The Fujinon XF 56mm f/ has long been one of the most popular lenses for the Fuji APS-C mirrorless system. It has a fast aperture, a lovely rendering for portraits and its size – while not the smallest in the line-up – fits most X-series cameras well. It would be my first recommendation to any serious portrait is however another more recent portrait lens that we must take into consideration the XF 90mm f/2. It has a state of the art autofocus motor and is as sharp as the other premium XF lenses. The obvious difference in focal length might be enough clinch the decision for some but for those of you who are hesitating or are simply curious to find out how these two prime lenses compare, we’ve compiled this complete comparison. We hope you find it useful!Ethics statement We were loaned these two XF lenses for review purposes. We were not asked to write anything about the lenses, nor were we provided with any sort of compensation. Within the article, there are affiliate links. If you buy something after clicking the link, we will receive a small commission. To know more about our ethics, you can visit our full disclosure page. Thank you![toc heading_levels=”2,3″]Main SpecsFujinon XF 56mm f/ RMount X-mountFormat coverage APS-CFocal length 56mmFocal length equiv. 35mm 85mmMaximum aperture aperture 16Number of aperture blades 7 circular bladesAngle of view focusing distance 70cmLens configuration 11 elements / 8 groupsSpecial elements 1 aspherical and 1 extra low dispersion elementsLens surface coating Yes Super-EBCMaximum image magnification Image Stabilizer NoDimensions x diamater 62mmWeight 405g excluding lens cap, lens rear cap, lens hoodFujinon XF 90mm f/2 R LM WRMount X-mountFormat coverage APS-CFocal length 90mmFocal length equiv. 35mm 137mmMaximum aperture 2Minimum aperture 16Number of aperture blades 7 rounded bladesAngle of view focusing distance 60cmLens configuration 11 elements / 8 groupsSpecial elements 3 extra low dispersion elementsLens surface coating Yes Super-EBCMaximum image magnification Image Stabilizer NoDimensions ø75mm x 105mmFilter diamater 62mmWeight 540g excluding lens cap, lens rear cap, lens hoodDesign and ease of useThe first difference regards the size and weight. As you can see below, the 90mm is longer and while both lenses have a similar diameter, the 56mm remains 135g lighter. Factor in the plastic hood and the total length extends quite a 90mm has a more robust construction with weather sealing the lens can stand up to moisture, dust and low temperatures of -10°C. The 56mm on the other hand is not weather sealed but has a solid metal construction. 56mm 90mmBoth lenses feature a clicking aperture ring that moves in 1/3 steps. The 56mm’s moves about a little more freely than the one of the we have two large “fly-by-wire” focus rings and here again the one on the 90mm feels a little more precise. Another nitpick is that on the 56mm, there is less space on the barrel to grab the lens when mounting or un-mounting it. The most space is found near the mount but it is uncomfortable to grab and turn the lens from final note concerning the XF 90mm when the camera is turned off, you can feel the lens elements moving around inside. This is because the 4 linear motors are linked to four magnets that remain disengaged when the power is off, so it’s no cause for and optical qualityField of viewThe difference in focal length can be a major factor when choosing between lenses. Here is one example that shows the difference in composition when shooting from the same distance. You will have the chance to see other examples in the sharpness and bokeh that for some tests, I varied the distance from the subject on purpose to produce a similar composition. Doing so gave me similar magnification areas to analyse and made it easier to spot the begin with the sharpness performance of the two lenses at a close distance. To make the side by side images easier to look at, I tried to create the same composition by backing up while using the imageThe 56mm has a faster maximum aperture than the 90mm and while the performance is really good at f/ and f/ peak sharpness is reached at f/2, which is the first aperture shared with the longer lens. The 90mm retains slightly more sharpness wide onward the results are more or less identical. Diffraction starts to kick in at f/11 but remains reasonably contained even at f/16, which is the smallest aperture available on both our second sharpness series, I took a landscape shot from the same distance so you can see how the field of view as well the 56mm appears softer up to f/2, whereas the 90mm retains a tiny advantage that is almost non-existent from onwards. Obviously we perceive more details with the longer lens since everything is won’t go into the corner performance too much but know that once stopped down, both lenses offer good results across the frame so they can serve other genres such as landscape photography very point to observe from the examples above is that the 56mm has less contrast than the 90mm. This doesn’t come as too much of a surprise to me because the 56mm is designed for portraits more than anything else, and like many other portrait lenses, the goal is to render smoother skin tones. The 90mm on the other hand can serve more purposes beyond strictly portraits so seeing more contrast in the results make sense. Of course, contrast is an aspect you can easily control in post of fieldWhen we talk about portrait lenses, bokeh, shallow depth of field and subject separation are always key selling points. Here again we have to consider the different focal lengths and this is a good opportunity to analyse how they I skipped examples at with the 56mm lens so as not to fill the article with too many images, especially considering that the rendering at and is I start by showing you two portraits taken at the fastest apertures and from the same distance, we can see that the field of view is different but the amount of background blur looks similar the fast f/ aperture of the 56mm compensates for the shorter focal length. The 90mm has larger bokeh balls but that is simply because it magnifies them 1/400, f/ ISO 200 – 56mmX-T2, 1/200, f/2, ISO 200 – 90mmHowever if I downsize the 90mm image to match the magnification of the 56mm picture, we can see that the latter has fewer in-focus details. For example, the hair around the head is blurrier in comparison to the 90mm version. It’s not a huge difference but it’s there and we can noticed that the 90mm delivers more sharpness as the 56mm, you can increase the depth of field a tiny bit by stopping down to which gives you slightly more sharpness as well. It is also worth noting that at f/ it is more difficult to set a precise focus point regardless of whether you use auto or manual focus as every micro movement of the subject can alter the result a little. Note that the camera was on a tripod for these examples.If I set the two lenses to the same aperture, it’s the 90mm that gives a shallower depth of field this time thanks to its longer focal length. Sharpness and detail in the face are much more 1/200, f/2, ISO 200 – 56mmX-T2, 1/200, f/2, ISO 200 – 90mmWhat happens if I change the distance to create the same composition? Well, with both lenses set at their respective fastest apertures, the background has a similar amount of blur but the 56mm has fewer details in focus on the subject’s face once again. As soon as I set them to the same aperture, it’s the 90mm that remains slightly 1/400, f/ ISO 200 – 56mmX-T2, 1/250, f/2, ISO 200 – 90mmX-T2, 1/200, f/2, ISO 200 – 56mmBelow is another example at 1/100, f/ ISO 200 – 56mmX-T2, 1/125, f/ ISO 200 – 90mmAnother example I took was a full body shot for which I kept the same composition by varying my distance from the subject once again. The 90mm compresses the image more because of the longer focal length but in terms of subject separation, the 56mm defends itself well at f/ although at that aperture the decreased sharpness becomes even more evident than in the previous examples. When both are set to f/2, sharpness is equal but the 90mm does a better job of separating the subject from the 1/160, f/ ISO 200 – 56mmX-T2, 1/80, f/2, ISO 200 – 90mmX-T2, 1/80, f/2, ISO 200 – 56mmBokehBy looking at all the previous images, you may have started to notice the bokeh characteristics of the two lenses which, to be honest, aren’t all that 56mm has a uniform rendering overall. At f/ and f/ we can see more oval shapes at the edges of the frame and a slightly swirly effect. At f/2 the bokeh balls start to lose their roundness and assume the heptagonal shape of the aperture diaphragm. This becomes more evident as you stop down. Aberrations as well as onion rings are well contained which contributes to the smooth and creamy 90mm rendering is really good too. The shapes at the edges remain similar to the centre with a uniform rendering while the roundness of the bokeh balls starts to disappear from f/ focus distanceThe 90mm not only has a longer reach but also a shorter minimum focus distance in comparison to the 56mm. This means that it also has a higher magnification ratio vs You can see a direct example below where I managed to get much closer to my 1/500, ISO 200 – 56mmX-T2, 1/500, f/ ISO 200 – 90mmChromatic aberrations, vignetting and flareYou can find traces of mild chromatic aberration at the fastest apertures especially from the 56mm but they are not too invasive and easily removable with a post production is almost non existent on the 90mm and well-contained at the largest apertures on the 56mm lens. Some ghost and veiling flares can appear when direct light hits the sensor but otherwise the resistance is pretty 1/6400, f/ ISO 200 – 56mmX-Pro2, 1/5800, f/ ISO 200 – 90mmAutofocus and manual focus performanceHere comes an important difference between these two lenses. The 90mm has been designed with a quad linear motor that makes it one of the fastest autofocus lenses in the Fujifilm X line-up. I tested it with moving subjects in both good and low-light conditions and I was always impressed by the quick and smooth 1/1000, f/ ISO 200 – 90mmThe 56mm doesn’t perform poorly by any means, especially when used on recent cameras such as the X-T2. In our side by side tests, we found that it actually holds up quite well against the 90mm. But overall the response is a little slower and the AF motor isn’t as smooth nor as quiet as the you are interested in manual focus, the focus ring on the 90mm is more precise in operation especially when trying to fine-tune a point. On the 56mm, it can be more difficult to focus on small details when using magnification and requires more trial and error, especially considering the shallower depth of field of the fastest XF 56mm f/ and the XF 90mm f/2 are both excellent portrait lenses and in addition to being priced similarly, are definitely the very best the system has to offer in terms of optical quality. There are many differences however, starting from the obvious the focal 56mm gives you the classic field of view of a portrait lens 85mm equivalent and is usually the portrait photographer’s weapon of choice. It is easier to work with in tight spaces whereas the longer reach of the 90mm 137mm equivalent can pose more of a challenge. For studio and indoor work, the 56mm is definitely the best choice and its fast aperture makes it a good companion for low light work in spite of the slightly slower AF 90mm is more versatile but for different reasons. For outdoor work or if you do lots of head-shots where you don’t go wider than the head and neck, it can be the perfect focal length to work with. Its higher magnification also allows you to get much closer if you want to hone in on a specific detail. Last but not least, it’s one of the fastest autofocus lenses from Fujifilm so it can be useful even with fast moving the XF 56mm f/ ifyou mostly work indoors and take various kinds of portraits from head shots to half-bodyyou want a faster aperture for low light workyou want a smaller lensChoose the XF 90mm f/2 ifyou mostly take head shotsyou like to work outdoors where you have more room to move about and get the composition you wantyou want a fast focusing lens capable of handling events and fast moving subjectsAdditional note concerning the 56mm lens there is a second version called APD whose anodisation element gives you a different bokeh rendering while sacrificing one stop of light. Personally I would always advise the normal 56mm because the difference is so subtle but if you are curious to know more, you can check out our quick comparison the price of the XF 56mm f/ onAmazon Amazon UK B&H Photo eBayCheck the price of the XF 90mm f/2 onAmazon Amazon UK B&H Photo eBayYou may also like the following lens comparisonFujifilm 50mm f2 vs 56mm vs 60mm – Complete comparisonFujifilm 56mm vs Samyang 50mm – Complete comparisonAdditional ImagesXF 56mm f/ 1/800, f/ ISO 200 – 56mmX-T1, 1/850, f/ ISO 200 – 56mmX-T1, 1/1250, f/ ISO 200 – 56mmX-T1, 1/2500, ISO 200 – 56mmX-T1, 1/750, f/2, ISO 200 – 56mmXF 90mm f/2X-Pro2, 1/1800, f/2, ISO 200 – 90mmX-Pro2, 1/950, f/ ISO 200 – 90mmX-Pro2, 1/680, f/2, ISO 200 – 90mmX-Pro2, 1/3000, f/ ISO 200 – 90mmX-T2, 1/125, f/2, ISO 3200 – 90mmX-Pro2, 1/450, f/8, ISO 200 – 90mm

TheFujifilm XF 90mm f2 is yet another superb quality lens for the X-system: a bright telephoto prime that delivered excellent results across the board in my tests. Most commonly the 135mm equivalent This is also one of the rarely-considered benefits of the XF 56mm f1.2 over the XF 90mm f2. Neither have optical stabilisation, but the

Fujifilm XF 56mm R APDSony FE 90mm Macro G OSSvs33 características comparadasFujifilm XF 56mm R APDSony FE 90mm Macro G OSSPor que Fujifilm XF 56mm R APD é melhor que Sony FE 90mm Macro G OSS?Abertura na distância focal mínima maior?f/ vsf/ Tem conector de metal?Abertura na distância focal máxima maior? mais leve?405gvs602gTem motor de foco silencioso embutido na lente?Distância focal mínima 34mm menor?56mmvs90mmPor que Sony FE 90mm Macro G OSS é melhor que Fujifilm XF 56mm R APD?Tem estabilizador óptico de imagem embutido?Impermeável à prova de respingos?Pode focar infinitamente?34mm melhor distância focal máxima ou teleobjetiva, com mais alcance.?90mmvs56mmTem motor de foco?Tem foco manual full-time?Distância focal mínima menor? mais lâminas de abertura?9vs7Tamron SP 90mm F2__8 Di Macro 11 VC USDTamron SP 85mm F1__8 Di VC USDSony FE 55mm F1__8 ZA Carl Zeiss Sonnar T*Tamron SP 24-70mm F/ Di VC USDTamron SP 35mm Di VC USDSigma 35mm f/ DG DN ArtNikon Nikkor Z 50mm f/ SCanon RF 85mm f/2 Macro IS STMSigma 105mm EX DG OS HSM MacroAvaliações de usuáriosInformações geraisTipo de lenteobjetivas de distancia focal fixaobjetivas de distancia focal fixa, Teleobjetiva, MacroO tipo de dispositivo tem proteção adicional para evitar falhas causadas por poeira, pingos de chuva e respingos de conector de metal costuma ser superior a um conector de plástico, pois é mais que um peso mais baixo é melhor, já que aparelhos mais leves são mais confortáveis de manusear. Isso também é uma vantagem para eletrodomésticos, pois facilita o transporte, e para muitos outros tipos de elemento frontal não roda. Isto é importante se você usar filtros, por exemplo filtros polarizadores e gradientes têm de ser orientados de uma certa com uma capa de lente para que não tenha de a comprar separadamente. Estas são usadas para bloquear fontes de luz forte da lente, como a luz do sol por exemplo, para prevenir brilhos e reflexos da capa da lente pode ser atarrachada na lente no sentido inverso para que possa mantê-la sempre na câmera, pronta a do filtro Desconhecido. Ajude-nos sugerindo um valor. Fujifilm XF 56mm R APD Desconhecido. Ajude-nos sugerindo um valor. Sony FE 90mm Macro G OSSEsta medida é importante a ser levada em conta na compra de maior distância focal máxima permite que você foque em apenas uma pequena parte do enquadramento, e oferece um ângulo de visão mais estreito que as distâncias focais mais distância focal mínima mais curta permite que você obtenha mais da cena na foto, e oferece um ângulo de visão mais amplo que as distâncias focais mais estabilização óptica de imagem utiliza sensores giroscópicos para detectar vibrações da câmera. A lente ajusta o percurso óptico de acordo com o resultado, garantindo que qualquer tipo de "motion blur" - ou mancha de movimento - seja corrigido antes do sensor capturar a menor lado da lente oferece o ângulo de visão mais amplo. Isto permite que você integre mais elementos de cena em uma fotografia baseado no formato APS-C.Na parte mais longa da lente você tem o ângulo de visão mais estreito. Isto permite-lhe apanhar uma pequena parte da cena na fotografia da mesma maneira quando faz zoom em algo baseado no formato APS-C.Uma verdadeira lente macro tem uma ampliação de 11. Isto significa que a imagem produzida é uma representação em tamanho real do objeto faixa de zoom é a razão entre os comprimentos mais longos e menor focais. A faixa de zoom mais elevado significa que a lente é mais uma maior abertura de diafragma, o sensor pode captar mais luz e ajudar a evitar imagens fora de foco, acionando maior velocidade de obturação. Isso também gera uma menor profundidade de campo, permitindo que as imagens em segundo plano sejam desfocadas e trazendo, assim, maior foco ao objeto uma abertura de diafragma mais ampla, o sensor pode captar mais luminosidade, ajudando, com maior velocidade de obturação, a evitar imagens desfocadas. Isso também cria uma baixa profundidade de campo, permitindo que você desfoque o segundo plano e foque no objeto ao número de lâminas de abertura, as lâminas arredondadas afectam a maneira como a luz entra no sensor. As lâminas arredondadas, normalmente encontradas em lentes mais caras, melhoram a aparência das áreas desfocadas. Isto permite-lhe obter um melhor e mais suave efeito bokeh nas suas abertura controla a quantidade de luz que chega ao sensor da câmera. Mais lâminas costumam indicar uma lente de melhor qualidade. Isso também permite obter melhor aspecto visual em efeitos - como o efeito "bokeh" - ao desfocar o plano de fundo, enquanto uma lente com menos lâminas costuma produzir efeitos "bokeh" mais duros e abertura menor reduz a quantidade de luz que alcança o sensor. Isso é importante em condições de claridade, em que uma abertura mais ampla poderia resultar em superexposição de imagem. Outra vantagem é que, com uma abertura menor, é possível obter maior profundidade de campo e manter toda a imagem em abertura menor reduz a quantidade de luz que alcança o sensor. Isso é importante em situações de claridade, quando que uma abertura maior poderia resultar em superexposição da imagem. Outra vantagem é que, com uma abertura menor, é possível obter maior profundidade de campo e manter toda a imagem em lentes permitem fazer foco infinito. Isso é essencial quando você quer tirar fotos que incluam objetos muito distantes, como paisagens, de modo que tudo esteja nítido e em com um motor de foco embutido podem fazer focos automáticos mesmo que a câmera não tenha o seu próprio motor de o foco manual em tempo integral, é possível mover o anel de foco enquanto estiver no modo AF foco automático. Isso significa que você pode fazer ajustes manuais sem que seja necessário alterar para o modo com motor de foco embutido focam mais rápido e silenciosamente que as lentes sem motor de foco que apenas podem utilizar o motor de foco do corpo da é a menor distância em que a lente pode focar. Uma menor distância focal mínima permite chegar mais perto do objeto fotografado, o que é especialmente importante quando se faz de nitidez Desconhecido. Ajude-nos sugerindo um valor. Fujifilm XF 56mm R APDO resultado da nítidez da medição da DxOMark. Este resultado é baseado na medição do MTF modulation transfer function, e dá uma indicação geral da nitídez da imagem produzida pela lente. Testado com a Nikon D7000 ou Canon 7D. Fonte resultado da distorção cromática lateral da medição da DxOMark. A distorção cromática é um tipo de distorção que resulta na disperção de cor ao longo das bordas da imagem. Testado com a Nikon D7000 ou Canon 7D. Fonte DxOMark Desconhecido. Ajude-nos sugerindo um valor. Fujifilm XF 56mm R APDDxOMark é uma série de testes que medem o desempenho e a qualidade de lentes e câmeras. O resultado DxOMark é a pontuação geral atribuída à lente. Testada com Nikon D7000 ou Canon 7D. Fonte Desconhecido. Ajude-nos sugerindo um valor. Fujifilm XF 56mm R APDO resultado da distorção da medição da DxOMark. A distorção na lente refere-se à variação da magnificação ao longo da imagem. Mais distorção irá resultar na gravação incorrecta de linhas rectas na imagem. Testado com a Nikon D7000 ou Canon 7D. Fonte Desconhecido. Ajude-nos sugerindo um valor. Fujifilm XF 56mm R APDO resultado de transmissão da medição da DxOMark. A transmissão refere-se à quantidade de luz que chega ao sensor através de todos os elementos de vidro de uma lente, com um TStop mais baixo a significar mais luz. Isto é importante visto que menos luz a alcançar o sensor pode requirir ISOs maiores ou velocidades de obturador mais lentas. Testado com a Nikon D7000 ou Canon 7D. Fonte vignette Desconhecido. Ajude-nos sugerindo um valor. Fujifilm XF 56mm R APDO resultado dos efeitos de vinheta da medição da DxOMark. Os efeitos de vinheta referem-se a quando o brilho de uma imagem muda a partir do centro para as bordas resultando em cantos escurecidos. O resultado de 0 é perfeito e a imagem não terá efeitos de vinheta. Testado com a Nikon D7000 ou Canon 7D. Fonte FE 70-200mm f/ GM OSS IITamron SP 90mm F2__8 Di Macro 11 VC USDSony FE 55mm F1__8 ZA Carl Zeiss Sonnar T*Canon EF 85mm f/1__4L IS USMTamron SP 85mm F1__8 Di VC USDNikon AF-S Nikkor 105mm F1__4E EDCanon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USMCanon EF 70-200mm F/2__8L IS II USMSony FE 100-400mm f/4__5-5__6 GM OSSExibir tudo

FujifilmX-T3: F1.2 R: https://amzn.to/2pR34lvFujifilm X-T2: https://amzn.to/2ImNB5090mm F2 WR: https://amzn.to/2IkVOqgHere is my

SummaryThe XF 90mm f2 is another superb addition to the X-system and one which will delight portrait photographers, not to mention anyone who shoots close-range action or likes to capture tighter details on landscapes and buildings. It excels at subject separation with well-behaved bokeh, but is also one of the sharpest and fastest focusers in the range. If the 135mm equivalent coverage suits your style, it's an easy lens to Highly it now!Check prices on the Fujifilm XF 90mm f2 at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, or Wex. Alternatively get yourself a copy of my In Camera book or treat me to a coffee! Thanks! Fujifilm XF 90mm f2 review 25th January 2016 Written by VerdictVerdictIn depthQualitySamplesThe Fujifilm XF 90mm f2 is yet another superb quality lens for the X-system a bright telephoto prime that delivered excellent results across the board in my tests. Most commonly the 135mm equivalent focal length will be used for portraiture, at which the XF 90mm excels, capturing crisp and fine details of the subject with lovingly-rendered blurred backgrounds and well-behaved bokeh. But point it at a distant landscape or urban scene and you’ll notice the sharpness extends to the extreme edges and corners of the frame. Even with the aperture wide-open at f2, the XF 90mm is impressively sharp across the autofocus system is quiet and also the fastest in the X-system to date – couple it with a body sporting embedded phase-detection, like the XT1 or XT10, and it’s quite capable of being used for tracking close range sports and action. I also have no complaints with the build quality and am delighted weather-sealing is becoming a standard feature on XF of this is good news because there’s no alternative in the native X-series that delivers the same coverage with as bright an aperture. Sure there’s two zooms in the system which include the 90mm focal length, but neither has an f2 focal ratio. The XF 50-140mm comes closest but is larger, heavier, a stop slower and roughly 50% more expensive. The XF 50-140mm does however have one big advantage over the XF 90mm f2 beyond a variable focal length, and that’s the presence of optical stabilisation. The XF 90mm f2, like all Fuji primes to date, lacks optical stabilisation and I personally found this the biggest issue in use. I can cope with ensuring the shutter is fast enough to avoid camera shake, but if your hands are anything other than rock steady, you’ll notice wobbling as you compose your image. I find stabilisation most useful when composing precisely at longer focal lengths and really missed it is also one of the rarely-considered benefits of the XF 56mm over the XF 90mm f2. Neither have optical stabilisation, but the brighter aperture and shorter focal length of the XF 56mm simply make it a much more practical lens to handhold as light conditions grow for most photographers, the choice of a telephoto lens will be based on their preferred focal length and its ability to deliver attractive shallow depth-of-field effects. The XF 50-140mm is definitely a contender, especially if you can exploit it at the longer-end of its range, but for me it’s really a contest between the XF 90mm f2 and the XF 56mm especially as they cost essentially the thing to mention straightaway is weather-resistance as the XF 90mm f2 has it and the XF 56mm does not. So if you’re likely to be shooting a lot under inclement conditions and have a weather-sealed body to match, then the XF 90mm f2 will be obviously though, the longer focal length of the XF 90mm f2 lets you shoot portraits from a longer distance which is ideal if your subjects aren’t comfortable with you being too close, although conversely I find a better connection when you’re closer with lenses like the XF 56mm. The longer focal length of the 90mm also renders elements in the background larger, which makes it easier to isolate the foreground from distraction. You can see that in the portrait comparison of Emily below. Above left XF 90mm at f2, above right XF 56mm at you’re into bokeh-balls, they’ll also be larger on the XF 90mm f2 and in my tests were also more uniformly circular across the frame, avoiding the squashed cats-eyes and outlining seen on the XF 56mm when wide-open. Of course while the XF 90mm is optically more correct in this regard, it doesn’t make it preferable, as many seek-out the squashed ovals and outlines of the XF 56mm – it’s purely down to personal preference, see below. Above left XF 90mm at f2, above right XF 56mm at may find the bokeh a little creamier on the XF 56mm although I found it was also a tad less crisp in its focused areas than the XF 90mm f2. That’s not to criticise the XF 56mm which remains one of the sharpest lenses around, it’s just that the XF 90mm f2 is even crisper all round and some of that is reflected in the blurred areas too. Above left XF 90mm at f2, above right XF 56mm at you can see in the macro comparison above, they can perform very similarly under many circumstances, so if you can only afford to own one, then simply go for the focal length that better matches your preferred subject distance. If you’re a portrait photographer though, you’ll need little justification to own both lenses. If you don’t yet own the XF 56mm, you may also prefer to pair the XF 90mm with the APD version of the 56mm that has smoother bokeh characteristics, and provides greater differentiation between them. Ultimately the XF 90mm f2 is another superb addition to the growing X-system and one which will delight portrait photographers, not to mention anyone who shoots close-range action or likes to capture tighter details on landscapes and buildings. It excels at subject separation with well-behaved bokeh, but is also one of the sharpest and fastest focusers in the range. If the 135mm equivalent coverage suits your style, it’s an easy lens to Highly Recommend. PS – don’t forget to check out the other pages in this review, using the tabs above!Good points Superb quality across the frame even wide-open. Very well-behaved bokeh with uniform shapes. Fast and quiet focusing makes it practical for sports. Weather-sealed and comes with lens points No optical stabilisation, so hold steady. Tough competition from the XF 56mm Check prices on the Fujifilm XF 90mm f2 at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, or Wex. Alternatively get yourself a copy of my In Camera book or treat me to a coffee! Thanks!Pages 1 2 3 4

IfI were to grab just one, go for the 56mm F1.2 (no APD preferably for a lower lens cost) My problem with the 90mm is the lack of OIS and weight. My problem with the 56mm is the poor AF performance. With the 90mm, I usually shoot at shutters of 1/120 upwards (mostly 1/160). This is a far-cry from the 56's 1/60.

Go to fujifilm 90mm f2 vs 56mm - your experiences? I’m considering getting either - both are similar price, the use case for both would be portrait, with the 90mm having extra reach for zoom that may come in handy. I already own a 23mm Has anyone used both of these lens and what is your experience? The 56mm has been raved about plenty and I have used the 56mm test shots so I know how good the bokeh is also how slow the AF can be as well But what about the 90mm? Haven’t used / tried the 90mm f2 yet. Feel free to post photos taken with it as well I feel like if the 90mm doesn’t work out for me I can probably flip it for the 56mm. I also plan to take either of these while traveling as well. Thank you. Edit changed 56mm to correct aperture of Weappreciate your understanding. by the quality and efficiency of our service. We always aim to provide a great product and want you to be 100% satisfied. Our high standard of honesty has gained us a respectful reputation in Japan.

Go to fujifilm *50mm f1* OR *56mm + 90mm f2* I'm currently getting into wedding photography and I own the 90 f2. Wonderful lens with great performance however there are many times where it's just too long to use and I find myself backing up against walls. I'm considering getting the 56 to have a little less reach and more like gathering. HOWEVER I'm also looking at selling the 90 f2 and just going in on the 50 f1 and having the great performance of the 90 and even better light gathering than the 56. Would love to know people's thoughts on using the 56 and 90 as a pair for is the 50 f1 is worth the jump over to it. I'm also a prime shooter who's using the 18 f and 35 f

zGimZj. 180 340 211 219 496 468 347 423 71

fuji 56mm f1 2 or 90mm f2