xf 56mm f 1.2 on a T-X4 - focus issues?

Hi guys,

I'm currently looking at a new camera and a couple of lenses. Right now I'm kinda leaning towards a X-T4 with the Fujinon XF 56 f/ 1,2 (Non APD version).

I really love the look of photos I've seen taken with this lens. However, last night I stumbled upon a video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yDSlkJwMOc&ab_channel=JoshuaJoelMunoz) where the author isn't really satisfied with a number of things.

One big issue seemed to be that it tends to miss the face focus quite often when using eye focus.

After watching the video I googled this issue and found quite the number of posts from other people about this. (Google search link )

What's your experience with this lens on your Fuji X-T4 (or T3) ? Do you recognize yourself with the missed focus problems?

It's really not the cheapest lens out there so I prefer not being dissapointed after getting it.

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

I saw no one had replied to your question, so I thought I would jump in.  I have both an X-T4 and the 56 1.2 (non APD) lens.  I've never been disappointed in their performance.

But, I looked over some of the links you provided, and then ran some super-simple tests with my lens.  ... and there is something odd going on... but not sure its missed focus.

Sorry I don't have photos attached, but I used my sleeping dog as a subject and shot at f/1.2.  This was not eye tracking, obviously.

When I selected a center(ish) focus point and looked at the photos (on the camera, zoomed in) things looked sharp at the focus point.

When I selected a focus point out toward the 1/3 area, and did the same... things were slightly less sharp.  And when I moved the focus point closer to the frame edge, even more so.

But I'm not sure it was missing focus vs lens sharpness as you move toward edges of the frame?  I'm not the kind that does "brick wall" tests, so don't have other data to compare this to.

Outside of that example, I know I've had times where I focused on a person (again, not Eye AF) and then, for example, their coat was in focus but their ears blurry... that was my fault, for using the thin f/1.2 DOF and not accounting for the difference in distance between coat and face.

But all of _that_ said, I love the lens and the only real-world problems I've had with it have been of my own making.

AnderssonX wrote:

Hi guys,

I'm currently looking at a new camera and a couple of lenses. Right now I'm kinda leaning towards a X-T4 with the Fujinon XF 56 f/ 1,2 (Non APD version).

I really love the look of photos I've seen taken with this lens. However, last night I stumbled upon a video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yDSlkJwMOc&ab_channel=JoshuaJoelMunoz) where the author isn't really satisfied with a number of things.

One big issue seemed to be that it tends to miss the face focus quite often when using eye focus.

After watching the video I googled this issue and found quite the number of posts from other people about this. (Google search link )

What's your experience with this lens on your Fuji X-T4 (or T3) ? Do you recognize yourself with the missed focus problems?

It's really not the cheapest lens out there so I prefer not being dissapointed after getting it.

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

I don’t have an X-T4, but don’t have any real AF issues with the 56 on my X-T2. F/1.2 can, however, be very challenging to focus in just the right spot - and if you miss at f/1.2, even a little, it looks like you missed by a mile. I don’t recommend shooting portraits at f/1.2 anyway, unless you’re at a good distance, but if you must, I find that manual focus is usually the way to go unless your subject is square with your camera position.

The 56mm f/1.2 is quite simply a magnificent  lens however it's not necessarily a beginner lens as it can be a little tricky to use.   Unless you plan to use it extensively at f/1.2, I'd suggest a Fuji's equally wonderful 50mm f/2  or the terrific 50-140 f/2.8.

Phil1 wrote:

I can't comment on the focusing as my cameras are X-H1s but looking at around 80 portraits I have to agree with Erik on the critically small DoF wide open & close up.

The comment I would have about the 56mm (mine is now sold) is that my copy was not at its best wide open, especially at the edges, and Lenstip found similar results.

Really? The 56 can be a bit tricky to work with, but, unlike the 35 f/1.4 at wide apertures, I find my 56 to be quite sharp across the frame, even wide open:

56mm wide open at  f/1.2

In the end I traded it for the 90mm which is very sharp at full bore & be careful if you stop down to f2.8 or you may cut yourself on the sharpness! Most women taken with this lens seem to require a good dose of negative clarity, but it's fantastic for showing the 'character' of males.

Of course, you question was not about the 90mm lens - and it does require more room than the 56mm - but I just wondered if you might appreciate a slightly different take? I hope you’ll forgive the liberty!

I'm not a portrait guy, but if I was, I would want the 90mm too. I've played with one and it really is fantastic - a focal length best used outdoors, though.

As always, if you can, try before you buy if at all possible and make sure you test the lens you get within the 'return period' just in case.

I’m sure we’d all be interested to know how you get on with your choice in due course?

Phil

AnderssonX wrote:

Hi guys,

I'm currently looking at a new camera and a couple of lenses. Right now I'm kinda leaning towards a X-T4 with the Fujinon XF 56 f/ 1,2 (Non APD version).

I'd suggest you to get the Viltrox AF 56mm f1.4. The aperture makes almost no difference to background blur and the AF is a lot faster.

Also 1/3 of the price.

I just acquired 56mm f1.2 recently and pair ot with my xt4, the eye af it's more difficult compare to my other lens, sometimes it's only show face detection, but not that often, most of time it still show the eye square, maybe around 80%.

Not testing with fast moving object, but i don't have any complain about eye af with this lens

@f1.2 eye efe detected the eyes

@f2.2 eye af can't detect my daughter eyes

All jpeg SOOC

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

AnderssonX wrote:

Hi guys,

I'm currently looking at a new camera and a couple of lenses. Right now I'm kinda leaning towards a X-T4 with the Fujinon XF 56 f/ 1,2 (Non APD version).

I really love the look of photos I've seen taken with this lens. However, last night I stumbled upon a video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yDSlkJwMOc&ab_channel=JoshuaJoelMunoz) where the author isn't really satisfied with a number of things.

One big issue seemed to be that it tends to miss the face focus quite often when using eye focus.

After watching the video I googled this issue and found quite the number of posts from other people about this. (Google search link )

What's your experience with this lens on your Fuji X-T4 (or T3) ? Do you recognize yourself with the missed focus problems?

It's really not the cheapest lens out there so I prefer not being dissapointed after getting it.

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

I don’t have an X-T4, but don’t have any real AF issues with the 56 on my X-T2. F/1.2 can, however, be very challenging to focus in just the right spot - and if you miss at f/1.2, even a little, it looks like you missed by a mile. I don’t recommend shooting portraits at f/1.2 anyway, unless you’re at a good distance, but if you must, I find that manual focus is usually the way to go unless your subject is square with your camera position.

Yes, what he said. The depth of field at f1.2 is very shallow, so you might nail the tip of his nose and miss his eye. Use MF and you’ll get better results.

GKramer1 wrote:

I saw no one had replied to your question, so I thought I would jump in. I have both an X-T4 and the 56 1.2 (non APD) lens. I've never been disappointed in their performance.

But, I looked over some of the links you provided, and then ran some super-simple tests with my lens. ... and there is something odd going on... but not sure its missed focus.

Sorry I don't have photos attached, but I used my sleeping dog as a subject and shot at f/1.2. This was not eye tracking, obviously.

When I selected a center(ish) focus point and looked at the photos (on the camera, zoomed in) things looked sharp at the focus point.

When I selected a focus point out toward the 1/3 area, and did the same... things were slightly less sharp. And when I moved the focus point closer to the frame edge, even more so.

Sounds like filed curvature to me.

Truman Prevatt wrote:

GKramer1 wrote:

I saw no one had replied to your question, so I thought I would jump in. I have both an X-T4 and the 56 1.2 (non APD) lens. I've never been disappointed in their performance.

But, I looked over some of the links you provided, and then ran some super-simple tests with my lens. ... and there is something odd going on... but not sure its missed focus.

Sorry I don't have photos attached, but I used my sleeping dog as a subject and shot at f/1.2. This was not eye tracking, obviously.

When I selected a center(ish) focus point and looked at the photos (on the camera, zoomed in) things looked sharp at the focus point.

When I selected a focus point out toward the 1/3 area, and did the same... things were slightly less sharp. And when I moved the focus point closer to the frame edge, even more so.

Sounds like filed curvature to me.

This is some very old and very ugly wallpaper shot with the 56 wide open not far from its close focus limit. Considering the ridiculously shallow DOF at this range, I'd say this thing is sporting a rather flat focal plane. And no, this wallpaper doesn't look especially sharp in real life either.

56mm f/1.2 @ f/1.2

Luisdent wrote:

this might be an old post, but i just got a used 56 1.2 I'm not sure if my copy is good or bad, but here are my findings so far.

at f2 and up this thing is stupid sharp. capture one defaults to a slight sharpening for images, and with some lenses it looks natural. with this lens it looks over sharpened. the lens is so sharp on its own i turn off all sharpening and it is still super sharp (but now natural looking). f2.5 is like a razor blade.

below f2 things are harder to discern. f1.8 is mostly solid. i took it to a ren fest this weeken and can post pics soon, but shot it mostly wide open to test the feasibility of doing so in a general sense.

what i found was a frustrating set of photos with some amazing shots mixed in. a few things to note... first, i focus using single point smallest box or second smallest. back button focus. I'm incredibly steady with my hands. i can easily shoot at much lower shutter speeds than most without ibis. this isn't to boast, but to give a point of reference to what I'm about to say.

at 1.2 i focus by moving the box to a top side rule of thirds quadrant for instance. then focus on an eye. this means no recomposing, and practically zero movement on my part. with many of my shots, the subject was standing still, posing as well. so the least possible movement situation. i tried pressing focus and snapping a shot, i tried almost simultaneously doing as well (still waiting for green acquisition) to eliminate any time for movement. and many of these shots were at a decent distance (3/4 body) and not just head shots.

what i found was a few things. many of the shots were focused on something near the face instead of the eye. a coat, hair, some decoration on the head... and while it might seem i just drifted forward or backwards, i don't believe this is the case. it seems like all the areas that it caught in focus were high contrast edges. so i feel like sometimes the camera tries to find the contrast in the eye but defaults to something close with more contrast. I've seen this with other lenses too, so that strengthens my theory. i didn't use eye detection or manual focus. I'll try those next outing and see how they differ. my gut instinct says f1.2 requires manually focus tweaking most of the time.

another thing i notice was an unpleasant out of focus area near the critical focus plane. it exhibits chromatic aberration and a nervous appearance. but this is when focus isn't perfect. however, when focus is nailed, damn.

some images look tac sharp at 1.2 where it is focused. beard hairs, eyeballs, you name it. razor thin plane of focus, but if it's in it and focused it's super sharp. and the rest is butter. just make sure exposure is correct. this lens is very easily over saturated with exposure. what i mean is that if you expose properly, everything looks good. if you over expose even a little, there appears to be a lot of diffraction type appearance, with things looking even less focused, soft, and sort of aberrant. this is moreso than other lenses, possibly due to the longitudinal aberrations otherwise, this lens is very reminiscent of the 35 1.4 and 90 f2 but possibly smoother. I'd say closer to look the 35 1.4 than the 90 f2 in how smooth the bokeh is.

anyhow, i found f2 was safe. i probably got almost all keepers at f2. most at f1.8. f1.6 was reasonable at a distance. 1.2 and 1.4 were fairly poor keep rates.

my take based on the reasonably limited testing is the following...

if you are a pro portraits photographer, this lens is superb. you can use it all around at f2 and when you do serious portraits and want wider, just use a tripod or continuos low mode and capture a few shots to ensure focus. other focus modes may even work better. I'll need to test more.

if you are a casual shooter, even doing portraits, f2 still looks amazing at 56mm, but I'd opt for the 50 f2 lens. cheaper, smaller lighter, faster focusing. why use the 56 if you're using f2 all the time anyway? rendering is not different enough to matter. there is a blind comparison by reggie something or other on youtube and unless you use 1.2 the 56 doesn't make much sense in my opinion.

however, 1.2 does look amazing when focus is achieved. and it gives you better low light leeway. I'm tempted myself at the idea of the 50 f2 but I'm going to give it more time as i really do love the look at 1.2 and the low light benefit. so we'll see.

This has been detailed elsewhere, but I highly recommend ditching BBF except in M mode (which doesn't require disabling AF on the shutter button) . The older lenses can be quirky and given the chance to lose focus lock, they often will (especially the 56 and original 23). With FOCUS PRIORITY on, try AF-S with a single point focus box positioned where you want it and a full-press of the shutter button (no half-press first), I had the same issues when I got my 56 and this works every time, even wide open in low light (though you should bump up the focus box size as the light drops). The 56 looks great at wide apertures if you nail the focus, but can look pretty awful if you miss (even just a little).