Good review As a working professional, who almost always stops down to a minimum of F/2.8 as most people want to be in focus not just some of them in focus, at 2 meters the DOF is so shallow 6cm, 3cm before the eye, and 3cm behind the eye at F/1.2, and 7cm at F/1.4 at F/2.8 you get 15cm, which is normally enough to get from the nose to the ear in focus. granted I shoot in the studio, so don't have to worry about blowing the backgrounds out. However, most professionals (not just photographers) when they are buying a tool for a job (a lens for us) they should be asking will this tool make me money or save me money. I know clients could not tell if I shoot on a Sigma 56mm F/1.4 a Fuji 56mm F/1.2 a full frame with an 85mm or a medium format camera. They also would not pay more for the session just because the gear costs more. They don't care, as long as the gear is good enough for the results they want, and in my opinion the Sigma is I have tested both these lenses (and the original 56mm F/1.2, the 50mm F1, and 50mm F/2) The 56mm F/1.2 R WR is the best of the lot... however I wouldn't buy it, I'd buy the Sigma 56mm F/1.4 (and did) and spend the extra money on lights, or another lens, something that will generate money The Sigma is 95% as good as the 56mm F/1.2 R WR, it is better than the original 56mm F/1.2, it is better than the 50mm F/2... the 50mm F/1 is a special lens optically it is not as good as the 56mm F/1.2 R WR, but it has a special character, but not special enough to buy it (or carry the extra weight) If money is no object, then get what you want. But if it needs to pay bills, The sigma means there is £/$ 500 you don't need to earn just to pay for the lens... and clients wont know the lens you used. My last 2 professional jobs, I used the X100 VI and nobody asked a question, or complained about the results keep up the good work, real world reviews are far better than looking at test charts
I completely agree with everything you said - I think the only thing that pushed me to keep the Fuji is that it has weather sealing and I really enjoy shooting outdoors in all kind of different conditions. Cheers!
@adventureaheadphoto I'm in England, it rains about 360 days a year here, so I don't shoot a lot outside anyway, but I'd not be worried really about a bit of water if I was caught out and it started to rain just make sure it was dried properly. But if I was planning on shooting in heavy rain (rather than running for cover ) I'd probably use a fully WR lens too. On a budget the 50mm F/2 is WR if that is important (but can make do without the F/1.2 or F/1.4) as is still pretty shallow, a major downside for the 50 F/2 is it is an ugly lens 😂
I wouldn’t say a 7minutes talk without any sample photos is a good review. No one wants to look at your face and listen for such a long time. Please show photos while you are talking!!!!!!! The sample photos are not enough also….
Thanks for the feedback, but I don’t believe that viewing compressed photos in a 4k video is really a great way to showcase the examples of a lens, so I stick to a limited number of them. I don’t know of any photography gear review channels that aren’t 95% talking head. If you want a gallery of sample photos I’d recommend going to a review website like DP Review. There are also many more sample photos from each lens in their respective full reviews, and all of my videos have chapters clearly marked so that you don’t have to watch parts you don’t enjoy. Cheers!
Good review
As a working professional, who almost always stops down to a minimum of F/2.8 as most people want to be in focus not just some of them in focus, at 2 meters the DOF is so shallow 6cm, 3cm before the eye, and 3cm behind the eye at F/1.2, and 7cm at F/1.4 at F/2.8 you get 15cm, which is normally enough to get from the nose to the ear in focus.
granted I shoot in the studio, so don't have to worry about blowing the backgrounds out.
However, most professionals (not just photographers) when they are buying a tool for a job (a lens for us) they should be asking will this tool make me money or save me money.
I know clients could not tell if I shoot on a Sigma 56mm F/1.4 a Fuji 56mm F/1.2 a full frame with an 85mm or a medium format camera.
They also would not pay more for the session just because the gear costs more. They don't care, as long as the gear is good enough for the results they want, and in my opinion the Sigma is
I have tested both these lenses (and the original 56mm F/1.2, the 50mm F1, and 50mm F/2)
The 56mm F/1.2 R WR is the best of the lot... however I wouldn't buy it, I'd buy the Sigma 56mm F/1.4 (and did) and spend the extra money on lights, or another lens, something that will generate money
The Sigma is 95% as good as the 56mm F/1.2 R WR, it is better than the original 56mm F/1.2, it is better than the 50mm F/2... the 50mm F/1 is a special lens optically it is not as good as the 56mm F/1.2 R WR, but it has a special character, but not special enough to buy it (or carry the extra weight)
If money is no object, then get what you want. But if it needs to pay bills, The sigma means there is £/$ 500 you don't need to earn just to pay for the lens... and clients wont know the lens you used.
My last 2 professional jobs, I used the X100 VI and nobody asked a question, or complained about the results
keep up the good work, real world reviews are far better than looking at test charts
I completely agree with everything you said - I think the only thing that pushed me to keep the Fuji is that it has weather sealing and I really enjoy shooting outdoors in all kind of different conditions.
Cheers!
@adventureaheadphoto I'm in England, it rains about 360 days a year here, so I don't shoot a lot outside anyway, but I'd not be worried really about a bit of water if I was caught out and it started to rain just make sure it was dried properly.
But if I was planning on shooting in heavy rain (rather than running for cover ) I'd probably use a fully WR lens too.
On a budget the 50mm F/2 is WR if that is important (but can make do without the F/1.2 or F/1.4) as is still pretty shallow, a major downside for the 50 F/2 is it is an ugly lens 😂
@ fair takes! The 50 f/2 is definitely ugly. It was actually the first Fuji lens I ever owned. I’ve since sold it, and I always hated how it looked 😂
I wouldn’t say a 7minutes talk without any sample photos is a good review. No one wants to look at your face and listen for such a long time. Please show photos while you are talking!!!!!!! The sample photos are not enough also….
Thanks for the feedback, but I don’t believe that viewing compressed photos in a 4k video is really a great way to showcase the examples of a lens, so I stick to a limited number of them. I don’t know of any photography gear review channels that aren’t 95% talking head. If you want a gallery of sample photos I’d recommend going to a review website like DP Review.
There are also many more sample photos from each lens in their respective full reviews, and all of my videos have chapters clearly marked so that you don’t have to watch parts you don’t enjoy.
Cheers!