Fujifilm Fujinon Portrait Lens Showdown
This is a showdown of the four available Fujifilm portrait lenses. Whilst any lens can be considered a portrait lens, most portrait photographers use short to medium telephoto lenses that are able to achieve a more natural perspective, compression of facial features, as well as the ability to blur out distracting backgrounds.
There is an emerging crop of photographers who use wider lenses such as the Fujinon 23mm f/1.4 to take what are known as environmental portraits, not portraits in the traditional sense, but pictures of people in their environments. Lenses for environmental portraiture aren't the subject of this showdown, here, we're restricting ourselves to the traditional portrait lenses.
There is an emerging crop of photographers who use wider lenses such as the Fujinon 23mm f/1.4 to take what are known as environmental portraits, not portraits in the traditional sense, but pictures of people in their environments. Lenses for environmental portraiture aren't the subject of this showdown, here, we're restricting ourselves to the traditional portrait lenses.
The Current Lineup
I'm predominantly a portrait photographer, or at least I try to be, the following lenses in the Fuji lineup are what I would consider its main portrait lenses.
In this article, I'll be looking at how these lenses stack up in areas that relate predominantly to portraiture as well as giving a run down on each individual lens and who they're for. I genuinely believe that each of these lenses are very different and they have enough differences to really consider, perhaps, owning more than one, so keep that in mind too.
In this article, I'll be looking at how these lenses stack up in areas that relate predominantly to portraiture as well as giving a run down on each individual lens and who they're for. I genuinely believe that each of these lenses are very different and they have enough differences to really consider, perhaps, owning more than one, so keep that in mind too.
Overview
When selecting a portrait lens, there are several things that you'd often want to keep in mind. Focal length and aperture, obviously, but also handling, weight and feel are also extremely important. Focal length and aperture are important because having a longer focal length helps with facial compression and also subject separation.
Contrary to popular belief, it's actually not the aperture which determines the subject separation, but rather, the focal length. The aperture does play a part, but there's only so much shallow depth of field can do. Don't believe me? Check out my article on the subject. In this regard, the Fujinon 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS zoom has a very big advantage as it goes out to 140mm and offers much better background separation, despite being the slowest lens. Its narrower aperture, however, is a disadvantage in low light situations, though perhaps the OIS does go some way to counteracting that for static subjects, which some forms of portraiture is.
In a studio setting, the zoom would also be very useful, as it allows you to change quickly from a half-body shot to a headshot with the flick of the wrist, meaning you can work tethered on a tripod much more easily. In studio, we often shoot at higher f-stops such as f/5.6, so optically, all of these lenses will be great and the zoom's smaller f/2.8 aperture won't make any difference.
On location, however, I prefer to use the smaller Fujinon 56mm f/1.2. The two and a half stop advantage in aperture allows the 56mm f/1.2 to collect over four times more light, being more usable in low light. Whilst most people won't mind the weight of the larger 50-140mm f/2.8, the 56mm f/1.2 is much smaller and less daunting, meaning that subjects are less likely to be intimidated by the lens.
The 60mm f/2.4 Macro is, to me, basically a smaller, lighter and slower version of the 56mm f/1.2. It's what I would buy if I can't afford the 56mm f/1.2. It's the cheapest of the bunch here and whilst f/2.4 might seem slow to most people, remember that it's still faster than the 50-140mm f/2.8 zoom, which is a half stop slower.
The newer 90mm f/2 is also worth considering as an alternative to the 50-140mm f/2.8, especially if you already own the 56mm f/1.2. I would suggest that this is an ideal lens for low light dynamic portraits. For example, if you are shooting catwalk fashion, it's often difficult to use flash, the 56mm f/1.2 is probably a little bit short and in these situations, since you want to keep your shutter speed high, every stop of light you can get is critical. The difference between the 90mm f/2 and 50-140mm f/2.8 might be very important to you.
Contrary to popular belief, it's actually not the aperture which determines the subject separation, but rather, the focal length. The aperture does play a part, but there's only so much shallow depth of field can do. Don't believe me? Check out my article on the subject. In this regard, the Fujinon 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS zoom has a very big advantage as it goes out to 140mm and offers much better background separation, despite being the slowest lens. Its narrower aperture, however, is a disadvantage in low light situations, though perhaps the OIS does go some way to counteracting that for static subjects, which some forms of portraiture is.
In a studio setting, the zoom would also be very useful, as it allows you to change quickly from a half-body shot to a headshot with the flick of the wrist, meaning you can work tethered on a tripod much more easily. In studio, we often shoot at higher f-stops such as f/5.6, so optically, all of these lenses will be great and the zoom's smaller f/2.8 aperture won't make any difference.
On location, however, I prefer to use the smaller Fujinon 56mm f/1.2. The two and a half stop advantage in aperture allows the 56mm f/1.2 to collect over four times more light, being more usable in low light. Whilst most people won't mind the weight of the larger 50-140mm f/2.8, the 56mm f/1.2 is much smaller and less daunting, meaning that subjects are less likely to be intimidated by the lens.
The 60mm f/2.4 Macro is, to me, basically a smaller, lighter and slower version of the 56mm f/1.2. It's what I would buy if I can't afford the 56mm f/1.2. It's the cheapest of the bunch here and whilst f/2.4 might seem slow to most people, remember that it's still faster than the 50-140mm f/2.8 zoom, which is a half stop slower.
The newer 90mm f/2 is also worth considering as an alternative to the 50-140mm f/2.8, especially if you already own the 56mm f/1.2. I would suggest that this is an ideal lens for low light dynamic portraits. For example, if you are shooting catwalk fashion, it's often difficult to use flash, the 56mm f/1.2 is probably a little bit short and in these situations, since you want to keep your shutter speed high, every stop of light you can get is critical. The difference between the 90mm f/2 and 50-140mm f/2.8 might be very important to you.
For Versatility
For versatility, you can't go wrong with the Fujinon 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS. It's a very good lens (albeit expensive) that performs excellently and is much more useful than for purely portraiture. Many people who choose to buy this lens would also use it for sports, wildlife and other general telephoto use. The fact that it zooms makes it extremely handy.
Autofocus on this lens is top notch thanks to its triple linear motor design and it is, perhaps, the toughest built of the batch here with weather sealing and a very sturdy, all-metal construction. The feel of this lens is very different to the 56mm f/1.2. Whilst both feel metallic and great, the 56mm f/1.2 feels very well crafted and precise whereas the 50-140mm f/2.8 feels tougher and tighter.
If you're after a lens that works well in many different situations and can go beyond delivering great portraits, the 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS is your best bet. It's not the best lens here for low light performance, but it's extremely sharp, it covers a very useful focal length and it's the lens that's most likely to come with you to your non-portrait shoots.
Personally, I use my 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS on many different types of assignments. As a portrait lens, however, its main strength lies in its convenience and its ability to zoom out to 140mm, which helps with subject separation and compression of facial features. That said, however, the difference between 140mm and 90mm (as in the Fujinon 90mm f/2) is very marginal and very difficult to notice.
Being the most expensive lens in the group, it's fair to say that this lens will probably get the most usage if you do choose to purchase it. It's the do-everything lens of this group, it does everything pretty well, but not as specialised as the other lenses in the group which all offer something extra. Lastly, it's also extremely big and heavy. This might not be a problem for you, but do remember that when shooting portraits most people, especially those who aren't models, prefer to be shot with smaller cameras and lenses. Something like the 56mm f/1.2 will allow you to interact with your subjects better than this gargantuan zoom.
Autofocus on this lens is top notch thanks to its triple linear motor design and it is, perhaps, the toughest built of the batch here with weather sealing and a very sturdy, all-metal construction. The feel of this lens is very different to the 56mm f/1.2. Whilst both feel metallic and great, the 56mm f/1.2 feels very well crafted and precise whereas the 50-140mm f/2.8 feels tougher and tighter.
If you're after a lens that works well in many different situations and can go beyond delivering great portraits, the 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS is your best bet. It's not the best lens here for low light performance, but it's extremely sharp, it covers a very useful focal length and it's the lens that's most likely to come with you to your non-portrait shoots.
Personally, I use my 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS on many different types of assignments. As a portrait lens, however, its main strength lies in its convenience and its ability to zoom out to 140mm, which helps with subject separation and compression of facial features. That said, however, the difference between 140mm and 90mm (as in the Fujinon 90mm f/2) is very marginal and very difficult to notice.
Being the most expensive lens in the group, it's fair to say that this lens will probably get the most usage if you do choose to purchase it. It's the do-everything lens of this group, it does everything pretty well, but not as specialised as the other lenses in the group which all offer something extra. Lastly, it's also extremely big and heavy. This might not be a problem for you, but do remember that when shooting portraits most people, especially those who aren't models, prefer to be shot with smaller cameras and lenses. Something like the 56mm f/1.2 will allow you to interact with your subjects better than this gargantuan zoom.
For Low Light and Classic Portraiture
For low light and classic portraiture, the Fuji 56mm f/1.2 is king. There are several reasons why I would choose this lens over the 50-140mm f/2.8 zoom. The obvious reason is the aperture, at f/1.2, it's two and a half stops faster than f/2.8, meaning it gathers far more than four times the amount of light. The larger aperture allows for a shallow depth of field, a look popular with many portrait photographers.
The 56mm focal length is perfect for the classic half-body to full-body type shots. I wouldn't go in for a head shot with the 56mm f/1.2 because its shorter focal length will introduce perspective distortion, meaning that noses get bigger and faces get slimmer. It's not terrible, though, but probably not ideal. I prefer my 56mm f/1.2 over the larger zoom because it's lighter and more approachable, it's easier to talk to my subjects and interact with them when I'm not hiding behind such a huge lens.
It's also cheaper, coming in at around 65% of the cost of the 50-140mm f/2.8. Personally, I find that the 56mm f/1.2 is perfect for indoor portraits where space is a bit more limited. For outdoor situations, you'd usually want to go a bit longer than this 56mm, so perhaps the 50-140mm f/2.8 zoom or 90mm f/2 prime would make more sense. The 56mm f/1.2 is a very specialist lens that's built for shallow depth of field and great low-light performance.
Perhaps of interest to some people, however, is the 56mm f/1.2's very neutral and lower contrast rendering. Unlike the Fuji 35mm f/1.4 or even the 50-140mm f/2.8 zoom, the 56mm f/1.2 doesn't have the same level of contrast and the reds are noticeably more subdued with this lens. This isn't too different from the great classic portrait lenses such as the Nikon 135mm f/2 DC which helps people look more natural and more flattering.
The 56mm focal length is perfect for the classic half-body to full-body type shots. I wouldn't go in for a head shot with the 56mm f/1.2 because its shorter focal length will introduce perspective distortion, meaning that noses get bigger and faces get slimmer. It's not terrible, though, but probably not ideal. I prefer my 56mm f/1.2 over the larger zoom because it's lighter and more approachable, it's easier to talk to my subjects and interact with them when I'm not hiding behind such a huge lens.
It's also cheaper, coming in at around 65% of the cost of the 50-140mm f/2.8. Personally, I find that the 56mm f/1.2 is perfect for indoor portraits where space is a bit more limited. For outdoor situations, you'd usually want to go a bit longer than this 56mm, so perhaps the 50-140mm f/2.8 zoom or 90mm f/2 prime would make more sense. The 56mm f/1.2 is a very specialist lens that's built for shallow depth of field and great low-light performance.
Perhaps of interest to some people, however, is the 56mm f/1.2's very neutral and lower contrast rendering. Unlike the Fuji 35mm f/1.4 or even the 50-140mm f/2.8 zoom, the 56mm f/1.2 doesn't have the same level of contrast and the reds are noticeably more subdued with this lens. This isn't too different from the great classic portrait lenses such as the Nikon 135mm f/2 DC which helps people look more natural and more flattering.
On a Budget
If you're on a budget, the Fuji 60mm f/2.4 Macro is a very good choice. It's got a very similar field of view to the 56mm f/1.2. Some people might find that the f/2.4 aperture is a little slow, but it's faster than the 50-140mm f/2.8 zoom by a good half-stop. I wouldn't use it in extremely low light situations, but honestly, in good light, there's no difference between this lens and the 56mm f/1.2. It can't quite render out of focus areas quite as nicely and it has a bit more of a tendency to flare, but it's a very good choice for portraiture.
Coming in at less than half the price of the 56mm f/1.2, the only real sacrifice you're making is the aperture, it's 2 stops slower. That said, it's important to also note that the autofocus with this lens isn't amazing, however, it doesn't deserve the amount of flack it gets. Many people wrote this lens off years ago on the X-Pro1 when it was first released, but successive firmware updates and body updates have allowed this lens to have quite acceptable autofocus performance.
Coming in at less than half the price of the 56mm f/1.2, the only real sacrifice you're making is the aperture, it's 2 stops slower. That said, it's important to also note that the autofocus with this lens isn't amazing, however, it doesn't deserve the amount of flack it gets. Many people wrote this lens off years ago on the X-Pro1 when it was first released, but successive firmware updates and body updates have allowed this lens to have quite acceptable autofocus performance.
The Question of the 90mm f/2
The Fuji 90mm f/2 is a very unique lens. Personally, I haven't tried it, not many people have at this point in time. That said, I'll assume that its image quality is great, but then and again, so is the image quality on all of the other Fujinon lenses. The Fuji 90mm f/2 is a very specialist lens. Being so close in price to the 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS, I would generally recommend the zoom for most people unless that extra stop of light is extremely important to you.
Examples of people who would appreciate that stop of light would be wedding photographers who can't use flash during a ceremony or catwalk fashion photographers. However, another point to consider is that the Fuji 90mm f/2 has a very long focal length which is, mostly, unsuitable indoors unless you're in a large room, e.g. as with a wedding ceremony. The 90mm f/2 is also a lighter and easier to handle lens than the 50-140mm f/2.8 zoom.
Despite this lens' strengths, including the quad linear motor which, hopefully, should contribute to excellent autofocus performance, I feel that unless weight is of paramount concern or if every stop of light is important and you need something longer than the 56mm f/1.2, the better option is to have a look at the 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS zoom as the more versatile and useful lens.
Examples of people who would appreciate that stop of light would be wedding photographers who can't use flash during a ceremony or catwalk fashion photographers. However, another point to consider is that the Fuji 90mm f/2 has a very long focal length which is, mostly, unsuitable indoors unless you're in a large room, e.g. as with a wedding ceremony. The 90mm f/2 is also a lighter and easier to handle lens than the 50-140mm f/2.8 zoom.
Despite this lens' strengths, including the quad linear motor which, hopefully, should contribute to excellent autofocus performance, I feel that unless weight is of paramount concern or if every stop of light is important and you need something longer than the 56mm f/1.2, the better option is to have a look at the 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS zoom as the more versatile and useful lens.
Conclusion
I am, at heart, very much a portrait photographer. I'm glad that Fuji has multiple great options for portrait photographers ranging from the very affordable Fuji 60mm f/2.4 Macro to the very expensive and versatile 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS zoom. Of all the available options, my personal recommendations would be:
I would only recommend the new 90mm f/2 lens in cases where one absolutely needs the extra stop over the 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS and a focal length longer than the 56mm f/1.2. It's also a good choice if the 50-140mm f/2.8 is simply too heavy.
- Versatility - Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS
- Shallow Depth of Field, Super Low Light, Lightweight - Fuji 56mm f/1.2
- Budget - Fuji 60mm f/2.4 Macro
I would only recommend the new 90mm f/2 lens in cases where one absolutely needs the extra stop over the 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS and a focal length longer than the 56mm f/1.2. It's also a good choice if the 50-140mm f/2.8 is simply too heavy.