Reading mode: Light Dark

A few thoughts on the Viltrox 27f/1.2

Go to last post
D

dccberry

Veteran Member
Messages
1,781
Reaction score
1,888
Location
US
[ATTACH alt="I purchased the Viltrox 27 f/1.2, and after using it for several days, I returned it to B&H. The build and optical quality are fantastic, and I had no issues with focusing speed or accuracy. Size and weight are not an issue on my gripped X-H2. The focal length was the deal breaker, since I already have the Fuji 23f/1.4WR. There is not enough difference in the focal lengths to justify having both in my opinion, and the 1/3 stop advantage of the Viltrox is inconsequential in real-world use. The 35mm equivalent focal length has always been my "go-to" for editorial work, and the 27 felt a bit tight when working close to my subject. If I did not have the Fuji 23, it would have remained a keeper though. Highly recommended overall."]3768763[/ATTACH]
I purchased the Viltrox 27 f/1.2, and after using it for several days, I returned it to B&H. The build and optical quality are fantastic, and I had no issues with focusing speed or accuracy. Size and weight are not an issue on my gripped X-H2. The focal length was the deal breaker, since I already have the Fuji 23f/1.4WR. There is not enough difference in the focal lengths to justify having both in my opinion, and the 1/3 stop advantage of the Viltrox is inconsequential in real-world use. The 35mm equivalent focal length has always been my "go-to" for editorial work, and the 27 felt a bit tight when working close to my subject. If I did not have the Fuji 23, it would have remained a keeper though. Highly recommended overall.

--
www.conklinphoto.com

The Big Picture Framing & Photography in Port Townsend WA

The Big Picture Framing & Photography (Linda Dugan & David Conklin) offers custom traditional, modern and archival framing, image conservation & restoration, fine art photography, as well as commercial, editorial, portrait, movement, dance photography, high-quality art copywork & gic
www.conklinphoto.com www.conklinphoto.com
 

Attachments

  • b6ebed363f594f52ab26e9f8b1fca25f.jpg
    b6ebed363f594f52ab26e9f8b1fca25f.jpg
    4.4 MB · Views: 0
Interesting timing, I just ordered the Viltrox 27mm f/1.2 today. I think in an ideal world, I'd take the Fujinon 23mm f/1.4 WR, but it's over twice the price I just paid for the Viltrox.

I'm going to use this for a few months and see how I get on, with the eventual aim likely to be that I get a Fuji 23 or 33.
 
Breamish said:
Interesting timing, I just ordered the Viltrox 27mm f/1.2 today. I think in an ideal world, I'd take the Fujinon 23mm f/1.4 WR, but it's over twice the price I just paid for the Viltrox.

I'm going to use this for a few months and see how I get on, with the eventual aim likely to be that I get a Fuji 23 or 33.
Click to expand...
I think you will have no regrets at all using the Viltrox. The Fuji is a little smaller physically, but image quality of the Viltrox is totally on par with the 23 f/1.4WR.
 
I recently purchased the Viltrox and am really happy with it. I also have the Fuji 23 f/1.4 (1st gen) and wanted something just a bit tighter so the Viltrox for me fit the bill.

Good luck!
 
The Viltrox 27 was my introduction to the 27mm (40mm equiv.) focal length and, I've got to say, I am getting along rather well with it.

23mm (35mm equiv.) has long been my preferred general purpose walkabout/documentary focal length, but it has always been a tad wide and lacking the subject isolation potential for people photography.

35mm has long been my preferred focal length for people, but it has always been too cramped (IMO) to be a good all-purpose prime option.

I've found the Viltrox 27 to be both wide enough to pull off 23mm duty - so far there has always been just enough room for me to take a step or two back to get the shot, and long and long/fast enough with its smooth rendering and razor sharp f/1.2 aperture, to very nicely pull off 35mm duty as well. Subsequently, my 35 f/1.4 is looking at possible retirement and sale, maybe my X100V too.

I agree, it probably doesn't make a lot of sense to own both the Viltrox 27 and the Fuji 23, but I've tried the Fuji 23 and 33mm WRs and, while they are both truly excellent lenses too, I preferred the IQ and the Goldilocks focal length of the Viltrox over both.

Plus, you can buy the Viltrox 27 f/1.2 and the similarly excellent Viltrox 13 f/1.4 for less than just one of the premium Fujis. Unless you're one of those folks only willing to shoot with tiny lenses, these two are a no brainer, IMO.
 
Last edited:
Erik Baumgartner said:
Plus, you can buy the Viltrox 27 f/1.2 and the similarly excellent Viltrox 13 f/1.4 for less than just one of the premium Fujis. Unless you're one of those folks only willing to shoot with tiny lenses, these two are a no brainer, IMO.
Click to expand...
I have both the Viltrox 13 and 75mm lenses, and they are always in my bag. Fuji does not really have an equivalent for either of these, so yes, for editorial work, a no brainer.
 
Breamish said:
Interesting timing, I just ordered the Viltrox 27mm f/1.2 today. I think in an ideal world, I'd take the Fujinon 23mm f/1.4 WR, but it's over twice the price I just paid for the Viltrox.

I'm going to use this for a few months and see how I get on, with the eventual aim likely to be that I get a Fuji 23 or 33.
Click to expand...
Well I've just received my 27mm f/1.2 in the mail, and I must say, I am absolutely shocked.

The build quality is absolutely outstanding for a lens of £399. It feels solid and like a lens I'd expect to cost much, much more. Even the packaging felt very premium.

I'll hopefully get a chance to take it for a spin this weekend to see how it is optically and to use, but first impressions are very good. Maybe the 75mm will follow soon...
 
Last edited:
Breamish said:
Well I've just received my 27mm f/1.2 in the mail, and I must say, I am absolutely shocked.

The build quality is absolutely outstanding for a lens of £399. It feels solid and like a lens I'd expect to cost much, much more. Even the packaging felt very premium.

I'll hopefully get a chance to take it for a spin this weekend to see how it is optically and to use, but first impressions are very good. Maybe the 75mm will follow soon...
Click to expand...
I highly recommend the Viltrox 75 f/1.2. That lens is easily in Sigma ART territory in terms of image quality.
 
dccberry said:
dccberry said:
Well I've just received my 27mm f/1.2 in the mail, and I must say, I am absolutely shocked.

The build quality is absolutely outstanding for a lens of £399. It feels solid and like a lens I'd expect to cost much, much more. Even the packaging felt very premium.

I'll hopefully get a chance to take it for a spin this weekend to see how it is optically and to use, but first impressions are very good. Maybe the 75mm will follow soon...
Click to expand...
I highly recommend the Viltrox 75 f/1.2. That lens is easily in Sigma ART territory in terms of image quality.
Click to expand...
 
Breamish said:
dccberry said:
Breamish said:
Well I've just received my 27mm f/1.2 in the mail, and I must say, I am absolutely shocked.

The build quality is absolutely outstanding for a lens of £399. It feels solid and like a lens I'd expect to cost much, much more. Even the packaging felt very premium.

I'll hopefully get a chance to take it for a spin this weekend to see how it is optically and to use, but first impressions are very good. Maybe the 75mm will follow soon...
Click to expand...
I highly recommend the Viltrox 75 f/1.2. That lens is easily in Sigma ART territory in terms of image quality.
Click to expand...
I’m already tempted. Took the 27mm out for a few shots today and I am just not used to that level of clarity in low light situations. The build quality is still shocking to me.

The 75mm focal length feels less useful to me in general photography, but for the price I’m tempted to just pick it up to have as a tool in my box.
Click to expand...
It is similar to the old Nikkor 105mm, but again, in a different realm optically. It's great for portraits and editorial work. I think it's even better than the 27mm in terms of image quality.
 
Breamish said:
dccberry said:
Breamish said:
Well I've just received my 27mm f/1.2 in the mail, and I must say, I am absolutely shocked.

The build quality is absolutely outstanding for a lens of £399. It feels solid and like a lens I'd expect to cost much, much more. Even the packaging felt very premium.

I'll hopefully get a chance to take it for a spin this weekend to see how it is optically and to use, but first impressions are very good. Maybe the 75mm will follow soon...
Click to expand...
I highly recommend the Viltrox 75 f/1.2. That lens is easily in Sigma ART territory in terms of image quality.
Click to expand...
I’m already tempted. Took the 27mm out for a few shots today and I am just not used to that level of clarity in low light situations. The build quality is still shocking to me.

The 75mm focal length feels less useful to me in general photography, but for the price I’m tempted to just pick it up to have as a tool in my box.
Click to expand...
The Viltrox 13mm f/1.4 is also of similar quality and is surprisingly versatile in all sorts of situations (IMO). Pairs nicely with the 27 or a mid range zoom.
 
Erik Baumgartner said:
Breamish said:
dccberry said:
Erik Baumgartner said:
Well I've just received my 27mm f/1.2 in the mail, and I must say, I am absolutely shocked.

The build quality is absolutely outstanding for a lens of £399. It feels solid and like a lens I'd expect to cost much, much more. Even the packaging felt very premium.

I'll hopefully get a chance to take it for a spin this weekend to see how it is optically and to use, but first impressions are very good. Maybe the 75mm will follow soon...
Click to expand...
I highly recommend the Viltrox 75 f/1.2. That lens is easily in Sigma ART territory in terms of image quality.
Click to expand...
I’m already tempted. Took the 27mm out for a few shots today and I am just not used to that level of clarity in low light situations. The build quality is still shocking to me.

The 75mm focal length feels less useful to me in general photography, but for the price I’m tempted to just pick it up to have as a tool in my box.
Click to expand...
The Viltrox 13mm f/1.4 is also of similar quality and is surprisingly versatile in all sorts of situations (IMO). Pairs nicely with the 27 or a mid range zoom.
Click to expand...
I could convince myself I need that for astro too...

I feel a sudden bout of GAS coming on!
 
Breamish said:
The 75mm focal length feels less useful to me in general photography, but for the price I’m tempted to just pick it up to have as a tool in my box.
Click to expand...
You may want to take a look at my review of Viltrox 75/1.2

Loading…

www.dpreview.com
 
dccberry said:
the 1/3 stop advantage of the Viltrox is ininconsequential
Click to expand...
Just a small correction: the difference between f1.2 and f1.4 is about 1/2 stop, not 1/3. You can check the math in the wikipedia article on f-number.
 
wjan said:
dccberry said:
the 1/3 stop advantage of the Viltrox is ininconsequential
Click to expand...
Just a small correction: the difference between f1.2 and f1.4 is about 1/2 stop, not 1/3. You can check the math in the wikipedia article on f-number.
Click to expand...
From Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia.

For all intents and purposes, it's a third stop.

And, at such wide apertures, the actual additional light transmission at f/1.2 will likely be even less than 1/3 stop vs. f/1.4.
 
Last edited:
Erik Baumgartner said:
wjan said:
dccberry said:
the 1/3 stop advantage of the Viltrox is ininconsequential
Click to expand...
Just a small correction: the difference between f1.2 and f1.4 is about 1/2 stop, not 1/3. You can check the math in the wikipedia article on f-number.
Click to expand...
From Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia.

For all intents and purposes, it's a third stop.

And, at such wide apertures, the actual additional light transmission at f/1.2 will likely be even less than 1/3 stop vs. f/1.4.
Click to expand...
The table is misleading, as the numbers there are conventional (rounded, and not always in mathematically correct way). You have to do the calculation yourself, with more precision, avoiding rough rounding, then you will see the real difference. Like it was done in the first of the three tables; note also the discrepancy between the second and third table, introduced by too aggressive rounding:



bb8d24513348427cb33eecb6119e037d.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 24281019a34040caa8737ab20d5ab93c.jpg
    24281019a34040caa8737ab20d5ab93c.jpg
    251.4 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
wjan said:
Erik Baumgartner said:
wjan said:
dccberry said:
the 1/3 stop advantage of the Viltrox is ininconsequential
Click to expand...
Just a small correction: the difference between f1.2 and f1.4 is about 1/2 stop, not 1/3. You can check the math in the wikipedia article on f-number.
Click to expand...
From Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia.

For all intents and purposes, it's a third stop.

And, at such wide apertures, the actual additional light transmission at f/1.2 will likely be even less than 1/3 stop vs. f/1.4.
Click to expand...
The table is misleading, as the numbers there are conventional (rounded, and not always in mathematically correct way). You have to do the calculation yourself, with more precision, avoiding rough rounding, then you will see the real difference. Like it was done in the first of the three tables; note also the discrepancy between the second and third table, introduced by too aggressive rounding:

bb8d24513348427cb33eecb6119e037d.jpg
Click to expand...
There’s less aggressive rounding and better precision in a 1/3 stop scale than a 1 or 1/2 stop scale. Who cares anyway. Do you think you’re getting an extra 1/2 stop of exposure at f1.2 over f/1.4? You are not. You’d be lucky to be getting even a third of a stop.
 
wjan said:
dccberry said:
the 1/3 stop advantage of the Viltrox is ininconsequential
Click to expand...
Just a small correction: the difference between f1.2 and f1.4 is about 1/2 stop, not 1/3. You can check the math in the wikipedia article on f-number.
Click to expand...
In real-world use, it still does not matter.
 
It really doesn't matter in real use, but for what it's worth, from my highly unscientific experiment with the lens, if I go from 1.2 to 1.4, I require 1/3 of a stop slower shutter speed to match exposure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top