Fujifilm XF 50mm f1 REVIEW vs f2 vs 56mm f1.2

[@cameralabs]

My full review of the Fujifilm XF 50mm f1.0 vs the 50mm f2 and 56mm f1.2 Check price at B&H: bhpho.to/3i80Ho1 // WEX: tidd.ly/2Z2Afo7 Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book at Amazon: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Like Cameralabs? Get the merch: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop

[@GregWallis]

Excellent review, Gordon. Probably the best on KZbin for this lens comparison.

[@cameralabs]

Thanks, I put a lot of work into it!

[@KentuckyMan30]

Well done, Gordon! I love your attention to detail in these comparisons. Good information presented as always! The amount of work and time that goes into a video like this isn't lost on me!

[@cameralabs]

Thanks, it's not just the shooting, but the captioning takes ages too!

[@ruaangrobler3035]

Gordon, I don't know if you know how valuable work like yours is to those of us in poorer countries or remote areas who often need to order lenses and gear without being able to physically test it. Been a fan since you were text-based :). Big thanks for all your work through the years. Nobody does detailed reviews like you.

[@cameralabs]

Thankyou Ruaan, I try to make the kind of reviews I would like to watch and I'm just pleased there's a few others who are interested too!

[@wanakoplays8874]

If Gordon says it's good, then it's GOOD. I'd better start saving up!

[@cameralabs]

It is good, but the other two are nice too, so there's something at all price points!

[@Dr.SalvatoreVinciguerra]

Excellent review of these lenses. I like how you compare these lenses by putting them side to side so we can see their capabilities. The footage with showing the focus features using the lenses is very intriguing. Have a fantastic day!

[@cameralabs]

Thanks, glad you found it useful!

[@deputydd4364]

Awesome review again Gordon. Thank you, as an owner of the 50F2 and 56F1.2 you've just saved me £1,500! I'll keep the 56 for portraits and the F2 for video. But as you say, if I didn't already have those....

[@cameralabs]

Glad to be of service!

[@marc6652]

Your assessment is in line with Ken Rockwell's. For him, it's the best F:1 length to date. Bravo Fuji. And thanks for this very complete and useful review.

[@phoenixkiula9554]

56mm gets very close for half the size, which makes a huge diff in real world.

[@fdanicek]

Awesome review, Thank You Gordon!!!! I do own the 50mm f2 and was thinking about an upgrade to its faster sister f1.2. But now, after seeing your video, I believe it is better to wait and save for the fastest. One lens to rule them all 😊

[@tonyadamis4171]

This is the one full review I've been waiting for ever since Gordon's preliminary look at the f1. Complicates my life a little, since I do own the 56, but I finally feel as if I have quality info on which to base my decision. Nobody does it better than Gordon.

[@cameralabs]

Thankyou Tony!

[@wardo999]

Thanks, Gordon! Outstanding review! Your discovery of the different quality of bokeh between the models was very interesting indeed. I have the 50mm f:2 and love it - and I didn't feel shamed into feeling I should upgrade to the other models. :) All the best from Calgary!

[@cameralabs]

Cheers! Yes, there's a real difference between their styles...

[@jonfletcher147]

I commented on your Instagram post Gordon...I'm going to have to say the 50 f2 gets it for me! size....plus the fact you can get in closer at f2 throwing the background softer still is more than good enough for the casual portrait photographer like me...then that AF performance!! and price!! yep...thanks for that Gordon....50 f2 for me!!

[@cameralabs]

I love the close focusing of the f2!

[@wungabunga]

Double that recommendation for the casual videographer. ;)

[@gregorybupp]

Thank you so much for moving the subject back so it fills the same amount of the frame. So many comparison video will stay in the same are with the longer 56mm, meaning they have the subject filling more of the sensor and then go on to claim it is inherently a sharper lens.

[@mlwadester87]

Love, as always, Gordon. I've been a fan for over a decade, now, and the stuff doesn't sour. Keep up the great work!

[@cameralabs]

Thanks for sticking around so long!

[@gregorybown]

Wow, I literally fell out of love with my 56mm about half way through this video. Thank you for this review, it is the most informative by far, great job!

[@AndyAudioVault]

Thank you Gordon! you have no idea how helpful this video has been for me. The price tag of F1.0 50mm is still quite a stretch for me as a new Vlogger and now I can be convinced that for my intended purposes, the price will be duly justified. I'd buy you coffee if we ever cross path!

[@cameralabs]

You're very welcome! It's quite a long lens for vlogging though - presumably you'll have it on a tripod a bit away?

[@AndyAudioVault]

@@cameralabs Yes, for low light indoor tripod shots. On XH2 8K, well that's my plan. Some crazy potrait focused sort of footage. LOL I hope I am doing this right. The rig would cost a lot but I am all game for it

[@cameralabs]

@@AndyAudioVault it'll certainly produce a dramatic effect!

[@JGRGilbert]

If you want a lens specifically for portraits and throwing backgrounds out of focus, I think the 90mm f/2.0 is worth looking at too. Has the advantage of much greater close focus.

[@cameralabs]

It is a great choice - I've reviewed it at cameralabs.com

[@farooghnoori9016]

So detailed and scientifically explained👍thanks for such a comprehensive review

[@jesserivchin8163]

This was extremely helpful, I made the novice decision to purchase the f1.0 without renting because the used price was too hard to beat. Was second guessing my purchase till this vid, thanks for your diligence

[@cameralabs]

You're welcome, it's a fantastic lens!

[@TritonB7]

Thank you for taking the time to create this review. I own both the 50mm f1.0 and 56mm f1.2 and have been trying to decide on if I should sell my 56mm 1.2. The 50mm f1.0 has been wonderful for my low light shots, that extra 2/3 of a stop from f1.2 to f1.0, lets me bring my ISO down to help improve image quality further. It is a bit front heavy on my non-gripped X-T4 though, but that's just going to have to be the trade off that I'm willing to live with. Again, thank you for the review as it was very helpful.

[@cameralabs]

How do you feel about their respective rendering, or is it similar for your subjects? I must say, I also noticed how the ISO remained refreshingly low even as it approached dusk!

[@TritonB7]

@@cameralabs it is about the same for me, though I'll be comparing the lenses wide open in brighter situations to compare their color fringing again. Im using Capture One and the corrections seem to be more subtle than I would like. Seems easier to correct this in Lightroom.

[@arielc2010]

A review as a review should be. Great Gordon!

[@God_is_in_the_details]

Thanks for the great review. That kind of meticulous deliberation takes A LOT of work, greatly appreciated. (I’m now swayed to the f1.)

[@trippalhealicks]

Super detailed and informative video, Gordon. Your self-portraits were great, too! :D

[@cameralabs]

Cheers! I was a bit grumpy looking but they served their purpose!

[@BenjaminKanarek]

Thanks for this review. I prefer the compression of the 56mm, as it is somewhat longer. I do own the 56mm and will stay with it as the perceived bokeh may appear even more evident than the 50 for all intent and purpose.

[@KandiKlover]

I miss that valley landscape shot he used to test all the lenses and cameras on in the old school videos hehe

[@MyNorthAmetican40]

As always, your reviews are just perfect....Thanks

[@cameralabs]

Thanks Ken!

[@Mowikan]

I have owned the 50 f1. It’s a beautiful lens. Beautiful rendering. The only downside is its behemoth size. But for studio work I would buy it again.

[@obscurelines]

For fun I borrowed the F1 for a weekend. I thought it would be a bit pointless but I must say I loved it. I don't remember ever loving the 56 or the 50 f2. They are fine, but I was just addicted to taking pics with the f1. I'm not quite sure why, as I mostly shoot FF and can achieve shallow DoF any time I like. A bit of an enigma. I would say that when I reviewed the pictures afterwards they weren't as awesome as they felt they were going to be when I viewed them in camera. Still, if I were brave enough to still do weddings with Fuji, I'd run and gun indoors with this lens.

[@tasteapiana]

I'm a Pentax shooter used to a 50mm f/1.4. I would go for the f/2 then f/1 and skip the f/1.2 as it doesn't do enough to deserve the $1,000 (shutter impacts on shapes kills it for me) whereas the f/1 really stands out as a "I'm being serious now" lens. Once you're in $1,000 into a lens purchase you're either crazy enough to go 50% deeper to $1,500 or dumb enough to wonder and regret not doing so until you do. My advice is - don't short change yourself in life, giving money away is called charity, giving your time away is just dumb.

[@georgewakelin4350]

Thanks for the reminder.... More Belvoir cordials required. The ginger one with hot water is a winter must have in this house.

[@karimnasser9226]

No doubt the f/1.0 is sharper, but for portraits it seems like the 56mm wins, the image is softer and warmer which in my opinion how a portrait should look.

[@milootje007]

Softer and warmer than the 50mm f/1.0?? You need to watch more reviews lol, that's where it stands out in.

[@gunnarkelly5051]

An excellent, practical, useful and very helpful decision making presentation. Thank you.

[@cameralabs]

You're very welcome!

[@richardrandolph9794]

Great video. I'll get the 90mm f2 and the 50mm f2.

[@cameralabs]

Nice choices!

[@gaitanos]

Nice and thorough review. I have all three lenses and use them in situations as you had summarized.

[@erikmortensen1091]

Thanks Gordon very detailed review! Have a question, will 50mm f2 be too wide for potrait photo of 2 people at dinner parties indoors. Also wedding photos?

[@cameralabs]

50mm on APSC is equivalent to 75, so it's perfect for portraits of two people, and fine for singles too, albeit a bit closer.

[@1BigBucks1]

Great comps! Thanks for including video examples.

[@cameralabs]

You're welcome!

[@shiniforever]

does the 50 1.0 have weather selling ?? i dont know if i heard you mention it in your video

[@joshuareveles]

It does

[@a.w.wicaksana5048]

This comparison video deserve an award 👍

[@cameralabs]

Thanks! I wish more people would watch them

[@phoenixexploration3301.1]

If you are looking for scenery, Come to America and visit Bryce Canyon, and Death Valley National Park. Both are accessible via tours from Las Vegas, NV through Adventure Photo Tours.

[@KAGilligan]

Thank you. Excellent review. Thorough, useful images to compare closely. Many thanks!

[@cameralabs]

You're very welcome!

[@DALVAmusic]

Excellent review of these lenses ! Tks a lot Gordon !

[@dcrilley9624]

Truly a superb review of the three lenses. I wonder if the APD version of the 56 adds a further twist to the relative merits ? It was, I think. intended to improve the bokeh characteristics of the 'ordinary' 56mm f 1.2

[@parmanduke]

Great review. Personally I'd rather have an 84mm f1.2 vs 75mm f1.0. It seems like most Fujimusers arent getting this lens as much as expected. Plus rumors for a WR newer version coimg out in 2022 has me anxiously waiting.

[@LyndonPatrickSmith]

Great review Gordon! I don’t have any of these, but to me it seems the skin tones look best on the 56 1.2.

[@cameralabs]

Thanks!

[@AbcDino843]

Awesome comparison, saved me a $1,000. I prefer portraits at f2, the autofocus speed and the size of the lens. Lower price is a plus.

[@cameralabs]

You're welcome!

[@RainerEberhardt]

Thank you for the nice review. I would love to see one across systems, like the 50mm f1.0 compared with the Sony 85mm f1.4 and a Nikon Z 85mm 1.8

[@cameralabs]

I think that would be interesting, but who would it be important for? People are unlikely to switch systems if a lens for a different system is outperforming theirs. And finding out you have the worst one won't make you feel good either!

[@RainerEberhardt]

@@cameralabs I for one am looking for an entirely new system and I find it very hard to find the right compromise between portability and image quality. My guess is that a Nikon Z6 with 85mm f1.8 might be just as good as the Fuji f1.0 or even better, quieter, sharper wide open. The Nikon combo is actually cheaper and lighter. I wonder if a lens like the f1.0 doesn't stretch APS-C too far. Thanks a lot anyway, I really do appreciate your work and have been following you for many years.

[@nycgeo18]

Gordon is, quite simply, the best in the game.

[@cameralabs]

Thankyou, that means a lot to me!

[@SeifEddineB]

If you added the 56 1.4 from viltrox to this comparison, it will be great

[@eliaspap8708]

Great review. I am assuming the sharpness tests of the building’s where done probably at close to infinity focus? I am just wondering cause I am hearing rather different results on other reviewers on this lens that close up sharpness is not that great? 2-4 metres or so and this is more typical distance that I would be mainly using it at. Just wondering how you found the close up sharpness? Or roughly at portrait distances.

[@cameralabs]

Yes, the buildings were close to infinity which is why I choose that location. Most people don't test / compare the long distance performance of lenses because it's hard to do. I did portrait and closer tests too in the video.

[@abuanwp]

0:06 - This photo alone made me buy the 50mm f1. I moved to Fuji from Nikon for the looks and the film sims.. lol!

[@ChimaChindaDev]

One if the few videos that really does the 50 F1.0 justice. Very well done. I have the 56 but I will eventually trade it for the F1.0.

[@cameralabs]

Thankyou!

[@phoenixkiula9554]

If you want a lens twice the size, for 10% better bokeh.

[@ChimaChindaDev]

I did the trade and I'm happy with the 50 f1.@@phoenixkiula9554

[@charliejg]

Fantastic review! While the bokeh may be smoother on the f1.0, I still like the look of the 56 for portraits. I think it's the "compression" that does it for me. Right now I'm trying to figure out the most cost efficient way to go. I like doing portraits and some youth sports. The 50-140 is out of the question financially. So, I'm thinking that the 90 f2 might do the trick. Any thoughts?

[@roxikoko3744]

The 50mm f2 has a smoother transition of tones. Better for black and white.

[@quite1enough]

Gordon, thanks for comparison! What's the first two numbers of serial number of your 50mm f/2 if you still have this particular lens?

[@cameralabs]

Sorry it's been returned, but in the EXIF data it's reported as 76A15721. Why do you ask?

[@quite1enough]

​@@cameralabs thank you very much! interestingly enough, the Christopher Frost's copy of lens might be better, but I really don't know, at least according to his review of 50mm f/2 it seems more sharp (serial starts with 75, which not that different I guess)

[@cameralabs]

@@quite1enough in isolation it may look great, but when compared against something sharper, you'll see the difference.

[@maximusclaudius6514]

Excellent review, thanks.

[@appleblows1]

Is this a better lens than the new 56mm f1.2 wr?

[@cameralabs]

I'll compare them in a future review. I suspect the 56 might be sharper, but that the 50 will deliver different rendering. But that's just speculation, I'll have to test to see,

[@edvardb8747]

You said it would fit better for larger bodies, so not recommended for xt30?

[@cameralabs]

I'd personally find it a bit big for an XT30, but if you hold the lens more than the camera, it may be ok. Beware if you use a big tripod plate as it may not fit.

[@KeithCarmichaelInFL]

Another great review! Thanks for doing my homework for me!

[@cameralabs]

You're very welcome!

[@just_eirik]

Is the APD version of the 56 sharper? I have it and I’ve never felt like it was soft in the corners like, that when shot wide open. But maybe that’s just cause I haven’t compared it directly with a sharper lens.

[@cameralabs]

I've not tested the APD version, sorry!

[@Gn0m4]

I had regular 56mm and have APD version. APD is almost 20% sharper at f1.2.

[@JohnDoe-xg3rt]

Thank you. Excellent review.

[@cameralabs]

You're very welcome!

[@kaitsang7020]

Great video Gordon... just a bit too much Toneh for me

[@zaneclone]

All three optically are great lenses- with the f/1.0 being exceptional given it's pushing the boundaries !! Question is- are the differences reflected in the price- the f/1.0 is quite pricey for a crop sensor camera ! One thing's for sure- it makes me realize what good value my Nikon 50mm f/1.8g is lol... :D

[@cameralabs]

I wouldn't worry too much about sensor size, crops and equivalences. They're of course useful to understand and make comparisons, but ultimately it's about the end result, and being able to identify a problem and know which way you'll need to go to improve or resolve it. Those f1.8 DSLR lenses are very affordable and while soft in the corners unless closed-down, they deliver sharp subjects in the centre and enough blurring for most of us - fantastic entries into primes and shallow DOF effects. Annoyingly most mirrorless systems lack a truly affordable prime like this (for example the Fujifilm XF 50mm f2 isn't exactly cheap).

[@marcusoutdoors4999]

A very interesting comparison would be to compare the Fuji F1 with the Sigma 85mm F1.4 DN which is 250g lighter than the Fuji is 2/3 the price and should offer similar if not better performance and a lighter overall camera + lens weight if mounted on a Sony, Leica or Panasonic. I know the debates rage about whether it is fair or appropriate to compare FF with APSC, but as both a Leica and Fuji user, this lens is intriguing but tricky to position as it is so huge.

[@cameralabs]

I actually have the Sigma 85mm f1.4 DG DN right now, but sadly there was no overlap when I had the Fujifilm on test. I'd also be interested in seeing them compared, but it goes beyond sensor size. The thing to remember is some people simply prefer shooting with one type of camera in terms of the design, controls, menus, processing, versus another. Some are simply loyal to a brand, and won't swap even if an alternative is proven to be cheaper and or technically superior. For example, I simply like the design of the Fujifilm cameras and for what I do, I like the output from them more than most rivals, regardless of sensor size. It's about the experience and how it makes you feel as much as the end result, and again if someone prefers the style and processing of Fujifilm's cameras, then they will be looking for the right XF lens for them and rightly couldn't care less about other systems.

[@marcusoutdoors4999]

@@cameralabs Good points well made as always. I very much look forward to see what you make of the Sigma 85mm, I don't think I need it, but doesn't stop me wanting it, we'll see! What I am also curious about is whether they manage to do the same weight saving magic when they create the DN version of the 50mm F1.4. You are absolutely spot on when you talk about the look of the images, your excellent Straight Out of Camera book really drove that home to me and yes, Fuji have a particularly warm spot for me with the film simulations and the ability to tweak settings to get the look you want without Photoshop. Anyway I could talk about Camera's all day, but must get back to work. Keep up the excellent work.

[@jcblum1507]

Amazing review!!!

[@cameralabs]

thanks!

[@brianpetersen3429]

Excellent review!

[@cameralabs]

Cheers!

[@muratsahan8697]

Watching the video of the pier with the water moving I had to stop the video and look again, is the water, the white waves moving erraticly on the far end of the pier? I mean the waves closest seems moving in a normal fashion but the ones behind the building has a "jerky" move. Anyone else seeing this? Apart from that thanks for another nice review.

[@cameralabs]

I'll look again! The camera did move a little during the video clips.

[@waginglove]

Very helpful and thorough. But I was hoping you would also address lens flare. I like portraits "against the light" and lens flare matters!

[@cameralabs]

Yeah, i'd like to include that too, but there's a limit to how many tests I can do, especially when these videos earn so little. I may do a patreon option in the future with more tests.

[@waginglove]

@@cameralabs Touche!

[@janlouiselandrito7180]

50mm f1 and the f2 has a small difference???

[@LarryGottschalk]

Nicely done, thank you!

[@cameralabs]

Thanks, glad you found it useful!

[@strippedlist]

I dont understand why its 1.5 and not 1.2 FF equivalent...

[@veerannapoojar5251]

Nice experiment 👍

[@johnjon1823]

Color rendering on the F2 looks best to me.

[@cameralabs]

It's a lovely lens!

[@nicoxg]

I own the 50mm f1 and I love it, but I find it puzzling, almost scary to be honest, when some renowned KZbinrs say it's great, and some others say it's trash, when all seem to measure the same things... Could there be huge discrepancies between copies of a same lens? You immediately start to wonder how good your own copy might be, if that's indeed the case... I guess the only thing that really matters about what I just wrote is the "I love it" part, but still, makes you wonder... Anyways, thanks for reassuring me I guess! :-)

[@milootje007]

I just bought the x-h2s and as a first lens the 90mm f/2.0 (both will be delivered tomorrow). It was hard to choose between that lens and the 50m f/1.0, honestly i now think the 50 might have been more for me since it's more intimate, better in low light, and has a signature look.. do you own both?

[@brian576]

IMO 50mm f1.0 is too expensive, heavy, and large, the 50m f2 just doesn't get enough bokeh, the 56mm f1.2 seems to be the just perfect balance...the only issue I have with it is the lack of WR

[@cameralabs]

Since they have just done a WR version of the 10-24, I wouldn't be surprised if the 56 gets a WR Mark II version next year.

[@AveryUnleashed69]

I would love to have these guys as a sponsor for my youtube channel!!

[@inspir3d81]

video probably needs an update on new firmware regarding video autofocus

[@MartinArgg]

I’ll choose the 56

[@andreitelenkov5775]

It strikes me as a kind of lens you don't want to buy... Something not kosher about it :):)

[@cyrfung]

It would have been nice if they were able to build the 33mm f1, but physics is physics I guess.

[@cameralabs]

Yes, I'd have found it more useful, but as you know, they reckoned it would have been too big and heavy.

[@SummersSnaps]

This was great.

[@cameralabs]

Thanks!

[@recmydream]

respect!

[@dddw6427]

awesome!

[@ofmetalphilosophy4837]

Thanks Gordon for the excellent review as usual. Unpopular opinion here that will pi** off Fuji fanboys: The Fuji system is un-buyable in its current form due to the lens selection and pricing. The good zooms are too expensive and the primes are not cheap either. Both will bring the only viable camera (XT4, due to IBIS, a must for me and many) closer to a Sony full frame when you compare the price of the whole system. This lens is very comparable to a Sigma 85mm f1.4, the new or the old one, which is 1/3rd cheaper and much better and since the Sony a7rii or a7iii are more or less the same price of the XT4, the overall cost is the same more or less. If you need approximately the same outcome you can even get away with a Sony 85mm 1.8 at 489£, a third of this lens's price, and still even less expensive than the XF 56 f1.2! Often you hear the bashers hit at the MFT system when they compare it to FF in terms of lenses apertures and ISO performance. But no one speaks about the overpriced, overhyped Fuji. It is neither FF quality yet as expensive nor MFT cheap or portable yet almost twice as expensive while not twice as better.

[@ofmetalphilosophy4837]

@M Tech they wouldn't. There's no competition in the APSC market. Sony is your best choice and their a6600 isn't as good as the xt4, while their lens selection is poor. Forget the useless Canon M too.

[@perilthecat]

I think Fuji has some fun features that add to the value proposition, such as film simulations and the retro ergonomics. I’m not familiar enough with their pricing structure to comment much on the value proposition (I’m assuming it’s not as insane as Olympus’ recent swan song), but I believe they were doing ok financially as of recently - compared to Nikon let’s say. So if people actively want to buy their gear then I don’t see much problem with that, I just wish there was more truth in advertising when it comes to crop gear. The full frame comparisons need to be done away with to reduce misinterpretation of what people are actually buying.

[@youknowwho9247]

That's a funny comment, considering how stubbornly you defend MFT - a system that's a lot more overpriced than Fuji. Both are indeed less cost efficient than full frame, but at least Fuji has a future. MFT is obviously dead, making an investment into the system even less economically sound.

[@youknowwho9247]

@@ofmetalphilosophy4837 What you conveniently forgot to mention is that body and lenses are much more powerful on the Fuji side of your comparison. As always, you fail to take crop factor into account properly. MFT glass needs to be one stop faster than APS-C glass to be comparable. Doing crop factor conversion correctly quickly reveals that MFT is, in fact, the least cost efficient system on the market. Of course you won't acknowledge obvious facts like this, just as you still don't admit that MFT is, for stills photography, absolutely dead.

[@youknowwho9247]

@M Tech I believe Fuji is pretty outrageously priced as well, and lack of third party support certainly isn't helping. However, they at least offer a unique user experience, which tends to be a strong argument with hobbyists. Their analog control style is something a lot of people seem to enjoy, and strategically speaking it sets them apart from full frame offerings. MFT on the other hand is just a less capable alternative that feels like every other system. Being small isn't as much as an argument since the advent of mirrorless APS-C, particularly by Sony, and smartphones. Olympus didn't realise that their market niche was disappearing in time so they died, while Panasonic moved to full frame - too bad they're shooting themselves in the foot by refusing to finally develop a phase detect af system to replace their unreliable, outdated contrast based solution.

[@somethingsafoot]

Picked up the 56mm for 400 bucks used LOL

[@popeyesailor9571]

Those "Blobs" are not Bokeh Bokeh literally means blur in Japanese. Those are lens distortions. Bokeh bro's have ruined photography.

[@cameralabs]

But I';m talking about out of focus lights which become blurred balls, so I feel the term still works. When I speak to Japanese lens engineers, they often talk about bokeh meaning the quality of the blur, or its style, rather than the sheer amount. So again i'm happy to use it to refer to the character of blur.

[@dr.sommer5069]

Rather expensive 75 mm f1.5 equivalent. But great video.

[@NVIK5]

This is a 1.0 lens equivalent to a 1.5 only in bokeh, in shutter speed for good exposure it is much faster than a 1.5 lens.

[@khanguyen4868]

But the other 75mm f1.5 on the market is from Leica, and it’s a manual lens

[@matthewwells1606]

Comparably priced to a Canon or Nikon 85 f/1.4.

[@dr.sommer5069]

@@matthewwells1606 valid argument. But for me the point is for a lets say canon rf camera I can also buy a sigma or samyang 85 mm 1.4 which are also very good at a much lower price point. In the fuji system this isnt possible.

[@matthewwells1606]

@@dr.sommer5069 You mean you can adapt a Sigma EF lens for RF? Knock yourself out. Third party isn't a winning argument for me. I wouldn't touch Sigma with the shit end of a stick. But there is no cheaper native lens for RF or EF (or F or Z) at this price, aperture, and focal length or the "full frame" equivalent. And even if I held my nose and bought a Sigma, it's $1200 when not on sale, so I'd still be only saving a few hundred bucks for a plastic lens with acrylic elements.

[@onehourmusicbc]

Noice xD

[@cameralabs]

Thoinks!

[@80-80.]

75mm F1,5 VS. 75mm F3 VS. 84mm F1.8

[@cameralabs]

Equivalent, not actual, and I stated the equivalence in the video so why do you feel the need to post it here?

[@NewHaarlem]

@80 80 The Fuji 50mm F1.0 lens can expose at f1.0 and faster shutter speeds in low light. If you're implying that a "75mm f1.5" full frame lens has equivalent exposure wide open, you need to do more studying about photography.

[@perilthecat]

I think what drives these comments is it annoys people how the companies producing these lenses market them somewhat disingenuously. At least that’s what bothers me. Such as Olympus’ ridiculous ads that overlaid the 300mm F4 onto a silhouette of a full frame 600mm F4 to create the representation that the results were equivalent.

[@perilthecat]

@They Caged Non they do, yes, you can see an example in the promo for this lens on their KZbin channel. Perhaps not as egregiously as Olympus, but their promo and marketing material focus prominently on the lens being F1.0, while at the same time leaning into the 75mm equivalence. If they go out of their way to mention 75mm equivalence then they should mention DOF equivalence to maintain integrity. If they assume people can’t convert focal length themselves then the same is true of F-ratio, and the opposite is true if they argue that people can convert F-ratio themselves- it makes mentioning the 35mm equivalence unnecessary. The implication is that it’s a 75mm lens that functions at F1, not a 50mm F1 lens with a 50% crop. Which is something virtually all crop manufacturers are guilty of (pretty much any company that’s ever put a lens on anything, camera, phone, whatever.) I don’t find it especially useful to call people tools, etc, especially because they might not understand what’s truly going on with optics. Partially because as mentioned corporations try to confuse things to their greatest benefit. The only tool in my mind is the camera and lens, and in my view the suspected ill intent of other commenters (people) are best met with good intent and clarifying information. (Note: as a human I’m also susceptible to bouts of comment section weakness so I don’t mean to imply anything to the detriment of you or any other individual)

[@perilthecat]

@They Caged Non I’m afraid I’ll have to disagree with you here, Bokeh and depth of focus are two completely different things. DOF is the region that is acceptably in focus, Bokeh is the quality of the out of focus regions. Only two things directly account for depth of focus/field (99% of it anyway): distance to the subject, and entry pupil diameter. This Fuji lens ostensibly has a 50mm entrance pupil, and will give you the same DOF as any other lens with a 50mm entrance pupil as long as your distance to your subject remains the same (not subject framing). This is a weakness of crop-system marketing in my opinion: instead of being treated as its own thing with the trade offs being easily understood and widely known, 35mm equivalence is invoked to create the best possible marketing sheen. Most people who buy a crop body will never pick up a full frame camera in their lives, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to reference anything in terms of 35mm equivalence. The target market largely doesn’t know what any of it looks like in practice anyway, there is just a common conception that full frame is better in some nebulous way that the average, say, Canon Rebel owner is completely unfamiliar with.