Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
HamSupLo
HamSupLo New Member • Posts: 23
Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?

Keeping this quick, outside of actually just wanting 50mm, is there any reason to pick one up at this point?

It's an older lens that's still pricey ($850 on B&H and $650 for a good used one on KEH) when you can get the VIltrox 56mm f/1.4 for $330 or shell out $100 more for the Fuji 56mm f/1.2.

So I'm wondering as someone who loves the ZEISS Touit 32mm f/1.8, what need/gap/whatever does the 50mm fill right now with the other options available?

 HamSupLo's gear list:HamSupLo's gear list
Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Carl Zeiss Touit 1.8/32 Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR +10 more
BJ60EH Forum Member • Posts: 76
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?
2

Do you need a macro lens? If you aren't going to use it for macro and want 50mm, you can get the Fuji 50mm f2 a lot cheaper and it's whole stop faster. Or if you want some macro ability but don't mind a bit slower focus there's the 60mm 2.4 (one of my favourite lenses). It only goes to 0.5x magnification but I really enjoy the colours and image quality.

Basically the Zeiss offers macro capability over the other lenses you mentioned.

 BJ60EH's gear list:BJ60EH's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm 50-230mm Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS
jjz2 Senior Member • Posts: 2,974
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?
1

HamSupLo wrote:

Keeping this quick, outside of actually just wanting 50mm, is there any reason to pick one up at this point?

It's an older lens that's still pricey ($850 on B&H and $650 for a good used one on KEH) when you can get the VIltrox 56mm f/1.4 for $330 or shell out $100 more for the Fuji 56mm f/1.2.

So I'm wondering as someone who loves the ZEISS Touit 32mm f/1.8, what need/gap/whatever does the 50mm fill right now with the other options available?

I mean the zeiss is a 1:1 macro so I don’t see it as comparable to any that you listed. Two diff purposes.

If you need a cheaper 1:1 macro that performs well, you could mount several versions of the nikon 60 2.8.

 jjz2's gear list:jjz2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R +1 more
HamSupLo
OP HamSupLo New Member • Posts: 23
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?

jjz2 wrote:

I mean the zeiss is a 1:1 macro so I don’t see it as comparable to any that you listed. Two diff purposes.

If you need a cheaper 1:1 macro that performs well, you could mount several versions of the nikon 60 2.8.

BJ60EH wrote:

Do you need a macro lens? If you aren't going to use it for macro and want 50mm, you can get the Fuji 50mm f2 a lot cheaper and it's whole stop faster. Or if you want some macro ability but don't mind a bit slower focus there's the 60mm 2.4 (one of my favourite lenses). It only goes to 0.5x magnification but I really enjoy the colours and image quality.

Basically the Zeiss offers macro capability over the other lenses you mentioned.

Thanks for reminding me about the 1:1 macro! I completely forgot about it. Makes a lot of sense to me.

Appreciate the suggestion on the 60mm as well. Heard about the slow focus and that the colors and IQ really make up for it!

 HamSupLo's gear list:HamSupLo's gear list
Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Carl Zeiss Touit 1.8/32 Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR +10 more
jjz2 Senior Member • Posts: 2,974
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?

HamSupLo wrote:

jjz2 wrote:

I mean the zeiss is a 1:1 macro so I don’t see it as comparable to any that you listed. Two diff purposes.

If you need a cheaper 1:1 macro that performs well, you could mount several versions of the nikon 60 2.8.

BJ60EH wrote:

Do you need a macro lens? If you aren't going to use it for macro and want 50mm, you can get the Fuji 50mm f2 a lot cheaper and it's whole stop faster. Or if you want some macro ability but don't mind a bit slower focus there's the 60mm 2.4 (one of my favourite lenses). It only goes to 0.5x magnification but I really enjoy the colours and image quality.

Basically the Zeiss offers macro capability over the other lenses you mentioned.

Thanks for reminding me about the 1:1 macro! I completely forgot about it. Makes a lot of sense to me.

Appreciate the suggestion on the 60mm as well. Heard about the slow focus and that the colors and IQ really make up for it!

The 60 FUJI has a really nice rendering, I've been thinking of picking one up again. Because at that length, I'm usually indoors with lighting set up. Could use it as an extra lens for nature hikes as well.

For outdoor portraits, I actually prefer my Viltrox 85mm 1.8 (I'm sure I'd like the fuji 90 also).

In the past for portraits, I would find it missing shots, even if I nailed focus in camera. Sometimes it hunted. That was back on the X E2 though, it's supposed to perform better on the newer cameras, but still doubt it's a speed demon.

 jjz2's gear list:jjz2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R +1 more
BJ60EH Forum Member • Posts: 76
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?

jjz2 wrote:

HamSupLo wrote:

jjz2 wrote:

I mean the zeiss is a 1:1 macro so I don’t see it as comparable to any that you listed. Two diff purposes.

If you need a cheaper 1:1 macro that performs well, you could mount several versions of the nikon 60 2.8.

BJ60EH wrote:

Do you need a macro lens? If you aren't going to use it for macro and want 50mm, you can get the Fuji 50mm f2 a lot cheaper and it's whole stop faster. Or if you want some macro ability but don't mind a bit slower focus there's the 60mm 2.4 (one of my favourite lenses). It only goes to 0.5x magnification but I really enjoy the colours and image quality.

Basically the Zeiss offers macro capability over the other lenses you mentioned.

Thanks for reminding me about the 1:1 macro! I completely forgot about it. Makes a lot of sense to me.

Appreciate the suggestion on the 60mm as well. Heard about the slow focus and that the colors and IQ really make up for it!

The 60 FUJI has a really nice rendering, I've been thinking of picking one up again. Because at that length, I'm usually indoors with lighting set up. Could use it as an extra lens for nature hikes as well.

For outdoor portraits, I actually prefer my Viltrox 85mm 1.8 (I'm sure I'd like the fuji 90 also).

In the past for portraits, I would find it missing shots, even if I nailed focus in camera. Sometimes it hunted. That was back on the X E2 though, it's supposed to perform better on the newer cameras, but still doubt it's a speed demon.

I use it on my X-T2 and you're right. It's no speed demon, but I find it sufficiently fast, especially in decent lighting. It nails focus for portraits and it even keeps up with kids, you juts have to anticipate a little bit what's going to happen but I have no problem with it. It's a fun walk around lens too, and when I want 1:1 macro I have some cheap meike extension tubes that work surprisingly well.

 BJ60EH's gear list:BJ60EH's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm 50-230mm Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS
Gringostarr Regular Member • Posts: 241
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?

Unless you absolutely need a 1:1 macro lens get the 60/2.4. If you absolutely need 1:1 macro the 80 2.8 is worth the extra cost over the Zeiss.

I will say that the 60/2.4 is fantastic if you can look past that fact that it's not a "true" macro lens (which is a BS designation IMO, it's fantastic as a macro lens), easily up there with the 35/1.4 when it comes to rendering and is among the sharpest of all the primes. Also, on newer bodies it also focuses reasonably well as long as it's not switching between macro and normal focus modes.

 Gringostarr's gear list:Gringostarr's gear list
Fujifilm X-E4 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR Venus Laowa 9mm F2.8 +1 more
Rod McD Veteran Member • Posts: 7,353
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?
1

Hi,

The Zeiss is a relatively expensive lens that goes to 1:1 where the Fuji 60mm only goes to 1:2.  The Fuji 80mm is a very heavy 1:1 macro that costs more than the Zeiss,  It is reported to be excellent at all distances.

If you specifically want macro, the Laowa 65/2.8 Apo is probably sharper than any of them.  It goes to 2:1 and it's apochromatic as well.  OTOH, it's MF (if that concerns you) and slower to use with its manual aperture system.

I would ignore notions that a lens isn't a "true " macro if it doesn't go to 1:1.  It's just a line in the mental sand.  There are just as many compositions at any magnification and it really depends what YOU want to take images of.

Cheers, Rod

 Rod McD's gear list:Rod McD's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Olympus Tough TG-4 Fujifilm X-T1 Voigtlander 90mm F3.5 APO-Lanthar SL II Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +16 more
biza43 Forum Pro • Posts: 13,333
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?
2

Easy answer: yes if you want a 50 macro.

-- hide signature --

www.paulobizarro.com
http://blog.paulobizarro.com/

 biza43's gear list:biza43's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro3 Fujifilm X-S10 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR Fujifilm XF 23mm F2 R WR Fujifilm 50mm F2 R WR +1 more
jjz2 Senior Member • Posts: 2,974
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?

Rod McD wrote:

Hi,

The Zeiss is a relatively expensive lens that goes to 1:1 where the Fuji 60mm only goes to 1:2. The Fuji 80mm is a very heavy 1:1 macro that costs more than the Zeiss, It is reported to be excellent at all distances.

If you specifically want macro, the Laowa 65/2.8 Apo is probably sharper than any of them. It goes to 2:1 and it's apochromatic as well. OTOH, it's MF (if that concerns you) and slower to use with its manual aperture system.

I would ignore notions that a lens isn't a "true " macro if it doesn't go to 1:1. It's just a line in the mental sand. There are just as many compositions at any magnification and it really depends what YOU want to take images of.

Cheers, Rod

Yes for somebody that just wanted to get up close occasionally, the 60 was more than close enough when I had it. And actually when so up close it’s pretty difficult hand held to get sharp and in focus shots, esp indoors of stuff around the house, as you also have to stop down the lens. Maybe just me, but needed a tripod often for these.

 jjz2's gear list:jjz2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R +1 more
Jim in Hudson Senior Member • Posts: 2,492
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?

Gringostarr wrote:

Unless you absolutely need a 1:1 macro lens get the 60/2.4. If you absolutely need 1:1 macro the 80 2.8 is worth the extra cost over the Zeiss.

I will say that the 60/2.4 is fantastic if you can look past that fact that it's not a "true" macro lens (which is a BS designation IMO, it's fantastic as a macro lens), easily up there with the 35/1.4 when it comes to rendering and is among the sharpest of all the primes. Also, on newer bodies it also focuses reasonably well as long as it's not switching between macro and normal focus modes.

With today's high resolution sensors, is a macro lens really just one with a flat plane of focus and not one that's 1:1?

 Jim in Hudson's gear list:Jim in Hudson's gear list
Pentax K-3 Fujifilm X-T3 Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM | C Fujifilm XF 16-80mm F4 +1 more
Rod McD Veteran Member • Posts: 7,353
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?

jjz2 wrote:

Rod McD wrote:

Hi,

The Zeiss is a relatively expensive lens that goes to 1:1 where the Fuji 60mm only goes to 1:2. The Fuji 80mm is a very heavy 1:1 macro that costs more than the Zeiss, It is reported to be excellent at all distances.

If you specifically want macro, the Laowa 65/2.8 Apo is probably sharper than any of them. It goes to 2:1 and it's apochromatic as well. OTOH, it's MF (if that concerns you) and slower to use with its manual aperture system.

I would ignore notions that a lens isn't a "true " macro if it doesn't go to 1:1. It's just a line in the mental sand. There are just as many compositions at any magnification and it really depends what YOU want to take images of.

Cheers, Rod

Yes for somebody that just wanted to get up close occasionally, the 60 was more than close enough when I had it. And actually when so up close it’s pretty difficult hand held to get sharp and in focus shots, esp indoors of stuff around the house, as you also have to stop down the lens. Maybe just me, but needed a tripod often for these.

Yes, I find tripods incredibly useful for a lot of macro, but unfortunately unsuitable for mobile subjects, ie pretty much anything living.....  Cheers, Rod

 Rod McD's gear list:Rod McD's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Olympus Tough TG-4 Fujifilm X-T1 Voigtlander 90mm F3.5 APO-Lanthar SL II Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +16 more
Majikdragon Regular Member • Posts: 147
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?

Given that you mentioned the Fuji and Viltrox lenses, I'm assuming you aren't specifically looking for a macro lens. The Fuji 50 f/2 is spectacular. I'd get that.

Gringostarr Regular Member • Posts: 241
Re: Is there a point in getting the ZEISS Touit 50mm f/2.8?
1

Jim in Hudson wrote:

Gringostarr wrote:

Unless you absolutely need a 1:1 macro lens get the 60/2.4. If you absolutely need 1:1 macro the 80 2.8 is worth the extra cost over the Zeiss.

I will say that the 60/2.4 is fantastic if you can look past that fact that it's not a "true" macro lens (which is a BS designation IMO, it's fantastic as a macro lens), easily up there with the 35/1.4 when it comes to rendering and is among the sharpest of all the primes. Also, on newer bodies it also focuses reasonably well as long as it's not switching between macro and normal focus modes.

With today's high resolution sensors, is a macro lens really just one with a flat plane of focus and not one that's 1:1?

Basically yes which is why the 16/1.4 is talked about as a macro lens. As I said though, unless you absolutely need 1:1 the 60/2.4 is an amazing lens for the price, easily the must underrated lens in the lineup.

 Gringostarr's gear list:Gringostarr's gear list
Fujifilm X-E4 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR Venus Laowa 9mm F2.8 +1 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads