56mm or 90mm ?

RogueOne wrote:

I've always eyed the 56mm f/1.2 and have expected to get it for my collection. However, recently I have been comparing the 90mm f/2 as well. I currently own the XF 50mm f/2. So my debate was if the 56mm would really benefit me, since I have a very similar focal length. Yes I know the rendering of the 56mm is different than the 50, but I'm not sure if it will be a big enough difference.

I really want a outstanding portrait lens. I don't expect to use it in inclement weather, so lack of WR on the 56mm isn't a big deal. And I'm not expecting to use it for fast moving subjects, so lesser focus speed on the 56 and my X-T2 also isn't a big issue.

I don't have a studio, so I don't expect to be doing many indoor/studio shots. I expect to be outdoors mostly when using it, so that would allow for the length of the 90mm.

So can anyone provide thoughts that have used, or own both lenses? I really enjoy the rendering on both of them. I am looking at used prices on MPB for the lenses, so they are really both in the same range.

I plan to pair either lens with my XF 35 f/1.4 if I need an 'environmental' portrait.

The 90/2.0 is a stellar lens, but there are times when I'd like the 56/1.2 for when my subjects are a bit closer, so I've been eying that one myself.  I'd definitely buy the 90/2.0 if I already had the 50mm focal length covered.  But I wouldn't rule out selling the 50/2.0 for the 56/1.2 in the future.