Blind Test: Fuji 56mm f1.2 vs Fuji 50mm f2

[@Reggiebphoto]

This is not meant to be a side by side comparison. Instead it’s to show that great photos can be taken regardless of the lens. If you’re looking for photos taken at the same settings and same framing, of course you’d be able to tell. And there’s plenty of videos and articles on this.

[@vanhungle8823]

Super

[@donmariano5489]

Stilll, watching your videos over and over again. Especially wedding portraits 😁.

[@michaelschmitt5413]

LOL. I only got 12 right. And I own both lenses. I've owned the 56mm for several years, and the 50mm f2.0 for three months. I dislike the 56mm for several reasons. One, the aperture ring is too easily shifted, and I have missed getting proper DoF on shots, because the ring was shifted to 1.2 by accident. I like shooting candid quick shots, and set my ISO at Auto to allow me to get proper exposure. So I don't notice when the aperture shifts too wide. Second reason is the poor focusing of the 56 in low light. So when I had a chance to buy the 50mm on sale, I grabbed one. I LOVE IT !!! My 56mm hasn't been on any of my cameras for the last two months. Thanks for the fun comparison !!!

[@milesparker3263]

I got 12 too! See my own response but if we'd just guessed 56 for all we would have done better!

[@Las_cacas]

Thumbs up for the baby sitting so chill.

[@ChimaChindaDev]

56 1.2 all the way. I’ve got that and the 23 1.4 and they’re both brilliant.

[@crumdog_millionaire_]

Instead of trying to guess which was which, I watched it and made a list of whether I liked the rendering of each photo. Then looking at the results after, it’s clear to me the 56 is the lens I like better

[@LeeD345]

I personally prefer 50 over 56apd due to focusing speed and size, it suits my needs better I’m pretty happy that fuji made such a great lineup of lenses

[@Reggiebphoto]

I haven’t tried out the apd but I’m happy with the 56mm 1.2

[@arthurmermelshtein1767]

I got 4 wrong. The 56mm 1.2 reminds me the rendering of the Canon 135mm f2 L which I love, fuji really did a great job on the charecter that the 56mm f1.2 produces, the 35mm f1.4 also has that special touch. The rest in the fuji lineup are mostly good lenses but don't have any special feel to them.

[@HVRIS]

Man, the 56mm 1.2 is my absolute favourite for low light/ Event and Weddings! I even use it for street as you know 😉However, for video and outdoor use, the 50 is a steal. If you are on the fence. Don’t worry

[@Reggiebphoto]

HVRIS agreed my friend

[@alanplummer2248]

I own the 50mm f2 for indoor sports (e.g. basketball), & very happy with it.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Nice!

[@sevillla68]

I deeply believe that images are true storytellers, not every photographer understands it and not every photographer has the talent to achieve it, you do, you have a powerful eye, thanks man...I personally own the 50mm and I’m very happy with it.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Thanks for the kind words 🙏

[@jacobherrman]

I've been trying to decide which lens I should buy. the 1.2 or 2, your video was a great deciding factor for my low light photos ideas. I'll be purchasing the 50mm, f2

[@Reggiebphoto]

jacob herrman awesome! Glad it helped you decide :)

[@MsRainer04]

My result. Sold the 56 and bought the 50mm. The 56 was mutch to big for every day take with me.

[@ProduceDelicious]

I love this video series, would love to see it for the 23 1.4 and 23 f2 someday

[@Reggiebphoto]

Blake T hopefully I’ll get a chance to do that combo :)

[@dentReviews]

just did this and got 22 correct. in all fairness too, most of the ones i got wrong (all but 2) were wide shots all in focus. makes sense that would be harder, especially on a phone screen. eliminating the wide shots with zero blur, my success rate is in the 75%+ range. tells me i can easily see the difference between the two when there is any background blur at all. This just makes me glad i bought the 56. ha. in all fairness, the 50 looks great still and when it does have blur it is very smooth and nice just not "as" nice as the 56. go with what fits your needs... I own the 56 and so I'm very familiar with its look. but this is still a great test and shows they probably are less different than people think in most ways. it's how you use them. but there is a difference. how much it matters to you jsa personal thing.

[@MikeKleinsteuber]

I think a like for like or side by side comparison actually would work better

[@Reggiebphoto]

Mike Kleinsteuber there are other reviews and videos that show this. I’m sure just a quick search will get you there. Thanks for watching!

[@KwyjiboVanDeKamp]

17 right (11x the 56 & 6x the 50). But it was hard to decide. Good video for all who can't decide between the two.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Thanks! I was hoping it would help

[@falkensmaize]

Interesting. I got 18 correct, but then I went back and discounted all the shots of toys and landscapes and was only left with 4 wrong. To me that says if you’re doing portrait shots of people, the 56 1.2 is clearly better and for everything else it matters less.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Jonathan Shearon it’s also because I never took out the 50mm to a portrait shoot. I had it for one week with no gigs lol.

[@bneil4059]

I had my eyes covered for the blind test, time to replay.

[@WS-bk7uu]

Thanks Reggie, nice video and blind test! Coming here after hearing your interview on Fujicast. The 56mm is slightly dreamier and probably a good pro choice but the 50mm is a fantastic lens and seems to be completely underrated (maybe because the 56mm is so well regarded). The 50mm is the first lens in my bag when I travel.

[@Reggiebphoto]

W S I was not surprised with how great a lens it is! Love the close focus

[@skipper4114]

I had pretty much all of the Fuji lenses before I switched systems. I purchased the 50mm f2 and returned it and got the 56mm f1.2..............so glad I did. The 50mm f2 just didn't have the separation. Great lens and ok if close to your subject but not really for portraits. I had a XT2 with the 23mm f2, 35mm f2, 56mm f1.2, 16mm f1.4 and 50-230mm. I switched to a Sony A7iii over a year ago and got a Tamron 28-75mm f2. Now I only have to carry one lens and I get great portraits with just this lens. I have other sony lenses and Zeiss but this Tamron lens lives on my Sony A7iii. However I miss my Fuji and the ergonomics of it. Cheers just subscribed.

[@Reggiebphoto]

thanks! maybe pick up a small fuji? :P

[@skipper4114]

Reggie Ballesteros been considering the XE3 or the new X100V in the future.

[@williamchan8866]

Great comparison but base on these examples to me the 50mm f2 has nicer bokeh it’s smoother and more natural looking. It could because you can get much closer with the 50. Thanks for for this vid it really help me decide.

[@Reggiebphoto]

👍🏽

[@stronman100]

So beautiful pictures! Gorgeous! Thank you so much for this Review!

[@fuzzyduck5668]

The 56mm 1.2 seems like a great lens, however I think it has one big issue that nobody is mentioning. It is not a weather resistant lens, therefore as soon as you put it on your sealed camera body, the whole thing is no longer sealed. Whereas the 50 mm is a WR lens, giving you a sealed system. Why would you buy a weather resistant body and then put a non sealed lens on it? Surely that would be like buying a raincoat with no hood and putting t-shirt on your head to get the rain out!

[@Reggiebphoto]

I personally don’t shoot in conditions that need weather resistance. Low light is more important for what I’m doing.

[@kencox6166]

I agree bigger question for me is why does Fuji a company that claims to listen to their customers keep pulling stunts like this. It would nbe nothing for them to add weather sealing I guess they want you to buy both.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Ken Cox in their defense, the 56 is one of the older lenses. And many of the older lenses also don’t have WR. I’m sure it would’ve had wr if it was released more recently.

[@kencox6166]

@@Reggiebphoto fair point I never knew this as am new to fuji they could do a mark II vertion then like canon and nikon do :)

[@Reggiebphoto]

Ken Cox I’m sure they will eventually. But so far they have no v2 lenses as the ecosystem is fairly young in comparison to Nikon and canon. So they’d have to be ready to cannibalize a whole product for the sake of a weather gasket?

[@sam-ww1wk]

Image 20 was a great shot. Very smart exposure. From your gallery, and image capability standpoint, the 1.2 is a much more versatile lens, and the f2 a good compromise if size is a factor. Extremely helpful for my amateur self. My brother used to shoot weddings, and I helped a friend with a few. I think it's the most challenging style to shoot. So many youtubers don't include their exposure info, which is so helpful for viewers. Thanks, and cute kiddos ya got, there.

[@milesparker3263]

First, your photographs are stunning. I'm trying to see if the 56mm makes any sense at all for me, and this was really helpful. I only got 60% right, barely better than average. (And statistically knowing that 2/3 of responses were 56 I could have done better simply by answering 56mm for every image!) But many of the ones I got wrong I was more on the fence about and able to go back and (pretty objectively I think) see what I'd missed. If you'd instead asked me to say which images I liked better no question they would be all 56mm. In practical terms all the 50mm is the sane choice but man I love those 56mm images best no question. I have to say that there really is a magical quality to the 56mm, especially for natural environments. There is an almost smoky softness (even though objectively the lens isn't soft!) to images whereas the 50mm feels kind of clinical. And of course the bokenh on the 56 is spectacular. Anyway, thanks man!

[@Reggiebphoto]

🙌

[@Rooftopaccessorizer]

After using the zeiss 55mm for sony, i find the 56mm to be super comparable in terms of quality. Theyre expensive but are absolute no brainers. If youre on a budget, its still worth just saving up the extra, even if it means you have to skimp on other lenses.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Jesse Mitchell yup the 56 1.2 is the real deal

[@Casiian_]

I got 20 out of 30 correct. The one that surprised me was number 7. Looking back at it while it does look good due to the lighting, it's slightly soft. I've been wanting to get the 56m, but I'm trying to justify the price lol

[@Reggiebphoto]

👍

[@tomscott4438]

I've been in a "lighten the load" mode these days. Got a 56 f/1.2 a few years back but traded it in for a 50-140 for the extra reach, OIS... and because back then I grabbed anything a KZbinr recommended without regard to my needs. :-) Sadly it rarely gets on the camera, let alone into the bag, for some time now so I'm moving it on. I've been looking at the 50 f/2 to round out a bag that also has the 16 f/1.4, 23 f/2, and 35 f/1.4. Since I'm not a pixel-peeper or fanatical about bokeh, the 50 seems like it might be just right for me. The problem with Fuji is that all the lenses are great, so you really need to think through your needs or GAS (gear acquisition syndrome) will set in.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Definitely agree. If you don't need absolutely low light performance or you like to focus close up to small details i think the 50mm f2 is a great all arounder.

[@kimelur6143]

i would love to have seen more portraits on the 50 f2. Got 18 / 30. Some portraits i thought it would be the 50 but it was the 56 and some other variants.

[@vpr5562]

Hey Reggie, you are correct, we edit our photos and that is why its difficult to see noticeable difference (at least to my eye on 23 inch monitor). But also a comparison side by side would be lovely to see :)).

[@Reggiebphoto]

There are tons of other videos on KZbin with side by side comparisons. So check those out instead :)

[@Martin-nu6ym]

I mainly got the environmental shots with the 56 because I really like the way the 56 works for landscapes and other nature shots. Yeah, I use it for low light purposes and people as well. :) Since I have all the 1.x Fuji primes, I switch to the red badge zooms when I can get by with f/2.8 or slower. It is easier to carry around the 16-55 instead of the four Fujicrons.

[@Reggiebphoto]

never tried the 16-55 just cause its a monster lol

[@ShutterKnack]

I got 18 correct. 6 I thought it was the 56 but turned out to be the 50mm. Surprised mainly by how much bokeh the 50mm can do. 6 I thought it was the 50 but turned out to be the 56mm. So I was a bit underwhelmed. I was expecting more bokeh. Good job on the 50mm! Composition and lighting always wins.

[@Reggiebphoto]

In the right hands, the 50mm is more than capable

[@fabienb]

I'm happy to say I know my kit sufficiently well 😁 I have both lenses and I got all right but 2. I think you mentioned it in a previous video, but if you still haven't tried it, I heartily recommend the 90mm 👍🏻

[@Reggiebphoto]

Yup I use the 90mm regularly during weddings

[@klerain5774]

Brilliant photos I was surprised with the 50mm f2 images.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Yup it has its own merits for sure. And it’s sharp! I love how close it can focus

[@expatriatechronicles6915]

The baby looks like he's dead set on the 50mm 2. He did some facial expressions that indicated, in baby language, that he thinks the 56mm is too expensive.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Expatriate Chronicles lol. Well his dad owns the 56mm 1.2

[@manwhalejoe6962]

I grabbed a notepad and wrote down my thoughts. My honest conclusions were that the 50mm WR has great bokeh and shallow DOF for portraits of small children and dogs, and does well for micro shots of toys. But if you want nice falloff and bokeh that is not too busy, if you want a little softer detail in faces, if you want to take portraits of adults, then the 56mm does a better job. Thanks alot for the video, it was very useful!

[@Reggiebphoto]

M Dat love your approach! And glad that it was helpful for you !

[@DesigedByNino]

14/30 guessed right - that is remarkable considering the price diff, but I believe each has a somewhat recognizable look regardless of aperture.

[@charliejg]

So, my guess as I started watching was that the wedding and portraits were probably done with the 56. While images from both were really good, what struck me most about the 56mm lens images was the warmth, the glow. Thanks for this video. I'm trying to decide upon a first prime for my X-T3. My bank account tells me to go with a Fujichron, but...... :-) Oh well, we'll see.

[@el0blaino]

Yeah I had that feeling - "He'll not trust the 50 for a wedding, so all those gorgeous people shots will be 56's. 50s will be the grabbed shots or black-and-whites."

[@petuniacortes3860]

Thank you so much, I got 50% right. This was a very nice experience.

[@tron_rider_7]

Thanks Reggie for making this video, how close can you shoot with the 50mm f2 ?

[@docmanny84]

Was hard to differentiate....the 50 mm seemed to be sharper with some

[@Reggiebphoto]

Definitely. I think because f2 is the largest opening it’s going to be sharper by default. L

[@Reggiebphoto]

Thanks for the info!

[@1028Will]

This one is so easy. Those shot at f1.2 has a very distinct look. It does get a lot harder when both lenses are stopped down beyond f2.0, but it becomes more of a "guess which aperture it is" kind of game

[@Reggiebphoto]

Will Y. Fair point! But to beginners (those who get sucked into the gear craze) who dontbhave as much of a discerning eye - this is an exercise in it doesn’t really matter as long as you focus on good photography

[@Kid2holy]

Does the 50mm f2 focus better in low light than the 56?

[@Reggiebphoto]

I haven’t tested them side by side in that Regard

[@shazbk7616]

Beautiful photos, wonderful comparison, amazing perspective. I got 18 out of 30 correct! The 50mm in my estimate is a bit more clinical when compared to the 56mm, nevertheless, it's still a wonderful lens.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Shaz BK yup it’s more Than good if the photographer using it can bring the heat :)

[@eagleeyephoto8715]

There is a clear difference between two, having both for a while you can recognize photos easily.56 f1.2 has soft focus transition and looks more organic then clinical 50mm.However 50 looks sharper when doing B&W due to punch in micro contrast.I did not get it last few minutes of your video since one lens does not replace other one. 56mm is portrait lens and 50 does not come close to it, just as 56 not to 50 for AF,WR,close focus distance, size and price.

[@Reggiebphoto]

I agree on your points. And I don’t mention thst one replaces the other. But for those who couldn’t tell the difference it shows that they can settle for the cheaper lens and be happy since the nuances of the 56 are not clear tk those people

[@davidmcc6666]

Only got 22 right. Thanks, mate.

[@Reggiebphoto]

David McC666 thanks for reporting back!

[@CVCC]

9 correct, shocking! Thanks for doing this!

[@Reggiebphoto]

Chagrin Valley-Web haha, crazy! Thanks!

[@Lorenzo88C]

Have you the 23f2? I've a problem with focus in the left angle.. i dont know why!

[@Reggiebphoto]

Lorenzo Tds I did for a brief time but sold it because I didn’t really like its close focusing

[@Lorenzo88C]

@@Reggiebphoto i think i will sell it..

[@BelowKelvin]

Agreed I sold mine and got the 16 1.4

[@Lorenzo88C]

@@BelowKelvin i've the 16, but its different! Its a 24mm, and the 23 its a 35mm

[@Reggiebphoto]

23 1.4 is solid and pairs well with the 56mm 1.2

[@ArsenijeRadenovic]

50mm images look kind of flat, but image quality is good. 56mm subjects pop out really nice! I'd say for portraits and weddings 56 is a better choice.

[@Noealz]

well I aint got neither of those but still fun to watch : )

[@Reggiebphoto]

How many did you get right? :)

[@Noealz]

@@Reggiebphoto not enough LOL - but then again I don't worry too much about gear, mainly just shooting : )

[@Reggiebphoto]

That’s what’s most important!! This was more of a “don’t have time to make a full video” videos :P

[@ginotizon2052]

Did you use a flash for some of these shots?

[@Reggiebphoto]

Just number 10, 25 and 26

[@FotosyMas.]

Both lack “3D pop” as even though subjects are isolated, the backgrounds appear flat and clinical. Reminds me a lot of Sigma lenses. As much as I love Fuji cameras I can’t stand their lenses. Only the 35mm 1.4 has that 3D punch in my opinion. By the way this is not a critique of your photos, which are technically great and well composed.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Fotos y Mas I kinda agree with you there. But for the most part 3D pop is usually characteristic of a normal focal length lens (around 50mm in full frame). So makes sense for the 35. Once you get more telephoto, it is by definition flatter in aesthetic. Even the 105 1.4 on Nikon that I had was pretty flat. I like the Fuji lenses so far but it’s all about preference. Great comment!

[@D-D0G]

Yoooo Reggie, whats the second track in the video please? Many thanks!

[@burritobrosvideos8060]

You need to take more professional pictures with the 50f2 for comparison. There were no wedding examples for the f2

[@Reggiebphoto]

I don’t sacrifice my clients photos for the sake of KZbin content. I prefer using the 56 1.2 for portraits and weddings. Check out John Branches channel for pro work with the 50 f2

[@burritobrosvideos8060]

@@Reggiebphoto step down off your box and admit thats a personal preference. The 50 f2 is plenty good to deliver high quality portraits to clients. My point is theres no point of a comparison/blind test if you only take prifessional photos with one of the lenses.

[@Reggiebphoto]

I clearly admitted it was a prefernece in my first reply to you. I’m not on any soapbox. It’s my choice what gear I use for my pro work. What’s wrong with having a preference for my professional work? I do not shoot with any f2 glass in order to keep my high isos below 3200.

[@substance90]

Am I the only one who noticed that the only photos where the 50mm f2 had good amounts of bokeh were macro shots of tiny objects?

[@Reggiebphoto]

The 50 f2 has a closer min focus distance

[@Telly26]

I was 16/30 on guessing. Great test!

[@hddhdhxhxb1793]

Silently hoping for a cheap XC50mmF2 🤗

[@adamaj74]

"I don't have the 50mm f/2, I had to rent it." Tells you all you need to know right there, lol. Btw, your link for the 56mm f/1.2 actually takes you to a 35mm f/1.4.

[@Innovate-pq9ci]

You can rent a lens to test it, I don't see the issue. Truth is the 50mm f2 is an amazing lens a much better value (what you get for the price you pay), The 56mm is an amazing lens as well but much more expensive. Finally I would also add the 60mm f2.4 macro in the same league, which I personally got for $225 used, amazing lens and superior to the 56mm f1.2 in some ways. There is no perfect lens, it,s good to compare.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Ah thanks for the tip. I’ll fix that

[@bobdrawbaugh4207]

I got 18 wrong! Obviously I’d be happy with the kit lens.😂

[@Reggiebphoto]

😆

[@pilarcasas1199]

I only got 13 right... I might have to rethink if to spend double! Thanks for the video X

[@paulpapagelis3946]

Your photos are so nice

[@Reggiebphoto]

Thanks

[@AbdonPhirathon]

I would like to see you use the 50mm f/2 for weddings because all of the wedding shots were taken with the 56mm f/1.2. Otherwise, I really liked this comparison. It did fool me a few times, like with the wedding ring shot, since I know that the 56mm f/1.2 can't focus that close, I thought you had used the 50mm f/2.

[@danni0510]

Kevin Mullins has some photos on his review of the lens on his blog!www.google.com/amp/s/f16.click/gear/fujifilm-50mm-f2.html/amp/

[@Reggiebphoto]

Ideally that would be best, but I personally didn’t want to use the lens for any pro gigs as that’s the lens I wouldn’t have used for my clients. Maybe one day I can arrange a free shoot or use itnwhen I second shoot a wedding.

[@kristiejochim9089]

Reggie Ballesteros interesting..so you personally wouldn’t use it for a paid gig? May I ask why? Thanks

[@kristiejochim9089]

Daniel Wiedner Fotografie this article was from 2yrs ago. He now only uses the f2s for video now.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Kristie Jochim because I don’t own it. I already have the 56mm 1.2. Also I shoot a lot of low light stuff for weddings, and f2 vs 1.2 is quite a bit of extra iso to rely on. I try to keep my ISO’s as low as possible

[@jayfokichu]

Pretty much all the paid work shoots were 56 and family shots were 50!

[@Reggiebphoto]

this is correct. i'm not going to shoot paid work with a lens i rented for youtube content, haha.

[@naive_songwriter]

can u make a tutorial about 8 photo panorama

[@Reggiebphoto]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/e4HMg3iOqdGdrZI

[@solvm1652]

Win win.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Yup yup

[@schaklez173]

What is the name of the song?

[@fontainemccullough]

what’s the first song?

[@mikeikeda1208]

The 50 looks a touch sharper. I was surprised.

[@Reggiebphoto]

yup def is a little sharper wide open

[@superninteyninegm8282]

First song?

[@Reggiebphoto]

Superninteynine Gm I forgot the name and Im currently away from my editing computer so I can check the file :(

[@davidconstantine5819]

It kinda bit unfair becauseost of the portraits you done in 1.2. ..

[@Reggiebphoto]

How would that be unfair?

[@8080408729a]

Fun fact... I dont own any pro camera body as of now😂😂 ( currently saving up for my 1st camera) & yet.. I only got 2 answers wrong 😅 (I did skip few images which includes images without bokah & product/macro shots Thus, i can say... i gess 18/20 images correctly ) All credit goes to youtube & youtubers/photographers

[@Reggiebphoto]

Cool 😎

[@Simon-Simon-Simon]

2.0 seem to work fine tho New York photo is nice. I have the 1.2 23 and 56 tho in hindsight would have purchased cheaper 23 and 56 and also get 16 and 90 tho the cheaper versions where not avail then 😆

[@Reggiebphoto]

Simon if you don’t need the max low light performance possible, the 2.0 and 2.8 lenses are awesome deals with phenomenal quality!

[@baptistepayendessinphoto]

7 mistakes... But I based my thoughts on the subjects and light conditions of your pictures.

[@Reggiebphoto]

Good job still!

[@baptistepayendessinphoto]

@@Reggiebphoto It just means that in the same conditions I would use the same lens, but I really did not find great differences between these lenses. Except perhaps in some out of focus areas rendering on few images.

[@EugeneLau]

Would it be interesting also if a same comparison done with xf35 f1.4 and xf50 f2?

[@Reggiebphoto]

I did one 35 1.4 vs 35 f2

[@wtonthemove6861]

I was listening to you but I couldn't take my eyes off the little guy...nice comparison though. Thanks.

[@TheoTrujillo]

Sick video bro!

[@Reggiebphoto]

Theo Trujillo thanks dude

[@voorachter2733]

Thanks for saving me €500!

[@whitekiki]

5 mistake :) didnt suprise on mistakes.

[@Reggiebphoto]

haha good job!

[@billpeterson8668]

very nice

[@Reggiebphoto]

Bill Peterson thanks

[@franckleclerc8692]

Don't like, don't understand what you want to show... To see the difference with 2 lenses you should make same photos, this video shows nothing

[@Reggiebphoto]

Franck Leclerc thanks for the feedback

[@ernestmccreight6188]

I tend to agree with Frank, unless you show the same images at the same fstop this means nothing.

[@Reggiebphoto]

If this were a side by side comparison I would get that. But this video is to prove that gear doesn’t really matter that much as opposed to how you use it.

[@danilocruz5978]

I understand what he wants to show..that F2 is capable..

[@emokia15]

I understand the point of the video but u get a f1.2 to do portraits and lowlight and for that blur. So showing esp the earlier photos that were shot at vry high f stops are pointless cos... Even the cheapest zoom lens can do that kind of shot and that was nt the purpose of the lens.

[@932nic]

I LIKE YOUR BABY

[@pcphotography9108]

15/30 lol!

[@Cagey7531]

Booooring - sick of these lenses being compared, they're not aimed at the same crowd, they're not the same type of lens, doesn't matter what specific images you show. One is slow and does better low light, one is much, much faster, does ok in low light but is also sharper stopped down and 1/3rd the price on the used market.

[@Reggiebphoto]

thanks for the comment. appreciate the input!