Fuji 90mm f/2 or 60mm f/2.4

[SquarePeg]

I'm seriously considering selling my Nikon 7100 and 105mm which I had planned to keep for macro/bokeh/floral stuff when I got the XT2. If either the 90mm or the 60mm can pair with the XT2 for that type of shot, I'm going to go totally mirrorless and leave Nikon behind.

I'm looking for a combo that can take nice portraits and also nice "macro" type shots - not super bug hairs showing macro but more like this:

Heat by SharonCat..., on Flickr

and this:

Butterflies_6463_edited-1 by SharonCat..., on Flickr

Anyone using either the 60mm or the 90mm with the XT2? Or have both and can offer a comparison? I know the 60mm had some knocks against it for AF speed but with the XT2 I'm thinking that won't be as big of an issue? I'd just go with the 90mm for it's longer reach and wider aperture but not sure if it's going to fill my macro needs... It's a 1:2 where the 60mm is a 1:2.4. I'm leaning toward the 60mm but don't want to get it then lose money on a trade a few months later when I decide I need to "upgrade" to the 90...

 

[Gary A.]

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

 

[fmw]

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

Mine hunts quite a bit but my Nikkor 60 did too. The better focal length will be the one that suits your shooting style. Personally I like 90mm for 35mm format and 60mm for APS-C. The Fuji 60 is a bargain. I bought mine new for $380 and, as Gary says, it is tack sharp. I've sold all my Nikon gear except for a few accessories. I feel just fine about it. You probably will too. I think your T2 is probably a better camera than your 7100.

 

[SquarePeg]

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

I don't think I want a Zeiss, I'm really liking the way the Fuji lenses work with the XT2 and will probably stick to that for now. What do you mean by "extended out for close ups?" Not sure I get what you're saying there. The minimum focus distance should be 10" or so?

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

Mine hunts quite a bit but my Nikkor 60 did too. The better focal length will be the one that suits your shooting style. Personally I like 90mm for 35mm format and 60mm for APS-C. The Fuji 60 is a bargain. I bought mine new for $380 and, as Gary says, it is tack sharp. I've sold all my Nikon gear except for a few accessories. I feel just fine about it. You probably will too. I think your T2 is probably a better camera than your 7100.

$380? They are over $600 new - are we talking about the same lens? I don't really know much about Fuji lens history. Is there a newer and an older version? I want to make sure if I buy used (which is my preference) that I'm getting the newer version. Currently a used "like new" on Amazon is is $440 and a new on Adorama is $649.

 

[Gary A.]

The 60mm hunts more closer you get to your subject(s). The Zeiss not nearly so much.

60mm portrait

50mm portrait

60mm macro

50mm macro

 

[jcdeboever]

I love my 60mm f/2.4. it is a winner, fantastic micro contrast, color saturation, and sharpness. As Gary shows, it makes an awesome portrait lens as well and gives you a 90mm field of view. It will hunt a little in poor light. I don't use mine in auto focus mode though, I use it in manual mostly, with peaking highlights on high. I use blue high mostly. I only autofocus for sports, action shots. I guess using older, manual, film cameras a lot has kinda made me that way.

 

[fmw]

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

I don't think I want a Zeiss, I'm really liking the way the Fuji lenses work with the XT2 and will probably stick to that for now. What do you mean by "extended out for close ups?" Not sure I get what you're saying there. The minimum focus distance should be 10" or so?

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

Mine hunts quite a bit but my Nikkor 60 did too. The better focal length will be the one that suits your shooting style. Personally I like 90mm for 35mm format and 60mm for APS-C. The Fuji 60 is a bargain. I bought mine new for $380 and, as Gary says, it is tack sharp. I've sold all my Nikon gear except for a few accessories. I feel just fine about it. You probably will too. I think your T2 is probably a better camera than your 7100.

$380? They are over $600 new - are we talking about the same lens? I don't really know much about Fuji lens history. Is there a newer and an older version? I want to make sure if I buy used (which is my preference) that I'm getting the newer version. Currently a used "like new" on Amazon is is $440 and a new on Adorama is $649.

I bought my Fuji 60mm f2.4 new. It was a gray market import. I caught it minutes after it was listed. I bought a brand new gray market X-E1 for $285. That camera and lens stay permanently on my tabletop product set. The X-E2 goes with me when I'm out shooting. You can find some amazing deals on photo gear if you dig enough. It takes some time and patience. I'm currently looking for a 10-24 zoom. My target price is $500. So far so bad but I'm not in a terrible hurry.

 

[jcdeboever]

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

I don't think I want a Zeiss, I'm really liking the way the Fuji lenses work with the XT2 and will probably stick to that for now. What do you mean by "extended out for close ups?" Not sure I get what you're saying there. The minimum focus distance should be 10" or so?

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

Mine hunts quite a bit but my Nikkor 60 did too. The better focal length will be the one that suits your shooting style. Personally I like 90mm for 35mm format and 60mm for APS-C. The Fuji 60 is a bargain. I bought mine new for $380 and, as Gary says, it is tack sharp. I've sold all my Nikon gear except for a few accessories. I feel just fine about it. You probably will too. I think your T2 is probably a better camera than your 7100.

$380? They are over $600 new - are we talking about the same lens? I don't really know much about Fuji lens history. Is there a newer and an older version? I want to make sure if I buy used (which is my preference) that I'm getting the newer version. Currently a used "like new" on Amazon is is $440 and a new on Adorama is $649.

I bought my Fuji 60mm f2.4 new. It was a gray market import. I caught it minutes after it was listed. I bought a brand new gray market X-E1 for $285. That camera and lens stay permanently on my tabletop product set. The X-E2 goes with me when I'm out shooting. You can find some amazing deals on photo gear if you dig enough. It takes some time and patience. I'm currently looking for a 10-24 zoom. My target price is $500. So far so bad but I'm not in a terrible hurry.

No thanks, my luck has been bad enough to add gray market anything. If someone told me I could only use one lens and one body, it'd be the 60mm and X-T2

 

[SquarePeg]

If someone told me I could only use one lens and one body, it'd be the 60mm and X-T2

Until next year when the 80mm 2.8 OIS macro is released!

 

[fmw]

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

I don't think I want a Zeiss, I'm really liking the way the Fuji lenses work with the XT2 and will probably stick to that for now. What do you mean by "extended out for close ups?" Not sure I get what you're saying there. The minimum focus distance should be 10" or so?

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

Mine hunts quite a bit but my Nikkor 60 did too. The better focal length will be the one that suits your shooting style. Personally I like 90mm for 35mm format and 60mm for APS-C. The Fuji 60 is a bargain. I bought mine new for $380 and, as Gary says, it is tack sharp. I've sold all my Nikon gear except for a few accessories. I feel just fine about it. You probably will too. I think your T2 is probably a better camera than your 7100.

$380? They are over $600 new - are we talking about the same lens? I don't really know much about Fuji lens history. Is there a newer and an older version? I want to make sure if I buy used (which is my preference) that I'm getting the newer version. Currently a used "like new" on Amazon is is $440 and a new on Adorama is $649.

I bought my Fuji 60mm f2.4 new. It was a gray market import. I caught it minutes after it was listed. I bought a brand new gray market X-E1 for $285. That camera and lens stay permanently on my tabletop product set. The X-E2 goes with me when I'm out shooting. You can find some amazing deals on photo gear if you dig enough. It takes some time and patience. I'm currently looking for a 10-24 zoom. My target price is $500. So far so bad but I'm not in a terrible hurry.

No thanks, my luck has been bad enough to add gray market anything. If someone told me I could only use one lens and one body, it'd be the 60mm and X-T2

A great picture making combination for sure.

My luck has been almost 100%. I once bought a gray market Nikon F5 that had a metering problem. I couldn't get it fixed in the U.S. so I sent it to Nikon in Japan. They replaced my camera with a brand new one (gray market, of course.) I only paid the shipping charge to Japan. It took less than 2 weeks. Otherwise I have received perfect products every time.

A few weeks ago I bought a factory refurbished E2. Fujifilm doesn't sell refurbished equipment in the U.S. so I know it was gray market. It was $500 with an 18-55 zoom. The camera is perfect. Not a mark. I didn't even have to update the firmware. The lens and accessories were brand new. The only way you would know it was refurbished was the label on the box and the fact that it was missing the lens hood.

I've been finding deals for as long as I can remember. The internet has made it a lot easier.

 

[SquarePeg]

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

I don't think I want a Zeiss, I'm really liking the way the Fuji lenses work with the XT2 and will probably stick to that for now. What do you mean by "extended out for close ups?" Not sure I get what you're saying there. The minimum focus distance should be 10" or so?

There is also a Zeiss 50mm which delivers 1x magnification. The Fuji 60mm is only a .5 magnification. The 60mm is great ... it is Fuji sharp (which means it is at a minimum as sharp as my 'L' lenses and the equal of the Zeiss. But I found the 60mm tends to hunt at bit when extended out for closeups. The 60mm does nice portraits.

I have the 90mm, it performs well, but won't deliver on .5x magnification.

Mine hunts quite a bit but my Nikkor 60 did too. The better focal length will be the one that suits your shooting style. Personally I like 90mm for 35mm format and 60mm for APS-C. The Fuji 60 is a bargain. I bought mine new for $380 and, as Gary says, it is tack sharp. I've sold all my Nikon gear except for a few accessories. I feel just fine about it. You probably will too. I think your T2 is probably a better camera than your 7100.

$380? They are over $600 new - are we talking about the same lens? I don't really know much about Fuji lens history. Is there a newer and an older version? I want to make sure if I buy used (which is my preference) that I'm getting the newer version. Currently a used "like new" on Amazon is is $440 and a new on Adorama is $649.

I bought my Fuji 60mm f2.4 new. It was a gray market import. I caught it minutes after it was listed. I bought a brand new gray market X-E1 for $285. That camera and lens stay permanently on my tabletop product set. The X-E2 goes with me when I'm out shooting. You can find some amazing deals on photo gear if you dig enough. It takes some time and patience. I'm currently looking for a 10-24 zoom. My target price is $500. So far so bad but I'm not in a terrible hurry.

No thanks, my luck has been bad enough to add gray market anything. If someone told me I could only use one lens and one body, it'd be the 60mm and X-T2

A great picture making combination for sure.

My luck has been almost 100%. I once bought a gray market Nikon F5 that had a metering problem. I couldn't get it fixed in the U.S. so I sent it to Nikon in Japan. They replaced my camera with a brand new one (gray market, of course.) I only paid the shipping charge to Japan. It took less than 2 weeks. Otherwise I have received perfect products every time.

A few weeks ago I bought a factory refurbished E2. Fujifilm doesn't sell refurbished equipment in the U.S. so I know it was gray market. It was $500 with an 18-55 zoom. The camera is perfect. Not a mark. I didn't even have to update the firmware. The lens and accessories were brand new. The only way you would know it was refurbished was the label on the box and the fact that it was missing the lens hood.

I've been finding deals for as long as I can remember. The internet has made it a lot easier.

I agree refurb and used is the way to go. It killed me to pay retail for the XT2! Usually I am at least one or two iterations behind so I can find good deals but the XT2 was so new there is nothing out there.

The last refurb I bought was my Nikon 7100 and the same, you would never have known it wasn't brand-new if it didn't say refurbished on the box

 

[Derrel]

When a lens is extended way out and focused at very close distances, there is typically a fair to large amount of focal length lost. That is NOT a "problem" nor a "fault", but it is something to consider; for example, my Tamron 90mm loses quite a bit of focal length at its closest focusing distance (Minimum Focusing Distance, or MFD), and is as I recall, effectively a 73mm lens at MFD.

Loss of effective focal length helps keep the maximum aperture from dropping too much....a typical 60mm f/2.8 macro from Nikon when extended way out and focsed at MFD might drop to an effective f/5.6 maximum aperture..or two full stops'less than at Infinity; this is one reason to select a LONGER than expected macro lens, for many people.

The issue is that at close range, when one's 60mm lens might drop to say a 50mm effective focal length, the angle of view BEHIND a close-up subject grows wider; the longer a macro lens, the easier it is for controlling the angle of view BEHIND close-up subjects...in my book, the shorter macros (50,55,60mm) are best for moderate-distance close-in shooting (3,4,5 up to 10 feet) and copy work, small-scale landscapes, gardening and botanical pictures, and so on; the 100 and 105mm lenses have a much narrower angle of view; the longer macros like the 150,180mm, and 200mm macros made by Sigma or Canon or Nikon, might be the best for insects, butterflies, and so on.

How FAR you want to be from the subject is an issue too...you can get a 1/2 life-size photo with a 60mm, a 105mm, or 180mm macro...but the 180mm will be 1/2 life-size from like 36 inches, and 1:1 at 18 inches...the 60mm will be 1/2 life size at 12 inches, and 1:1 at like 6 inches (all measurements of this type are made from the FOCAL plane, and NOT from the lens front!). These are rough figures, with relative distances--not exact, scientific figures, but the Sigma 180mm macro was 1:1 magnification at 18 inches from film plane for me.

When using flash on-camera or on-bracket---the LONGER the distance the flash is from the subject makes flash exposure and the right f/stop much easier to control accurately than when the lens (and flash!) is 4,5,6,7 inches from a subject.

Personal preference: a 60mm macro even on a 1.5x camera is too SHORT a macro lens, unless you are shooting close-up work of artwork, 8x 11 inch documents, or botanicals with a desire to show the backdrop a bit....if you want a more-selective view bedind the close-in stuff, go with the longer macro lens, like the 90mm--even on APS-C format cameras. Just my opinion. I have owned 55,60,90,100,180mm macro lenses...I prefer the longer 180 over any of them.

Lens work is dependent on how you wanrt the phoitos to look; sometimes one wants a wider angle of view BEHIND the close-up subject; other times a narrower angle of view behind the focused spot is desired....see Gary's shots above for good examples of how one can use a 60mm macro effectively on florals; there, the angle of view behind is only inches. Sometimes,like in a portrait shot, that could turn out to be multiple feet behind a subject if the distances are say 6 feet to the person and then 40 feet to the backdrop!

 

[SquarePeg]

When a lens is extended way out and focused at very close distances, there is typically a fair to large amount of focal length lost. That is NOT a "problem" nor a "fault", but it is something to consider; for example, my Tamron 90mm loses quite a bit of focal length at its closest focusing distance (Minimum Focusing Distance, or MFD), and is as I recall, effectively a 73mm lens at MFD.

Loss of effective focal length helps keep the maximum aperture from dropping too much....a typical 60mm f/2.8 macro from Nikon when extended way out and focsed at MFD might drop to an effective f/5.6 maximum aperture..or two full stops'less than at Infinity; this is one reason to select a LONGER than expected macro lens, for many people.

The issue is that at close range, when one's 60mm lens might drop to say a 50mm effective focal length, the angle of view BEHIND a close-up subject grows wider; the longer a macro lens, the easier it is for controlling the angle of view BEHIND close-up subjects...in my book, the shorter macros (50,55,60mm) are best for moderate-distance close-in shooting (3,4,5 up to 10 feet) and copy work, small-scale landscapes, gardening and botanical pictures, and so on; the 100 and 105mm lenses have a much narrower angle of view; the longer macros like the 150,180mm, and 200mm macros made by Sigma or Canon or Nikon, might be the best for insects, butterflies, and so on.

How FAR you want to be from the subject is an issue too...you can get a 1/2 life-size photo with a 60mm, a 105mm, or 180mm macro...but the 180mm will be 1/2 life-size from like 36 inches, and 1:1 at 18 inches...the 60mm will be 1/2 life size at 12 inches, and 1:1 at like 6 inches (all measurements of this type are made from the FOCAL plane, and NOT from the lens front!). These are rough figures, with relative distances--not exact, scientific figures, but the Sigma 180mm macro was 1:1 magnification at 18 inches from film plane for me.

When using flash on-camera or on-bracket---the LONGER the distance the flash is from the subject makes flash exposure and the right f/stop much easier to control accurately than when the lens (and flash!) is 4,5,6,7 inches from a subject.

Personal preference: a 60mm macro even on a 1.5x camera is too SHORT a macro lens, unless you are shooting close-up work of artwork, 8x 11 inch documents, or botanicals with a desire to show the backdrop a bit....if you want a more-selective view bedind the close-in stuff, go with the longer macro lens, like the 90mm--even on APS-C format cameras. Just my opinion. I have owned 55,60,90,100,180mm macro lenses...I prefer the longer 180 over any of them.

Lens work is dependent on how you wanrt the phoitos to look; sometimes one wants a wider angle of view BEHIND the close-up subject; other times a narrower angle of view behind the focused spot is desired....see Gary's shots above for good examples of how one can use a 60mm macro effectively on florals; there, the angle of view behind is only inches. Sometimes,like in a portrait shot, that could turn out to be multiple feet behind a subject if the distances are say 6 feet to the person and then 40 feet to the backdrop!

Thanks for the detailed response. Honestly I've read it 2x and some of it is still over my head even though your explanation is really good.

The one thing I still don't understand is (and Gary said this too) that when the lens is extended... how is a prime lens extended? Am I just being too literal? Are you talking about focusing?

 

[Derrel]

Yes....in order to focus very close, the lens extends, physically, moving the front elements farther and farther from the middle and rear elements. ALso, an extension tube can be used behind the lens, in order to physically extend the lens away from the film plane, which allows for closer minimum focusing distances.

When focused at Infinity, my 60mm macro lens is about 60mm in length...as it is focused closer and closer, it gets longer overall, literally "extending" its overall length, which allows for closer and closer focusing.

 

[SquarePeg]

Yes....in order to focus very close, the lens extends, physically, moving the front elements farther and farther from the middle and rear elements. ALso, an extension tube can be used behind the lens, in order to physically extend the lens away from the film plane, which allows for closer minimum focusing distances.

When focused at Infinity, my 60mm macro lens is about 60mm in length...as it is focused closer and closer, it gets longer overall, literally "extending" its overall length, which allows for closer and closer focusing.

Thanks for clarifying. None of the prime lenses that I have do that so I was not certain what you guys were referring to. Guess that explains the really long lens hood. I noticed in one of the photos I was looking at of the lens that the lens hood is almost the same length as the lens itself