Christopher Frost gushes over XF56mm f1.2 WR

Sounds like it is his favorite lens out of the 554 lenses he's reviewed so far. What an amazing endorsement.

Fast forward to the 11:15 mark if you only want to watch the part about the 56 f1.2.


Also, special mention to the Viltrox 13mm f1.4 lens.

So, he praises new version of 56/1.2, with more clinical look. Allright

Not sure if You notice, but for him most and basically only important thing is Sharpness. But, oh well.. Its his choice Me personally don't care if any YouTube reviewer score specific lens as his no1. Because then again.. So what?

Samuraidog said:

Sounds like it is his favorite lens out of the 554 lenses he's reviewed so far. What an amazing endorsement.

Fast forward to the 11:15 mark if you only want to watch the part about the 56 f1.2.

Also, special mention to the Viltrox 13mm f1.4 lens.

Click to expand...

I had two copies of the Viltrox 13mm and both were soft wide open which is contrary to what many have posted around the internet. So there appears to be some copy variation on that lens.

I want to pick up an 85mm equiv prime lens for either Fuji or Sony. If only they used linear motors in the new 56mm 1.2.... So hard to pay $1k for it without, but otherwise looks to be optically excellent.

dwalme said:

Samuraidog said:

Sounds like it is his favorite lens out of the 554 lenses he's reviewed so far. What an amazing endorsement.

Fast forward to the 11:15 mark if you only want to watch the part about the 56 f1.2.

Also, special mention to the Viltrox 13mm f1.4 lens.

Click to expand...

I had two copies of the Viltrox 13mm and both were soft wide open which is contrary to what many have posted around the internet. So there appears to be some copy variation on that lens.

Click to expand...

or user variation… and I do not mean you

dwalme said:

I want to pick up an 85mm equiv prime lens for either Fuji or Sony. If only they used linear motors in the new 56mm 1.2.... So hard to pay $1k for it without, but otherwise looks to be optically excellent.

Click to expand...

The original 56 was the 2nd lens I bought when I switched from Canon. Coming from the Canon 135 f2L, which is not only brilliant optically, but had lightning fast/super accurate AF, I was NOT ready for the hunting, especially in lowlight, of the 56, nor having to take 3 shots to make sure one might be in focus. It almost ruined the whole Fuji experiment. Fortunately a few months later, I bought the XF 90, which is much more akin to the 135 as far as the speed and accuracy of the AF, and it's been smooth sailing ever since.

I like Christopher's reviews, and I've seen his, and many others praising the improved optical qualities of the new 56, but they ALL also invariably mention that the AF performance of the new 56 is basically the same as the original 56. I know both the old and the new 56 have many fans, more power to them, but I'm not dropping a grand on a lens then have to worry about how many shots are in focus.

I've had the 56mm f1.2 WR for about a month and I'm still not sure if I like this lens over the 50mm f1. On paper, the reduction in weight, shorter MFD, and the optics wide open is a major improvement over 50mm f1. But I think the autofocus and the out of focus/bokeh rendering in 50mm f1 is much better. Outside of shooting numbers printed on a white sheet, 50mm f1 delivers on the image quality front.

It's getting really annoying when I use 56mm f1.2 WR for events and I'm getting lots of missed focus shots... Anyone having AF issue with this lens?