The wife refuses to give up the 56 1.2

So I'm talking about adding my own X-T20 to our kit but I told her my preference is the 56 and would want to use it alot and she said tough that I need to buy my own...

uhhh.... ok?

My Fuji system arrives tomorrow! I shot Canon for years, had a brief try with Sony and eventually settled with a Nikon D750. Now that Godox is compatible with Fuji, I have decided to go all in for the Fuji system with an X-T2. That 56mm f/1.2 was also a deciding factor for portraits. That and a 35mm equivalent and I'm all set. I went ahead and added the kit zooms for coverage.

Assuming the new system suites my needs, I will likely sell the full frame gear.

Go for it! As you already know, Happy wife....

jrscls wrote in post #18434587
My Fuji system arrives tomorrow! I shot Canon for years, had a brief try with Sony and eventually settled with a Nikon D750. Now that Godox is compatible with Fuji, I have decided to go all in for the Fuji system with an X-T2. That 56mm f/1.2 was also a deciding factor for portraits. That and a 35mm equivalent and I'm all set. I went ahead and added the kit zooms for coverage.

Assuming the new system suites my needs, I will likely sell the full frame gear.

If you shoot with an X-T2 fuji battery grip you'll feel at home regarding battery life. Just shot a 3 day car show and I couldn't have imagined not having it. If you shoot with a single fuji battery and compare that with your D750 you'll really notice how fast mirrorless eats batteries.

56mm is a killer lens. f/1.2 prime on a crop sensor is still very forgiving in dof compared to a Full frame with f/1.2 prime.

If your a 24mm prime lover on a full frame .......dont test a fuji 16mm!!! You'll have it on your shortlist or you'd already pulled the trigger online shopping LOL!!!

Just remember Fuji does not have a red focus assist grid on an external speedlight. Fuji is NOT Nikon so you'll soon see you'll notice different behaviour if your a low light shooter bouncing light.

Talley wrote in post #18434330
So I'm talking about adding my own X-T20 to our kit but I told her my preference is the 56 and would want to use it alot and she said tough that I need to buy my own...

uhhh.... ok?

Tell her that she will lack documentation blowing out the background to cream. She'll loose story telling capabilities always shooting 85mm equiv

Talley wrote in post #18434330
So I'm talking about adding my own X-T20 to our kit but I told her my preference is the 56 and would want to use it alot and she said tough that I need to buy my own...

uhhh.... ok?

Did your wife use the words "cold dead hands"? That or some similar idiomatic expression to bugger off is how I imagine it playing out.

And good for her.

I wouldn't see the point of owning two of the same lens.

Maybe this means I should go sony

Talley wrote in post #18434711
I wouldn't see the point of owning two of the same lens.

Maybe this means I should go sony

No, don't do that. It's the perfect opportunity to get the XF 50 f/2. You could do a comparative review.

Ya and give that 50/2 to her lol

50 f/2 is my favorite lens. I do not have the 56/1.2 but I figured I could get the 50 and 90 instead and save a few bucks and i like the 135 mm focal length more than the 85.

I would add the 90 f/2 which should make an awesome portrait duo along with the 56.

jrscls wrote in post #18434936
I would add the 90 f/2 which should make an awesome portrait duo along with the 56.

I often debate on 85mm and 135mm FOV.

The fuji 56 f/1.2 wideopen still has plenty of dof when the subject is at a reasonable distance. As a Canon shooter I'd rather shoot with my 85L f/1.2 prime on a full frame wideopen vs 135L. Subjects for portrait purposes are not too far for communication purposes and you can get the creamy bokeh. For more dynamic situations the 70-200 f/2.8 mk2 is like using a prime lens!!! 200mm provides alot of compression to the photo so that it can produce creamy bokeh too but with versatility.

The fuji 90mm is beautiful but it all depends on your style of communication when posing in portraits.

If we are talking about limitations of getting close to a subject like seated in a theater with your kids performing this is a choice of FOV as subject / camera distance if fixed.

I stay with canon only for the 200/2

No cropper can match it. Nor can the 70-200mk2

But for travel the 56 would be the longest I'd need. 10-24, 18/2, 35 is about all I need for travel.

I know the feeling Tally. The Canon EF 135L F/2 kept me shooting with Canon much longer that I probably would have, I really liked that lens. The 90/2 from Fuji, although a really great lens, is not the same at all - even though the FOV is about the same, it's just not mmmmm, oh I don't know but it's like the 90/2 is missing a little magic...

I do use my 90/2 a lot but I much prefer using the 56/1.2 for portraits, probably because I can get in closer without the giant brick camera feeling towards the client. With Canon I never really liked the 85mm, funny how the opposite worked out with that. The 90/2 can get in close so it's great for those detail shots, I see it as a technical lens.

I remember saying to Fujifilm a little while ago, my feelings about the 90/2 and how I view and use it as more of a technical lens. That was made with a few gasps [jokingly] from the UK guys. I'm trying to change my view on that.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/XNj3​ir

Talley wrote in post #18435066
I stay with canon only for the 200/2

No cropper can match it. Nor can the 70-200mk2

But for travel the 56 would be the longest I'd need. 10-24, 18/2, 35 is about all I need for travel.

The 200 f/2IS is a nice lens but i will say the 70-200 f/2.8IS or a fuji crop sensor can easily match it.....why?????

Because by definition "Image quality" is a variation of unique characteristics of the lens/body.

The organic characteristics of the Fuji rendition with a 56mm prime can be equally as pleasing and sharp to a compressed Canon 200 f/2 blown out to cream bokeh. The Canon 70-200 is so much more versatile than a prime and you have infinite variation of perspectives as you zoom which can create better "imagery" which is more important as an art than pure analysis of a 200 f/2IS prime.

The versatility of the 70-200 I can put a single 200mm prime to shame for events work. Prime lens has a fixed perspective as you keep the subject a certain size in the frame at an "x" distance of camera to subject distances. The 70-200 you can size the subject in the frame but move your camera/lens closer or further so you have CONTROL over the perspective of the image. So this is where I love pointing out the pros/cons of a prime lens and the con of the Primes is limitation in changing PERSPECTIVE.

The only superior thing about the 200 f/2IS is the over inflated price. The selection of FOV has nothing to do with creating a "superior" image. I've played with the 200 f/2IS through Canon professional services rental plan and I did not see anything astounding about that lens as it's not a superior tool for me in capturing a family photo session or even portrait photos because the the shear long distance you must be from your subject.

Miles may vary but as a photographer we all have different tools. 135L to me is even a better tool as you do not have to scream at your subjects as you pose them. If your lucky to have a professional model strutting her style you just spray and pray with a 200 f/2IS with no issues of capturing a pro model. If you have to work hard as a photographer posing your "real world" bride/groom to average kids/adult portrait session I think a nikon/canon/fuji shooter with an 85mm or 135mm prime FOV would be a more logical tool.

I shoot canon but i think the fuji 56mm is a sick amazing lens. f/1.2 on a crop sensor is forgiving in DOF but you still get some pleasing organic images. I see a common mistake from newbies is that blowing background to cream destroys story telling. Cool for some situations but can be overly used.....been there done that

The sharpness in the 200 f/2IS looks different from a newer generation Canon lens. Realistically Canon should be making a 200 f/2IS mk2 so that it can have similar optics to a Sigma 135 ART. The Canon 200 f/2IS has the old Canon sharp look that does NOT have the micro contrast like the newer designed modern lenses. An analogy is like comparing a 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2 vs 70-200 f/2.8mk2. There is a huge difference in how the micro contrast looks with the newer lens.

Fuji has this nice organic look compared to some sony lenses that have a more contrasty look. We all choose tools for a reason