The 50mm is best at f1.8?!? DxOMark needs to stick with sensors.
Wow, the world has changed. Now if they just priced it at $5,999 and called it a Lunar I could die happy.
It's interesting, on the US HQ building, Pentax is easily seen but Ricoh is not on the outside of the building.
MrTaikitso: Not to troll, as know how lovely the Fujis are, but spec wise, this is still not as good as my similarly priced Sony NEX 5R + 16-50mm Power Zoom kit, that offers an identical lens to the Fuji zoom, plus 50fps video (important), touch screen that can be flipped forward, faster high speed still shooting (10fps), and correct me if I am wrong, but a larger sensor amongst other things.
The very reason I would move to Fuji was their twin tactile exposure controls, but here, they have removed them, bringing back the same usability issues that effect the mid to low end NEX cameras with their somewhat fiddly on screen menu system. (I only keep my NEX because the IQ and shot to shot speed is superb. As is the articulating display.)
The NEX16-50mm sucks for IQ...sucks bad. Fast accurate AF, dogcrap (and I mean blurry dogcrap) IQ. Sony doesn't have one...not one really good E mount zoom lens. The sensors are exactly the same size. Please actually attempt to read a little about the camera, or god forbid try one out before spouting total crap.
Jefftan: Anyone know why pair with 16-50mm instead of 18-55mm kit lensIs the 16-50mm worse than 18-55mm?
The Sony "kit" zoom lenses are crap. Decent enough for basic stuff, but not in the same league as the Fuji 18-55mm & probably not near the new 16-50mm.
radissimo: Fuji just got lazy introducing "me too" camera. yawn
Nex 5R has a similiar feature set and physical controls...though the 5R can take an EVf. BTW, I shoot with an XE-1, not an NEX.
CarVac: I want a small 28mm equiv for aps-c dslrs.
Not some huge semi-fast prime (77mm filter threads!).
Not some huger, faster (!) zoom.
I'll even take f/4 if it's small.
Either way, more options are better.
Well, how about the Fuji 18mm f2 while we're at it, the only downside is that you'd have to get a smaller body :P.
iShootWideOpen: Amazing lens for amazing price. I have the EOS M with both lenses. The 22mm F/2 smokes the Fuji 23mm on the X100 and easily beats the Zeiss 24 1.8 for the NEX. Also the difference between the Canon EFM 18-55 and the mid range zooms from Sony is night and day.I'm pretty sure, based on current EFM optics, the 11-22 will be stellar!Suddenly the EOS M with the enhanced AF and the addition of what should be a stellar ultra wide is looking like an amazing bargain.
Agreed on the 22mm, and you can buy a new one for around $100 on eBay.
Dougbm_2: So it is really a 200mm to 560mm f4-5.6 IS L lens.Might as well buy a Panasonic FZ200 and get 25-600mm f2.8. Ok not the same and a tiny sensor but unless you are a serious photographer or quite wealthy what to do?. Don't get me wrong I would love this but my wallet says no. My longest lens is an old 100-300 f5.6 L lens that is a push pull design like the 100-400 L, but it is much sharper than that lens (now sold). I also have a 70-200 f4 IS and it is nearly as good as that, especially good at the long end, except it doesn't have IS. I was really surprised! Cost me almost nothing too!
I know, stayed up all night and can't decide between this lens or an FZ200.
In 9 months when it's selling for $149, I'd buy one.
kinglau711: Mr Butler,
Why are the RAWs of the X-E1 and X-Pro1 less sharp than the RAWs of any other camera like the Olympus E-M5, Canon 5D markIII, Sony Nex-7 or Nikon D7000, at 3200 ISO ?
That's cos max is an idiot.
On another subject, who the hell is paying almost $600k for an inkjet print-film scan of a tricycle.
DarkShift: Oh, it equals about 21mm f4.5 lens on full frame. Not too fast for a 900$ lens.
Vignetting is also very extreme, whopping 1.34 EV @ f8.
What I'd love is to see just ONE of these "crop sensor" comment discussions go on without some dumbass equivocating DoF to full frame. JUST ONE.
IstvanNagy: This is a good, very useful review, thanks. Many people are in doubt about the Fujifilm XF 18mm (also vs. the 18-55mm), it would be great to see a similar review for those lenses too.
Wow, I didn't know that f2.8=f4.5. :P
ogl: X-Trans sensor is 5-6 year late. New cameras 16-36 MP with Bayer sensors without AA filter have very weak level of moire. It's not a problem at all.X-Trans is invention of new bicycle without technical support. Deadborn.Fuji can't make the best software for X-Trans sensor and can't solve the problem of their sensor. We get false colours and other types of artifacts instead of moire of Bayer . Adobe and other software developers try to offer anything, but no any serious results.I can't see any advantages of this marginal technology.
Sigma offers the best software to develop RAW from their specific Foveon. Why can't Fuji offer RAW converter?
Seems to me you like to WHINE to WHINE.
digifan: I'm sorry but the E-PM2 does have an accessory port AND a flash socket, you could have mentioned that.
Well, the E-PM2 also has a crap fixed LCD and ineffective IBIS.
Well, Panasonic for better or worse has decided not to take on Sony--"maybe the best answer is a small sensor and bright lens".
Gaucho5: Seriously funny how people who apparently aren't interested whatsoever in 4/3 lenses or cameras seem to spend so much time talking about equivalence or lack of it.
Is there truly any justifiable reason to try to tell anybody that you know better than they do what is right for them?
Truly these things can surely be seen as tools.
For example, I play a classical guitar. You can get similar sounds with an acoustic though it's more versatile, but louder sounds with an electric, which weighs a lot more but we're talking rock & roll so you should be willing to sacrifice weight for the pure beauty of that sound!
I PLAY MY OWN CAMERA PEOPLE!!!!
Take it easy! LOL
Troll's arrogance and pretension best serves troll's head further up own rectum.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review