Fuji 27mm review

Started Jul 23, 2013 | Discussions
baobob
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,948Gear list
Like?
Fuji 27mm review
Jul 23, 2013
 baobob's gear list:baobob's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sony RX100 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +8 more
SixDasher
Senior MemberPosts: 1,710
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to baobob, Jul 23, 2013

Why in the heck does he make a lot of those sample shots at high ISOs and insane shutterspeeds of static subjects?!?!?!   f2.8 iso1600 1/1400s for a bicycle rack? These shots look horrible with noise and thus throwing away sharpness and color, kind of impossible to judge the lens with those pics.

Too bad as he seems to have put real effort into it.

-- hide signature --

FujiFilm X-E1
Samyang 8mm f2.8 Fisheye | Voigtländer 35mm f1.4 Nokton | Super Takumar 50mm f1.4
Nikon Ais: 28mm f2.0, 35mm f1.4, 50mm f1.2, 50mm f2.0 Ai, 85mm f1.4, 105mm f4 micro, 135mm f2.0

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MiWo
Regular MemberPosts: 446Gear list
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to baobob, Jul 23, 2013

High ISO or not, the review seems to play along with the samples posted so far, even the official Fuji ones: sharp center, much weaker corners.

I am surprised by his judgement on CA though, as some samples exhibit quite severe fringing...

Oh well, maybe the lens gets better with every production run? I'll wait for X-Mas then

Best,

Mike

-- hide signature --

______________
'Simplicate, then add light(-ness).' - Colin Chapman

 MiWo's gear list:MiWo's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5 Apple iPhone 4 Apple iPad Mini Wi-Fi
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
geejay101
Regular MemberPosts: 184Gear list
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to baobob, Jul 24, 2013

baobob wrote:

at

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/fujifilm_xf_27mm_f2_8_review/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+photographyblog+PhotographyBLOG

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

Why did they produce a crappy 27mm f2.8 pancake instead of taking the decent 23mm f2 lens from the X100 ?

I dont get it.

 geejay101's gear list:geejay101's gear list
Sigma DP1x Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dengx
Contributing MemberPosts: 931
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to geejay101, Jul 24, 2013

geejay101 wrote:

Why did they produce a crappy 27mm f2.8 pancake instead of taking the decent 23mm f2 lens from the X100 ?

Because 23mm f/2 found in X100 is not a pancake.

Regards

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
geejay101
Regular MemberPosts: 184Gear list
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to dengx, Jul 24, 2013

dengx wrote:

geejay101 wrote:

Why did they produce a crappy 27mm f2.8 pancake instead of taking the decent 23mm f2 lens from the X100 ?

Because 23mm f/2 found in X100 is not a pancake.

Regards

I dont understand what you want to say. Are you saying that the 23mm lens is actually very deep ?

 geejay101's gear list:geejay101's gear list
Sigma DP1x Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dengx
Contributing MemberPosts: 931
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to geejay101, Jul 24, 2013

geejay101 wrote:

I dont understand what you want to say. Are you saying that the 23mm lens is actually very deep ?

Being a fixed camera it allowed the engineers to hide most of it inside the X100

Courtesy of:

http://www.jamesmaherphotography.com/photoblog_view_post/767-taking-apart-the-fuji-x100

and

http://www.finepix-x100.com/en/story

Regards

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SixDasher
Senior MemberPosts: 1,710
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to dengx, Jul 24, 2013

It's not like it will fit in your pocket with that 27mm on it, so why make a slower softer not-so-cheap lens and make a decent 23/1.4 a few months later?

-- hide signature --

FujiFilm X-E1
Samyang 8mm f2.8 Fisheye | Voigtländer 35mm f1.4 Nokton | Super Takumar 50mm f1.4
Nikon Ais: 28mm f2.0, 35mm f1.4, 50mm f1.2, 50mm f2.0 Ai, 85mm f1.4, 105mm f4 micro, 135mm f2.0

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dengx
Contributing MemberPosts: 931
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to SixDasher, Jul 24, 2013

SixDasher wrote:

It's not like it will fit in your pocket with that 27mm on it, so why make a slower softer not-so-cheap lens and make a decent 23/1.4 a few months later?

Because it will drive the sales of X-M1 I suppose.

Regards

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Krich13
Regular MemberPosts: 422
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to geejay101, Jul 24, 2013

geejay101 wrote:

Why did they produce a crappy 27mm f2.8 pancake instead of taking the decent 23mm f2 lens from the X100 ?

I dont get it.

Because they do not want to cannibalize the sales of X100s.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
viking79
Forum ProPosts: 13,461Gear list
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to geejay101, Jul 24, 2013

geejay101 wrote:

dengx wrote:

geejay101 wrote:

Why did they produce a crappy 27mm f2.8 pancake instead of taking the decent 23mm f2 lens from the X100 ?

Because 23mm f/2 found in X100 is not a pancake.

Regards

I dont understand what you want to say. Are you saying that the 23mm lens is actually very deep ?

Yes, and fixed lenses usually perform better than interchangeable lenses since they can put a large element very close to the sensor (the rear element is nearly as large as the sensor so incident light angle is close to perpendicular).  With interchangeable lens cameras the mount limits how large the rear element can be.

Also, as for performance, the lens looks fine.  Remember, those book shelf shots only show how the lens performs for close to macro work.  Real world shooting might be substantially different at say infinity focus.

Eric

 viking79's gear list:viking79's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R Samsung NX30 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 ED SSA Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ballwin12
Regular MemberPosts: 254Gear list
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to baobob, Jul 24, 2013

baobob wrote:

at

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/fujifilm_xf_27mm_f2_8_review/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+photographyblog+PhotographyBLOG

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

Not sharp at all in my eyes.... I hope I'm wrong !

 ballwin12's gear list:ballwin12's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon D600 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Krich13
Regular MemberPosts: 422
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to viking79, Jul 24, 2013

viking79 wrote:

the rear element is nearly as large as the sensor so incident light angle is close to perpendicular

That is incorrect.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dengx
Contributing MemberPosts: 931
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to Krich13, Jul 24, 2013

Krich13 wrote:

the rear element is nearly as large as the sensor so incident light angle is close to perpendicular

That is incorrect.

  • Exploiting the benefits of a fixed lens, the rear lens element is larger than the front lens element. By giving it a diameter of 27mm, which is about the same as the sensor's diagonal dimension of 28.4mm, ample light volume can be received in the edge areas of the sensor.

Regards

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Krich13
Regular MemberPosts: 422
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to dengx, Jul 24, 2013

dengx wrote:

Krich13 wrote:

the rear element is nearly as large as the sensor so incident light angle is close to perpendicular

That is incorrect.

  • Exploiting the benefits of a fixed lens, the rear lens element is larger than the front lens element. By giving it a diameter of 27mm, which is about the same as the sensor's diagonal dimension of 28.4mm, ample light volume can be received in the edge areas of the sensor.

Regards

The size of the rear element has nothing to do with "incident light angle" being "close to perpendicular". Think of a field flattener lens near the sensor as a trivial example. Make the distance to the sensor zero (optical contact with the sensor) while you at it. As a matter of fact, this is the basic principle behind fast and cheap TV lenses.

BTW, I am an optical engineer.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Krich13
Regular MemberPosts: 422
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to Krich13, Jul 24, 2013

Here's and example

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
geejay101
Regular MemberPosts: 184Gear list
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to dengx, Jul 25, 2013

dengx wrote:

geejay101 wrote:

I dont understand what you want to say. Are you saying that the 23mm lens is actually very deep ?

Being a fixed camera it allowed the engineers to hide most of it inside the X100

Courtesy of:

http://www.jamesmaherphotography.com/photoblog_view_post/767-taking-apart-the-fuji-x100

and

http://www.finepix-x100.com/en/story

Regards

Thanks for the link to the tear-down. The camera looks fightingly plasticky. Not something one is likely to leave for the grandchildren like the Leica...

 geejay101's gear list:geejay101's gear list
Sigma DP1x Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dengx
Contributing MemberPosts: 931
Like?
Re: Fuji 27mm review
In reply to Krich13, Jul 25, 2013

Krich13 wrote:

dengx wrote:

Krich13 wrote:

the rear element is nearly as large as the sensor so incident light angle is close to perpendicular

That is incorrect.

  • Exploiting the benefits of a fixed lens, the rear lens element is larger than the front lens element. By giving it a diameter of 27mm, which is about the same as the sensor's diagonal dimension of 28.4mm, ample light volume can be received in the edge areas of the sensor.

Regards

The size of the rear element has nothing to do with "incident light angle" being "close to perpendicular". Think of a field flattener lens near the sensor as a trivial example. Make the distance to the sensor zero (optical contact with the sensor) while you at it. As a matter of fact, this is the basic principle behind fast and cheap TV lenses.

BTW, I am an optical engineer.

I've got you wrong thinking that you are saying that the rear element is not nearly as large as the sensor itself

Hope that it clears out now.

Regards

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads