Reading mode: Light Dark

No xpro-1 portrait lens?

Go to last post
S

samhain

Senior Member
Messages
1,475
Solutions
2
Reaction score
675
Location
atlanta, GA, US
I'm really excited for the coming xpro-1, but the more I've considered it, I can't help but wonder where's the portrait lens? I just don't consider a 60mm f2.5 Macro lens an acceptable portrait lens. The focal length is good, but f2.5 is just to slow(especially on aps-c) and well...it's a designated macro lens! It should've been a 55mm or 60mm f1.8, with a macro lens to follow imo.

I really think they shot themselves in the foot by using this focal length for a macro. I just can't see them putting out another lens with a similar focal length with a faster aperture for portraits. And with the roadmap already out for the 2012 & 2013, it'll be atleast 2 years.

I've read all the complaints, worries, reservations with the upcoming xpro-1 but imo THIS is the only deal breaker for me. Olympus announcing a new 75mm f1.8 along with the upcoming om-d only adds insult to injury.

Do you guys think we'll see a portrait lens within 2 years? am I in the minority thinking that a portrait lens should've had priority over a macro for this system? Seriously- who's buying a retro ranginder styled camera to shoot macro?
I just don't get it...
 
35mm f/1.4 with the crop factor considered is the best bet.

50mm or 85mm f/1.4 would be even better, so hopefully they'll get on getting that one done sooner than later.
 
I would think that the 'M' mount adapter should help you out.
 
samhain said:
I'm really excited for the coming xpro-1, but the more I've considered it, I can't help but wonder where's the portrait lens? I just don't consider a 60mm f2.5 Macro lens an acceptable portrait lens. The focal length is good, but f2.5 is just to slow(especially on aps-c) and well...it's a designated macro lens! It should've been a 55mm or 60mm f1.8, with a macro lens to follow imo.

I really think they shot themselves in the foot by using this focal length for a macro. I just can't see them putting out another lens with a similar focal length with a faster aperture for portraits. And with the roadmap already out for the 2012 & 2013, it'll be atleast 2 years.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is quite that bad. I would like a 55-60mm f/1.8 too, but the 60mm f/2.4 macro will probably be acceptable.

Fuji advertises the 60mm f/2.4 as a portraiture lens:

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujinon_lens_xf60mmf24_r_macro/
It would have been nice if they provided some portrait samples ;)
samhain said:
I've read all the complaints, worries, reservations with the upcoming xpro-1 but imo THIS is the only deal breaker for me. Olympus announcing a new 75mm f1.8 along with the upcoming om-d only adds insult to injury.
Click to expand...
Remember though that APS-C is 2/3 stops shallower depth of field than m4/3. If we look at the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 and Fuji 60mm f/2.4, they are going to be close as far as depth of field is concerned and field of view. Fuji will have nothing like the 75mm for a while at least. Again, as someone else suggested, can always use manual lenses to fill gaps until appropriate lenses are available.
samhain said:
Do you guys think we'll see a portrait lens within 2 years? am I in the minority thinking that a portrait lens should've had priority over a macro for this system? Seriously- who's buying a retro ranginder styled camera to shoot macro?
I just don't get it...
Click to expand...
I would hope for one, but I think I would be fine with the 60mm f/2.4 though. Samsung was rumored to have a 55mm f/1.8 coming for their NX line, but haven't seen anything yet. They have an 85mm f/1.4 too. However, I am not thrilled with their body lineup, hoping they announce a new camera too :)

Eric
--
I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)

See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)
 
Yes, thats my concern too. It is nice having 3 prime lenses at release, but 60 or 70mm would be nice.
 
I've expressed this several times before. No Xpro for me until there is a fast portrait lens. When that happens I can give up my DSLR and Carl Zeiss 85/1.4 Planar.
 
viking79 said:
Fuji advertises the 60mm f/2.4 as a portraiture lens:

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujinon_lens_xf60mmf24_r_macro/
Click to expand...
I saw that. But you know as well as I do a macro lens is not a portrait lens. In fact their designs are quite the opposite. Hell, I can use an 18mm for portraits too. Doesn't make it a portrait lens.

Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful for the 35mm f1.4, Imo it's the perfect 'all around' lens on aps-c. It'll do. Maybe ive just been spoiled with the pentax 77mm ltd & the sony zeiss 135mm f1.8...But I don't think I can invest in a camera system that doesn't have a portrait lens. All other lenses i can compromise on but not the portrait lens. But then again I shoot alot of portraits, with the majority of them at F2.

I have a 90mm Leica lens, but I'm not buying this camera to use manual focus lenses with, especially without focus peaking, confirmation, etc. Unless fuji has something up their sleeve for the m mount adapter and manual focusing that they haven't announced yet(and I hope they do!), my Leica glass will stayed married to the Minolta CLE.

I hope I'm not coming across as a troll, I really REALLY want this camera, I just can't believe they took the perfect portrait focal length(give or take) and used it for macro! Who in the world saw this retro styled camera and thought....man, I wanna shoot macro with that?!
It just boggles my mind.
Ok, I'll stop ranting, I just needed to get it out of my system. Sigh..
 
One of the real dangers in portrait photography is the shallow depth of focus which is compounded by the short telephoto focal length needed to maintain a natural perspective. With few exceptions it's best to have a depth of focus which keeps the tip of the nose and the eyes in focus, approximately 8 to 9 cm . For a head and shoulder shot it's hard to do this with an aperture wider than f/2.8. So Fuji's new 60 f/2.4 doesn't sound bad.
 
I wanted to post that same thing, because with the 1.4 I usually use you can't do portraits unless you step it to 2.4-2.8 or then your nose will be in focus and eyes not or vice versa :-)
But maybe that is the new thing having blurry nose.
325East said:
One of the real dangers in portrait photography is the shallow depth of focus which is compounded by the short telephoto focal length needed to maintain a natural perspective. With few exceptions it's best to have a depth of focus which keeps the tip of the nose and the eyes in focus, approximately 8 to 9 cm . For a head and shoulder shot it's hard to do this with an aperture wider than f/2.8. So Fuji's new 60 f/2.4 doesn't sound bad.
Click to expand...
 
I know you disagree... but I've found many macro lenses to be spectacular portrait lenses over the years. So to me... a 60mm 2.4 should work just fine as one.

If it bothers you, I'd suggest not buying the X-Pro 1, or wait until they come out with a proper lens that fits your needs.
samhain said:
viking79 said:
Fuji advertises the 60mm f/2.4 as a portraiture lens:

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujinon_lens_xf60mmf24_r_macro/
Click to expand...
I saw that. But you know as well as I do a macro lens is not a portrait lens. In fact their designs are quite the opposite. Hell, I can use an 18mm for portraits too. Doesn't make it a portrait lens.

Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful for the 35mm f1.4, Imo it's the perfect 'all around' lens on aps-c. It'll do. Maybe ive just been spoiled with the pentax 77mm ltd & the sony zeiss 135mm f1.8...But I don't think I can invest in a camera system that doesn't have a portrait lens. All other lenses i can compromise on but not the portrait lens. But then again I shoot alot of portraits, with the majority of them at F2.

I have a 90mm Leica lens, but I'm not buying this camera to use manual focus lenses with, especially without focus peaking, confirmation, etc. Unless fuji has something up their sleeve for the m mount adapter and manual focusing that they haven't announced yet(and I hope they do!), my Leica glass will stayed married to the Minolta CLE.

I hope I'm not coming across as a troll, I really REALLY want this camera, I just can't believe they took the perfect portrait focal length(give or take) and used it for macro! Who in the world saw this retro styled camera and thought....man, I wanna shoot macro with that?!
It just boggles my mind.
Ok, I'll stop ranting, I just needed to get it out of my system. Sigh..
Click to expand...
--
http://asylum-photo.com
 
samhain said:
viking79 said:
Fuji advertises the 60mm f/2.4 as a portraiture lens:

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujinon_lens_xf60mmf24_r_macro/
Click to expand...
I saw that. But you know as well as I do a macro lens is not a portrait lens. In fact their designs are quite the opposite. Hell, I can use an 18mm for portraits too. Doesn't make it a portrait lens.

Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful for the 35mm f1.4, Imo it's the perfect 'all around' lens on aps-c. It'll do. Maybe ive just been spoiled with the pentax 77mm ltd & the sony zeiss 135mm f1.8...But I don't think I can invest in a camera system that doesn't have a portrait lens. All other lenses i can compromise on but not the portrait lens. But then again I shoot alot of portraits, with the majority of them at F2.
Click to expand...
Then don't compromise :) The 60mm f/2.4 will work for a portrait lens for many, but not all. If it isn't what you want don't look.
samhain said:
I hope I'm not coming across as a troll, I really REALLY want this camera, I just can't believe they took the perfect portrait focal length(give or take) and used it for macro! Who in the world saw this retro styled camera and thought....man, I wanna shoot macro with that?!
It just boggles my mind.
Ok, I'll stop ranting, I just needed to get it out of my system. Sigh..
Click to expand...
I don't think you sound like a troll, if they don't make the lens you want, don't buy it. You could always wait and see what kind of portraits people turn out with the macro too.

I prefer Fuji's route to Sony, which made the macro the 30mm, so it is really awkward to use as a macro. I prefer the 18-35-60 Macro route, but as you say they really should have another portrait lens in that case, or at least have gone f/2 with the macro.

Eric
--
I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)

See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)
 
I have used 60mm 2.8 lenses (macro) for years. I am not sure where the problem is. I have them extensively on APS-C type sensors.

If you check out a depth of field calculator your range of depth at 2.4 is:

taking in the sensor size factor - at 10 feet 9.83 ft. to 10.2 feet / call the lens 60mm and it is 9.62 feet to 10.4 feet.

at 5 feet it is: 4.96 to 5.04 feet. If I want to call the lens 60mm at the same distance then it's 4.91 ft to 5. 1 feet

All of this is side opened.

--
Elliot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top