the fuji 90...

back alley

back alley

IMAGES
Local time
9:49 PM
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
41,289
anyone using the fuji 90/2 lens?
the more i look at images made with this lens the more i want one.
care to share your images and experience with this lens?
 
It’s sharp and renders beautifully.
In the few times I mounted an 85-100mm legacy lens on my fuji, I had trouble finding a need for the reach. It’s killed my interest in trying an xf 90mm.
The 60mm is the longest prime I need for the fuji kit.
 
i bought the 55-200 to have some long reach and it's a great lens...but i don't use it much...it hardly leaves the house...so it might be the same for the 90 as well.
but it's such a nice lens...
 
The 135L was one of my favorite lens and focal length on the full frame world.
I regret not trying the 90mm on the Fuji-X but if it's like the 135L, then it's a fun lens to use in the street.
 
I have the M-mount Minolta 90mm/f4 that I sometimes use on my Fuji bodies. It's a very nice small lens that makes excellent pictures (fully manual operation).
Sadly I don't sort my pictures by the gear I used so cannot put up examples from this lens.

But, like Andy above, 90mm for me is a long stretch and I don't often take it out.
 

Attachments

  • 90mm.jpg
    90mm.jpg
    20.2 KB · Views: 0
From all I've read, the 90 seems to be an excellent lens. I'm just not a long lens kind of shooter these days. I sold all my white Canon lenses a while back, retaining a single Olympus telephoto zoom from the E-series days that I use adapted to an OMD-EM1. For the Fujis, my longest lens is the 60 and, truthfully, I like it mainly for the close focus capability not the focal length.
 
I was never much of a 135 user in film days, but developed an appreciation for close to that FOV using my 85/2 on Nikon crop sensor. The Fuji 90 is a lens I can see myself getting someday, but it's not a burning desire at the moment.
 
I sold the 55-200 because it was only passable in favorable light. I'm about to buy the 90 specifically for an assignment that includes architectural detail and alot of walking through NYC. The only other option would be the 50-140 but I don't wan't to carry it.
 
I use the 90/2 for club shooting in decent light, also for events where I have room to move. Great optic, but kind of specialized, meaning it needs 1/180 min shutter speed to avoid shake, and (for me anyway) is a head/shoulders/upper body isolation lens. Much easier carry than the 50-140 which of course is a lot more flexible. I don't use the 90 often, but when I do it delivers. The 56/1.2 gets much more use, especially in darker venues.

If I get a chance I'll put some pics up on Flickr and link them here.
 
While it doesn't give you any more reach, it might be a lot smaller than the 50-200. What about the OM-mount 200/5 Zuiko? While it's not AF/AE, I think the single focal length and lighter weight may help it come out more often.

B2 (;->
 
the plan is to stick with fuji lenses. if i wanted to manually focus a lens i would have stayed with manual rangefinders.

the 90 will be a down the road buy...got lots of kit to play with for now.
with winter fast approaching i'm getting the bug to shoot more lately.
 
back alley said:
anyone using the fuji 90/2 lens?
Click to expand...

The 90mm f/2 Fuji lens is probably an excellent lens. I do not have one because it is not long enough for my needs. I prefer an adapted 135mm f/2 Zeiss instead. If I should need a fast 90mm focal length on my Fuji, I have an adapted 90mm f/2 Leitz that I can use.
 
I remember my 135mm was the lens I used least on my film Nikons. In any case, I have that focal length covered in my both my Fuji 18 to 55 mm, and my18 to 135 mm.
 
135 used to be THE tele back in 70s and 80s.
I will say I've used the 150mm Sigma macro for portrait and, now and then, landscape with good results.

Probably more compatible with the XT rather than XPro series tho.
...by all accounts the 90 is a truly stellar lens.
 
Hi gang!

The 90 f2 is the lens i now use most-often when i shoot with my xt1. I bought it for the longer reach but today i love it for the look it gives me (colors, compositions, bokeh etc.)

For street photography, it forces me to isolate elements and kind of tell the stories of the smaller things.. you will definitely not fill as much in the frame as with a 35 or 50mm; unless you stand at a street corner and wait for objects & people to get into your frame.
I was not into it at first but the colors and sharpness convinced me. It basically forced me to see things differently and that is one of the reasons why i prefer primes to zooms overall.
The only purchase that would make me use the 90 less is the 50-140. I rented it before and loved it.

For nature photography, same story but witj more landscape opportunity.

Overall a joy to use. It made me enjoy the 'smaller things'. Sorry i do not have any example to add here because i just joined the forum and the interface still looks fuzzy (not sure what the file type / size limit is)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom