Nice! Now WR for 23mm and 56mm WR or 60mm macro WR and the "rainy day" line-up is complete. Nice to be able to have this one in the small bag with the 16mm WR and 90m WR, or to be able to go out bagless, with just 35 WR and XT1 all through the Belgian winter without a worry. This is going to be fun, and something I cannot do as easily with any other system in my collection. Thank you Fuji!
Mark Alan Thomas: The threatened Leica haters squatting in this thread might (not) be interested in the size comparison photos posted to leicarumors.com. This camera is smaller than most DSLRs, and is priced about the same as the pro DSLR models it was designed to compete with: the Nikon D4 and the Canon 1Dx (and is actually a lot smaller than them).
The contrast detection autofocus of the SL will very likely not compete with D4s (or any current pro or semi-pro DSLR) in terms of reactivity, abilities in low light, tracking power, etc. Battery autonomy, flash system, native AF lenses, ergonomics, etc also make this irrelevant. Beyond D4 comparisons, lets compare to D750 or the bigger D810. Even at that level it does not compete. No, seriously, that SL and its native lenses look like the biggest mistake ever committed by Leica, and it will cost them dearly. The Q raised hopes, the M240 has charm, the S is great, but this.... Body size/weight is fine, it is the overall design and native lens ecosystem that is bonkers. That 24-90 is just nuts. This from a Leica fan, sadly (current M6, ex-R8, M8, M9, X1).
Nice! Would be interesting to compare the Milvus 21mm with this one on a A7IIR. The Milvus has a more complex optical design and is much bigger and heavier (and costlier). If it does not outperform the Loxia, that will again say something about the mirrorless advantage. For manual focus lenses anyway. Did anyone compare the Loxia 35mm with its ZF2/Milvus cousin in such a setup?
JacquesBalthazar: Beautiful updating of the ZF/ZE line, but wonder why they did not migrate the whole line and what is the point of maintaining a reduced Classic line?
Anyway, the new design and finish are more than tempting.
The only downside is weight increase. They all weigh more than their already heavy "Classic" counterparts.
The 2 new optical designs in particular are Otus BIG. I cannot imagine carrying that weight for such focal lengths, even for Otus-like quality, but that is just me and my screwed up back.
Pity, as I was kind of hoping for a 85mm update with same overall weight/size as the now "Classic"....
@Francis Carver: the zf2 line is mostly OK weight wise, though I would not want heavier at those focal lengths. The Otus doubled size and weight, and, outside of price, that makes a discouraging difference. The 2 new Milvus designs jump up by the same order of magnitude. This makes them much less attractive as part of a standard travel or day out gear bag for anyone, and especially for people like me who deal with arthritis. I also wonder why the other Milvus lenses, which are optically identical to their Classic versions, should weigh more than those. I have no intention of not using Zeiss lenses anymore, but will very likely pass on the new 50 and 85 f1.4. Otherwise, the new Milvus build looks superb. The weatherproofing is a major step forward.
Beautiful updating of the ZF/ZE line, but wonder why they did not migrate the whole line and what is the point of maintaining a reduced Classic line?
Just looked closely in real life, and there is indeed a yummy effect.
But I was surprised by the size. This thing is substantially bigger than a M6 with 28mm cron, except in width by a few mm. It is comparable in volume(marginally smaller) to a current M with 28mm 'cron. The lens itself is much bigger than its 'cron cousin. The Q feels also heavier than expected.
Not saying these are defects, but runs against expectations of "compact".
To an extent it reminds me of something like a Yashica Electro 35, much more than something like a Leica Minilux or even a CL/Minolta CLE.
Well done to team Sony! Lovely to have some good news from what feels like a free falling photography market. Seems that innovation can pay off after all....
coody: The camera's height seems not attractive.
Looks a bit like this one: http://www.camera.portraits.srv2.com/st701.htm
Pandimonium: The compact lens advantage on mirrorless seems to disappear above 35mm.
in "Tele-territory you're better off with a DSLR that lets you hold the camera comfortably" : that is true. If I purchase that 90mm, I am pretty sure I'll want one of the grips for the XT1 to gain better leverage/balance. Like having the MD12 motor on a FM + 180mm in the old days.
TN Args: ..... (sucks teeth).... Canon 85mm f/1.8 weighs 425g (not 550g) and costs $350 (not $950).... and is a darned fine lens....
@halfwaythere: "I guess you never shot a full body with a 135mm lens because you would know that you get all the dof you want while the background fades away."
Again I do not understand this. I use a Df and 135 routinely, and I love the output, the build and ergonomics. I do not love the weight. And sometimes, I'd like AF without sacrificing optical quality or other ergonomics (aperture ring, easy access to manual focus, minimum focusing distance, build quality).
I know by experience that, in imaging terms, I will benefit from the additional DoF provided by APS+90mm @f2 for this lens's main application (portrait at medium distance) without loosing anything substantial in the ability to keep background out of focus.
The design of this new lens gives us high hopes for optical quality close to the stellar Zeiss 135mm (sharpness, contrast, bokeh, etc). That is my expectation anyway. We'll see when we can get our hands on it!
JacquesBalthazar: It will be interesting to compare real life images from XT1 + this 90mm against something like the Nikon Df + Zeiss 135mm f2. Both are 16MP, so comparison can be pretty straightforward.
Construction/design point to potentially a very high performer, very solid, also mostly metal, but with great AF and weather resistance. Even closer focus than Zeiss.
The Zeiss 135 is a stellar perfomer as we know, but a bit fiddly to deploy due to MF and weight.
At almost half weight and half cost, this Fuji is truly appetising! Hope it delivers to that level of expectation!
"That's why a relatively cheap APS body with a cheap 85/1.8 lens will get you similar results as this lens on a Fuji X body": yes, I agree. But not the same experience. I like the XT1 (and the Df) as much as I like my FM3A.
@halfwaythere : yes, you are right, APS DSLR bring similar weight advantages to XT1 & c°. However, compare XT1 with D5500 and similar on fit, finish, ergonomics, depth from back to flange, etc, and you will recognise they are playing on different fields. Compare the build, finish and ergonomics of any of the G f1.8 primes with their Fuji counterparts, and again you'll recognise we are looking at very different beasts. I feel that the build quality/look & feel of the high end Fuji primes are in broadly the same league as the Zeiss or the old Nikkor AI, and miles ahead of the equivalent Gs. I will compare the XT1+90mm against my Df+135CZ with very high hopes! ;-)
" it won't be giving you the same depth of field control" : I really do not get this. At same aperture, the 90mm on APS will give more DoF than 135mm on FF for same field of view. Which means you gain an advantage of a few mm additional sharpness at portrait distance with the 90mm @f2. With similar low light abilities. I cannot think of any situation where I'd want LESS DoF at portrait distance wide open.
It will be interesting to compare real life images from XT1 + this 90mm against something like the Nikon Df + Zeiss 135mm f2. Both are 16MP, so comparison can be pretty straightforward.
Tempting. Curious about tests of course. The 25mm in particular: optical design uses less elements than the 25mm f2 ZF2/ZE, focuses closer and is much lighter. If same or better performance, that would send yet another signal to the DSLR vs mirrorless FF debate. The 85 is not that much lighter than the 85mm f1.4 ZF2 despite the latter's old school build. The OLED idea is ingenious. The overall design is nicely contemporary. These and the Loxia make the Sony a7 range very tempting. But I still do not like the design of that Sony camera range: bland, semi-retro cues, annoying user interface, etc. Probably not for me yet, but keeping an eye on them. That system is now moving fast, and in the right direction.
JacquesBalthazar: That Sony FE range sure has some very attractive features, and most of the recent lenses are clearly best in class. Well done to all involved! That said, I do wish the Sony body designs and user interfaces were not what they are. I just do not like them. Would love that range to have the Fuji xt1 design for example. One day maybe. Part of the pleasure of photography is the interaction with the tools. I think they are getting the lens designs right, the body features are great, but the body design.....
@Zorak That is a big risk indeed! ;-)
That Sony FE range sure has some very attractive features, and most of the recent lenses are clearly best in class. Well done to all involved! That said, I do wish the Sony body designs and user interfaces were not what they are. I just do not like them. Would love that range to have the Fuji xt1 design for example. One day maybe. Part of the pleasure of photography is the interaction with the tools. I think they are getting the lens designs right, the body features are great, but the body design.....
Canon users should rejoice having the option of all that additional real estate: ultimate cropping flexibility.
Some will use that for billboards and advertisement in general, and skip more expensive investments in medium format, just like what happened with the D800. And that is great for young up and coming photographers confronted with the falling tariffs of an extremely competitive market.
Landscape fans will use the 50 MP for ultimate detail, and leverage the camera's anti-vibration features with wonderful Canon and Zeiss lenses.
Great news! All the complaining just seems weird from the distance (I never used Canon DSLRs). We are all so spoiled!
You make some fair points and ask some good questions. Just one correction: you forgot the 18.5mm f1.8 lens (equiv around 55mm FX), which is a gem in itself. For the rest, it is a matter of opinion indeed. For very many applications the 1" sensor size makes perfect sense. The Nikon 1 users are usually very enthusiastic about the reactivity and speed of the system, the video features and the quality of the stills output. I know I love the V1 and keep going back to it after having failed to enjoy the more trendy but sluggish mirrorless offers (Nex 7, Fuji xe1). The sarcastic comments that pop up every time the Nikon 1 is mentioned do no good to anyone and are usually completely off the mark. Nikon has produced a great system, with many highlights, and quite a few odd gaps, baffling user interface details and bizarre marketing choices. I will buy the V3, if the 18MP output is as good as the V1's 10MP. And the new long zoom. And the 32mm f1.2. And keep my DSLR outfit.