Fuji I was wondering ...

[Robmas4229]

Had it. Very sharp and nice contrast, things I personally like. Pairs nicely with the 23mm f2, plus I like that it‘s WR. I found myself not using it so much and determined at the time that 50mm on a zoom was more useful for me. I have since re-purchased the 23/2 and am considering another 50 in the future. Judging from many of your photos Charles, I think you will really do it justice. Hope it arrives soon.

 

[Charzes44]

I agree with what most everyone has said, it is an excellent lens.

Thank you Elliot. That is very reassuring.

 

[Charzes44]

Had it. Very sharp and nice contrast, things I personally like. Pairs nicely with the 23mm f2, plus I like that it‘s WR. I found myself not using it so much and determined at the time that 50mm on a zoom was more useful for me. I have since re-purchased the 23/2 and am considering another 50 in the future. Judging from many of your photos Charles, I think you will really do it justice. Hope it arrives soon.

Thank you Rob. I am still waiting for it, patiently (not!). I am hoping that it will arrive by the end of this week, or the beginning of next?

 

[Charzes44]

Arrived last Friday. Now, to use it ......

 

[Irene McC]

I don't have it (I've got the 23 and 35) but all the reviews I've read for the 50 have been very positive.
"bland" ? it's up to you to de-blandify the output !

 

[Charzes44]

What the hell does "bland" mean, Charles?

Well, like this, I suppose:

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[drd1135]

The 50 works really well with the XT5. The images are "clinical", which means it is consistently sharp across the frame with very little in the way of optical defects. This is as opposed to the old favorite the XF35 1.4, which had optical "flaws" like less sharp corners that gave the images a look people often refer to as 3D pop. I own both and love having the choice.

 

[rayvonn]

The 50 works really well with the XT5. The images are "clinical", which means it is consistently sharp across the frame with very little in the way of optical defects. This is as opposed to the old favorite the XF35 1.4, which had optical "flaws" like less sharp corners that gave the images a look people often refer to as 3D pop. I own both and love having the choice.

I must have lucked out, my F1.4 was sharp across the frame and still had that look (which is why I always always raved on about it).

 

[drd1135]

I must have lucked out, my F1.4 was sharp across the frame and still had that look (which is why I always always raved on about it).

The corners of mine are fine. I used quotes because that's what you will always read about that lens. 🙄

 

[drd1135]

I was out today taking some shots of my newly bloomed daffodils with the 50. I remembered this thread when I was going through them. One is at f/8 and the shallow DoF one is at f/2.2. (I must have nudged aperture ring.). I was very close to the flowers although I wouldn't call it macro. As you can see, the bokeh is very smooth.

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)