XF 60mm v 50mm F2 for macro

jasimpson wrote:

Thanks all. I should of said that I realise that the 50mm wasn't a macro lens. Also both of these lens are in my budget that have auto focus. The other macro choices don't.

Does the minimum focus distance change with the macro tubes and the 50mm.

Does anyone know what the focus is like on the 60mm under artificial lighting and in poor lighting is really that bad?

having just used the 60 for a photo shoot on monday, i will say that it is a slow lens when doing inside work. the client had excellent lighting from the overhead lights and natural lighting from outside, so lighting wasnt an issue. it was slow to focus and just getting a focus lock was a chore. now having said that, the iq of the pictures was beyond excellent and worth the extra time. I also had the 50 f2 available to me, and it was faster and easier to get a lock. Images quality was also excellent.

under low lighting imho, the 60 can be a bit of a challenge. so if a majority of your shots are going to be in low light, get the 50, else the 60 could fit your bill.

cheers

MariusMasalar wrote:

I think you might find the 60mm to be frustrating in a wedding context. It's among Fuji's best lenses, optically, but it's slow enough that I would not feel confident deploying it in a shooting scenario that required fast AF.

The 50mm ƒ/2 is a rocket ship by comparison. Slows down in low light, but it's significantly more reactive in general. Not a great macro lens though, so if that's the priority then you're still better off with the 60mm.

Basically each of the lenses you mentioned excels at only one of your required shooting contexts, and is pretty bad at the other.

Your best bet might be option 3: the 50mm plus one of Fuji's macro extenders—that would get you good AF for weddings and a much better working distance for macro.

Here's an example I shot recently with the 50mm ƒ/2 + MECX-16 extender for reference: