than the 16/2.8 and almost as good as the famous 16/1.4 (which is really much larger). The weakest link remains IMO the 23/2. Esp. wide open and at close focus. I would love to see Fuji correct that in a mkII version. Rumor goes that Fuji will launch a new 18mm later this year. However instead of replacing the long-in-teeth and somewhat flawed 18/2, they plan for a f1.4. In my opinion a huge mistake (like the 50/1). With the advent of smaller and lower priced fullframes, IMO Fuji should play its traditional strenghts (compact, travel-friendly, reasonably priced and solid quality) rather than focus on exotic, big, heavy and expensive). I totally agree with your review. This is the most common sense and excellent 50mm in the Fuji system. Stopped down to f2.8 and you get very good IQ for a small and reasonably priced package. This one and the 35/2 are the best of the bunch. Now, Fuji make me an 18/2 I cannot resist...
@@voorachter2733 Fuji’s big failure would perhaps be too harsh. It very much depend on what you want from the lens. The lens renders rather soft (low contrast) when you use it wide open (at f2) and the edges/corners are not pin point sharp at close focus (within 1.5m or 6ft or so). Other than that, its quite good but not exceptional. For street and candid photography it is very useful. For stuff like food photography or architecture not so... The great thing about this lens, is that it is compact, weather sealed and focuses fast and silent. The 23/1.4 (with great IQ) is much bigger, not weather sealed, focuses slow and loud. With my x-pro2 I find myself often packing the 23/2 anyway, because it is such a great match. I then just avoid the weaknesses while shooting...
@@jacobh5817 Yes I can see that it's not that bad, I should've elaborated a bit. 23 and 35 on a crop are the most commonly used vocal lengths. I just feel like they should absolutely nail these (they nailed the 35) considering these are the bread and butter of the system. It's just a shame the 23mm is not on par with the 35mm because it should be.
I wonder why Fuji decided to invent a 76ish full frame equivalent pair of lenses. It seems like an oddball focal length, neither here nor there. For head and shoulder portraits, I would think an 85 (Fuji’s 56) would produce more flattering images of adult faces, and for general walkabout shooting, it would seem to be too tight and not as good as my 50mm equiv 33/f1.4. Could it be that Fuji simply wanted to add a télé to their f/2 line of small lenses and also wanted to make an f/1.0-something lens for bragging rights and their optical engineers determined that 50mm was about the longest they could get to keep the size down? Just speculating. But I can’t avoid noting that Nikon and Canon, as far as I am aware, has never produced a 75-76 mm fixed focal length lens.
I also wonder about the "psychological" aspect of having 50mm lenses (even if they don't behave like 50mm focal lengths). You'd be surprised by how many people who don't know that a 50mm lens on Fuji X-mount isn't actually a 50mm lens. 50mm is the most popular prime focal length.
Excellent point. I hadn’t considered that. The Fuji 50s are surprisingly popular, so I guess they make sense from a marketing perspective. As for me, such a neither-here-nor-there focal length that is also not as versatile an option due to its its proximity to my 33 (I also have the 35 f/2) would make no sense. If I get a prime télé, it will be either the 90 or, if I’m patient, wait to see when or if Fuji updates it’s 56. Thanks again! Looking forward to your next review.
It is indeed remarkably good for its size and price. I think I’m pretty much settled on my ideal lightweight travel kit for my XT-3: the 16-80 and either the 35 f/2 or the 33 f/1.4 for city street walkabouts at night, in my Billingham Hadley Small Pro bag. Maybe I’ll throw my 55-200 in my regular carry-on in case I need the extended reach, but maybe not. Thanks again!
I love your reviews for Fuji gear and it would be great if you could do a review of the popular mitakon 35mm 0.95 and also the 35mm artisans 0.95 for Fuji ! It would be an interesting video
Thanks for the feedback. I can't make any promises, as it's basically up to those companies whether or not they approach me to send me samples for testing.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Oh, that's interesting. I've never tried it - I got the X-Pro1 kit with the original 35mm so I've never had the need to try the others ;/
Thanks for the review of one of Fuji's newer X range of primes. The lauded 23 1.4. 16 1.4 and 56 1.2 still appear to be highly regarded. However, their designs are ageing and they are expensive. I am not a pixel peeper. Tbh, I have more productive tasks to spend my time on than to check if there is in reality, very minor purple fringing etc, when image composition, lighting and the other basics are far more important to my capturing good images. Fuji also have an excellent reputation for their native glass. I have been very happy with the snappy focussing of the 2 f2 lens purchased and their overall image quality. For lesser capable souls such as myself, they are ideal.
No disrespect. But all the photos do not showcase this lens capability. Photos are average at best. No pop whatsoever even in the most contrasting areas of the all the shots 'need to let the light in'. The photos are reminiscent of when I buy a lens and get disappointed with its performance, but most probably likely to do with my beginner skills as I'm still learning. And those were shot with Fujifilms best apsc sensor. Shocking
No disrespect taken, though I'm typically praised for delivering real photographic results rather than just test charts. I'm afraid the reality is that I have to work within the constraints of, well, reality. In this case it was A) winter and B) a COVID lockdown. Not a whole lot of options available to me for wild and diverse photos.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks for explaining that. Although I feel in Covid times, it has allowed us all to take a step back from our busy lifestyles of the 20th century, and appreciate things a little more. I am just a beginner, but on trying out the Fujifilm X-S10 with some non-native vintage/manual lenses such as Mitakon 35mm f0.95, Tamron SP 500mm f8, I am quite happy with the dynamic range and resolution from the camera.I really wanted to try the XF 50mm f2 for some focus bracketing as I heard it is tack sharp with almost zero distoration and CA across all apertures. Unfortunately this video review hasn't convinced me. But hoping that if you do get another chance to review this lens in more favourable and creative conditons in the future, it can showcase what it can really be capable of.
My experience is that many Fuji reviews are not as balanced as they should be. They tend to overrate performance of Fuji gear relative to the market, and I think the 50mm F2 is good but not tack sharp across the frame. I won't be reviewing it again, however, as I have a near endless line of review requests.
Useful, to the point, and you got a very nice voice and diction which makes watching those reviews very pleasing !
Glad it was helpful!
You've gained a subscriber for your stylish presentation and using the metric system :)
Thanks!
As you mentioned at the end, Fuji is to me the best quality / price / bulkiness ratio, both body and lenses, and both APS-C and MF format.
Fair enough. I think APS-C is debatable, and I'm reviewing the massive GFX-100 right now...so it doesn't feel either small or cheap :)
@@DustinAbbottTWI It all depends on who you are comparing them to. Just look at Leica or Blad MF bodies and lenses and Fuji MF gear immediately seems very cheap !
Great to see your review here! So what’s the best Fuji lens you have reviewed so far? And it would be great to see reviews of Fuji medium format gfx cameras and lenses on your Chanel
The best lens was the 200mm F2 - probably most shooters will never touch that one, though. I liked the 35mm F2 best of the small primes, and the 16-55mm F2.8 best of all the zooms.
Great review as always, much appreciated. Do you recommend this lens over the xf 35 mm f2, as a first prime lens (In term of optic performance). Thx a lot
I actually like the 35mm F2 better optically.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks a lot
I have the 23mm F2 and love it. It isn't as good as the 1.4 but it is just so small and light. On a recent trip to Japan a barely took it off but to get one or two wide shots.
I have both 35mm f1.4 and 35mm f2. For sure, f2 one is faster on autofocus, but for portraits f1.4 is always the best in my preference. So i go to my 35 f1.4 mainly for portraits specifics and 35 f2 for generic use.
Im about to decide if i get 50 f2 or the 56 f1.2.. since i already own the 35 f1.4, i think 50 f2 is the way to go
@@DustinAbbottTWI Interesting. Optically, i think the 50F2 is sharper.
The rotation be changed in the settings, at least in the XT4 they can. In the Button Dial Settings menu, Focus Ring Operation choose "Linear" or "NonLinear" to change the focus ring "style." Also I wonder if using the focus range limiter in the AF/MF settings would help to customize the focus throw when you know how / what you are shooting. thoughts ?
I’ve definitely experimented with those settings, but I have never been delighted with a manual focus either way
@@DustinAbbottTWI heard..
Can you please review what almost everybody consider as the best lens for the fuji system, the xf 16mm f1.4? Best regards .
I'll get to eventually. Right now I'm working on the GFX side of things with some upcoming reviews.
Amazing lens. If someone isn't able to take great pictures with this lense the problem isn't the lense but the photographer
That's true of most modern gear.
Hi! How is the focus breath on this lens?
I'm afraid its been several years and a probably 75 lenses ago. It is wasn't covered in my review, I don't remember.
i dont know, my 50 f2 seems much sharper at f2 than the reviewed copy. From all fuji lenses i had (including 16 1.4) this one is sharpest. But of course, sharpness isnt everything! :)
Hi Erik, it is probably unlikely that you have formally tested your lens in the demanding way that I do lens tests (results examined at 200%). But what matters most is that you are happy with the sharpness of your lens.
So the viltrox is better in every way except for the size?
Every way? I wouldn't go that far, but the Viltrox does have some advantages.
@@DustinAbbottTWI What would you say are the disadvantages of the Viltrox other than size? - baring in mind, size is important too, I have a 35mm F2 Fujinon and 33mm F1.4 Viltrox. I usually grab the Fujinon as it's so light and fun, but for video (e.g. talking heads) I always grab the Viltrox. I got the 56mm Viltrox F1.4 recently and quite impressed with it!
The Fuji has weather sealing, for one
The man is a sharp dresser.
Does not use terms such as sexy, cool, etc.
I like SOLID PERFORMER, as the best way he says this lens should be considered.
I dig his benchmark tests, yes, but since I guess that this lens is made with the portrait in mind, I'd like for him to have included them.
Maybe later, uh?
Nice Lady, a cute pooch.
A+ presentation.
Thank you, Manny.
I've got that lens and it was fine but nothing special. Solid it and get 16mm 1.4 and 56 1.2. Never regret my decision - these are outstanding lenses.
That was roughly my conclusion. It's fine (gets the job done), but there's nothing special about the images it produces. Unlike you, however, I wasn't blown away by the 56mm F1.2
I really think that many people purchase the 16 1.4 in particular because of it's "name". The 16 2.8 has worked very well for me. That said, I do not tend to use for available light shooting and it's expensive.
@@robertcudlipp3426 I've already owned 16 f2.8 / 18-55 / 23 f2 / 35 f1.4 / 50 f2 and now 16 1.4 and 56 1.2 which serves me well and suits my needs. The 16mm is one of my favorites focal lengths which combined with a fast 1.4 aperture and semi-macro capability gives me an excellent tool for my projects. 56 mm fills the rest of my needs (mostly portraits). I'm waiting now for 27 f2.8 and 70-300 to complete my lens setup. :)
@@DustinAbbottTWI it's you not the lenses that produce.
Thank you for comparing to the viltrox. Most reviewers compare that lens to the 56mm 1.2.
The viltrox is much closer in price, so a logical alernative.
how does the new FUJIFILM XF 56mm f/1.2 R WR Lens compare to this 50mm f2 WR in terms of auto focus ?
I have reviewed a 56 mm F1.2, but I can’t recall if it was a new one. I don’t remember the auto focus being exceptional in the one that I tested, but you could look at that review and see if it is the lens you’re speaking about
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks. you reviewed the older model (not WR which one way to tell the new one). The old one certainly is gonna be laggy AF I'm sure! thanks!
I imagine part of the issues with sharpness you had were probably due to using Lightroom to develop the photos. Adobe and Fuji X-Trans have never really gotten along...
I've tried Capture One instead, and frankly I didn't see a significant difference.
I've noted that you have not reviewed any Fuji XC lenses. Yes, they are less robust, but, they are lighter, and from what I've seen in other reviews , are quite capable lenses. It would be great to see your take on these lenses. thanks. Oh, might I add affordable. Unfortunately not many 3rd party x-mount lenses, but overall they are much less expensive and can still take very good photos. Perfect for someone that is not a pro.
That's not by intention; I review Fuji less often and just haven't gotten to any of them.
Another great video. Thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it
Your jacket looks great 👍
Thank you!
Though I’ve disembarked the Fuji X platform for professional work, I’m still using the X-Pro2 with the full set of f2 primes for personal travel and street work. These lenses are indeed the sweetspot for the Fuji X system. The entire setup fits in a small backpack and the visual IQ is very good. Instead of the 16/2.8 I’m using the 14/2.8. Though slower and noisier on AF, not WR and slightly larger, it is much better in terms of IQ than the 16/2.8 and almost as good as the famous 16/1.4 (which is really much larger). The weakest link remains IMO the 23/2. Esp. wide open and at close focus. I would love to see Fuji correct that in a mkII version. Rumor goes that Fuji will launch a new 18mm later this year. However instead of replacing the long-in-teeth and somewhat flawed 18/2, they plan for a f1.4. In my opinion a huge mistake (like the 50/1). With the advent of smaller and lower priced fullframes, IMO Fuji should play its traditional strenghts (compact, travel-friendly, reasonably priced and solid quality) rather than focus on exotic, big, heavy and expensive). I totally agree with your review. This is the most common sense and excellent 50mm in the Fuji system. Stopped down to f2.8 and you get very good IQ for a small and reasonably priced package. This one and the 35/2 are the best of the bunch. Now, Fuji make me an 18/2 I cannot resist...
I think I'm with you on all of this. So far the 35mm F2 has been the best of the bunch optically. The 23mm was definitely the weak point.
I totally agree
It's good I see this post because the 23mm f2 was next on my buying list. Sounds like a big failure by Fuji though, it should be their best lens
@@voorachter2733 Fuji’s big failure would perhaps be too harsh. It very much depend on what you want from the lens. The lens renders rather soft (low contrast) when you use it wide open (at f2) and the edges/corners are not pin point sharp at close focus (within 1.5m or 6ft or so). Other than that, its quite good but not exceptional. For street and candid photography it is very useful. For stuff like food photography or architecture not so... The great thing about this lens, is that it is compact, weather sealed and focuses fast and silent. The 23/1.4 (with great IQ) is much bigger, not weather sealed, focuses slow and loud. With my x-pro2 I find myself often packing the 23/2 anyway, because it is such a great match. I then just avoid the weaknesses while shooting...
@@jacobh5817 Yes I can see that it's not that bad, I should've elaborated a bit. 23 and 35 on a crop are the most commonly used vocal lengths. I just feel like they should absolutely nail these (they nailed the 35) considering these are the bread and butter of the system.
It's just a shame the 23mm is not on par with the 35mm because it should be.
I wonder why Fuji decided to invent a 76ish full frame equivalent pair of lenses. It seems like an oddball focal length, neither here nor there. For head and shoulder portraits, I would think an 85 (Fuji’s 56) would produce more flattering images of adult faces, and for general walkabout shooting, it would seem to be too tight and not as good as my 50mm equiv 33/f1.4. Could it be that Fuji simply wanted to add a télé to their f/2 line of small lenses and also wanted to make an f/1.0-something lens for bragging rights and their optical engineers determined that 50mm was about the longest they could get to keep the size down? Just speculating. But I can’t avoid noting that Nikon and Canon, as far as I am aware, has never produced a 75-76 mm fixed focal length lens.
I also wonder about the "psychological" aspect of having 50mm lenses (even if they don't behave like 50mm focal lengths). You'd be surprised by how many people who don't know that a 50mm lens on Fuji X-mount isn't actually a 50mm lens. 50mm is the most popular prime focal length.
Excellent point. I hadn’t considered that. The Fuji 50s are surprisingly popular, so I guess they make sense from a marketing perspective. As for me, such a neither-here-nor-there focal length that is also not as versatile an option due to its its proximity to my 33 (I also have the 35 f/2) would make no sense. If I get a prime télé, it will be either the 90 or, if I’m patient, wait to see when or if Fuji updates it’s 56. Thanks again! Looking forward to your next review.
The 35mm F2 is probably my favorite of the compact F2 lenses.
It is indeed remarkably good for its size and price. I think I’m pretty much settled on my ideal lightweight travel kit for my XT-3: the 16-80 and either the 35 f/2 or the 33 f/1.4 for city street walkabouts at night, in my Billingham Hadley Small Pro bag. Maybe I’ll throw my 55-200 in my regular carry-on in case I need the extended reach, but maybe not. Thanks again!
I love your reviews for Fuji gear and it would be great if you could do a review of the popular mitakon 35mm 0.95 and also the 35mm artisans 0.95 for Fuji ! It would be an interesting video
Thanks for the feedback. I can't make any promises, as it's basically up to those companies whether or not they approach me to send me samples for testing.
I recommend the XF50mmF2 or the XF35mmF1.4 as the foundation for any Fuji kit (except for the strictly zooms-only folks.)
I actually like the 35mm F2 better than 50mm, optically.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Oh, that's interesting. I've never tried it - I got the X-Pro1 kit with the original 35mm so I've never had the need to try the others ;/
Totally disappointed by the 56 1.2 R . I can't put my subject to the side. I have to shoot the middle otherwise it is blurry
Focus can be an issue, unfortunately.
Man, the colors in this frame pop against that wall! Too much photographer in!
I'm not sure this is a compliment or not ;)
@@DustinAbbottTWI Absolutely a compliment sorry lol. I love the colors!
Thanks for the review of one of Fuji's newer X range of primes.
The lauded 23 1.4. 16 1.4 and 56 1.2 still appear to be highly regarded.
However, their designs are ageing and they are expensive.
I am not a pixel peeper. Tbh, I have more productive tasks to spend my time on than to check if there is in reality, very minor purple fringing etc, when image composition, lighting and the other basics are far more important to my capturing good images.
Fuji also have an excellent reputation for their native glass.
I have been very happy with the snappy focussing of the 2 f2 lens purchased and their overall image quality.
For lesser capable souls such as myself, they are ideal.
I personally didn't love the 56mm F1.2 for a number of reasons, but I haven't yet tested the other two lenses you mention.
Lovely 😍💋 💝💖❤️
Thanks
No disrespect. But all the photos do not showcase this lens capability. Photos are average at best. No pop whatsoever even in the most contrasting areas of the all the shots 'need to let the light in'. The photos are reminiscent of when I buy a lens and get disappointed with its performance, but most probably likely to do with my beginner skills as I'm still learning. And those were shot with Fujifilms best apsc sensor. Shocking
No disrespect taken, though I'm typically praised for delivering real photographic results rather than just test charts. I'm afraid the reality is that I have to work within the constraints of, well, reality. In this case it was A) winter and B) a COVID lockdown. Not a whole lot of options available to me for wild and diverse photos.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks for explaining that. Although I feel in Covid times, it has allowed us all to take a step back from our busy lifestyles of the 20th century, and appreciate things a little more. I am just a beginner, but on trying out the Fujifilm X-S10 with some non-native vintage/manual lenses such as Mitakon 35mm f0.95, Tamron SP 500mm f8, I am quite happy with the dynamic range and resolution from the camera.I really wanted to try the XF 50mm f2 for some focus bracketing as I heard it is tack sharp with almost zero distoration and CA across all apertures. Unfortunately this video review hasn't convinced me. But hoping that if you do get another chance to review this lens in more favourable and creative conditons in the future, it can showcase what it can really be capable of.
My experience is that many Fuji reviews are not as balanced as they should be. They tend to overrate performance of Fuji gear relative to the market, and I think the 50mm F2 is good but not tack sharp across the frame. I won't be reviewing it again, however, as I have a near endless line of review requests.
WTF is a Fujinon? Son of Fuji and Nikon?
Ummm, it's the name of the lens maker...
@@DustinAbbottTWI I know but it's so funny, I wonder who came up with that one!
@@RideWithRahulOfficial A Japanese person...