First Fast Portrait Lens - XF 50mm F1 or XF 56mm F1.2?

toktik · Nov 12, 2021

The fastest lenses I have are the F2 primes: 23mm, 35mm, and 50mm. My primary use for each lens is street photography or indoor concert photography in small venues.

The XF 50mm F2 has been useful for both street portraits and concert photography, but I would like to get a lens that would provide more bokeh for general portrait use and be better for low light environments.

I was planning to pick up an XF 56mm F1.2, but I have an opportunity to purchase an XF 50mm F1 for a couple of hundred dollars more, and I am wondering if that would be the better purchase. The greater weight and size of the 50mm F1 are not big considerations to me, and I do prefer weather resistant lenses for flexibility. However, I saw a review that indicated the 50mm F1 is not a great solution for continuous autofocus (which I often use for concert photos), but I don't know if the XF 56mm would be better in low light using continuous autofocus.

If lens size, weight, and cost are not primary factors, which lens do you think would be a better solution for my uses?

liggy · Nov 12, 2021

I haven’t had the chance to shoot the F1.0 but do have the 56 1.2 and 50 2.0

Given your current lens lineup I’d suggest the 90 2.0 for portraits.

Erik Baumgartner · Nov 12, 2021

sshapiro said:
The fastest lenses I have are the F2 primes: 23mm, 35mm, and 50mm. My primary use for each lens is street photography or indoor concert photography in small venues.

The XF 50mm F2 has been useful for both street portraits and concert photography, but I would like to get a lens that would provide more bokeh for general portrait use and be better for low light environments.

I was planning to pick up an XF 56mm F1.2, but I have an opportunity to purchase an XF 50mm F1 for a couple of hundred dollars more, and I am wondering if that would be the better purchase. The greater weight and size of the 50mm F1 are not big considerations to me, and I do prefer weather resistant lenses for flexibility. However, I saw a review that indicated the 50mm F1 is not a great solution for continuous autofocus (which I often use for concert photos), but I don't know if the XF 56mm would be better in low light using continuous autofocus.

If lens size, weight, and cost are not primary factors, which lens do you think would be a better solution for my uses?

I honestly don’t know why you’d want to AF-C for concert photos but, no, the 56 f/1.2 is not especially good with AF-C, especially wide open where critical focus is paramount. I haven’t used the 50 f/1, but I doubt it’s much better.

toktik · Nov 12, 2021

Erik Baumgartner said:
I honestly don’t know why you’d want to AF-C for concert photos but, no, the 56 f/1.2 is not especially good with AF-C, especially wide open where critical focus is paramount. I haven’t used the 50 f/1, but I doubt it’s much better.

I have been able to use AF-C to track musicians as they move forward and backwards on the stage with 50mm F2, but I generally have my ISO at 6400.

liggy · Nov 12, 2021

sshapiro said:
Erik Baumgartner said:

I honestly don’t know why you’d want to AF-C for concert photos but, no, the 56 f/1.2 is not especially good with AF-C, especially wide open where critical focus is paramount. I haven’t used the 50 f/1, but I doubt it’s much better.

Click to expand...

I have been able to use AF-C to track musicians as they move forward and backwards on the stage with 50mm F2, but I generally have my ISO at 6400.

AF/C with the 56 1.2 isn’t very good as previously mentioned. The 50 2.0 and 90 are better.

Clive99 · Nov 12, 2021

liggy said:
sshapiro said:

Erik Baumgartner said:

I honestly don’t know why you’d want to AF-C for concert photos but, no, the 56 f/1.2 is not especially good with AF-C, especially wide open where critical focus is paramount. I haven’t used the 50 f/1, but I doubt it’s much better.

Click to expand...

I have been able to use AF-C to track musicians as they move forward and backwards on the stage with 50mm F2, but I generally have my ISO at 6400.

Click to expand...

AF/C with the 56 1.2 isn’t very good as previously mentioned. The 50 2.0 and 90 are better.

That is true. However it also depends on the camera. AFC on the 56 is really poor with xtrans3 cameras. It is usable with the latest xtrans4. Not stellar, but ok as long as movement isn't too fast. I've read the 50f1 is somewhat better, but it's still moving a big chunk of glass.

The 90 is in a whole other league.

Orsonneke · Nov 13, 2021

I use XF 50/2,50/1 and 56/1.2

I advise to get the XF 50/1 as the bokeh is gorgeous and light you can get at F 1 is a big pro for concerts.AFC works as it should.
a bit more shutter lag though with 50/1

Iuvenis · Nov 13, 2021

If weight isn’t a factor, it’s a no brainer - get the 50 f1.

Everything the 50 f1 is (relatively) bad at, the 56 f1.2 is also bad at, so it’s definitely the better lens apart from its heft.

toktik · Nov 13, 2021

I ordered the XF 50mm F1 today. I decided it is worth a try, and the place I got it from allows returns through January of 2022 because of the holiday season (normally 45 days for returns). If I am not satisfied with it, I will send it back and the experience will cost me $8 USD for return shipping.

Based on some of the comments, I am going to consider the XF 90mm F2 for next year! Thank you all for your help.

KAAMBIC · Nov 13, 2021

sshapiro said:
The fastest lenses I have are the F2 primes: 23mm, 35mm, and 50mm. My primary use for each lens is street photography or indoor concert photography in small venues.

The XF 50mm F2 has been useful for both street portraits and concert photography, but I would like to get a lens that would provide more bokeh for general portrait use and be better for low light environments.

I was planning to pick up an XF 56mm F1.2, but I have an opportunity to purchase an XF 50mm F1 for a couple of hundred dollars more, and I am wondering if that would be the better purchase. The greater weight and size of the 50mm F1 are not big considerations to me, and I do prefer weather resistant lenses for flexibility. However, I saw a review that indicated the 50mm F1 is not a great solution for continuous autofocus (which I often use for concert photos), but I don't know if the XF 56mm would be better in low light using continuous autofocus.

If lens size, weight, and cost are not primary factors, which lens do you think would be a better solution for my uses?

I'd for sure go with the 50. It's supposed to offer a fair improvement in CAF performance over the f/1.2 and it's another half stop of DOF control, yet still optically good wide open.

Search

First Fast Portrait Lens - XF 50mm F1 or XF 56mm F1.2?

toktik

Senior Member

toktik

liggy

Senior Member

Erik Baumgartner

Forum Pro

toktik

Senior Member

liggy

Senior Member

Clive99

Senior Member

Orsonneke

Senior Member

Iuvenis

Senior Member

toktik

Senior Member

KAAMBIC

Leading Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts