Fujifilm XF 50mm f2.0 WR Reviewed vs 56mm f1.2 Locked

The difference in aperture and therefor lowlight and shallow depth of field is obvious and goes without saying.
I was more interested in their performance for street photography and for my style of aesthetics.

Pros 50mm:

• Small and light (the 56mm needs at least an XT1 for balance imo)
• Cheaper
• Faster
• Smaller filter needed

Pros 56mm:

• f1.2
• Mojo
• Better filter size for video

Cons both:

• Brittle metal in the rings

Video Review
Here is a video review with more comments and plenty of samples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn1VLCDq2w0

Samples

The 50mm f2.0 on the X-T2

The 56mm f1.2 on the X-Pro2

Re: brittle metal used in construction - have you had a problem with lens breakage?

As soon I saw that dog I knew it was you, Mattias.

Lobbamobba wrote:

Not breaking completely but the focus rings on fujis and Sonys tend to get a bit out of shape without any force applied.

Leads to a scraping sound when turned. Annoying for stills, bad for audio.

I don't think "brittle" is the term you are looking for. The definition is "hard but liable to break or shatter easily" What you describe is metal that is maybe a bit too malleable.

Lobbamobba wrote:

Brittle is another word for fragile as well. But its all good, call it what suites you the best

If you are talking about something like "brittle emotions", perhaps.  In the area of material science (e.g. metals) brittle has a very specific meaning.  It does not mean "bendable" or "deformable" or "malleable".

If your goal is to communicate your experience with the product to give people a sense of what to expect, then common language should be used. I'm with Michael in that I got the wrong impression by your use of "brittle". Languages do indeed evolve, but I've never seen "brittle" substitute for "deformable" in a metallurgy context (actually can't think of it doing so in any other context as well).

Lobbamobba wrote:

synonyms: breakable, splintery, shatterable, fragile, frail, delicate, frangible;

If you politely and respectfully don't care, why do you keep trying to make your case?

The first three synonyms are material qualities while the last four are more figurative, pertaining to emotion or temperament.  Were you suggesting that the lenses are emotionally fragile or materially breakable? Which was it?

If you go to the trouble of looking up the synonyms you apparently care at least a little bit and none of them accurately describe the problem below:

"Not breaking completely but the focus rings on fujis and Sonys tend to get a bit out of shape without any force applied."

A couple of problems here. First, if the rings do indeed get out of shape without any force being applied that would be an interesting problem. Much more likely is that force is being applied when the lenses are mushed about in camera bags and the rings become deformed.

Second, the not breaking part is pretty much the opposite of brittle or any of the other synonyms you list and is leading to the confusion I and others have pointed out.

You may not care about this thread but presumably you do care about the issue being addressed. If you complain to Fuji and Sony that their rings are brittle they will attempt to correct the problem by making them not brittle, that is more bendable or malleable which will make the problem you describe worse not better.

I see that you live in Sweden, many/most Swedes speak English reasonably well but if not a native English speaker you may not be familiar with the precise definition of technical terms and that is perfectly understandable.

The term Brittle is very well defined, likely to crack or rupture before plastic deformation occurs.

You are using it in totally the wrong context, see the previous 2 replies.

Lobbamobba wrote:

It wouldn't show on a photo. But you can hear it.

Same thing happened with the Sony/Zeiss 35mm and Fuji X100t.

Im sure most wont notice since they use AF and some dont care (I can live with it,). Its just a shame imo that such expensive lenses are made from such brittle metal. Might as well use plastic then..

Voigtlander are one of the few still sticking to proper metal. For some reason I haven't experienced the same issues with Panasonic or Olympus. And of course not in Canikon who use plastic for the most part.

No point in carrying this any farther, the mob has spoken. You are guilty of using the word brittle instead of malleable in a language that is secondary to you. How silly, I knew what you meant as soon as I read it. Thanks for the review.

EugeneC wrote:

Lobbamobba wrote:

It wouldn't show on a photo. But you can hear it.

Same thing happened with the Sony/Zeiss 35mm and Fuji X100t.

Im sure most wont notice since they use AF and some dont care (I can live with it,). Its just a shame imo that such expensive lenses are made from such brittle metal. Might as well use plastic then..

Voigtlander are one of the few still sticking to proper metal. For some reason I haven't experienced the same issues with Panasonic or Olympus. And of course not in Canikon who use plastic for the most part.

No point in carrying this any farther, the mob has spoken. You are guilty of using the word brittle instead of malleable in a language that is secondary to you. How silly, I knew what you meant as soon as I read it. Thanks for the review.

No there isn't any point. One of the things that bothers me a lot with forum behavior (not just DP Review, but all on-line chatter) is the inability of people to just admit they made an error and move on.

The OP is clearly wrong in his usage of the word "brittle" when using it to describe characteristics of metal. Rather than recognize and simply admit that it is not the correct word and move on, he has to try to prove that his usage of the word is correct. He goes on to label those that point out his mistake as word police and continue in his use of the word.

Ever read "Through the Looking Glass"?  “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean."

At this point who actually cares about his lens comparison?

What the Hell are you guys talking about?

I have all the Fuji lenses except the brick and I have never noticed whatever it is you are talking about.

I'm so confused.... Is my 50 F2 as good as I think it is or not?  Brittle?  Malleable?  Huh?

No comprendo Baby....