56mm or 90mm ?

RogueOne wrote:

GMacF wrote:

First of all, don’t sell the 50 f2, it’s a gem of a lens and is super compact. I regularly use mine on my X-S10 as a walkabout lens and especially when I’m out with the family.

I own the 90 f2 - however it’s currently on eBay. As others have said the 90 f2 is just a special lens and I totally agree. My issue was it was getting less and less use and I also just picked up a 50-140 although this was purely because I was really starting to struggle with my 70-300 for my sports shoots here in the UK winter.

If I was a portrait photographer by trade I would absolutely have the 90mm in my arsenal but I don’t do that kind of work - the very odd time for a family or friend perhaps and for that reason I could no longer justify having a ~£600 lens sitting around gathering dust.

For the rare times I do want a good portrait lens I can more than compensate with my 50mm and my newly acquired 50-140.

Unfortunately I can’t offer any comment on the 56mm as I’ve neither owned nor used it but as I say, regardless off where your cards fall I would strongly advise you keep the 50 f2.

Appreciate the advise. I do really enjoy my 50mm f/2 and didn't want to consider selling it right away, which is why I was debating if the 56mm would really give me that much difference from it.

I have all 3. I first bought the 90 and the 50. I don't use the 90 that much, but it really is special. I love the rendering and the fast AF.  My 50 was ok..but I was never really that happy with it. I bought the 56 a year ago and it's now one of my most used lenses. IMHO it has a far nicer rendering compared with the 50. I'm now contemplating selling the 50. The 56 has the magic of the 90 just in a shorter FL (and w/o the awesome AF).