The Fujinon 60mm f/2.4 Macro is Fuji's only macro lens for the Fujifilm X system and is the only option unless you opt for the much more expensive Zeiss 50mm f/2.8 Macro. It gives an equivalent angle of view as a 90mm lens on full-frame. Weighing in at 215g, it's a good, lightweight option for a short telephoto prime lens or as a macro lens for doing food, product or the like where normal lenses don't focus quite close enough. Despite its slower f/2.4 aperture, it's still faster than Fuji's professional zooms such as the 50-140mm f/2.8 OIS, meaning it's perfect for use in most conditions but the dimmest lit areas.
For an overview of the Fujifilm X system, see my Fujifilm X System Guide. For other reviews of Fujifilm X System gear, click here to see my complete list of Fujifilm gear reviews.
Unlike the Zeiss and most other macro lenses on other systems, the Fuji 60mm f/2.4 Macro only has a 0.5x magnification ratio, meaning that it is not "true 1.0x macro", however, since the Fuji X system uses an APS-C sensor, a 0.5x magnification would be similar to a 0.75x magnification on full-frame. This level of magnification is enough for most things apart from small bugs and detail shots of flowers.
The 60mm f/2.4 Macro gives a nice 90mm equivalent angle of view, making it a perfect portrait and short telephoto lens. However, since I own the 56mm f/1.2, which is a superior portrait and short telephoto lens, I mostly keep my 60mm f/2.4 Macro at home in order to take photos of products, e.g. the photos of other lenses you see on this website are all taken with the 60mm f/2.4 Macro.
This lens excels optically and mechanically. As you can see from the shots around the website and the samples in the section below, it's sharp. It's also built well, with heaps of metal and a nice, solid feel that you don't get with most Nikon and Canon lenses. Compared to other lenses in the Fuji lineup, it's as well built as the 56mm f/1.2 and the 23mm f/1.4. However, since it is lighter, it doesn't feel as dense. The front of the lens telescopes as it is focusing. The included hood is metal, which is a nice touch.
This lens is optically great. It has a very small and recessed front element, so it's not very prone to flare. In terms of image quality, it's sharp. Fuji's cameras internally correct other lens issues such as distortion, thus, there is practically no distortion that can be seen shooting straight lines.
Specifications
- Fujifilm Fujinon XF60mm f/2.4R Macro
- 10 elements in 8 groups, 1 aspherical, 1 ED glass
- Angle of view - 26.6 degrees
- Aperture range - f/2.4 to f/22
- 9 rounded aperture blades
- Focus range - 26.7cm - ∞
- Maximum magnification - 0.5x
- Weight - 215g
- 39mm filter thread
What's in the Box
Because this is one of the three original Fujinon lenses - the 18mm f/2, the 35mm f/1.4 and this 60mm f/2.4 Macro, it has extremely nice packaging. It comes in a magnetically closing box slipped inside a thin cardboard box. Inside the magnetic box, we find:
- Fuji 60mm f/2.4 Macro Lens itself
- Front and rear caps
- Metal lens hood - really nice touch
Underneath the magnetically closing box, we find:
- Documentation
- Lens Wrapping Cloth
The lens wrapping cloth is just a really oversized loose bag (I think Fuji include the same one with all lenses?) that prevents the lens from getting scratched when stored. It provides no protection from knocks.
Samples
All of the product shots seen on this blog are taken using this lens, apart from, of course, the ones of this lens itself, which was taken with the Zeiss Touit 32mm f/1.8. Here are a selection of shots of other lenses taken using this lens. You can see for yourself how sharp this lens is. Stopped down to f/2.8, it's as sharp as the Fuji 56mm f/1.2 stopped down to f/2.8, which is to say - extremely sharp.
The autofocus performance is a little lacking. It's slow, the front element telescopes, it hunts most of the time and manual focus is next to useless. However, for the conditions I use it in - controlled conditions, I find it to be fast enough, you just have to be a tiny bit patient. For moving subjects, I would not use this lens. That said, this lens cops more flack than it deserves. The autofocus isn't terrible - it used to be, but since the firmware updates, it has become very usable. On the X-T1, it's fast enough for me. The autofocus motor is a little noisy, but not terrible.
Because the autofocus sensors of the X-T1 are on the sensor rather than on a separate module, it does not suffer from missing focus the way a DSLR can. Focus is not as fast as a DSLR, but in terms of accuracy, when the focus is found and locked, the pictures always turn out tack sharp because of how well the focus has locked and how accurate the on sensor phase-detect autofocus system is. The key point stopping many from achieving sharp images, provided they have decent technique and equipment is missed focus. The Fuji mirrorless system definitely helps here.
The magnification of this lens is more than enough for product shots, whilst some users might find it lacking for shots of extremely small things such as bugs and flowers, it works extremely well for food, products - e.g. lenses, watches, equipment and of most normally sized things, as shown here. None of these pictures below were taken anywhere near its maximum reproduction ratio, despite most normal lenses not being able to get this close.
Compared to the Fuji 56mm f/1.2
There are two things to consider when tossing up between this lens and the Fuji 56mm f/1.2. I own both of these lenses, that's because I actually need both of them for the stuff I do - the 56mm f/1.2 is great for portraits and shallow depth of field, as well as excellent in low light. The Fuji 60mm f/2.4 Macro is great for macro stuff, so for me, that's mostly product shots. The 56mm f/1.2 doesn't get close enough for product shots.
Both of these lenses are sharp. I tested them both at a common aperture of f/2.8 and found that they were practically indistinguishable and I could not pick them apart in a blind trial. That's an extrodinarily good performance from the 60mm f/2.4, as it's only stopped down slightly to f/2.8 compared to the 56mm f/1.2, which has been stopped down over two stops.
The strengths of the 60mm f/2.4 Macro are that it does macro, despite not being 1.0x reproduction, at 0.5x, it can still get five times closer than the 56mm f/1.2. This is a significant amount and it's impossible to crop in five times without a significant reduction in detail. That part is simple, if you need macro, you need the 60mm f/2.4. You can't make do with the 56mm f/1.2.
The strengths of the 56mm f/1.2 are equally clear. Its key strength is its aperture - f/1.2. You can do amazing things with f/1.2. You can create a wafer thin depth of field and isolate your subjects, turning your background into smooth, lush bokeh. The bokeh on the 56mm f/1.2 is amazing, and yes, you can completely tell the difference between f/1.2 and f/2.4 most of the time, so it is a noticeable advantage. On top of that f/1.2 is around two stops faster than f/2.4, allowing you to capture images in 4 times less light. This is equivalent to managing to get a shot at a clean ISO1600 rather than a muddy ISO6400, or even worse, the difference between getting a usable and unusable shot. That's where the 56mm f/1.2 shines. It's a portrait monster - it's a bokeh machine and it's a low-light machine.
This would be pretty simple if it weren't for cost, and to a lesser extent, weight. Whilst I would love to say get the 60mm f/2.4 Macro for macro and get the 56mm f/1.2 for portraits and general short telephoto use, the 60mm f/2.4 is actually half the weight and half the price of the 56mm f/1.2. That's actually quite a significant amount, meaning that there are people who might be more suited to the 56mm f/1.2, but are considering the 60mm f/2.4 because of that cost difference.
Personally, I would recommend the 60mm f/2.4 as the better choice for all-round photography. It's a great short telephoto lens. Even if you think about it, f/2.4 isn't slow. It's still faster than the fastest f/2.8 professional zooms and is more than fast enough for use in all but the dimmest of situations. On top of that, in daylight, we're mostly shooting stopped down anyway, at f/2.8 or higher, both of these lenses are equally sharp, so there's no benefit to going with the 56mm f/1.2 unless you want to use f/1.2 for the wafer thin depth of field. The 60mm f/2.4 Macro also adds, well, macro! So even if you don't intend to use it for macro, that's a nice feature to have. This makes the 56mm f/1.2 a very expensive specialty lens. It's a lens for portrait photographers who want a razor thin depth of field and a nice lens to use in low light - they pay for it though, it's expensive, especially compared to the excellent 60mm f/2.4.
Compared to the Zeiss 50mm f/2.8 Macro
Unlike the previous comparison, this one is much easier. The Zeiss lens is over twice the price of this Fuji 60mm f/2.4 macro and offers no distinct advantages apart from having a 1.0x magnification ratio, giving it the ability to do "true macro". I assume that people shooting test charts would find it sharper, but I would argue that the Fuji 60mm f/2.4 Macro is already plenty sharp enough. I do not own the Zeiss lens.
It comes down to how much that 1.0x magnification ratio matters to you and how much you are willing to pony up in exchange for being able to get closer to your subjects. For most people, you'll never reach anywhere near 1.0x. That's extremely close and in the range of bug and flower photographers. For products or simply "close-ups", the Fuji 60mm f/2.4 Macro is great.