Viltrox 56 1.4 and 85 1.8 worth it compared to 50 2.0

Started 3 months ago | Questions thread
GMacF Regular Member • Posts: 148
Re: Viltrox 56 1.4 and 85 1.8 worth it compared to 50 2.0

HatWearingFool wrote:

GMacF wrote:

I have had all three of these at one time or another in addition to the Viltrox 23mm 1.4 and the 50-140.
The best portrait lens I have? The 90mm f2!

My current prime line up is the Viltrox 23mm, XF 50mm and XF 90mm so as you can guess I either returned or sold on the other lenses.

The thing to consider with the 85/90mm focal length is you really have to WANT to shoot at that as it’s not a very versatile length.

I think this really depends on the photographer. Other than when I'm shooting wildlife I'd say the viltrox is my most used focal length. Great for portraits or landscapes, just really good general purpose lens. I've always loved the 135mm focal length.

Totally agree, that’s why I suggested you have to like that FL to get the most out of that lens. My 90 f2 only really gets used when I’m doing a corporate shoot or when I’m a paid SS at a wedding (which isn’t very often I should add). I haven’t had a corporate shoot since December so the 90 actually hasn’t left the shelf since then as I personally don’t find much use for it outside of that, but as you say everyone is different.

By the by I just looked up the price of the 90 and it has seriously shot up this past year or so - but then most lenses have I suppose. I got mine for £465 around the middle of last year and at that time the extra £100 over the Viltrox (albeit the Viltrox was new) was a no bringer for me. But I see the 90mm is between £600-£700 now which seems crazy. I’d nearly be tempted to cash in on mine!

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow