TheWhiteDog: I think, irregardless whether the lens is excellent or not, that Fuji made a misstep here. Instead of this, they should have introduced a 16-70mm, f4 lens, just like SONY has from Zeiss for the NEX(well, used to be NEX) line. This would be a 24-105 FIXED aperture lens. Advanced users(what the XT-1 is marketed to) like this range and fixed aperture zooms(plus it would be less bulky that this 18-135mm). Look at the success Canon has had with their "L" series one, even selling it as the kit lens with the 5D3. And with Fuji's upcoming X PRO2 it would have made a great kit lens with that. Yes, I know they have a 24-70mm f2.8 on their road map but that will be way more expensive than a 16-70mm f4 would be and also weigh considerably more. Canon has both, and neither interferes with the other. Hopefully Fuji will produce such a lens in the future. But doubtful, alas.
I partly agree. One of my most beloved lenses in the past was the Olympus 2.8-4 12-60, which is roughly 24-120. So a constant f4 or 2.8-4 16-70 or 16-80, would be lovely.
However, the 18-135 still looks very good but is sadly missing the 16mm, which makes a big difference for an all purpose travel lens.
On the other side, I would never travel without my 14, 23 and 56mm lenses ... and most of the time still take the 35 and 55-200 with me ... but not always everything on the daily tours.
However, I am still tempted, just for hiking and casual use.
.... continue ....
I am more a prime lens type, but like the convenience of the 18-55 when going on hike with my family. The 18-55 is optical quite good and still very small. The 18-135 would give me weathersealing and more flexibility, but for the price of much more bulk and some more weight. Therefore, personally I would have preferred to get a WR-Version of the 18-55, which I would have bought in an eye blink to replace my 18-55. With the 18-135 I am still not convinced, as it contradicts the small size of the system a little bit.
But still, it would be very convenient on a hike .....
don't know what the issue is.
The lens seems to me to be a very nice one of its kind. But it's still a super zoom, no question. People compare it with the Canon 18-135 and say its expensive, what is kind of funny. Have you ever held the Canon 18-135 in your hand? It feels crappy and cheap, no fun to work with - it also looks cheap and crappy and it doesn't have any sealing. Summarized, it's a cheap super-zoom kit-lens.The 18-135, in comparison, feels very solid and like a high quality lens, it is weather sealed and what I've seen so far optically superior. Therefore of course it is more expensive. Here in Malaysia the price is at around 700 Euro, the Canon is at 450 Euro. No problem, and a justified mark up.
... to be continued...
iudex: Man this lens is huge. Considering it is a lens for CSCs and it is so slow (f3,5-5,6) it should have been much smaller. But 490g and 67mm filter thread? Definitely not corresponding with the luminosity. And also more suitable for large DSLR with proper handgrip than for small CSC (OK, X-T1 is relatively usable, but this lens definitely doesn´t fit to X-E2/X-M1/X-A1).
you've made some good points, especially with the comparison of the Pentax lens. I've also hoped for an a bit smaller lens, as for the shorter focal lengths there is no retro-focus design necessary. In principle I am more the fixed focal lens user, but still thought that the 18-135 would may be tempting. Technical wise it is, but size wise it is really one beast of a lens.
A WR version of the good 18-55 in addition would have been very welcomed.
However, I first wait how it will do optically compared to the competitors before I finalize my opinion.
The best Fuji lenses are optically better than anything from Canikon.
Also drop the f/1.8 thing. For an APSC system this is f/1.2 lens.
What about purple fringing, CA and distortion? All are effectively reducing the final quality. And by far not everything in terms of microcontrast, colour etc. can be equivaly amended on the pc.
But my experience shows that these discussions can be interesting but they seldomly lead to any results. Mostly because the common nerd is not accepting anything beside 0 and 1. But, hey wecome, we are still in a analog world with some shades of grey ;) - and I am every bit glad about that.
To all the moaners and naysayers:
I do photography for many, many years now. I still own a complete Canon FF system with quality glas. I also own a Fuji X-System with some glas, as also the 1.2 56mm lens.
You see, plenty of experience and enough equipment to compare. And in my humble opinion the 1.2 56mm lens is one of the finest lenses I've ever used. It's just a joy to use und the results are lovely. Period.
P.S. Some pics taken with that lens are in my gallery
Looks like a great alround and very good travel camera to me.
For sure very appealing for many people.
Bernard49: When will Fuji like Oly push the envelope?
At least it seems that Fuji 'listens' or 'hear' what customers want. It still will remain as an afterthought.
Imagine a pro active company, without stupid teasers when an new camera comes out, ask us the photographers upfront what we want and why, good for the marketing and we will be better off with a product for what it is meant for, taking photographs!
Equipment made by photographers for photographers, an other philosophy an other approach. Just imagine the potential.
OK, I agree I do not have the balls, the means and the knwoledge to start that kind of a comapny myself. I just have crazy ideas and a dream :-)
Pushing the envelope should be about useful functionality for the photohgrapher and not about marketing 'terminology and numbers' to impress the competetion.
Maybe its a bit slow for the one other thing, but therefore it is quite small and lightweight and it seems that optically it is very, very good. Therefore I do not really understand all the bashing here.
I am a Canon and Fuji X user and think that Sony is doing great for the whole camera industry - they are playing the pioneer in many areas. Only Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji are also in that ballpark, but FF only comes from Sony. Canon and Nikon are still waiting with their thumbs up in their - you know what - . If you like the handling of the Sony cameras or not is just a matter of preference, but technically they are doing really well. Very interesting times for all of us!
They did it again ....
Ok, that's optically absolute impressive. Great lens.
Ok, nice lens. But I'll stick to my Fuji 60mm lens.
1. I own it aleady2. It's not that pricy3. IQ is lovely, cannot imagine the Zeiss is realy better4. it is a bit brighter and longer AND much smaller and lighter5. for me 1:2 on APS is most of the time good enough
But choices are always good to have.
I really think that on the x-mount side with the really good Fuji lenses it's a tough run for Zeiss.
Wow! 1000 comments now.
This camera is really hitting a nerve. I wanted to wait for the X-Pro2, but I am heavily tempted.
I really like the rangefinder design, but as a left-eyer it is not that big advantage as for some others.
Martin Grecner: I do not understand the viewfinder size comparison with 1D.This is an APS-C camera, while D1 is a full frame camera.So, given about the same magnification factor, the viefinder on the APS-C camera should be smaller than that on full frame camera.For example, the 70D has 0,95x magnification, and still the size is much smaller than the 1D with 0,76 magnification, as the crop factor applies.
Or does Fuji use a different methodology ?
Fuji compares with 35mm cameras, so in fact view-finder area is bigger than the one from the Canon 1dx.
Kevin Sutton: Anyone apart from me think this camera looks rather ugly? That faux-pentaprism is not very pretty, unlike the E-M1 version that harks back to the OM-2, which was a truly pretty camera. Cheers Kevin
Hi Kevin,no, I don't think it's ugly. In fact this one harks back to the also very famous Fujica and looks for me even more similar with the Contax RTS III.
So at least as much legacy as the Olympus ;)
Obviously this camera hits a nerve, as can clearly be seen on the quantity of comments in such a short time.
For me this one is a tough call, I really only wanted to update from my X-Pro 1 if there are serious improvements in IQ, x-sync and shutterspeed.However, this camera is extremely tempting.
Well done Fuji!
Nikon2011: video and shutter buttons are badly arranged
I prefer to take something in my hand before making a judgment basing on one photo.
Of course you can say now: Why not from the beginning?
And of course that's not wrong.But on the other hand Fuji is proving again that they really take the KAIZEN-thought serious. And that's very good and not be seen from the major players so far. Therefore it is quite unique.
A cynical guy may also say, that they only do it to sell some additional grips.
But I prefer the more positive approach, wich is the one that they really want to change to the better - everything.
There is one thing I don't like with this roadmap:
The timelines ;-)
Most probably we will see the bright-zooms by end of this year, respectively early next year, but we are just at the early beginning of this year. Tough, tough.
Everything else: Well done Fuji, you are addressing most of the photographers wet dreams within this roadmap - most, not all (f2 90 ;) ).
I guess both 2.8 zooms will be announced during the Photokina together with a new suitable body.
I think the Canon M is not a bad camera, but I also have the feeling that Fuji is achieving more with a firmware update than in this case Canon with a new camera release.