Incredible objective
Perfect for Portrait pictures
Maybe slow with X1DII but all the gear is slow. Not for sports and so on
I work slowly, with manual focus mode

Quote from: Orokaj on January 13, 2025, 09:51:16 AM80E is not far away.

What might be its maximum aperture?

The 80mm was my dream lens when I decided to buy into the X System. So I got it together with the X1D, pre-owned copy with 65 clicks only at MPB. Yes, difficult to focus, many misses, but dream results when the focus nails (manual focus on the X1DS never worked for me).

Sadly, the 80/1.9 was also the first mechanical failure I had in my entirely photography life.
Only a few months after purchasing it, I had to return it with a stuck shutter, and the dealer offered me a refund, which I took, because repair would take a few months. I didn't get an 80mm back, and I most likely won't.

I added an XCD 2.8/135 to my lineup, the next lens on my list; it plays well with my now X2D. Now, I am thinking of buying a pre-owned XCD 3.2/90 to close the gap between my 35-75 and 135.

How you like the 135 in comparison to the 80?

Quote from: paratom on February 27, 2025, 01:51:28 AMHow you like the 135 in comparison to the 80?

The most crucial difference is the focal length and, thus, the required space to shoot more than just a close portrait, like a half body shot inside or on location. With the XCD 135, I have to back up further, but other than that, both lenses create beautiful results.

I didn't buy the 135 as a replacement for the 80mm, it was a planned addition. However, I will not replace the XCD 80 with another 80, if available, but with a 90mm/3.2 most likely.

For me, the XCD 80mm is a lens worth getting into the X system for.
It is not perfect, especially considering modern lens designs that focus on correcting flaws and delivering perfection.

However, the 80mm has its own unique vibe, creating a natural sense of depth. Its colors appear more organic and less digital, while out-of-focus areas have a more retro look.

If you're looking for a lens that will take you on an artistic journey, the 80mm is a better choice—even over the 90V.

Quote from: Orokaj on January 13, 2025, 09:51:16 AM80E is not far away.

So... it was far away. Will they propose a kit with the new X2D...?

I'm going to rent it. But I shoot random people on the street. I don't have big problems with Noctilux 0.95. But it's easier to focus manually. Has anyone shot 80 on the street, is there any good experience?

Quote from: gibonxxl on March 06, 2025, 08:49:51 AMFor me, the XCD 80mm is a lens worth getting into the X system for.
It is not perfect, especially considering modern lens designs that focus on correcting flaws and delivering perfection.

However, the 80mm has its own unique vibe, creating a natural sense of depth. Its colors appear more organic and less digital, while out-of-focus areas have a more retro look.

If you're looking for a lens that will take you on an artistic journey, the 80mm is a better choice—even over the 90V.

I would love to see some comparative examples of this between the 80mm and the 90mm. In my experience shooting those 2 lenses, I am not seeing that difference and the only advantage I find for the 80mm is the less than one stop max aperture advantage. There could indeed be advantages and differences, so far I have not seen them, but would be interested if you have some examples illustrating.

I can't seem to get an image to display, but I may be doing something wrong. below is a link.

80 XCD vs 90 V


Steve Hendrix/CI

And don't forget that the HC 100/2.2 mounts on the X2D with an adapter preserving both AF and the leaf shutter. If you want an even more artistic look, the older Hasselblad 110/2 renders gloriously, but is MF and Electronic shutter only, which kills it for a lot of applications.

And for the truly insane, there's the Canon 85/1.2 

Matt

The HC 100 is a little front heavy, but is my favorite for portraits with the X. AF only works with the proper firmware (certainly orange dot). With the converter 0.8x, it turns into a 1.8/80 or so - and gets even more heavy ... I do have to 110, too, but use it mostly with the 20x cameras.

Quote from: Hendrix_CI on May 10, 2025, 06:11:37 AMI would love to see some comparative examples of this between the 80mm and the 90mm. In my experience shooting those 2 lenses, I am not seeing that difference and the only advantage I find for the 80mm is the less than one stop max aperture advantage. There could indeed be advantages and differences, so far I have not seen them, but would be interested if you have some examples illustrating.

I can't seem to get an image to display, but I may be doing something wrong. below is a link.

80 XCD vs 90 V


Steve Hendrix/CI

The difference becomes more visible when you get a little closer to the subject with the Xcd80 so that the image frame is the same.

Quote from: Ralf on May 10, 2025, 08:00:51 AM

Quote from: Hendrix_CI on May 10, 2025, 06:11:37 AMI would love to see some comparative examples of this between the 80mm and the 90mm. In my experience shooting those 2 lenses, I am not seeing that difference and the only advantage I find for the 80mm is the less than one stop max aperture advantage. There could indeed be advantages and differences, so far I have not seen them, but would be interested if you have some examples illustrating.

I can't seem to get an image to display, but I may be doing something wrong. below is a link.

80 XCD vs 90 V


Steve Hendrix/CI

The difference becomes more visible when you get a little closer to the subject with the Xcd80 so that the image frame is the same.

Ralf, did you see my comparison?


Steve Hendrix/CI

Quote from: Kiwimac on September 19, 2024, 03:39:13 PM

Quote from: niviblad on August 21, 2024, 07:57:38 PMTed Forbes mentions using X1D or X2D (with the 90V or the 80) for dance photography, prefocusing a zone where there was a probability his subject would be. It is not made with that (professional) usecase scenario in mind I guess but I think this is precisely where is the fun with our tools: trying to challenge ourselves. In this case, using this absolute gorgeous piece of glass to shoot something hard to catch, because the result will be astonishing and literally extraordinary. I keep on trying and exercising shooting my very young and fast moving kid with that lense. I have some good shots, not perfect (and that would be - to my eye - the closest to perfect composition, light, colors, focus, sharpness, scene and expression), but that is fun, and I look regularly these shots. Thinking, planning and sometimes, not thinking at all and obtaining descent (again to my eye) results.

I also use the 65 mm, which is clearly faster to autofocus, very sharp and has also this ability to separate, maybe in more organic way I think.

 It's how sports were shot before AF existed.

This ties in w/anticipation, even focusing "on the fly" where something's going to be, breath control regardless of the what the camera can do.  Selective focus/biasing focus, all the stuff necessary to get something in focus before auto focus showed up.

Portraiture can be a nightmare in terms of focus; focusing on the eyelashes on a "head n shoulders" and closer (most folks see their portraits as sharper than they really are if their eyes are sharp) sounds good, but what about the NOSE.  It's in front of the eyes and can distract since it's in front of everything/OOF things tend to look a lot better behind the main subject matter instead of in front notwithstanding exceptions.

YES, stopping way down is an alternative/different style.

Profiles/silhouettes are worse, focus needs to consider the eye on the near side, and a line going down the middle of the forehead down the middle of the nose which is the edge of the face behind the eye which usually needs to look sharp as well as the eye on the near side, exceptions notwithstanding.

It just seems to me that AF camera wise doesn't cover all of the issues needing solutions when it comes to focus.

W/a AF camera I use it but don't trust it where I focus on a point then hold focus and frame/reframe, then if there's enough time fire a second or third shot (just a little bit diff) on manual; sometimes one of the insurance shots looks better than what I thought was going to be in focus looking at the shots up close in PS later.


I saw a documentary on one of the greatest ever, Andre Kertez out shooting which amazed the hell out of me and this was way before AF; they show him taking a shot and then they show the shot he took, this is 1 for 1, every shot in perfect focus, beautifully composed, a home run every time he stepped up to the plate.   

I'm not looking down my nose at AF, it's helped me get some important shots particularly when my eyesight was at its worst before my surgeries.

Quote from: Hendrix_CI on May 10, 2025, 09:56:26 AM

Quote from: Ralf on May 10, 2025, 08:00:51 AM

Quote from: Hendrix_CI on May 10, 2025, 06:11:37 AMI would love to see some comparative examples of this between the 80mm and the 90mm. In my experience shooting those 2 lenses, I am not seeing that difference and the only advantage I find for the 80mm is the less than one stop max aperture advantage. There could indeed be advantages and differences, so far I have not seen them, but would be interested if you have some examples illustrating.

I can't seem to get an image to display, but I may be doing something wrong. below is a link.

80 XCD vs 90 V


Steve Hendrix/CI

The difference becomes more visible when you get a little closer to the subject with the Xcd80 so that the image frame is the same.

Ralf, did you see my comparison?


Steve Hendrix/CI

Yes, the xcd 80 shows a larger image frame.