Plastek: No DoF scale on f/1.2 lens? o_O Seriously? On a 1000 pound lens they can't add stupid DoF window? Ridiculous.
It has digital DoF and focus distance scale, in the viewfinder and rear LCD, I find these more useful on modern cameras and wish more manufacturers did this.
abortabort: Filling out very nicely indeed.
Though looks like no new primes (other than the 56mm just announced) for the foreseeable future, specifically no 85/90. Still one of the best and fastest growing out there.
Yes true, but that's where the 56mm f1.2 comes in ;)
Only thing wrong with this lens is that there is no camera with a 1/8000th shutter to take advantage of it in good light, so your expensive f1.2 lens often is forced to be a f2 lens (not suggesting a lens like this should only be shot wide open, far from it, it's about choice... A choice which is robbed in good light).
And yes, I know about ND filters.
ijustloveshooting: if it had an effective image stabilization like sony sel50 has, it would be my reason to switch to Fuji...a dream low light street lens, it would be...
Why do people think that IS is better or more useful than more light? I will take the extra stop of actual light gathering over the 'only sometimes useful' IS.
Emacs23: Same size as Canon 85/f1.8 and slightly smaller than equivalent Nikon. About the same low light performance (FF vs APS-C), more than twice expensive (three times more expensive than Canon). And the performance will be worse than those full framers, because to be better it should be better than Otus 55 (which is about on par with Nikon 85/1.8G at equivalent apertures mounted on D600, Otus mounted on Nikon D7100).
Yet the cheapest FF's that can give you this performance are 3x as expensive as the cheapest X-Series that can use this lens.
The new "high speed wide angle lens" only at f2.8???
We have the XF 18mm at f2 and the XF 14mm at f2.8 already.
I have a feeling that we are talking f1.4 - 1.8 here :)
I should also point out, that the images Fuji have used in the roadmap are reused images of their closest counterparts:
16-55mm is the 18-55mm50-140mm is the 55-210mm (with little mount bracket)Super Tele is the same but elongated18-135mm looks like 18-55mm elongated'high speed wide angle' is the 23mm f1.4
Obviously they aren't using real pictures yet, but it's probably a safe bet this new prime is closer related to the 23mm f1.4 than any of the other wide primes.
I suspect so too, in fact I don't think Fuji ever described the 14mm as 'high speed' when it was sitting on the roadmap. I suspect a 24mm f1.4 equiv lens (so 16mm). I suppose it could be an f2 like the 18mm. Plus there is going to be a 16-55mm f2.8, so unless it was wider than the 14mm (doubt it) it must be faster than the 16-55mm.
Yeah but they already had the excellent 18-55mm f2.8-4, the new lens only gains a stop at the longer end (and slightly wider wider end), its a difference for sure, but is it really that necessary?
The f2.8 Tele looks interesting I must admit though.
And I stand corrected, the 'fast aperture wide angle' is a prime, guessing a fast 24mm equiv?
ConanFuji: Oh yeah!!!Too bad about the lack of touchscreen.... and the pinhead sized sensor.... and the slow lens.
Well f2-5.6 isn't actually half bad considering the range. Yeah small sensor and all that, blah blah blah.
Good to see no price hike, though the original Limited Edition black X100 came with a bunch of original accessories, which made the price difference not that big.
Filling out very nicely indeed.
Hasa: Ref. the quest for a silent shutter: A totally silent electronic shutter on APS-C is found on the Sony R1.
The R1 has a leaf shutter, like the CP A, GR, X100/S, RX10, RX100, RX1/R, DP1/2/3M etc (I realise the RX's are not APS-C). The R1 was not electronic.
abortabort: Actually don't get the fuss around the GM1? Ok it IS nice, sure. What I actually don't get is why everyone is going ga-ga over it, yet at the same time shun the E-PM2 as being the 'beginners' camera? It is 10mm taller, 10mm wider and 3mm thicker. That isn't a whole hell of a lot really (also DPR, why no comparison shot?). Thing is though, that unless using the 'kit' lens, the GM1 is a bit more awkward with existing m43's lenses, potentially needing the grip to make it that bit taller.
The E-PM2 on the other hand had the same great AF as the OM-D, the same sensor etc, it was basically a mini OM-D in a tiny body... But no, it's labelled as a lame duck. Adding to this that the E-PM2 has a hotshoe, can take an EVF (including the well regarded one from the E-M1) or OVF and it has IBIS all at a considerably cheaper price... I just don't get it?
To be continued...
Point is, I really like the GM1, I think it is the epitome of what m43's should be about and I hope they continue in this way... But I don't get why the E-PM2 wasn't seen in this way (and considered / reviewed in this way) and the GM1 being compared against it and essentially dethroning it to become the new champion of 'tiny but capable m43's cameras'?
Actually don't get the fuss around the GM1? Ok it IS nice, sure. What I actually don't get is why everyone is going ga-ga over it, yet at the same time shun the E-PM2 as being the 'beginners' camera? It is 10mm taller, 10mm wider and 3mm thicker. That isn't a whole hell of a lot really (also DPR, why no comparison shot?). Thing is though, that unless using the 'kit' lens, the GM1 is a bit more awkward with existing m43's lenses, potentially needing the grip to make it that bit taller.
foocando: I do own one. I've been used it with Leica 25mm 1.4 lens. To me it is a killer combo for everyday casual shooting. Very light compact and produce great image quality. It deserves the GOLD Award.
Can't wait to get the 15mm 1.7 lens.
Happy holidays to all. Enjoy shooting pictures.
Seems like this would be a rather uncomfortable combo to me? I had the PanaLeica 25 on an E-PM2 and it was just awkward. It was better on the E-P3, just, with the 'large' (but actually tiny) grip. Are you using it with the little alloy grip on the GM1?
No Pentax Q7? ;)
Xentinus: Looks pretty but too big for Fuji x system cameras.
Well done caver3d, you must be very proud ;)
Having owned an X camera myself, I found the 18-55mm already too front heavy with no grip, is this going to be any better?
yabokkie: this lens has to be awesome, as good as EF-M11-22 for that's one of the reasons we need mirrorless mount.
@vratnik - Spoken like a true fan.
The 11-22mm is an excellent lens, but this would want to be for 2.5x the price!
jkspepper: bravo Fuji.. Sony, are you taking notes?
Why because they didn't already have a stabilised constant f4 UWA for a crop sensor? Oh wait...
cinemascope: The small throat of the FE mount also forces the lenses to be big, so it's not like it would make any difference if these were "native" designs.Sony itself also stated they are not "interested" in doing fast FE lenses, maybe because they would be silly monstrosities? Of course they won't admit FE is a technical nightmare, so let's just say they are "not interested"...This FE mount is a bad joke really and I hope this silly FF fad dies with it too...
Sony design team behind the A7/R said they were developing faster lenses.
As for the size, maybe consider this before shouting,your mouth off about what IS and ISN'T possible due to design:
ALL the recent Zeiss lenses and ALL the Sony Zeiss lenses have been absolutely HUGE compared to their respective counterparts, try having a look at these lenses and see how they sit compared to other lenses:
Zeiss OtusZeiss TouitsSony Zeiss 24mm E f1.8Sony Zeiss 24mm f2 Sony Zeiss 50mm f1.4Sony Zeiss 85mm f1.4Sony Zeiss 135mm f1.8Sony Zeiss 16-35mm f2.8Sony Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8
All of these lenses are big, rather big even compared to similar lenses for the same or similar systems. This tells me there is a trend amongst Zeiss lenses that they don't tend to care much about size. Looking at the ones for E-Mount crop, they were also huge.
This does not mean that smaller lenses can't be designed for this system. Otherwise we could jump to the same conclusions that all 50mm f1.4's for DSLRs need to be as big as the Otus, what a shocker, they don't.