- Location
- Jersey Shore
- Name
- Steve
My XF 16-55 f/2.8 has arrived for my brand- new X-H1. No doubt this lens will spend a lot of time on this body. I also have the 35mm f/1.4 and will probably get the 23mm f/1.4 at some point. The jury is still out on whether I will bother with the 50-140mm f/2.8.
My question: Should I go for the 56mm f/1.2 or the 90mm f/2.0 as a portrait/general short telephoto lens for the X-H1? A quick internet search reveals the 90mm is lighter and superior in a number of other ways, such as sharpness wide open and autofocus speed. It's also a bit less money.
But is there some magic about the 56mm that I need to take into consideration? Is f/1.2 that useful in the real world? Fuji shooters do seem to enjoy the 56 - but results from the 90 seem to be just as pleasing to me.
My question: Should I go for the 56mm f/1.2 or the 90mm f/2.0 as a portrait/general short telephoto lens for the X-H1? A quick internet search reveals the 90mm is lighter and superior in a number of other ways, such as sharpness wide open and autofocus speed. It's also a bit less money.
But is there some magic about the 56mm that I need to take into consideration? Is f/1.2 that useful in the real world? Fuji shooters do seem to enjoy the 56 - but results from the 90 seem to be just as pleasing to me.