Old 56 vs New 56 WR for general shooting on X-T2

Now that the X-T20 is settling nicely into its new home, it's time to start looking at the next, and potentially last, major gear project, and that's going to be a walkaround/ general shooting setup built around a fairly fast 85mm or equivalent prime. (This represents a chance to return at last to my original passion, which I've never quite been able to reproduce in the digital realm. )

There are lots of interesting options on full frame, all of which would require the purchase of a new camera, and all but one of which would require a major step back in shooting experience compared to Fuji.  And of course, there's the obvious choice, which is to add a 56mm f/1.2 to my Fuji stable. The camera I would be using is an X- T2, and I have no plans to upgrade.

I can read the reviews and study the specs lists, but I'd also really like to hear from people with real world experience with both lenses. If you were going to shoot a wide variety of subjects, indoors and out, in available light, jpeg only, using an X-T2, which version of the 56mm would you choose for the job, and why?

I would also consider the Sigma 56 f/1.4 as an option. Great optics and build quality, and I bet that it focuses quicker than the old Fuji 56 f/1.2

No aperture ring, no sale.  If I want to change apertures with a control wheel, I have every other camera in the world to choose from.

Well, if price matters the older lens is $699 and the newer lens is $999.  (On B&H anyway).

yardcoyote wrote:

No aperture ring, no sale. If I want to change apertures with a control wheel, I have every other camera in the world to choose from.

If that is important, then there are the Fuji options. I have never had an issue personally using the control wheel. It's actually faster than using the aperture ring for editorial work.

Price matters but is not the defining factor. The newer lens was recently on sale for $699 anyway, and may still be.   I won't be buying for quite some time, since the budget will take some time to refill.

I bought into Fuji to get a different shooting experience then I get from my control wheel cameras-- and it's a shooting experience I much prefer. I am not in a hurry.

Luckily it's starting to not just be Fuji options for X lenses with "real" aperture rings. TT Artisan recently introduced a charming little cheapie 27mm AF semi pancake for Fuji with a great feeling clicky aperture ring. I'm slightly crazy over this lens and would welcome longer primes in this series, warts and all. A 55mm f/2 or f/1.8 of similar quality would be a great stopgap.

I had the old 56 and sold it for the new one but I’m not sure it’s worth the upgrade. I don’t find it to be superior other than in AF speed which doesn’t matter an awful lot to me.

Test shots here - sorry for the eating  - my daughter was tired of modeling but agreed to let me photograph her while eating breakfast.

hopefully these are at a format and size where you can see the incredibly sharp results with both

With the new version

Old version

Thank her for letting you interrupt her meal-- the first image would not look out of place in an advertisement. I was wondering if a very used first gen might be the way to go. There doesn't seem to be any doubt that both versions will give great results.

Instagram: @yardcoyote

yardcoyote wrote:

Thank her for letting you interrupt her meal-- the first image would not look out of place in an advertisement. I was wondering if a very used first gen might be the way to go. There doesn't seem to be any doubt that both versions will give great results.

Instagram: @yardcoyote

I wonder if you can find more technical details online?  Is the only difference the autofocus motor and WR?  Is the optical formula unchanged?   Info like that might help with your decision, and you could apply your own priorities.

You might want to rethink that. The old 23 1.4 was just discontinued. Probably just a matter of time before the old 56 is as well.

I agree, comparing the general aspects of the two the difference is slight. the AF improvement over the old one is alright, but actually not enough for me to be deciding factor for upgrade. one thing that is quite a game changer for me is the close focusing quality and the ability to focus closer. This is one aspect where the new one is in fact a long step ahead. The old one at close, you had to stop down quite a bit to not lose contrast and sharpness, The new one is very well adjusted for close focusing.

RivkiLocker wrote:

I had the old 56 and sold it for the new one but I’m not sure it’s worth the upgrade. I don’t find it to be superior other than in AF speed which doesn’t matter an awful lot to me.

Test shots here - sorry for the eating - my daughter was tired of modeling but agreed to let me photograph her while eating breakfast.

hopefully these are at a format and size where you can see the incredibly sharp results with both

With the new version

Old version

Makes very little difference to me. Used copies will be available for a long time.

As I said in my original post,I can read reviews and study spec lists. What I'm looking for here is personal experiences from users "on the ground".

Close focus and WR are the two things about the new version I picked off the spec list as important to me in a general purpose lens.

From what I've seen, the new 56 is definitely sharper with better contrast wide open, has less CA/fringing in contrasty situations, and focuses closer, but the older lens is still very nice as well.

So long as I use AF-S with a full-press of the shutter button, I really have no trouble focusing my old 56 at all with my X-T2/X-T20. I mostly use mine around f/2 to f/f2.8, but it's fine wide open at f/1.2 too (though f/1.2 really doesn't look significantly different than f/1.4).

No problem with AF at f/1.2 here (and this flower was blowing all over the place in the wind)

Nice smooth focus falloff at f/1.4.

I always kind of wondered if f/1.2 was more of a talking point than a useful or practical aperture. It does let f/1.4 be one stop down though.

yardcoyote wrote:

I always kind of wondered if f/1.2 was more of a talking point than a useful or practical aperture. It does let f/1.4 be one stop down though.

Actually, it's only a 1/3 stop difference, one stop would be f/1.0. It's effectively just f/1.4 that looks a little worse. No real difference in bokeh and you get slightly less contrast and slightly more vignetting and CA.

I can't immediately find it but DPR did a comparison as they were using the original lens for the studio scene.  Bottom line was no difference IIRC.