That rabbit would have bit me!!! Great pics.
Marathonianbull: But will it perform better than the rest of the X family with M-Mount lenses?
Who cares. You have fuji lenses.
tinternaut: Looks a tad "Me too," but that generally isn't a problem in the camera business.
Me too compared to what? Their Own x100?
I think these cameras are over rated. The concept is good. They will be great for manual focus lens users.
So where is the fuji XE-2 review?!?!?
Combatmedic870: In the first paragraph you put 1.2 fx prime. I'm assuming it should be 1.8 prime.
Of coarse. Easy mistake given there were 2 F1.2 lenses released. I actually didn't even know if I was correct! Lol
In the first paragraph you put 1.2 fx prime. I'm assuming it should be 1.8 prime.
tkbslc: "A highly reliable metal mount is durable enough for repeated mounting of the lens."
I should hope so!! Every other lens in the history of changeable lenses has been durable enough for repeated mounting.
I dont have one, thank you though.
Yeah, i am hating on this lens though. The cost is completely unreasonable. $1199 fine.....1599 no.
Except the oly 12-40. I think they put that out there asa jab to oly and there mount failures
Waaaaaay to expensive. Fuji for 999 and this for 1599.You could but an xe1 and the 56mm for that!!
Combatmedic870: Too late. You've been one uped
This being bigger vs the fuji is unacceptable.
Too late. You've been one uped
abortabort: Funny that there were 4 lenses in the first year, 6 in the second and 7 in the third, 17 lenses in total over 3 years. Sony announce 15 lenses over two years (5 on launch and 5 per year after) and they get panned for being 'too slow' in releasing lenses for their new system?
Not not saying kudos to Fuji, they seem to be the benchmark, just making note of the perceptions across brands vs reality - i.e. Fuji are considered the best and Sony the worst.
Well, how many 18-200's has sony released. The 16-70 zeiss sounds great! But it's not even close to zeiss quality. I would have expected it to at least match the 16-80 they have the the a mount(I loved that lens btw). But it does not. Sony is starting to get a decent line up. But it's just not quite there. I actually think that samsungs line up is better vs sonys now. Even if you remove the fast 16-50. Quality over quantity.
mandophoto: Considering the size and weight of the 16-50 2-2.8 version, it should be popular with Americans.
I actually think this is quite true. I'm american. But I'm not in the bigger is better crowd. I used to be. Then I bought a oly xz1 and the rest is history.
pfzt: can somebody please explain to me how the pancake zoom works? i'm not familiar with those kind of lenses. thx.
You take all of the lenses and smash them together!
But really, when the camera is off, the lenses retracts into a unusable state in order to be as small as possible. When it turns on it retracts out.
Combatmedic870: Wow, nice lenses! Gotta give it to them they have a decent lens line up!They were the first to release a mirrorless apsc. Now the first to release a fast standard zoom. The F2-2.8 may make people to take them alittle serious.
Even m43** Wouldn't let me edit my above post.
Apsc dude. I kinda figured that was a given and didn't need to explain that. But, dpreview. Gotta explain that stuff. The m43 does not have a F2-2.8.
Wow, nice lenses! Gotta give it to them they have a decent lens line up!They were the first to release a mirrorless apsc. Now the first to release a fast standard zoom. The F2-2.8 may make people to take them alittle serious.