DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

56 vs 90: Who is more versatile? Discuss.

Started Aug 10, 2018 | Discussions thread
Truman Prevatt
Truman Prevatt Forum Pro • Posts: 14,596
Re: 56 vs 90: Who is more versatile? Discuss.

atoniolin wrote:

I took more photos today and again most of them were shot at the 55mm end of the 16-55. I love the FL a lot and the images are actually amazing if the background is playing along. If there is a lot of foliage, then I think the 2.5 stops from the 56 F1.2 helps. But I think that the 56mm F1.2 is quite redundant from the 16-55 perspective; since I have the 16 F1.4 and it usually sits on the shelf unless I know for sure it is a environmental portraiture indoors (museums / malls / concerts) or before dusk/after dawn.

In this way the 16-55+90 covers a wider use case than the 56 alone as Vic Chapman and a few others have advocated! Argh, this is hard. Ha. I think I will get both eventually, the question is which first?

I also prefer autofocus lenses by a margin

Both are good. The 16-55 is over two stops slower than the 56 f1.2. That can be a important in controlling a gnarly background in a portrait.

Dan was shot at f1.2 with the 56 on the Pro2.  Background was extremely distracting but the 56 handled it quite well allowing me to spotlight Dan instead of the background.  Even at f2 the background becomes distracting and at f2.8 I would have walked away from the shot.  In this location there was insufficient room for the 90.

-- hide signature --

Truman
www.pbase.com/tprevatt

 Truman Prevatt's gear list:Truman Prevatt's gear list
Leica Q2 Monochrom Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm X-Pro3 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 50-140mm F2.8 +12 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow