This is the Fuji lens that I will keep forever. I bring this out on every portrait shoot for the closeup shots and the results are always phenomenal. Can't believe it took you so long to review this gem of a lens! :)
the XF 90mm F/2 is one of my favorite two lenses on Fuji x mount (the other being the old XF 23mm f1.4 R). This lens can give you a really nice OOF redering that many lenses with brighter aptures cannot.
Nice one. I really would like a review from you of the new kit lens - Fujinon XF16-50 mm - PLEASE, you are the best of all youtubers to do these reviews!
I love my 90mm - IMO a truly stunning lens - a pleasure to use and it gives remarkable results - it flatters my photography!! I use it alongside my other favourite Fuji lens - the 33mm 1.4 - a great combo!
What an interesting Plena comparison! Yet, with the release of the Viltrox 75mm f/1.2, the 90mm seems a lot less attractive given its high price and comparatively dark maximum aperture. Some argue Fuji’s lens has better autofocus than the Viltrox. But having used the Viltrox professionally for a year now I can confidently assert that AF is not of practical concern. I’d still love to give this Fuji a try at some point!😊
The Viltrox 75 is usable indoor, the XF90 sometimes not, because too narrow. Thats the only „problem“ of use with the 90. The depth of field of the 75 1.2 and the 90 2.0 is the same. Outdoor the 90 shines, but otherwise a 50-140 2.8 is more versatile there. So I have sold it with some tears and now have the 75 1.2 and the 50-140. And for indoor and portrait the 56 1.2, too. First world problems 😅.
@@Powerland56 I already find the 75mm to be too tight occasionally, so I can imagine the Fuji to be even more limiting. That’s when the 56mm shines. I occasionally photographed indoor sports events in terrible light with high shutter speeds required. That‘s where the Viltrox gives me significantly cleaner files compared to both a 90mm or a 50-140mm. It‘s a bargain for what it can do.
Love this lens. My favorite. Great for events, travel, even some action. Also, used and refurbished copies are available and much less expensive. I got mine refurb from Fuji and it's perfect.
LOVE my 90.. even on the 'older' X-T2 the AF was fantastic.. it's one of the only Fuji lenses with a quad linear focus motor.. It's really not that big, and a fairer comparison would be to the Canon 135 f2, which is its FF equivalent and actually much bigger than the Fuji
Love this review and agree with all the praise given to the lens. I owned it for about 2 years and then sold it on. It was overkill for my purposes, and it's also fairly clinical. I couldn't justify it given the size and price. This lens really made me miss the Canon 85mm f/1.8, which is affordable, compact, and has an indelible character to it.
Looks like a great lens if you are a Fuji XT owner. Was there a reason you left out the sunstar and coma tests? It’s would be good to see the same exact test suite done on every lens you test so that a complete comparison can be made. Thanks.
Love this!!! I have the Sony FE G 90mm F/2.8 macro that I use for portraits as well on my a6400 & a6700. Love that focal length 😊 As always great video!
Although I'm having some intermittent issues with focussing this lens in auto on my X-H1, when I get what I want, it reminds me of what people used to say about the 105mm Contax lens in the old days. The images seem 3 dimensional. All kinds of details that probably stood out in transparencies on the Contax 2 1/4 system. Amazing resolution. A perfect match for the Fuji sensor.
I had one but ultimately sold it and replaced it with the new 56mm 1.2. The 90mm was definitely lovely in all sorts of ways but the focal length was very rarely the right one (for me). I find the 56mm way more versatile and love the rendering of that lens even more. The 90 can be a v good deal used, though, and there are loads knocking about. Wouldn't consider buying new.
When I sold my Fujifilm X system, to go over the GFX. The one lens I kept was the 90mm f/2, and it is because of that lens, I eventually bought a X-H2.
I just don't quite understand why only f/2.0, this lens is a 135mm f/3 FF equivalent, whereas the FF competitors can go as big as f/1.8. Just a couple of weeks ago, I bought the Full Frame Sigma 135mm f/1.8 Art, brand new, for pretty much exactly the price of this APS-C f/2 lens. Fuji's pricing in recent years makes no sense, which is one of the reasons why I jumped ship last year.
First party lenses always cost more than third party lenses. But yeah I’d have been more interested in this lens if it was like f/1.4 or something. I got the Viltrox 75mm f/1.2 which honestly beats out the compression and shallow dof of a lot of full frame lenses. Nice to have the versatility of a lens like it while being able to use a tiny lens when I want without changing systems.
Whilst this lens is larger than some X-mount lenses, it is still much smaller than full-frame 135mm f/2 or f/1.8 lenses, and this is going to effect the aperture of the lens. To be very honest, I am not really bothered with the lens being an f/3.06. Optically, it is my favourite X-mount lens, and it is much more portable than my Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Plannar. Which means I use the 90mm much more.
Isn't it a bit weird to compare this APS-C 90mm to the fullframe Canon 85mm f1.8? Canon has the fullframe 135mm f2.0 which is a much closer focallength imo. Difference in size doesn't really matter anymore in that comparison.
Are you planning on reviewing the new 7 artisans 35mm f1.4 mark II (manual focus) for mirrorless APS-C cameras (sony, canon, fuji, nikon)? I'm personally quite curious to see how it compares against the Meike 35mm f1.4 APS-C, which right now sells for a bit more than the 7 artisans.
Still one of my favorite lenses. Even though it got strong competition with the new 56 mm f1.2 which I find a bit more versatile I still prefer the overall look and feel of the 90 mm.
Got the 90 and the 80 macro and let me tell you something. That clunky parts moving inside the lens aren't that much of an issue when the camera is turned off of when the lens is mounted off the camera. BUT every time you hit the playback button to review the images you take, the parts inside lose up as if it was turned off. That not only causes delay to review your pictures but also quite annoying noise during the shootout, especially in product photography when I review almost every shot taken on the tripod with my 80. It's nowhere near to the 56/1.2 R II WR when the whole STM drives in before you can review the images, but it is annoying. They (80 & 90) are still great lens though imho.
Been mulling this one for portraits and even sports for a while. Half the price of new pre owned. I’ve read the Viltrox 75mm 1.2 doesn’t track so well so I’ve gone off that.
@Christopher Frost: This is probably a beginner question, but do lens optics affect autofocus performance? Most of your lens reviews, of any but the very top notch lenses, reveal some amount of lacking corner sharpness esp. at wide open apertures. I imagine that this negatively affects AF when the focus point or focus area is set near the corners (as opposed to being near the center of the image, where any half-decent lens is reasonably sharp). Am I just imagining this, can modern AF systems compensate for this somehow, or is this a known quantity that nobody ever mentions because it is so obvious?
On rare occasions (and I can't remember when) I've tested a lens that was soft enough wide open that the AF system would hunt a little, but no, it doesn't really happen often - AF will almost always find /something/ to latch on to
What exactly is there to improve? Christopher just showed this is a near perfect lens, time would be better spent looking at other gaps or lens updates in their lineup.
@@JayOhFree I agree. Maybe Fuji could wave a magic wand and make a MK2 smaller and lighter but other than that, it's difficult to see how it can be improved!
Sticking my head out here. Is it just me or du the smallest lines at number 1 in the test chart lacking separation between the thinnest lines. Looking at others lenses from Sony, Nikon , Canon there are cleary separation between the lines and it look like it's lacking the ability to resolve fine details. Compare it to the latest test of Canons 24-105 as a reference
Fantastic lens but it does beg the question, if both the bodies and lenses are bigger/heavier and more expensive than full frame options, while missing modern features and autofocus still being hit and miss, why not just go to full frame?
The fujifilm is $950 and 540 grams with a total length 4.13”. The cannon RF 135 F1.8 is $2100 and 935 grams with a total length of 5.10”. So how in the world is this lens bigger and heavier then a equivalent full frame lens? And that the full frame lens is 2.2x more expensive , 1.23x longer, and 1.73x heavier.
@@shanevassar9884 Canon is an outlier, it's really huge and heavy for seemingly no good reason, just to look more "pro" on a client shoot maybe? - try Sony A7CII with an f/2.8 135mm to match the APS-C.
@@jeremytheoneofdestiny8691 yes, but you need a 135mm f/2.8 to match the focal length, depth of field and light gathering ability on full frame, then Sony full frame is a lot smaller and cheaper than Fuji.
If anyone is looking into buying this, these are DIRT CHEAP on the used market. I have friends trying to sell theirs in the 350 Euro range and getting no bites.
Fujifilm needs 10 or more years, not to update the most important lenses in the XF lineup.... and if they update, they release too often noisy and slow focusing lenses (56/1.2 WR). Not investing in R&D is great for their financial results, bad for their customers. The 90mm teached me: I hate standing so far away from my model. But it never disappoints.
It's not "equivalent" to the Canon's FF 85mm/1.8. Fuji's APS-C 56mm/1.2 is "equivalent" to that Canon lens. For the Fuji APS-C 90mm/2.0, the "equivalent" FF lens is 135mm/3.0. For comparing size/weight, I think this matters a lot. By simple math, equivalent lenses have the same aperture diameter, but the FF lenses have 1.5x longer focal length. So, in basic theory, the FF lens will be 1.5x bigger. This ignores the larger image-circle required by FF, so there might be more weight and diameter over the simplified math. Even so, with variations in lens optical design, AF system, stabilization system, etc., there will be a lot of variation for any individual lens comparisons. But on average, I would say that "equivalent" APS-C lenses ought to be smaller on average (redundancy on purpose).
By 'equivalent', I was obviously referring to the fact that they're both almost the same focal length and aperture. The fact that the FF lens should be bigger is the point I was making.
I would not compare this lens with the plena because the "bokeh" will be not the same : on APCS you need to multiple by 1.5 the aperture so f/2 on APSC is equal to f/3 for fullframe... And f/3 vs f/1.8 clearly not the same
The 90mm f/2 is my favorite lens of all the Fuji lenses I own.
This is the Fuji lens that I will keep forever. I bring this out on every portrait shoot for the closeup shots and the results are always phenomenal. Can't believe it took you so long to review this gem of a lens! :)
the XF 90mm F/2 is one of my favorite two lenses on Fuji x mount (the other being the old XF 23mm f1.4 R). This lens can give you a really nice OOF redering that many lenses with brighter aptures cannot.
Nice one. I really would like a review from you of the new kit lens - Fujinon XF16-50 mm - PLEASE, you are the best of all youtubers to do these reviews!
Finally Chris delivered 90mm f2 review. Thank you so much, i am a huge fan of you, please do review on 8-16 f2.8 and nikon z35 f1.4 as well
I love my 90mm - IMO a truly stunning lens - a pleasure to use and it gives remarkable results - it flatters my photography!! I use it alongside my other favourite Fuji lens - the 33mm 1.4 - a great combo!
I think the 18mm 1.4, 33mm 1.4 and 90mm 2.0 is probably the best prime trio you can get on Fuji!
@@CadenMcCullough2424 I use the 16mm 1.4 instead since it's cheaper used :v
@@CadenMcCullough2424 it would be hard to give up the XF56mm F1.2 R WR however.
Thank you for this video of an old but awsome Fuji lens. Finally 🥳.
What an interesting Plena comparison! Yet, with the release of the Viltrox 75mm f/1.2, the 90mm seems a lot less attractive given its high price and comparatively dark maximum aperture. Some argue Fuji’s lens has better autofocus than the Viltrox. But having used the Viltrox professionally for a year now I can confidently assert that AF is not of practical concern. I’d still love to give this Fuji a try at some point!😊
The Viltrox is my favouite portrait lens too. I now usually just switch between that and Fuji 33mm F1.4 for portraits.
@@zupperm solid choices!😉
The Viltrox 75 is usable indoor, the XF90 sometimes not, because too narrow. Thats the only „problem“ of use with the 90. The depth of field of the 75 1.2 and the 90 2.0 is the same. Outdoor the 90 shines, but otherwise a 50-140 2.8 is more versatile there. So I have sold it with some tears and now have the 75 1.2 and the 50-140. And for indoor and portrait the 56 1.2, too. First world problems 😅.
You can find the 90mm used in excellent condition for around $600 nowadays. Definitely makes it a bit more appealing.
@@Powerland56 I already find the 75mm to be too tight occasionally, so I can imagine the Fuji to be even more limiting. That’s when the 56mm shines. I occasionally photographed indoor sports events in terrible light with high shutter speeds required. That‘s where the Viltrox gives me significantly cleaner files compared to both a 90mm or a 50-140mm. It‘s a bargain for what it can do.
Waited YEARS for this one
One of my favourite lenses of all brands.
I love my 90mm. If I ever got rid of my Fuji system. I would keep just one body to continue using this lens. It’s that good. Very underrated lens.
My favorite lens, it's just super. Thanks for sharing.
Love this lens. My favorite. Great for events, travel, even some action. Also, used and refurbished copies are available and much less expensive. I got mine refurb from Fuji and it's perfect.
LOVE my 90.. even on the 'older' X-T2 the AF was fantastic.. it's one of the only Fuji lenses with a quad linear focus motor.. It's really not that big, and a fairer comparison would be to the Canon 135 f2, which is its FF equivalent and actually much bigger than the Fuji
Love this review and agree with all the praise given to the lens. I owned it for about 2 years and then sold it on. It was overkill for my purposes, and it's also fairly clinical. I couldn't justify it given the size and price. This lens really made me miss the Canon 85mm f/1.8, which is affordable, compact, and has an indelible character to it.
Finally!! You made a video on this lens. Thank you Chris..
Excellent review, very informative, as always.
Good job! 'looking forward for the next review 😊
Looks like a great lens if you are a Fuji XT owner. Was there a reason you left out the sunstar and coma tests? It’s would be good to see the same exact test suite done on every lens you test so that a complete comparison can be made. Thanks.
This lens is my absolute favorite. It is with my kit always.
I am just about to buy this lens and where else to come but here for a good and honest review, thank you as always.
Glad to bought this lens, i wait CF review this lens long time ago
I have this little guy. Yes, it’s a chunk, but man the photos you get.
that is some beautiful performance. makes an x-mount camera kind of compelling
Especially when people are selling the lens for around 500.
Our sharpest Fuji lens--you have to see it to believe it. However, there are some advantages to the 80mm....
WHERE IS 200MM
The 80mm is sharper. But the rendering can't touch the 90.
Love this!!! I have the Sony FE G 90mm F/2.8 macro that I use for portraits as well on my a6400 & a6700. Love that focal length 😊
As always great video!
Thank you very much for this review Chris, please do 8-16 f2.8 as well, we are waiting for that. once again thank you
Nice review. though I have the viltrox 85mm 1.8 instead and I am quite happy with it
Although I'm having some intermittent issues with focussing this lens in auto on my X-H1, when I get what I want, it reminds me of what people used to say about the 105mm Contax lens in the old days. The images seem 3 dimensional. All kinds of details that probably stood out in transparencies on the Contax 2 1/4 system. Amazing resolution. A perfect match for the Fuji sensor.
This lens was mounted to my Fuji most of the time when i did portraits. AF is blazing fast compared to 1st version of 56mm.
I had one but ultimately sold it and replaced it with the new 56mm 1.2. The 90mm was definitely lovely in all sorts of ways but the focal length was very rarely the right one (for me). I find the 56mm way more versatile and love the rendering of that lens even more.
The 90 can be a v good deal used, though, and there are loads knocking about. Wouldn't consider buying new.
When I sold my Fujifilm X system, to go over the GFX. The one lens I kept was the 90mm f/2, and it is because of that lens, I eventually bought a X-H2.
I just don't quite understand why only f/2.0, this lens is a 135mm f/3 FF equivalent, whereas the FF competitors can go as big as f/1.8.
Just a couple of weeks ago, I bought the Full Frame Sigma 135mm f/1.8 Art, brand new, for pretty much exactly the price of this APS-C f/2 lens. Fuji's pricing in recent years makes no sense, which is one of the reasons why I jumped ship last year.
First party lenses always cost more than third party lenses. But yeah I’d have been more interested in this lens if it was like f/1.4 or something. I got the Viltrox 75mm f/1.2 which honestly beats out the compression and shallow dof of a lot of full frame lenses. Nice to have the versatility of a lens like it while being able to use a tiny lens when I want without changing systems.
Whilst this lens is larger than some X-mount lenses, it is still much smaller than full-frame 135mm f/2 or f/1.8 lenses, and this is going to effect the aperture of the lens.
To be very honest, I am not really bothered with the lens being an f/3.06. Optically, it is my favourite X-mount lens, and it is much more portable than my Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Plannar. Which means I use the 90mm much more.
I use this lens almost every day :)
I had this in my radar for a long time.
I have owned the lens since it was published
Isn't it a bit weird to compare this APS-C 90mm to the fullframe Canon 85mm f1.8? Canon has the fullframe 135mm f2.0 which is a much closer focallength imo. Difference in size doesn't really matter anymore in that comparison.
finally, i was waiting for this
the focus breathing is crazehhh
I paid 450 Euros on eBay and I love it!
Are you planning on reviewing the new 7 artisans 35mm f1.4 mark II (manual focus) for mirrorless APS-C cameras (sony, canon, fuji, nikon)?
I'm personally quite curious to see how it compares against the Meike 35mm f1.4 APS-C, which right now sells for a bit more than the 7 artisans.
i have this and it is really nice lens. super high quality.
Still one of my favorite lenses. Even though it got strong competition with the new 56 mm f1.2 which I find a bit more versatile I still prefer the overall look and feel of the 90 mm.
The 90f2 is 135 1.8 in fullframe language and thì 75 1.2 is 105 1.4. So just choose the focal lenght for you. I prefer 90 due to the 60cm focus range
fuji's sharpest lens, indeed.
Fun fact: optical formula looks strikingly similar to the Z 85mm but with an extra ED element
Barely any vices, as long as the lens hood is on. Very nice!
This is my go-to for club and theatre concerts. Sadly I have to use the manual Samyang 135mm F2 for stadiums still, wish Fuji made a 135mm prime ASAP
Used, this lens has value around the mid $650 for a copy in excellent shape for those who are interested in the focal length.
Would have loved a short comparison to the 75/1.2 Viltrox since they basically target the same audience
Got the 90 and the 80 macro and let me tell you something. That clunky parts moving inside the lens aren't that much of an issue when the camera is turned off of when the lens is mounted off the camera. BUT every time you hit the playback button to review the images you take, the parts inside lose up as if it was turned off. That not only causes delay to review your pictures but also quite annoying noise during the shootout, especially in product photography when I review almost every shot taken on the tripod with my 80. It's nowhere near to the 56/1.2 R II WR when the whole STM drives in before you can review the images, but it is annoying. They (80 & 90) are still great lens though imho.
Been mulling this one for portraits and even sports for a while. Half the price of new pre owned. I’ve read the Viltrox 75mm 1.2 doesn’t track so well so I’ve gone off that.
You can check its coverage by using a Fuji X to Nikon Z adapter and then mount it onto a FF Nikon camera.
That's a good idea too!
I heard it doesn't work, the lens detection will automatically shift in DX mode and Nikon won't let you disable it.
@@Kliffot tape the contact area on the adapter mount to prevent detection.
@@qingyunwang3802 but AF will still work then ?
@@Kliffot I thought we’re testing coverage?
@Christopher Frost: This is probably a beginner question, but do lens optics affect autofocus performance?
Most of your lens reviews, of any but the very top notch lenses, reveal some amount of lacking corner sharpness esp. at wide open apertures. I imagine that this negatively affects AF when the focus point or focus area is set near the corners (as opposed to being near the center of the image, where any half-decent lens is reasonably sharp).
Am I just imagining this, can modern AF systems compensate for this somehow, or is this a known quantity that nobody ever mentions because it is so obvious?
This lens has a quad type focussing system made just for it. One of the fastest focussing Fuji lenses. Thrilling.
@@sclogse1 What has that to do with my question?
On rare occasions (and I can't remember when) I've tested a lens that was soft enough wide open that the AF system would hunt a little, but no, it doesn't really happen often - AF will almost always find /something/ to latch on to
If it does not have stabilisation, what exactly is making the noise inside? Blades?
The AF elements
Magnetized AF motor. It's by design.
The 90 is a stunning lens, have one however I’m sure Fuji could improve it with a MK2 😎👍
What exactly is there to improve? Christopher just showed this is a near perfect lens, time would be better spent looking at other gaps or lens updates in their lineup.
@@JayOhFreenewer af motor would be nice
@@JayOhFree I agree. Maybe Fuji could wave a magic wand and make a MK2 smaller and lighter but other than that, it's difficult to see how it can be improved!
@@JayOhFree IS and the ability to accept TC
@@johndao5870 it already has quad linear focus motors, the best Fuji has to offer. I believe it’s actually the only Fuji lens that has quad linear.
Considering the prices of the other brands, the price for this lens doesn't seem too bad now
Sticking my head out here. Is it just me or du the smallest lines at number 1 in the test chart lacking separation between the thinnest lines. Looking at others lenses from Sony, Nikon , Canon there are cleary separation between the lines and it look like it's lacking the ability to resolve fine details. Compare it to the latest test of Canons 24-105 as a reference
How does this compare to the Olympus 75mm 1.8? Because the entrance pupil is pretty close, the fov also.
They are similar, the rendering of the 90 is a tiny bit smoother but they are both fantastic.
Goooood eeevening
And people try to claim the focus hunting oversized flare monster that is the 75 1.2 is the best tele prime for X-mount....
Im desperate for the nikon 35mm 1.4 review!
Viltrox 75 1.2 is the Plena of Fuji X system
...but after using the lens as a pro for years: contrast is a bit lower than other XF lenses (18/1.4 56/1.2 & 56/1.2 WR)
Fantastic lens but it does beg the question, if both the bodies and lenses are bigger/heavier and more expensive than full frame options, while missing modern features and autofocus still being hit and miss, why not just go to full frame?
The fujifilm is $950 and 540 grams with a total length 4.13”. The cannon RF 135 F1.8 is $2100 and 935 grams with a total length of 5.10”. So how in the world is this lens bigger and heavier then a equivalent full frame lens? And that the full frame lens is 2.2x more expensive , 1.23x longer, and 1.73x heavier.
@@shanevassar9884 Canon is an outlier, it's really huge and heavy for seemingly no good reason, just to look more "pro" on a client shoot maybe? - try Sony A7CII with an f/2.8 135mm to match the APS-C.
@@DigiDriftZone Sony's 85mm f1.8 is also smaller and cheaper
@@jeremytheoneofdestiny8691 yes, but you need a 135mm f/2.8 to match the focal length, depth of field and light gathering ability on full frame, then Sony full frame is a lot smaller and cheaper than Fuji.
Viltrox AF 75mm f/1.2 XF
Easily the best lens on Fuji.
Better buy it in Thailand, special offer of around £500!
If anyone is looking into buying this, these are DIRT CHEAP on the used market. I have friends trying to sell theirs in the 350 Euro range and getting no bites.
finally！
1🎉
Plena from Temu/Wish 😂
Fujifilm needs 10 or more years, not to update the most important lenses in the XF lineup.... and if they update, they release too often noisy and slow focusing lenses (56/1.2 WR).
Not investing in R&D is great for their financial results, bad for their customers.
The 90mm teached me: I hate standing so far away from my model. But it never disappoints.
It's not "equivalent" to the Canon's FF 85mm/1.8. Fuji's APS-C 56mm/1.2 is "equivalent" to that Canon lens. For the Fuji APS-C 90mm/2.0, the "equivalent" FF lens is 135mm/3.0. For comparing size/weight, I think this matters a lot. By simple math, equivalent lenses have the same aperture diameter, but the FF lenses have 1.5x longer focal length. So, in basic theory, the FF lens will be 1.5x bigger. This ignores the larger image-circle required by FF, so there might be more weight and diameter over the simplified math. Even so, with variations in lens optical design, AF system, stabilization system, etc., there will be a lot of variation for any individual lens comparisons. But on average, I would say that "equivalent" APS-C lenses ought to be smaller on average (redundancy on purpose).
By 'equivalent', I was obviously referring to the fact that they're both almost the same focal length and aperture. The fact that the FF lens should be bigger is the point I was making.
@@christopherfrost Yes, I get that. I love your consistent reviews and am a long term subscriber. I didn’t mean to criticize. Sorry.
@@swagonman No problem! I don't mind clarifying things
I have this lens, got is at less than $500, didn't realize this is the Fuji's Plena, OMG, gotta use it more!
I would not compare this lens with the plena because the "bokeh" will be not the same : on APCS you need to multiple by 1.5 the aperture so f/2 on APSC is equal to f/3 for fullframe...
And f/3 vs f/1.8 clearly not the same
cough cough... Viltrox 75mm f1.2
Fuji wishes they could compare to the Plena.
the Plena is complety overpriced (2500€ wtf) compared to the Fuji offering👌
@@muttishelfer9122 Fuji can charge whatever they want for the 90mm but it doesn't come close to the Plena.
@@muttishelfer9122 what if I tell you they're both overpriced 🤔
@@muttishelfer9122 Not even in the same league, the Plena is on another level entirely.
This is basically a 135 f3 full frame, I wouldn't bother buying one
Enjoy your full frame mythology.
I prefer to buy a lens on its performance rather than specs. This seem to average superb performance.
Who cares.