Previous news story    Next news story

Fujifilm announces XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS wideangle zoom

By dpreview staff on Dec 18, 2013 at 05:00 GMT

Fujifilm has announced the XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS, a premium ultra-wideangle zoom lens for the company's X system mirrorless cameras. It offers an angle of view equivalent to 15-36mm on full frame, and incorporates optical image stabilisation to reduce blur at slow shutter speeds when shooting hand-held. It also has an aperture control ring on the barrel, and is compatible with the company's Lens Modulation Optimizer function that promises more detailed out-of-camera JPEG images when shooting at small apertures. It'll be available from March 2014 for $999.95 / £849.99. 

Jump to:


Press Release:

Fujifilm launches the Fujinon XF10-24mmF4 R OIS – an ultra wide to standard zoom lens with an F4.0 aperture throughout

FUJIFILM Corporation (President: Shigehiro Nakajima) is proud to announce the launch of the Fujinon XF10-24mmF4 R OIS lens compatible with all Fujifilm X mount compact system cameras.

The new Fujinon XF lens is a 2.4x zoom lens – equivalent to 15-36mm in 35mm format. Its ultra wide to standard focal length capabilities make it the perfect choice for shooting dynamic, high impact landscapes images with maximum detail from the foreground to the far distance. It also comes into its own when shooting interiors, making small rooms look more impressive, while the maximum F4.0 aperture that is available throughout the zoom range, enables handheld shooting even in low light conditions.

Fujifilm’s introduction of the Fujinon XF10-24mmF4 R OIS means its X mount series can now boast (in 35mm equivalent) focal length options ranging from 15mm to 350mm.

Key features on the Fujinon XF10-24mm lens

  • Newly designed optical system with 4 high-precision aspherical lenses and 3 extra low dispersion glass lenses which maximize performance of the X-Trans sensor.
  • A powerful Optical Image Stabilisation function which boosts the ability to work handheld when shooting in low light.
  • Ghosting is minimized by Fujifilm’s unique HT-EBC* multi-layer coating that is applied to all sides of Fujinon lenses. 
  • An additional newly developed coating has been added to the reverse side of the front lens in the XF10-24 composition to further reduce the ghosting that typically occurs when using deep concave lenses. 
  • Enhanced resolving power at all apertures when used in-conjunction with an X-series camera** that incorporates a Lens Modulation Optimizer (LMO) function.
  • Seven-blade aperture diaphragm that helps to create smooth and round bokeh effects.
  • The ability to shoot at an aperture of F4.0 from the lens’ ultra-wide 15mm focal length to its longest at 36mm. 
  • A minimum working distance of 24cm means that with macro photography you can capture both the small foreground detail and the wider surroundings to give your subject greater context.
  • Its high-speed AF is achieved via its inner focusing system which drives smaller lenses in the middle or rear lens groups without moving the larger lenses in the front lens groups
  • Thanks to light weight internal lenses and the addition of a stepping motor, the XF10-24mm lens is also very quiet to use.
  • With its precision-made, responsive, and finely-tuned metal aperture and focus rings, you are ensured a superb handling experience.

* High Transmittance Electron Beam Coating
** As of December 2013 FUJIFILM X-E2

Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS specifications

Principal specifications
Lens typeZoom lens
Max Format sizeAPS-C / DX
Focal length10–24 mm
Image stabilisationYes
Lens mountFujifilm X
Aperture
Maximum apertureF4.0
Minimum apertureF22.0
Aperture ringYes
Number of diaphragm blades7
Aperture notesRounded
Optics
Elements14
Groups10
Special elements / coatings4 aspherical elements, 3 extra low dispersion glass elements
Focus
Minimum focus0.24 m (9.45)
Maximum magnification0.16×
AutofocusYes
Motor typeStepper motor
Full time manualYes
Focus methodInternal
Distance scaleNo
DoF scaleNo
Physical
Weight410 g (0.90 lb)
Diameter78 mm (3.07)
Length87 mm (3.43)
MaterialsMetal barrel, metal mount
Zoom methodRotary (internal)
Filter thread72 mm
Filter notesDoes not rotate on focusing
Hood suppliedYes
34
I own it
149
I want it
8
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 172
drwho9437
By drwho9437 (4 months ago)

This lens is heavier than the X-E1 so I hope the center of mass of the lens is toward the rear element otherwise things just become awkward. I have been waiting for this to be released and got a 14mm to tide me over to the release. This is the make or break lens for any system and myself. If it is terrible I will probably dump my X-E1 and lenses and put my eggs into my FF system (happy to dump the FF system if this lens rocks). I probably would need to get something like an X100s if this lens is horrible. Though I could stick with just the 14mm + other primes. I have my fingers crossed.

0 upvotes
povetron
By povetron (4 months ago)

Hey, this is an pretty nice lens.
But I would like to see more pancake lenses to acomplish compact mirorless bodies. They could be slower, but should be optically and mechanically flawless and really compact. And then I will be in. M43 got too small sensor for me.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

well if optically its a solid performer(yet to be seen). I would prefer buying this over 4 primes, doesn't matter the brightness and size. This focal length range can be best served with a flexible zoom. A good OSS/IS/VR, resolution, low vigg CA and distortion (don't need to be perfect) .. that's all you need .. post processing is very easy these days

also m43 got too small for you? well when it was not that small and then how small is not small for you :))

seriously!!

1 upvote
povetron
By povetron (4 months ago)

I ment that there could be an option of having really compact pancake lenses eg 24,35,40,50mm. Because main adevantage of mirrorless over dslrs should be in compact size. And zoom lenses and large aperture lenses doesnt accomplish that. Just to have combo of large sensor camera with lenses which fit into the pocket.
But you right, I am too choosy, there are already some good solutions.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

basically pancake design is no option if high image quality is of priority though EF-M22/2 is really good (compared with Sony E24/1.8, for example).

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (4 months ago)

Uh, sorry mister expert, the 27/2.8 pancake is one of the sharpest lenses.

And i agree with povetron, some more compact lenses would be nice, but it doesn't have to be really completely 'pancake' though, that only really benefits the X-A1 or X-M1 anyway. The 27 is almost too small on the X-E2. And doesn't have the aperture ring to complement the shutter dial on the body !

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

the center sharpness is good.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (4 months ago)

Depends if you account for the field curvature, most tests don't. That's the main problem with brick wall tests, the reason people should be looking at PICTURES for a change.

The performance is golden from edge to edge, Photozone shows the difference if you must have numbers. Don't forget it's smaller than Panasonics 20/1.7, almost the size of Panasonics 14mm now that is small considering its apsc, which i believe was the point of this conversation ..

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

it's a so-so okay lens for
27mm (41mm equiv.) is the easiest to make,
f/2.8 is a relative slow f-number for APS-C,
but it's a bad one at the unreasonable high price.

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (4 months ago)

Missing the point much? You claim pancakes incapable of high quality. I am showing you the problem lies not with pancake but the fact that people like you expect it to be small, have a fast aperture anyway, and still only cost a penny, those things do not mix. Fuji here shows how it can be done, and yes that comes at a price.

I you don't like it, don't like it, but stop with these useless and incorrect claims only to defend your wrongs with lame excuses later.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

> I am showing you the problem lies not with pancake

EF-M22/2 showed us already.
hope Fuji could learn and get it right next time.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (3 months ago)

EF-M22/2 is a great lens, but I wish if I could like it's camera body

27mm fuji comes in a cheap double-kit lens with fuji X-M1 with their new zoom kit 16-50mm and I agree its slow and not the best fuji lens, but luckily it is cheap, does its job and compact. I only wish if its bundled with xe-2 dual kit too.

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (4 months ago)

I held an X-Pro today in a store. What an ugly and chunky piece of hardware, can't understand the excessive laudatory remarks around these forums.

2 upvotes
masterofdeception
By masterofdeception (4 months ago)

You're in the Fuji forum. The X-Pro is a great camera. I love it. I've loved other cameras, mostly Canon, but also Minolta and Pentax. What can't you understand?

6 upvotes
SMPhoto
By SMPhoto (4 months ago)

Loving many cameras can lead to a life of shallow relationships... but I think she's a classic looking girl myself

7 upvotes
sixtiesphotographer
By sixtiesphotographer (4 months ago)

Sorry the X-Pro1 is not to your liking. But for many people, including me, it is near-perfect.

Also, Fuji has shown themselves to be very responsive to customer needs and has even upgraded the firmware for obsolete models (X100).

I wish Fuji great success.

7 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

please never touch x-pro again!!!

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

> You're in the Fuji forum.

is that blackmail?

0 upvotes
topstuff
By topstuff (4 months ago)

" I held one in a store" and I "can't understand the laudatory remarks"…

Weird gear-head alert. You do know that cameras are for taking pictures and that is how they should be judged?

Taking pictures with the Fuji's is a pleasure once you take the time to learn them. And the image quality is fantastic.

If it really matters most to you what they are like when you "hold them in the store" without actually using them, then you need to accept that you are NOT a photographer.

Happy christmas.

1 upvote
audijam
By audijam (4 months ago)

someone complains about the weight? oh please~~~why don't you hire someone to carry the camear and lens for you then.

and please don't even have a doubt in fuji's optical performance.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

> please don't even have a doubt in fuji's optical performance.

not all of them good and not all of them bad

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

I'll bet this lens is great, but I'll need more than a photo and a press release to be sure. I can't even state that I have compared it to the Canon 11-22 and found the Fuji is superior, although some fans have already made that determination. If only DPR could test lenses this quickly!

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

@audijam .. truely
why can't they use their other hand to hold the lens!!

0 upvotes
$$Policy$$
By $$Policy$$ (4 months ago)

I'm enjoying everything about the X-Series. With this lens, my bag will be largely complete: 10-24/15-36mm zoom with stabilization, 23/35mm prime which lives on the XE2, and 55-200/84-305mm zoom with stabilization.

3 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (4 months ago)

good for you

4 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

congrats .. share your photos .. Policy

0 upvotes
BillGarrett
By BillGarrett (4 months ago)

Fuji seems to be on a tear with its new lenses! I've been shooting Nikon DX for 6 years, the last 3 with growing frustration about Nikon's apparent halt to building out its DX lens lineup. I've been thinking about jumping the fence to the Fuji X-mount; this lens makes the choice more compelling. But, oh, the price! The Sigma 10-20 I shoot on my Nikon cost less than half the price.

0 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (4 months ago)

Though DX (and DSLRs in general) are a dead end indeed, the Nikon DX system has had this lens for ages and then some:

- Nikon 12-24 f/4
- Nikon 10-24 f/3.5-4.5
- Tokina 11-16 f/2.8
- Tokina 12-24 f/4
- Tokina 12-28 f/4

And your Sigma costs less than half the price because it is optically terrible. You get what you pay for. I doubt Fuji would ever release a lens as bad as that Sigma.

2 upvotes
Cane
By Cane (4 months ago)

Mike999999, do you work at Fuji or just an over the top fan boy spin machine?

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

Sigma is definitely a master in wide angle zooms but 10-20 is not as good as Tokina (that a good sample of DX10-24 may equal).

no one can get every lens super good, not Canon or Nikon. Fuji's X-mount lenses are so-so ones, maybe good compared with decades old lenses.

0 upvotes
jhinkey
By jhinkey (4 months ago)

It's lenses like this one that really makes me think twice about having both a FX and m43 system - If I only had one system Fuji would be it.

5 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (4 months ago)

You mean you want a system with lenses the size of full frame lenses yet with the image quality of micro four thirds? Because then yes, you should get a Fuji.

0 upvotes
jhinkey
By jhinkey (4 months ago)

You mean to replace the Nikon 16-35/4 that is
82.5mm in diameter
125mm in length
and weighs 680 grams?

You bet I would.

AND the IQ (mostly dynamic range) of the Fuji sensors is a whole lot better than m43.

Comment edited 60 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
joejack951
By joejack951 (4 months ago)

In equivalent terms, the Nikon 16-35/4 is also a full stop faster as it covers a full frame sensor. If you don't like the size of the faster lens that's fine, but don't act like you are getting something equivalent but with less size going with Fuji.

1 upvote
jhinkey
By jhinkey (4 months ago)

The only thing I'd be giving up going from FX to APS-C is shallow DOF at f/4 - something I'm not worried about with an ultra-wide.
Exposure is the same at the same ISO.

2 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

joejack951 .. why don't you guys stop talking about conversion between two sensor types and sizes when you don't understand f-stop, aperture, brightness, dof measurement and simple maths!!

isn't it easier? none of the two is any stop faster .. fast is for shutter speed .. not physical opening size of aperture!! at equal exposure, both of these lenses including the one on 4/3 or 1" with f/4 will be equally fast (takes same time)

1 upvote
jhinkey
By jhinkey (4 months ago)

Exactly as Naveed says - I understand it, but joejack951 does not.

0 upvotes
vzlnc
By vzlnc (4 months ago)

@: Naveed Akhtar - "fast is for shutter speed .. not physical opening size of aperture!!" - wait what?? Aren't 2.8 lenses *faster* than f/4 lenses?

"at equal exposure, both of these lenses including the one on 4/3 or 1" with f/4 will be equally fast" Does this even mean anything? At equal exposure the image from a FF sensor will always have less noise than APS-C, which is what is called as the one stop advantage - as the noise performance of FF sensors is typically one stop better than APS-C as the same exposure.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
1 upvote
jhinkey
By jhinkey (4 months ago)

So, yes, the continuing equivalence talk.
Yes the FF will have less DOF and will be a stop better in noise for the same aperture and shutter speed.
But with a super wide angle used at base ISO that difference will be a very happy trade for many.
Plus for the equivalent DOF (if that's what you are after) the APS-C will be one f-stop wider, thus enabling a lower ISO (if not already at base ISO) for the same shutter speed.
There are no clear winners in every situation, but this lens is much smaller and lighter than the FX "equivalent" taken on whole.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

well vzlnc .. the argument was not including noise factor or any dof ... also if noise is REALLY your concern .. no FF can touch Fuji's excellent APSC XTrans .. full stop

0 upvotes
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (4 months ago)

I am sorry to say, but neither price nor weight are surprising for this lens (since than optical performance and mechanical quality are there). If you want small and compact get a couple of primes or move to smaller sensor (price will most probably not change though).

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

will you please share what you know about
optical performance and mechanical quality?

2 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (4 months ago)

glad to hear you're finally willing to learn.

5 upvotes
SMPhoto
By SMPhoto (4 months ago)

I think it's safe to assume that the lens will be in the same mechanical and optical quality range as the other top level lenses in the X system, which are very good

3 upvotes
mferencz
By mferencz (4 months ago)

Fuji makes great stuff, but i'm thinking they need to differentiate themselves a little more from Nikon and Canon. Big heavy lenses are the bread of butter of the big two. A slightly more sensitive sensor is not enough in my book. They should compete with M43 not with FF and APSC. Find a niche and preferably not in the wheelhouse of the bully on the block. Otherwise damn yourself to getting the scraps.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (4 months ago)

Why should they compete with m43 when neither Panasonic nor Oly have ever made a profit from it. They are learning the hard way that compactness and high expense has little appeal outside of Japan.

3 upvotes
mferencz
By mferencz (4 months ago)

Oh I forgot about the huge market share and profits Fuji has developed with it's mirrorless cameras. It's substantially less than M43 let alone Canon or Nikon. Lets create a camera that nullifies half the advantages mirroless provides and make lenses the size of FF telephoto zooms. Being a 'cult' camera only works if the masses see it as such, if they see it as more of the same, it's an extinct camera line and you sir sound as if your a camera paleontoligst

4 upvotes
Petr K
By Petr K (3 months ago)

"[bla bla...] and make lenses the size of FF telephoto zooms."
Exaggerations like this one will only get you that far, and it won't be far enough to support your point.

0 upvotes
konanon
By konanon (4 months ago)

Very happy indeed but I can't help and think about the size of this bad boy. Filter size of 72mm? I never thought we'd see that in mirrorless. THAT is not small.

2 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (4 months ago)

A big APSC sensor needs lots of glass either way to get the kind of high-end performance people are expecting. That's just how it is. Mirrorless doesn't mean it has to be small by definition, just no bigger or heavier than it needs to be altogether. It's not just the kind of mirrorless that you'd take along when the FF camera stays home, it's supposed to replace all of it, it's the real deal. And believe me i'd rather carry around a complete 3-lens 1-camera kit of this stuff than even the smallest DSLR equivalent (or the biggest and baddest for that matter).

1 upvote
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

I agree with you in a way .. this won't look awesome sitting over a small mirrorless camera. But think it another way .. I would like to have a mirrorless fuji x-e2 with a small, fast and thin prime, lets say the one 28mm ff equivalent all the time. but when I need a wider or slightly narrower coverage, I don't have to buy and carry another heavy fullframe camera.

This lens makes Fuji x system more COMPLETE!!!! :)

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

Nice range, but big, heavy and expensive (43% more than 55-200/3.5-4.8 - they are crazy!). But a lot of Fuji shooters are going to make themselves a Christmas present. :)

2 upvotes
LeVerm
By LeVerm (4 months ago)

A Christmas present … in March next year?

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

Well, they probably can preorder sooner than that through their local dealers - and then sweet sweet anticipation. :)

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

This looks like a very good upgrade to fuji system .. congrats!!

0 upvotes
Chaitanya S
By Chaitanya S (4 months ago)

Along with m43, only Fuji X-system is becoming an serious alternative for photographer wanting to go mirrorless route.

9 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

Totally agree mate!!

However new Sony A7 is a daring move .. and with the passage of time, I see a potential there :)

0 upvotes
Chaitanya S
By Chaitanya S (4 months ago)

only if sony releases some good lenses for that system. So far on E-mount I have seen more bodies being released than lenses. Also Sony has history of abandoning systems for no reason at all.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

i know dude .. and this is one of the main reason why am not adopting sony .. LENSES!!! nex is getting better though

the big reason behind adopting new standards is they are trying to find their stronghold and doing their every effort to win its grounds .. not like Canikon who already got stablished client base and getting lazy everyday, bragging on their existing lense catalog!!

I like innovation and new ideas and for those reasons, respect Sony and Fuji! Even though I am going to keep my m43 gear and probably will get into nikon fullframe as second bigger body one day!!

1 upvote
Chaitanya S
By Chaitanya S (4 months ago)

Sony has always brought some innovative design concepts to market. But when it comes to interchangeable camera systems- lenses are going to be at the heart of any system. And so far Sony hasn't been paying much attention to that. Lets see if 2-3 years down the line they offer lenses like m43 or Fuji-X. Until then I am going to stay away from Sony. I am hoping the success of A7/7r motivates Canon and Nikon to design and release their own FF mirrorless cameras. In past both these manufacturers had rangefinders in their catalogues so making small FF lenses shouldn't be a big problem for either of the two.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (3 months ago)

Even if CaNikon will make a small FF mirrorless, it will not be as easy to compete against Sony. Because small FF mirrorless will need new lenses!! Sony will progress on that grounds. Plus CZ will always be there for Sony.

0 upvotes
giliath
By giliath (4 months ago)

Seems like an awesome uwa. But please! I need native iso100 for landscape photography!

3 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

Why? X-E2 DR at 200 is very good already (it is really 100 BTW), and even better at DR extension modes.

2 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (4 months ago)

Yes, why? Native ISO for a sensor is what it is, and the quality is best just there. Why do you need just 100 ISO for your landscape shots, why not 25 ISO like oled KodaChrome?

3 upvotes
yangz
By yangz (4 months ago)

Manufacturer cannot provide features doesn't mean people don't want them. I think giliath's concern is reasonable.

Comment edited 52 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

sorry mate, don't wanna judge you here .. but I don't think you know what you want here .. lower ISO ? for what!!

1 upvote
Xentinus
By Xentinus (4 months ago)

Naveed do you know why people buy and use ND filters?
Lets say you have 3 stops ND filter and you can take a shot with 2 sec f22 iso 200
if you had iso 100 your f stop would be 16 which means better image quality (or you could take a photo with 4 s which means a lot for day light long exposure photography)and even if u had iso 50 you wud be more free to chose those values.
And sometimes you want to take a shot with f1.8 but your max shutter speed is 1/4000 for fuji x pro1 and you will need to use an ND filter to make this shot (which drops the image quality which is important especially if it s a portrait shot)
I have never needed to take a shot at ISO 3200 or more but yes I needed smaller ISO values.
BTW I know some cameras have some creative filters ND included which is really good but still if you had smaller ISO values that ND filter feature would be more useful with an extra 1 or 2 stops ISO advantage.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

Xentinus .. thanks a lot dude for a detailed response, I really appreciate your kind efforts .. though, trust me, I know very well about ND, Polariser, Gradient fileters etc and know the impact of diffraction on different camera formats.

ND filter is deffinately a great tool to use for gaining longer exposure. But please give it to gilliath who is asking ISO100 to slow his exposure, he needs exactly an ND filter, it will help him much more!!

0 upvotes
PatMann
By PatMann (4 months ago)

Every new Fujifilm lens makes my Nikon DX system look more and more like a dead end. No significant new DX lenses since the 16-85, and not a single wide prime without going to an enormous heavy lens that needlessly covers the full frame format. With full frame 2x or more the weight, bulk and price, Fujifilm is looking like the way to go for everything but long telephoto and f/2.8 zooms. Bringing out that 58mm and mapping out a path to a 300mm f/4 with 1.4 extender for birding would absolutely seal the deal. A battery pack for extended operation when needed (or a new top-end camera with a bigger basic battery and a bit more of a grip) would neutralize another DSLR advantage.

7 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (4 months ago)

The Tokina 11-16/2.8 is a highly regarded lens. You just need to look beyond Nikon/oem.. third parties have essentially filled in the APSc/DX lens gaps.

6 upvotes
AlexRuiz
By AlexRuiz (4 months ago)

Not really sure what the issue is here. Nikon already has a full line up of lenses for DX. In addition to that, third parties provide even more to choose from. And let's not forget the affordable prices either. You can cover the entire focal range for less that the price of this fuji lens. You have the Tokina 12-24 f4, Nikkor 35mm f1.8G, Tamron 17-50 f2.8, Nikkor 24-85 f3.5-4.5 VR, nikkor 70-300 f4.5-5.6 VR. And don't forget the D lenses like the great 50mm f1.4D. These are just a few of the great choices that can be had FOR LESS THAN $350 EACH, used market.

1 upvote
topstuff
By topstuff (4 months ago)

Very nice indeed.

I am very, very impressed with Fuji. They seem to relentlessly plug away, continually improving their camera bodies ( firmware upgrades make a freshly update XP-1 almost a new camera compared to the original ) and they just keep on increasing the lens range.

Very impressive. And I must say the only weaknesses, around AF in the main, are also much improved too.

The web is full of some excellent work being done by bloggers and pros using Fuji now. People like Mike Kobal.

Like I said, its very impressive. Well done Fuji.

5 upvotes
Leiduowen
By Leiduowen (4 months ago)

Well, it surely did take a while! Now I can start thinking seriously about my next camera body as ultra-wide is my favorite angle.

1 upvote
Dave Oddie
By Dave Oddie (4 months ago)

This looks to be another quality lens from Fuji but what all the makers seem to be be missing whether for mirror-less or just aps-c on d-slr's is a compact fixed focal length uwa prime.

On m43 that would be say a 8.5mm to give a f.o.v of a 17mm on FF and on aps-c say 11mm.

I use a Sony 11-18 on my A77 and the only reason I do is for the 11mm end really. My 16-80 takes me wide enough most of the time and if I need wider than 16mm it is usually 11mm.

The Sony is not a heavy lens at all and is rather underrated (very good geometry IMO) but still, I'd prefer a less bulky lens to lug about so a 11mm F3.5 would be great.

I just find it odd that for all sensors smaller than FF no matter what make you shoot the only way to get an ultra wide angle rectilinear lens is to buy a zoom.

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting
1 upvote
PatMann
By PatMann (4 months ago)

Just get the Zeiss 12mm

5 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

"I just find it odd that for all sensors smaller than FF no matter what make you shoot the only way to get an ultra wide angle rectilinear lens is to buy a zoom."

Because 2x zoom can be made from a prime quite easily, and much more flexible and thus valuable for the market.

0 upvotes
Dave Oddie
By Dave Oddie (4 months ago)

peevee1, The result is a lens the size of the Fuji. If I was an X series or Nex owner I might be tempted by that Zeiss mentioned by PatMann but the point still stands.

Bar that lens which is available in just two mounts you have to buy a zoom if you want UWA on aps-c and smaller sensors.

They may be easy to make (really!?) but they are still bulky lenses and you won't find a prime this wide for smaller format Nikon/Sony/Pentax/Sigma d-slr cameras.

I used ot own an Olympus 18mm F3.5 film lens for my oM cameras and it was muh smaller than the Fuji zoom and it was full frame!

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

Need small? Look at Oly 9-18 for m43. Zoom mechanism does not add much by itself, its mostly glass.

0 upvotes
tr4driver
By tr4driver (4 months ago)

It looks like the aperture control ring is similar to the one on the other zoom lenses - NO MARKINGS? I understand the reasoning for this on the other lenses that have a variable largest aperture through the zoom range, but why leave the markings off on this lens with a constant f4?

1 upvote
shigzeo ?
By shigzeo ? (4 months ago)

Variable aperture lenses from other manufacturers have always had marked aperture stops. I have no idea why Fuji would release unmarked aperture stops for the XF zoom line.

It could be that the aperture ring itself doesn't do anything and is only an electronic control ring. Perhaps that is the reason. It makes little sense.

I would JUMP on Fuji'x XF lenses if they were mechanically coupled to helicoids and aperture irises. Too limiting for me no matter how well some of them shoot.

0 upvotes
tr4driver
By tr4driver (4 months ago)

I'm sure it is just an electronic control ring (same as on the other Fuji lenses, including the primes that are marked. I'm just baffled as to why they don't add the marks on the zooms, and particularly on this lens with a constant aperture. It's nice to be able to set the aperture before bringing the camera up to your eye or even turning it on.

That said, I'm still planning on buying this lens. It looks very nice.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

what else than cost saving?

0 upvotes
dengx
By dengx (4 months ago)

Three low dispersion elements (or four looking at the picture on their site) and four aspherical.
Quite shocking. It better be the best UWA ever.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Rob Sims
By Rob Sims (4 months ago)

An UWA was one of the missing lenses that meant I went with Sony a year ago, so nice that they're finally filling that gap. Would be interesting to see how it compares come next March, as I find the Sony 10-18/4.0 good at F5.6 and excellent at F8.0+. From the spec sheet I can see this lens is close to double the weight (410g vs 225g), and significantly more expensive - but that will matter little if it's genuinely sharper wide open.

0 upvotes
Van Boxtel
By Van Boxtel (4 months ago)

I keep on waiting and waiting for my 56mm lens, what a frustration.
When i bought my X-Pro 1 a year ago, it was already in the pipeline,
so they said.
Or will the new X-Pro 2 be a full frame camera and the 56mm comes
out as a full frame lens ?

0 upvotes
Red5TX
By Red5TX (4 months ago)

The 60mm won't tide you over in the meantime? It's a cracking lens.

1 upvote
Theelderkeynes
By Theelderkeynes (4 months ago)

Weight weight weight... As an elderly micro four thirds fan I always look at what its going to feel like hauling it around with a portrait and longer telephoto! It all adds up.

Tony

2 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (4 months ago)

If light weight is important, micro 4/3 is still the best choice. Get the Lumix GM1 with the new 12-32mm f3.5-5.6, a 20mm f/1.7 and the new Lumix 45-150mm f/4.0-5.6. This combo would cover almost any required focal length and its as light as a feather. The Lumix 20mm f1.7 would cover most low light situation.

Although the Fuji mirrorless cameras are quite good the lenses are as big as most DSLR lenses. Thus, the attraction is negated.

3 upvotes
Harry S
By Harry S (4 months ago)

The lenses are significantly smaller and lighter than equivalent DSLR lenses in most cases. As an example, find me a DSLR 14mm 2.8 or 35mm 1.4 that comes close to the size/weight of these.

1 upvote
Resom
By Resom (4 months ago)

SMC Pentax-DA 12-24mm F4 ED AL
Weight: 430 g
Diam x Length: 83.5 x 87.5 mm
Filter size: 77 mm

So - I don´t really see a difference.

2 upvotes
junyo
By junyo (4 months ago)

http://j.mp/1bUpiSm#sthash.GYRkedAv.dpuf

"Pentax K-3 is 2% (2.5 mm) wider and 34% (25.1 mm) taller than FujiFilm X-E2.
Pentax K-3 is 108% (40.3 mm) thicker than FujiFilm X-E2.
Pentax K-3 [800 g] weights 129% (450 grams) more than FujiFilm X-E2 [350 g] (*inc. batteries and memory card)."

There's your difference.

0 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (4 months ago)

This looks like a very nice lens, especially if the quality is there, and it probably will be there.

Fuji was smart to move to the high end of the MILC market by offering better lenses and bodies, and ceding the low end to Samsung and Sony. This is the niche they will probably own in the future, especially if they keep creating top quality lenses.

2 upvotes
Higuel
By Higuel (4 months ago)

WOAH!!!! WHAT A LENS!!! XD
NO ONE makes anything like this!!! And if their other lenses are any prove, it should be very sharp also!!! Amazing work Fuji!!! :D

1 upvote
Oleg Vinokurov
By Oleg Vinokurov (4 months ago)

No one? Well, m43 already has 2 good uwa zooms. Sony nex is also rather good. And well, let's see what Olympus will make for their pro grade uwa zoom, the 12-40 in this line is simply awesome.

2 upvotes
Cityzense
By Cityzense (4 months ago)

Huge difference of 15-36 and 14-28, and the size difference is not that big tbh. 100 grams and 8mm longer and larger diameter than the pana 7-14.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

well Oly's 12/2 prime isn't that good,
hope they can come out with a better zoom.

0 upvotes
InTheMist
By InTheMist (4 months ago)

Nikon makes a 16-35 f/4 as well as Canon's 17-40 f/4. Both full frame.

Still, I can't disagree that Fuji is kicking butt for mirrorless fans!

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

Size is only "not that much different" because length of Pana 7-14 includes integrated hood. Mount a hood on the Fuji 10-24 and then compare. And 110g of weight difference is also with hood vs without - mount a hood and it is even more (but even 110g is quite the difference - and 14mm-eq is wider).

1 upvote
love_them_all
By love_them_all (4 months ago)

Fuji XF - the line up is as attractive as the m line up, even being APS-C only.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

this lens has to be awesome, as good as EF-M11-22 for that's one of the reasons we need mirrorless mount.

2 upvotes
vratnik
By vratnik (4 months ago)

this lens will be far better than EF-M11-22

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (4 months ago)

@vratnik - Spoken like a true fan.

The 11-22mm is an excellent lens, but this would want to be for 2.5x the price!

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

well, EF-M11-22 got smaller apertures and not as wide, but otherwise a lot better image quality than Sony E10-18, so that I think EF-M11-22 can be used as a standard for "good wide angle zoom."

though the MTFs are not directly comparable XF10-24 does't look too promising (would really appreciate everyone use 15 and 45 lp/mm for APS-C).

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Higuel
By Higuel (4 months ago)

@ abortabort: hy, i im a canon user, and got the 10-22 a few months ago, for the first time in my life i wanted to exchange it: the corners at 10mm were really bad with the 70D!!! only at 10mm but that is the focal for wich i bought it!!! (i had the 15-85 IS before!). I went to the shop and was lucky enough that a friend there helped me tested against another sample just arrived from japan(tripod and all, naturally!) there was a very tiny diference... and mine was better actually! I supose that the tests in Photozone.de etc were in lesser demanding sensors! :(

0 upvotes
technic
By technic (4 months ago)

@ Higuel: do you realize you are talking about the 10-22 EF-S (for DLSR), and not about the 11-22 for EF-M (for mirrorless)? Very different lenses! The 11-22 EF-M seems to be an excellent lens for the money, difficult to beat for the competition.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

10-22 is also a very good lens compared with rivals,
11-22 is better and it has to for 18mm flange back.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

The EOS-M is kind of a dog but the 11-22 with the big sensor is first class. This determination that the Fuji will be better, from just looking at a picture of the lens is, well, what fans do.

0 upvotes
D 503
By D 503 (4 months ago)

Seems over priced.

3 upvotes
Zaax
By Zaax (4 months ago)

The 14mm is $900 in the USA. Why is the 10-24 over priced?

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (4 months ago)

If this is overpriced, then what is the Panasonic 7-14mm F4 ?

3 upvotes
shigzeo ?
By shigzeo ? (4 months ago)

If the only metric left by which customers choose their products is price, expect lots of plastic crap to hit the shelves, and by and by, deteriorating quality.

I welcome a Fuji that could focus on a market they want to capture and tweak until they have it. This do all and be all to everyone strategy will only dilute their brand. Focus on the mid-high end of the mirror less market and get rid of the toenail and puppy dog shooters.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

The Pana is overpriced too. But at least it is explainable - much easier to make 10 mm lens vs 7 mm lens for the same flange distance.

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (4 months ago)

Got nothing against the Panasonic, it is awesome, but that is the bigger load of **** i ever heard.

0 upvotes
ShatteredSky
By ShatteredSky (4 months ago)

Finally!

0 upvotes
Lakeview Man
By Lakeview Man (4 months ago)

F4 for all the focal lenghts - so why no aperture numbers/markings on the lens? Can't see them on the pictures anyway.

I love my XF14mm, so I will not buy the 10-24mm I guess. On my Canon 7D with 10-22mm I discovered that my widest shots over the last years, that I really liked, were around 12-13mm, so I decided to buy the 14mm for my X-Pro1 earlier this autumn. No need for 10mm... yet.. :D

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
xeriwthe
By xeriwthe (4 months ago)

i am looking forward to seeing images from this. i'll bet they're going to look really good :) mm fuji

4 upvotes
ragmanjin
By ragmanjin (4 months ago)

If there was ever a company capable of making hasselblad lenses under the hasselblad name, it was fujifilm. And here we have it: More recent Fujinon lenses than Hasselblad for a body priced from $400 if you put a bit of effort into your search, rather than $40,000 for the cheapest Hassy equivalent.
Proof: http://www.prweb.com/releases/Fujinon/avatar/prweb3412524.htm

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

though best German lenses were made by second- or third-class Japanese makers but didn't some Hasselblad lenses come from Singapore (maybe the same one acquired by Rollei)?

1 upvote
attomole
By attomole (4 months ago)

Looks like a useful choice for travel landscape lens, and not sure that fast but heavy or big zoom factors but flawed optically, are the right concept for the fuji X cameras, what it needs to be is sharp and linear across the envelope.

0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (4 months ago)

The first 18-55mm f/2.8-4 zoom was amazingly sharp, no reason to think this would not be equal in quality (except of course that wider angles are always more difficult to get right).

If this turns out well enough I might replace the 14mm with this.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Filipphotography
By Filipphotography (4 months ago)

Do you guys think the 14mm will be sold for less once this new lens comes out? I should have bought the 14mm on sale for $668.

0 upvotes
nawknai
By nawknai (4 months ago)

Why would it be sold for less?

0 upvotes
Filipphotography
By Filipphotography (4 months ago)

Because they both do 14mm. :P

0 upvotes
DVT80111
By DVT80111 (4 months ago)

F4
F4
F4
what's the excitement?

2 upvotes
Nectar D Or
By Nectar D Or (4 months ago)

10-24
10-24
10-24

or 14/2.8 if you need fast wide angle. This is an extremely useful range on APSC , and 10-24 2.8 would have been huge.

9 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (4 months ago)

What is the point in a heavier f/2.8 lens that needs to go to 5.6-8 for sharpness, when you can have a lighter and cheaper f/4 and up the ISO? We are no longer in the early days when ISO 3200 was a noisefest in digicams.

1 upvote
smatty
By smatty (4 months ago)

The only reason for f2.8 would be low light indoor shots where you can't use a tripod (churches, museums etc.) But the OIS will cover some of that.

It is a very interesting lens, but I have the XF 14mm and Samyang 8mm Fisheye, so no 10-24mm for me ;)

3 upvotes
Higuel
By Higuel (4 months ago)

@DVT....
man, learn a thing or two before writing here! merry christmas to you and get a better mod and attitude! :)

2 upvotes
Leiduowen
By Leiduowen (4 months ago)

... unless you meant Nikon F4, a camera that makes me excited even today, 25 years after it first saw the light of the day :P

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

bec even if its soft at f4 .. its worth it .. bec at f4 i like it soft and tender
and if its sharp at f8 to f12 .. thats all it counts!!!
long live fuji ..

0 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (4 months ago)

Why IS in a super wide telephoto lens?

2 upvotes
straylightrun
By straylightrun (4 months ago)

24mm (35mm) is not super wide angle.

1 upvote
RFC1925
By RFC1925 (4 months ago)

Never taken a blurred photo with a wide angle? In low-light?

5 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (4 months ago)

For use in any situation where you might want to use shutter speeds slower than you can comfortably hand-hold. With wideangles, this might include:

1) Shooting interiors of buildings

2) Shooting landscapes in fading light

3) Using slow shutter speeds to add motion blur, e.g. to water

Of course it's useful if you shoot video hand-held.

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

none of the three cases is usual way to use the lens.

0 upvotes
shigzeo ?
By shigzeo ? (4 months ago)

I agree, if only because IS adds weight and size. Careful landscape and architecture shooters will be on tripods anyway. Low light... I can fathom that being important, but not really. IS is becoming rather common and certain customers expect it. I have a feeling that many of those customers would benefit from boning up on stabler shooting techniques.

0 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (4 months ago)

The first certainly is.

1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (4 months ago)

The first is what, the very reasons tripods even exist? Anyone who *plans* on shooting interiors without a tripod isn't being very professional, as you would want to use at least F11 anyway, so it's gotta be one awesome crib if there's enough light to do that handheld at base iso, even with OIS. Of course, you can't plan everything and you don't have to be professional if you don't want to.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

there are some tricks to shoot interiors without a tripod, like pressing the camera against a wall, but often slow shutter is not enough for interior that a tripod is more needed for multiple shots (focus stacking, HDR, stitching).

it's really creative to shoot handheld, though.

0 upvotes
BillGarrett
By BillGarrett (4 months ago)

I often shoot interiors without a tripod. For one, some buildings (museums, churches) have rules barring tripods. Second, even when tripods are allowed they're difficult to use in crowded environments. Third, if I'm traveling all day on foot, carrying a tripod is a difficult choice. It means carrying a backpack versus perhaps just carrying a small camera with single lens slung over a shoulder.

1 upvote
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

This lens is intended to be an excellent workaround lens, not just for professional work .. IS can be very useful for such casual use ..

Also at 36mm equivalent with IS, you may struggle to get a speed of 1/40 sec or to be on the safe side 1/70 sec, and specially in English weather we are facing now a days!!

0 upvotes
Stanny1
By Stanny1 (4 months ago)

Sony already has an equivalent E-mount lens for $749 at the local Sony store in San Diego. We will have to see what the street price for this Fuji lens will be after March.

3 upvotes
caver3d
By caver3d (4 months ago)

Yeah, but Fuji makes lenses that are superior to Sony. So, you can't really compare against Sony - and you shouldn't.

11 upvotes
Olymore
By Olymore (4 months ago)

All mainstream companies make good lenses and bad lenses. And they're all full of compromises whether that is built to a price point or with certain design objectives (e.g. small size).
And some lens design is outsourced or uses well known optical formulae that have existed for many years.
So your sweeping statement that Fuji makes better lenses is simply not true. In this case the Fuji lens may have been designed to be higher quality (at a higher cost and possibly larger size) than the Sony lens but all camera manufacturer's could probably produce or outsource an equivalent if they wanted to.
I think Sigma have shown that there are no magic ingredients.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (4 months ago)

Not true are you kidding? You can blame or thank who-ever you want, for all i care it was Tamron who designed them (it was not). The fact is that there is only one questionable performer in the XF lens line-up so far out of 10, or 11 if this one turns out to deliver, or 13 including Zeiss Touit. They had exactly 0 only two years ago!! Obviously they ARE designed that way, and no surprise that comes at a cost. Comparing this with probably the worst superwide zoom ever make no sense whatsoever.

And one more, the 56/1.2 is on the roadmap for next month.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

Sony E 10-18 is pretty good, certainly not "the worst superwide ever made". And making determination about this lens before any tests is rich. 2.4x range is pretty ambitious for a UWA, ends of the range might not be so good.

0 upvotes
Olymore
By Olymore (4 months ago)

M Jesper, I know that the Fujis are good lenses. I personally am very interested in the X system and may in the future run one alongside my m43 stuff.
Fuji has targeted a specific type of photographer with the X system who will be very critical of poor lenses and will happily buy expensive lenses.
For the Nex system with a large number of more casual users using Nex3 or Nex5 it may have made more sense for Sony to produce a cheaper and smaller lens at the expense of optical quality.
The point I was making is that the lenses are targeted at certain segments of the market and any major camera company **could** produce an equivalent of this lens (even if by outsourcing) but it may not be commercially viable (or less profitable) to do so.

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (4 months ago)

That IS the point. Fuji XF is for those who seek more high-end equipment without the weight of a DSLR. And it's working, people love it, certainly not everybody but isn't that always the case with specialized equipment. Mainstream is not the only way to success you know. caver3d simply noted correctly that that is the difference with Sony. So i don't know why you keep defending them. Why would anyone care they COULD do it if they wanted to, the point is that Fuji is the one who is doing it now.

Sure there is ZEISS glass for Sony which is awesome, but Fuji actually IS doing it all on their own. To most the Touit lenses for X mount aren't even interesting either because Fuji's own offerings are more interesting with equal or better performance ànd more economic as well. Surely Fuji may have an advantage to their own equipment, nobody's saying there are angels at work, it's just the end result that matters.

0 upvotes
Joachim Gerstl
By Joachim Gerstl (4 months ago)

You can't ignore the rules of physics. Rather big and heavy I guess. Why is there no weight info in the announcement?

2 upvotes
idefixx
By idefixx (4 months ago)

410grams

2 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

since when 410g too heavy for an enthusiast photographer?!!

0 upvotes
Olymore
By Olymore (4 months ago)

When my m43 Olympus 9-18mm (admittedly slow) lens weighs 155 grams

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (3 months ago)

Olymore .. that's my only Ultrawide angle lens (9-18mm) and I agree its small, lovely and no doubt quite sharp.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hakeem-na/sets/72157628658823079/

However its no match for this fuji one for its coverage, brightness and OIS!

0 upvotes
Glen K Wells
By Glen K Wells (4 months ago)

Fuji make good quality lenses for the XF range I would like one covering that focal length but at that price out of my reach. Maybe secondhand in a couple of years.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

no mate, lens always new .. there can be so many issues ..

unless you get it for 1/10th of the original price

1 upvote
jkspepper
By jkspepper (4 months ago)

bravo Fuji.. Sony, are you taking notes?

9 upvotes
Clayton1985
By Clayton1985 (4 months ago)

Now Sony needs to release an ultra wide angle constant f4 zoom for APS-C?

2 upvotes
Rob Sims
By Rob Sims (4 months ago)

Sony 10-18/4.0 OSS... or am I missing something?

11 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (4 months ago)

Why because they didn't already have a stabilised constant f4 UWA for a crop sensor? Oh wait...

2 upvotes
Xentinus
By Xentinus (4 months ago)

Looks pretty but too big for Fuji x system cameras.

5 upvotes
caver3d
By caver3d (4 months ago)

That is absolute nonsense. Do you own an interchangeable lens Fuji X-camera? I do.

3 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (4 months ago)

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?

3 upvotes
shigzeo ?
By shigzeo ? (4 months ago)

@caver3d,

The X system is smaller than current digital SLR cameras, but is the same size as older SLRs, which weren't often used with zooms. Solid, compact primes were typical. This lens is both longer and heavier than it needs to be.

I have no problem with grip less cameras. In fact, I prefer them to gripped cameras, but when one-handing a camera, a grip is sturdier with a heavy lens.

1 upvote
Xentinus
By Xentinus (4 months ago)

@caver3d,

OK lets go step by step to be sure you got the point.
Your comment is the second the most nonsense comment i have ever seen (ur next comment will the the most:) )...
Because;
I said it is too big
You said you own x system camera :D wow grats!!
I wish you said "no its size well balanced with fuji x system".
Not to own a camera doesnt meant you can't make comment. And since i have something to compare with it
(I have Nikon d7000 and Tokina 12 24 on it and it s really well balanced..And while Fuji 10 24 lens has almost the same size with Tokina 12 24)
Yes I have right to say "hey it s pretty but too big ".
This is my opinion and you cant change it...
I also think that if it was 10 or 12mm prime ultra wide angle lens
with smaller size Fuji would be really more attractive to me.

0 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (4 months ago)

The is an external Grip available for Fuji http://static.bhphoto.com/images/images500x500/849431.jpg

1 upvote
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (3 months ago)

Fuji X series bodies are big too !!

0 upvotes
Len_Gee
By Len_Gee (4 months ago)

Sweet lens. Go Fuji!

1 upvote
remo1232
By remo1232 (4 months ago)

This seems a decent lens with f4.0 aperture throughout. What is the pricing going to be in EU? Any ideas?

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
vratnik
By vratnik (4 months ago)

1000€
ka ching

1 upvote
remo1232
By remo1232 (4 months ago)

Yiaks!!!!!

0 upvotes
Dave Luttmann
By Dave Luttmann (4 months ago)

March.....damn!

2 upvotes
oking23
By oking23 (4 months ago)

My sentiment also! I have been waiting for this lens.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 172