XF 50mm f2 a "review" which isn't needed and some shots

What I mean by not needed is that the lens is old enough to have a decent amount of pros and amateurs, but I guess one more won't hurt.

I only got mine one week ago mainly for shooting in the streets at night. I was debating between a used xf 56mm 1.2 or a Viltrox 56mm 1.4 but ended up with the 50mm. No point to write specific info for each of its characteristics like build quality, af etc. I will only confirm that the build quality and handling is very nice indeed, the aperture has very satisfying clicks, the lens hood is indeed weird but amazing for rainy days which are my favourite so it works just fine for me and of course the colors, contrast and sharpness are very very good. Lastly one thing about the focusing. Autofocus is pretty much instant indeed during daytime but during nighttime on rare occasions it can get slower. I am using an X-T20 so it might has to do with the low light sensitivity of the camera (please let me know in the comments if you know). Not saying that as a con but just something I noticed. The manual focusing is suprisingly smooth. For my standards (hobbyist, amateur etc) it is a solid 5/5.

Below are a few shots I took during my first week with the lens all edited just a bit in Capture One.

Friend of mine, not stranger

Michael Floyd wrote:

Nice images. I like your colour choices and reduced contrast.

Thank you !!

No 1 is particularly striking - very good!

Wolf's Head wrote:

No 1 is particularly striking - very good!

Thanks!

This is a great lens, as so many of us have discovered, and it really seems to suit your eye. The shot with the red umbrella is both tender and full of texture, and I also like the dark interior with the window at the end and the figure  in silhouette.

I am glad you mentioned the handling and "feel" of the lens, particularly the perfectly damped aperture ring.  This contributes so much to the pleasure of carrying and using it.

Agreed that it's a superb lens. Light yet well-built, WR, super-fast to focus, and the images it produces are wonderful. This and my 90mm F2 are the sharpest lenses I have used from Fuji. Maybe a few people overlook this lens due to the lower price, but they're missing out.

yardcoyote wrote:

This is a great lens, as so many of us have discovered, and it really seems to suit your eye. The shot with the red umbrella is both tender and full of texture, and I also like the dark interior with the window at the end and the figure in silhouette.

I am glad you mentioned the handling and "feel" of the lens, particularly the perfectly damped aperture ring. This contributes so much to the pleasure of carrying and using it.

Thank you. I only regret not getting it sooner.

Love the first shot. This is what great street photography can look like.

I had the 56 f1.2 and sold it as rarely used it because it is so big. Replaced it with the f2 and never looked back. The AF is faster and when it is on my X-T2 it balances a lot better on it. The weather sealing was another big factor in switching.

Same.  I bought mine primarily because I wanted a WR walkaround lens for my first WR Fuji, my X-T2.  I don't think it's been off the camera more than three times in more than a year.

Great shots, especially the umbrella and the motorbike pics.  Almost a filmic look to these, very nice.  This makes me look again at buying one of these.

Zaax wrote:

Love the first shot. This is what great street photography can look like.

I had the 56 f1.2 and sold it as rarely used it because it is so big. Replaced it with the f2 and never looked back. The AF is faster and when it is on my X-T2 it balances a lot better on it. The weather sealing was another big factor in switching.

Thanks !! That was my thought as well. I have seen some great street shots of the 56mm one from various users, most notably from Eren Sarigul and Craig Whitehead (I think Craig uses primarily that lens while Eren not that much) as well as Nadines.77 on Instagram so it is definitely usable for such stuff but I am not on par with them so the 50mm was a safer and a more practical choice.

Mr Bolton wrote:

Great shots, especially the umbrella and the motorbike pics. Almost a filmic look to these, very nice. This makes me look again at buying one of these.

Thank you !!

Kalimera!

love the 1st and the last one! Very beautiful, I also like your post process. I sold the 50mm/2 about a year ago because I didn’t use it as much but now I miss the lens…

I see I'm late to the party.  Glad you overcame your reluctance - that first shot is a stunner.

The 50/2.0 is such a lovely lens. Really shows the excellent usability of the Fujicron range. Small, light, fast, well built - and all at a reasonable price. Optically, it's a stellar lens, too. Can't fault it.

It's a shame that there is such a rush to compare x vs y ad nauseam. The 50/2.0 is such a different lens to the 56/1.2. While there is an overlap in use, they are clearly specialised in different areas. The 50/2.0 often gets overlooked in favour of the 56/1.2, but I am glad to see it gain more popularity.

Besides the 14/2.8 and the 27/2.8, the 50/2.0 completes my personal top 3 favourite lenses for Fuji.

I have it and I was really surprised at the beginning by the results, with such a small piece of glass, definitly a must have, not costly, small and light *****

MarkMyWords wrote:

Why Fuji APS-C? This lens, for example.

I'l be controversial and state that this lens is in a strange 'nether fish nor fowl' territory for me, just me personally.

F2 on APSC as I have seen in many reviews and comparison photos even at 50mm really doesn't compress backgrounds much and has very hard transitions and contrasty bokeh or out of focus areas.

So the 56mm F1.2 make more sense to me in terms of differentiation.  It;s too expensive for e though lol but the Viltrox 56mm F1.4 calls to me much more as it differentiates itself from the 18-55 at 'F3. and a bit' / F4 a lot more than F2 does.

However I say this as an owner of the 23mm F2 which some would think of a strange choice for the same reasons above as I own the 18-55mm which is F3.2 at 23mm and 23mm F2 on crop really doesn't do stunning bokeh either.

But it is my one favourite FL so I pop it on for when I want to do street or go light on social trips etc

So whilst i have outlined why I personally will choose the V 56mm F1.4 over it, I can see why those who actually like it as one of their favourite or their favourite or one of their  main or their main FL would buy it as a sharp small light prime with great IQ

For me though at that FL, as I don't use it much, when I do I want good TONEH out of it or might as well use the kit lens at 55mm F4!

Hope that make sense, it seems very logical to me

The first two images are exceptional, the remaining three are just merely very good (thought I better edit this in, the "merely very good" is a joke).

Also when two lenses are released, the faster of the two is almost universally deemed the "best." In Canon language, the faster 85mm (can't remember the speed) is clearly better than the Canon 85mm f18. Yet if you read the reviews of the 1.8, folks love it.

Were you shooting RAW or film simulation, if film - which one?

More editing in: Concerning background blur (bokeh), this for me is a critical element of a decent lens. Below is a link to the Fuji 50mm f2 photo page, could someone point out the poor background for me, I seemed to have missed this observation:

https://www.flickr.com/groups/3281213@N25/pool/