Dear reader, thank you for visiting our website. The article you are looking for – Fujifilm 56mm vs Samyang 50mm – has been transferred over to our comparison website. You can find the new URL in the comment section below. We apologize for the inconvenience.
If you are looking for information about the XF 56mm or 50mm f1.2, you can also check our individual reviews below:
The article can be found here:
https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/x-mount-lenses/samyang-50mm-vs-fujifilm-56mm/
The article can be found here:
http://mirrorlesscomparison.com/x-mount-lenses/samyang-50mm-vs-fujifilm-56mm/
You must have had a dud lens. Sharpness is perfectly acceptable and if you stop down a bit it begins to hurt the eyes, that’s how sharp the f1.2 Samyang is. It’s easier to soften a sharp photo that the other way round.
I made different side by side shots (short and long distances, portraits etc) and the 56mm is always sharper.
Thanks — I love your reviews. To what extent do you think the apparent superior sharpness of the 56mm attributable to the 12% increase in focal length over the 50mm? You note this phenomenon yourself when evaluating close-focus performance, and it would be very interesting to see comparisons of equivalent compositions.
I agree. I loved the perfect softness in the portraits of the 50mm here. In the bokeh test, I also found the colors and handling of highlights better. However I think sharpness becomes more of a clear advantage in the full body shot. These properties are the most useful in smoothing skin so that it doesn’t look clinical, and instead maybe more film like and forgiving.
I agree! 😉
The 56 is magical !!
For most of the shots yes.
Was a tripod used ?
I agree with everything you guys are saying. I did this comparison with skin tones in mind, but it was also to test the best portrait lenses on all three systems:
http://romeobravophoto.zenfolio.com/blog/2016/6/skin-tone-test—sony-85mm-g-master-comparison-part-2
I think the Fuji 56/1.2 is the Goldilocks of the bunch. The best considering rendering, size, performance, and cost.
this.
I thought about buying the Nocti too, but it was just too expensive. I ended up buying a used X-T1 and new 56mm for less than the 42.5mm f/1.2 would have costed. I got a chance to compare both lenses and even my friend who owns the Nocti (and because of whom I even considered buying it) had to admit, that the Fuji was at least as good in most aspects (sharpness, CA, color rendition) and better at some (subject isolation and especially price!)
I think that Fuji has produced the best 85mm equivalent (on mirrorless) for a long time. The Sony 85GM probably is better, but it’s huge, heavy, expansive and slow to focus.
And at the moment Oly and Pana are moving to much more expansive lenses too, one has to wonder why to buy them and not directly go the the (cheaper) Fuji versions.
Yes, the Fuji Lens may be razor sharp and that’s where my problems start: when I look at the results they are sharp but kind of sterile and kind of antiseptic, to clean imho. I love the Fuji Xpro cameras but not the results with their lenses. That’s why I only kept the 35 1.4, otherwise I shoot manual with vintage canon fd lenses mostly. Here my favourite lenses are the old Fl 55 1.2 or the 50 1.4 or 85 1.8 and 135 2.0 in combination with a metabones speed booster. But to come back to the 50/56 discussion: the results confirm my impression namely that the Fuji lens may be sharp as can be but does it render a want-to-look-at look? Not for my eyes, do I want to count every wrinkle or eyebrow? I think we are often taken away by technical details and performance but forget about aesthetic and emotion that makes the beauty of a photo. But all lenses have their field: Fuji for clean-washed technical razor sharp photos, a samyang or vintage manual lens for beautiful photos. Always good light!
Flickr/photos/jensaddis
Tumblr/jensaddis
Great comparison.
Although I love my current Fujinon prime lenses, I also have to admit, I do find most, if not all, the fujinon prime lenses a little annoying to handle… as you say, there isn’t much real estate to grip the lens most of the time.. I find I have to lock the focus ring wide open end to mount onto camera, and the reverse at closed or “A” end to dismount the lens. Both the focus and aperture rings can spin so freely, it doesn’t make the twisting action to mount or dismount the lens quite as secure.. alternatively, you simply have to wrap as much of your hand around the lens to get a confident grip. It works, but I find having the aperture ring, in particular, being moved and needing to be reset a fair number of times after handling the lens a small peeve.
Other than that, I love my 56mm f1/2.. it’s hard to find a better portrait lens for the Fuji system over that one. Coming from M43 as well, I was interested in how the Nocticron compared to it.. I’ve tried the Nocticron at least 3 times and despite the greater majority of reviews and their conclusions, I was disappointingly unimpressed with it.. I think it was over hyped and perhaps my expectations were exceedingly high. I was not unimpressed by the sharpness and bokeh as much as the color rendering.. I personally found it a bit flat and boring.. and I used it on the OM-D E-M1 & E-M5 MkII.. perhaps it was color profile I had set, but what I had set was what I usually used with the lenses I did own and I was fine with that… Also, for the price to get a Nocticron, I feel it could have been spent better on other lenses for almost as much, more often a lot less. For example, I preferred the Oly 40-150mm f/2.8 for the greater majority of my portrait work.
And if we’re comparing fast f/1.2 portrait lenses between M43 & Fuji, then I’m happy to say the 56mm f1.2 performs better than the Nocticron, imho, and the price is right for the high quality you get from it.