My hands-on preview of the Fujifilm XF 50mm f1.0 and how it compares to the 50 f2 and 56 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
i’m no stranger to big expensive glass but i absolutely adore my 50 f2. its optical qualities are absolutely stellar. but i really like the rendering of the f1. excellent pop.
Gordon, I love your reviews! Honestly I think you’re one of the best review channels out there for photographers right now. You deliver the information with an opinion and samples for us to look at, without all the YT hype. Thank you 🙏
A few thoughts after watching the video: I'm glad Fujifilm developed this lens in the public eye. We were able to observe their thought process, balancing portability and (some) practicality with, quite frankly, an engineering flex. It gave users the chance to adjust their expectations to a lens that, while not entirely sensible for most, is still impressive and attainable for those who want it. It's almost the polar opposite of the Noct 50mm f/0.95, which was developed in a vacuum and released to a befuddled market. Meanwhile, I'm sure there's plenty of people who are going to complain that it's too big and heavy for an APS-C mirrorless, but it's just as easy to do the same for other camera systems -- telephoto lenses with big apertures just aren't small and lightweight. Personally, were I still using the X system, I'd go for the utility of the 50mm f/2 because I like having more context in my photos and the close focus distance advantage is hard to ignore, and I prefer medium format if I want dramatic DoF effects. Thanks as always, Gordon!
I'm going to get this for my Fuji! Great complement to my FF cameras. It's important to note (I don't see this in reviews often thank you for that attention to detail - nice work) - that this F1 lens is a full frame equiv of 76.5mm F1.53. So it'll be the first Fujifilm lens I will have that will approach my 1.4's so I can use this for my professional work. Great work Fuji.
I also have the 56mm and I think I'll keep it in the mean time bcs the 50mm F1 is too cumbersome for street photography. With that said, I'll definitely get the F1 sometime in the future if I find one used.
The 56mm had some nicer contrast and a more pleasing ambience imo. It also looked more plastic (in sense of being 3D) while maintaining a similar bokeh. But as we all know, natural light can change every few milliseconds and is probably causing a lot of those differences - but that also leads me to say, that the 50 f1.0 is a banger for what I promised but no noticeable worry upgrade if you already have a 56 f1.2 or try to get the best Costa-Performance-Balance. The 50 f2 wins the latter, but I'd say the 56 is still the sweet spot.
I'd definitely be in the 50 f2 camp - at some point, depth of field is reasonably thin and isolates well, and you don't really benefit from more (and if you do, I find the option of a speedboosted vintage 50 1.4 a lot more justifiable). The light gathering advantage of the 56 1.2 could still be quite interesting, say when you're taking photos in a dimly lit venue like I found myself struggling with at my friends' wedding afterparty about a year ago when I only had a 1.8 at hand. For the f1, I think it's just unreasonably big and heavy unless you're already used to shooting full frame, with someting like Sigma Art primes - then it's a savings, but if you're a native crop mirrorless shooter, I think you'll just find the size and weight overbearing. Beautiful lens no doubt, but I can hardly see the f1 justify itself vs the f1.2. Either way I'm glad Fuji are producing so many options at (almost) the same focal length - means you can actually pick what's right for you, rather than just the nearest-best compromise (something I also really appreciate about my now-home system of MFT).
I totally agree with you. I'm actually thinking about trading in my 56mm f1.2 for the 50mm f2 and possibly the 16mm f2.8 because I rarely use it. I've grown quite fond of the size, fit and finish of the f2 primes. Also the image quality is great IMO. Cheers!
Already owned the 50mm f2, and although it's tack sharp, I wasn't quite satisfied with the bokeh/subject-background separation. Of course, you can achieve the desired results if you move the background far enough, but having tried the 35mm f1.4, it had more of what I wanted without having to go to great lengths increasing the distance between subject/background. So, I sold it and got the 35mm f1.4 instead. 😆 I also heard from another X ambassador that this 50mm f1 is one of the sharpest, rivaling even the 80mm macro (which I also own). I'm so thrilled to be getting this. 😆
Muata O I traded the 56 for the 50 and I’m very happy with the decision. The 50mm F2 is much lighter, focusses much faster and is totally silent (as opposed to the 56, which is much slower and prone to hunting in low light); also, I find the 50mm a more flexible focal length, very useful for street, reporting, documentary etc. If you use the lens solely for portrait (which I don’t), I’d stick with the 56, but I use the 50mm much more often than I did use the 56. And portraits still look very nice, especially since I prefer to add a touch of context anyway.
My main lens is the 16-55f2.8 which is about the same size and weight as the 50f1. My primary motivator for choosing the 50f1 over the 56f1.2 is the weather-sealing and improved autofocus. I feel like the 50f2 wouldn't be different enough or more capable in lowlight enough, than what I could produce already with my zoom to justify the purchase. Still though, it's nice they have different options.
One thing that I think was missed in the review and comments when you did the self portrait with all 3 lenses was the micro contrast in your hat was visibly sharper on the 1.0 than the other two. If someone needs to have that level of detail then they will need to go with the 1.0. That said, the DoF in the same test was also noticeable narrower to the point where with the 1.0 parts of your face and neck had some Toneh whereas they were in focus on the other two lenses. You were right to say that it’s a matter of taste but it may be a case where having more Toneh might be too much in some situation - which I guess opens the door to for professionals to justify more than one lens. Overall, good job and looking forward to the review of the production version.
The f1 gives you the flexibility to open it wide to minimize DoF or close it up as much as required to get the DoF you need. Of course if *never* need/want f1 then the size, weight, and expense of the f1 would be a waste.
I'm impressed by the fact that the f1 doesn't show obvious LOCA wide open, but I don't think your close-up, everyday objects tests suit this lens very well, at f1 it will just turn everything into low contrast soft mess, for that the 90 f2 is the king IMO. This lens at f1 will enable you to capture some shallow DOF at longer working distances, so that'd show more strength of it.
I got rid of my fullframe gear with big lenses and wanted to focus on my smaller Fuji system more. Oh look a massive lens again. Dammit I want this though.
I already have those results for the bokeh blobs, but not the portraits. I'll reshoot when the lens is final and add them to my review at cameralabs.com
It’s great to have all my questions answered and comparisons available within an hour of the lens announcement. Thank you, Gordon. Bonus points for the Camera Conspiracies reference.
I have the 50mm F2 and I really love it. It's super sharp even a wide open. It has super fast AF with the X-T2. And I have a lot of fun with it. The Fuji F2 prime lenses are forgotten lenses as they generally live in the shadow of their faster cousins. The 50mm F2 is hardly ever talked about. Now with the release of the F1 there will be new attention paid to the F2. As nice as the F1.2 and F1 lenses are, it's hard for me to justify their cost because I'm not a professional and my skill level isn't to a point where I can make serious use of the additional F stops. I'll be sticking to the F2 for now. Anyway, I enjoyed the video. I liked how you compared all three lenses instead simply the F1 VS the F1.2. When the F1 is released for production I hope you do a similar 3 way comparison. I look forward to that!
I'm actually most amazed by how well it pulls focus for video! I was expecting a lot more breathing and hunting, but it nails the end points even if it's not lighting fast between them. And the XT4 seemed to drive it pretty well wide open, i'm wondering how it would go on my XT3... Bokeh is nice too, without those harder edges of the 56, and without the low-light compromise of the APD which is now looking pretty redundant.
Thank you. I have the 50mm F2 and happy for that due to price, size, closer focusing, and faster focusing. Was thinking of the 90mm F2 as a portrait lens as well as this and the 27mm pancake .
I recently got the 50mm f/2 and it is an amazing lens. I would definitely recommend it if you don’t need the extra light gathering capability of the other lenses or their particular characteristics for portraiture.
I can’t wait for a full review, Gordon. I have and love the Fuji 50mm f2 ‘Fujicron’, which seems to be the sweet spot for the Fuji X system. I’m hoping to get the new Sigma 85mm 1.4 DG DN for the E-mount, and I would love to see a comparison of how this lens compares to that lens and similar other 85mm f1.4 lenses. Thank you again for all the good work.
This video helped reduce my GAS. The differences between the look of the new lens vs the 56m I already have were negligible, not enough to justify the expense.
Thanks for the video, Gordon. As always..thorough and clear. I was hoping for a better bokeh rendering..actually. My favourite is still the 90mm....so that's the one I'll get, as soon as I upgrade to the X-T4..and its IBIS. I'll still wait for your final review, though. ;) Cheers from Portugal
Ooh, the Toneh... razor sharp and smooth as butter at the same time. Should give Fuji a bit of street cred. I once read that digital cameras don’t register f-stops below 1 anyway, so f0.95 as the Leica so proudly puts on their expensive keyrings costing several hundreds of dollars for bragging rights doesn’t really get you any benefit over f1 except film (the lens, not the keyring), and they’re full-frame of course. I recently bought the 56mm on sale, knowing full well this thing was coming, but it would be much bigger, heavier, and more expensive. If I made a living doing portraits, I would have waited for this thing. An instant classic.
Superb content as always Gordon! I’d love to see a side by side comparison of the Kamlan 50mm f1.0 mk2. It’s a budget manual lens that I sincerely believe worthy of a little limelight and an excellent alternative for those looking for similar results on a “COVID budget”! Thank you very much for all of your efforts, keep up the great work!
Gordon, your reviews are excellent! You've created a superb formula for presenting the capabilities of various cameras and lenses. Thank you for saving me so much time and money!
11:15 - Rather odd, but this shot reminds me a lot of the (seemingly) unrealistic bokeh-mode effects you see on higher-end smartphones these days. Apparently they were right on the money for an f1.0 portrait prime!
Well, we can't simply break the rule of physics for designing lens design That lens should be equipped with tripod collar so it could be mounted on a tripod
The size. Can't get over it. Not the length, its girth. Glad to see the AF on that size isn't crap. A lot to look forward to on future lens upgrades in that range.
They all looked good side by side in portrait. The bokeh on the f/1 is absolutely gorgeous during that test. Honestly, I would steer newer photographers away from it. The ultra narrow depth of field can be discouraging to beginners.
Thanks for the video, looks like this lens is mainly designed for portrait head shots to full body and couple shots for weddings etc, I think the shot you took with the women on the bike really shows it’s 3D pop. That’s my favourite shot. Also the low contrast helps with skin tones, Not sure the detail shots you took were ideal to show case the best this lens has to offer. This is a portrait lens.
Well, depending on the background, if it's not pleasing, you can blur it out and if you want more detail, stop it down to f/2. This lens gives you the possibility. Bear in mind that if you're doing a full body portrait at 50mm f/2, it won't blur out the background much, so that f/1 actually more useful than you might think.
Fujifilm is the undisputed king of APS-C cameras and lenses. APS-C lenses are very neglected by lens manufacturers. Very few APS-C are remarkable. For a example: _By the Sony is Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* E 24mm F1.8 ZA. _By the Sigma the lineup of f/1.4 lenses for mirrorless cameras , the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 and 50-100mm f/1.8 _By Canon only the EF-M 32mm f/1.4. _By Tamron the impressive super telephoto 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 _By Nikon maybe the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Only the Fujifilm has an impressive lineup of fast and sharp APS-C lenses like the Fujinon XF 56mm f/1.2 R & APD, Fujinon XF 35mm F/1.4 R, Fujinon XF 23mm F/1.4 R, Fujinon XF 16mm F/1.4 R WR and now the unique and the only f/1.0 autofocus lens in production Fujinon XF 50mm F1 R WR. The full frame autofocus f/1.0 Canon EF 50mm f/1.0L USM is magnificent but was introduced 31 years ago in 1989 and is discontinued. At f/1.0 is rather soft while the 31 years younger APS-C Fujinon XF 50mm F1 R WR at f/1.0 is sharp.
APC is a weird format; It doesn’t provide the compactness advantage of MFT, but doesn’t provide the same low light performance of FF. It’s kinda neither here nor there.
Sean The average APS-C lens is much smaller and lighter than a full frame lens of similar angle of view and aperture. That is very important fore those who need smaller and lighter cameras and lenses. The micro 4/3 lenses are even smaller. The good with APS-C lenses is that they are between micro 4/3 and full frame. They don't have the serious disadvantage of micro 4/3 depth of field neither the larger size and more weight of full frame lenses. However many APS-C cameras and lenses nowadays have similar prices of full frame cameras and lenses and that moves many people to full frame. Also cameras like the Canon RP or the forthcoming Sony a7c can be cheap and very small. Micro 4/3 have died recently and maybe in the distant future the APS-C.
Achilleas Labrou yeah I see your point. I never owned full frame but I used to own APS-C and actually found it to be kinda bulky (I had a body with a grip plus fast zooms). Back then I was shooting semi professionally. These days I shoot mostly for fun and I realized I simply love the form factor and portably of Olympus OMD, so I got that whole set up with the fast primes (which are not very small lenses even though they are MFT). But if I were to go back and shoot professionally, I’d probably go for full frame, just for that added low light capability and absolute best image quality (I shoot portraits and fashion). Even Medium format is tempting for me but auto focus and price are both disadvantages with MF.
Gordon Laing I remember well that the Sony Zeiss 24mm f/1.8 on a Sony NEX-7 in 2011 was comparable to professional full frame cameras and lenses. It was the first moment that professional photographers were really impressed by the mirrorless technology. Fujifilm followed the next year in 2012 with the X mount.
excellent video! i have the 50 and 56mm lenses and i need both and the new 50mm is very expensive!! for the similar aperture i use the mitakon 35mm 0.95 and its focuses close! and it is very sharp with great colour rendering! but its a manual lens! i dont think id be buying the 50mm unless i made money out of photography.
Good review and as owner of 56&50 it is nice to see that Fuji offer choice.I would reconsider 50 f1 for planned portrait work ,not for lugging around weight and size. Luckily I see below in comments that you don't have misinformed equivalent warriors which comparing apples and oranges.
I think I'll just hold on to my XF90F2. It seems to focus faster and closer at 60cm and only weighs 540 grams. But great engineering achievement by Fujifilm, it looks like a winner.
I am pretty satisfied with 50/2, price+weight+Bokeh are just good. However, 50/1 worth to consider, it is still affordable, and the F/1 lens with AF so far...
Thanks for this Gordon! Interesting that your 56mm f1.2 images vs the 50mm f1.0 do show a difference, whereas most reviews I've seen show very little. Personally, I think I'll stick with my 56mm f1.2, especially since it AND the 90mm f2 only weigh 100 grams more than JUST the 50mm f1.0. And give you many more options.
Oooo, I almost commented that Canon had what I thought was the First f1.0 50 af .however I missed that the Fuji f1 IS the first af 50 FOR mirrorless cameras. Very classy review as usual
Watching again I really prefer the 56mm over the 50mm f1 visually, I dig the harshness. But the f2 I like more than both. The advantage of the f2 is more's in focus from the jump. All the facial details pop out.
Thanks for the great preview. Love the look of the lens. It also doesn't seem to suffer from longitudinal ca a lot. If I had a Fuji camera, I'd certainly would like to have one.
I like the shallower dof at this particular focal length which has tad bit more perspective distortion than the 56mm. Specs seemed close enough at first, but I think the results set it apart nicely.
Great review, for portraits I prefer the f.2, the other too are really overly blurry. Of course you can use F2 on the other 2 lenses but then why spend the extra money. The bokeh of the brick wall looks ok on the F2.
Very nice review. Nice to have your thoughts about the 3 lenses. I would like very much to hear more about what you think of the 50 f2, especially in terms of sharpness.
My question is were photographers demanding an f1.0 portrait lens? If I were a 56mm f1.2 owner I’d be a bit upset with Fuji for doing this. A great review as usual Gordon 👍🏼
Thanks Gordon, I really appreciated the comparison between the other fifty(fish) mm lenses. I probably won't ever need this lens, but I imagine for wedding photographers or serious portrait shooters it will be great. I actually bought and sold the 56mm because I actually prefer the 50mm f2 lens!
In my (very unprofessional) opinion, the overall rendering is a bit weak at f/1 for it being an f/1 lens - there's a good bit of busyness in the transition between in- and out-of-focus areas. That said, the sharpness and clarity is there in spades at f/1. Looking forward to the more in-depth review.
I don't particularly care about bokeh, and I don't even know what “toneh” is - I need a wide-aperture medium tele lens for photographing under very dim light conditions, such as outdoors at night or backstage at theatrical performances. If I were starting over with Fujifilm, I'd probably try to save up the extra $500 to afford the f/1 lens, partly for the extra half-stop and partly for the weather sealing (not that I shoot pictures in the rain very often, but it does happen occasionally.) However, since I'm NOT just startling out with Fujifilm, I'm going to stick with my 56/1.2 - the incremental advantages of the f/1 aren't large enough to make me spend the money needed to switch.
This new lens appears to be one of those things that are done just to do it. I have the f2 and 56mm f1.2. I ended up getting the 90mm to give me some DOF so I can actually get a model’s eye and ear in focus wide open. I now only use the 56mm when I don’t have the room to back up. This thing is expensive and - though I don’t have my logarithm chart in front of me - only a 1/3 stop faster. And all this at a neck breaking over twice the weight as the 56mm. Who’s going to buy this thing? I personally love my 35’s, both the f2 and f1.4, but the latter is getting a bit dated. I was really hoping for a new 35mm 1.4 with internal focusing, water resistance, faster and quieter focusing, you know the drill. What in hell do I need a $1500, 845g monster for? Look at the bokeh comparison. One can hardly tell any difference whatsoever to the 56mm. How about a redesigned updated 18mm or 27mm...after the 35mm of course? How about a 200mm prime normal pedestrians can afford? Do you know one personal that ever said to you - including you, “gee, I sure wish I had a 75mm equiv f1.0 anchor in my bag, just for those times when I have to...ah...show it off to other photographers?” “Taste of the exotic?” Hold on. A shift lens would be, “exotic,” and I’d actually have bought one of those? A B&W dedicated X-Pro sensor would have been, “exotic,” and I’d have bought one of them too. I love new gadgets as much as the next guy - maybe more - and usually invent some excuse to get the latest, but this is not going to pose any temptation at all. Very odd decision on Fuji’s part, I say. I doubt I’m going to be invited to Tokyo anytime soon, but I only critique Fuji like this because I really love the cameras and hope they stay in business in a tough market by making good decisions. This one has me scratching my head. Someone’s got to speak up, it appears. Every company should employ a jester complete with bells hanging off funny hats sitting at the board room table.
Fuji's FRANKENLENS! Great video! Just because Fuji can design and develop an awesome 1.0 fast lens - doesn't necessarily mean they should! The size, weight, and price take this lens out of consideration from a brand and value standpoint [i.e. it counters Fuji existing brand and value proposition]. While this is a great experimental design and lens, and will not live up to its legendary 16mm f1.4 lens in terms of design, brand, and value, it does push the envelope for those rare breeds desiring a faster lens. The contrast and detail coming from this lens is extraordinary! What I'd love to see from their development: a near-Frankenlens with weather sealing in the 35mm to 50mm focal length prime lens area, with modern motors, but with reasonable weight, size, and price [maybe an XF 40mm f1.3 WR?]. Regardless - terrific video!
I'll stick with the 56mm F1.2 on my fuji X-t30. Just the right size. Thought I would love a real update to the 56mm F1.2 to provide a more solid click between stops. Or an updated APD version.
The only two things I would want for my 56mm f1,2 is of course WR and AF motor that does not freeze in cold conditions. With the rest of faults (?) I could live with...
I like the tonality of the f1 and the f2 lens. In comparison the 56 has a slightly different render in colors that I'm not that sure about (able to fix in post, but just my thoughts when comparing soc). The 56 reminds me a little of documentary style photos in the tones. ☺️
I think the 56 images have more mojo, the F1 images seems dead or kind of flat in comparison with the 56 and if anything the colours on the F2 seemed more pleasant
Gordon superb video and analysis of all three 50mm competing lenses. I have the 56 f1.2 and find it fine for what my photography entails which is mostly portraits. However when the price drops a bit to maybe $1100 then I may add this to my Fuji line up. Kudos to you brother on your hard work.
