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

Help - 55-200 vs 56 1.2

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
Artur Darulewski Senior Member • Posts: 1,209
Re: Help - 55-200 vs 56 1.2

No doubts, 56/1.2 is better for portraits, but I found my 55-200 also very nice portrait lens even at 200mm. In my opinion longer FLs are great for outdoor portraits (I used even 400 or 600mm). Personally I picked 90/2 over 56/1.2, mainly due to better AF and I decided I'll be better companion for 35/1.4 (I have an old vintage Russian Helios 58/2 and I don't miss 50mm AF lens). If  you need to cover more needs with one lens then XF55-200 could be better choice, but if portraits are the priority, one of portrait primes (from 33 to 90 mm) would serve you better. Now there's a lot of choices from Fuji, Sigma or Viltrox AF lenses. I think I could also consider some cheaper manual lens for portraits

Cheers,

Artur

 Artur Darulewski's gear list:Artur Darulewski's gear list
Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm X-H2S Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +16 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
xtm
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow