Previous news story    Next news story

Fujifilm adds five lenses to X system roadmap, including fast zooms

By dpreview staff on Jan 6, 2014 at 08:00 GMT

Fujifilm has updated its X-system roadmap for 2014, adding five lenses to its list of upcoming releases.

First up is an extended-range zoom, the XF 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 R OIS (28-200mm equivalent), which looks like it could be a particularly good match for the X-E1 and X-E2. Following this will be two fast zooms, the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R OIS standard zoom, and XF 50-140 F2.8 R OIS (24-83mm and 75-210mm equivalent respectively). All three feature aperture rings and optical stabilization.

These will be followed by a 'high speed wide angle lens' towards the end of the year, and 'super telephoto zoom lens' at the start of 2015. The exact focal length and aperture ranges of these are still to be confirmed.

The Zeiss Touit 2.8/50 Macro is also on the roadmap, slated for early 2014 release.

We have to applaud Fujifilm for being so open about its lens release schedule, and helping potential customers to gauge whether the X system is likely to meet their needs in the foreseeable future. It's fair to say that the X system lens lineup now looks particularly strong for enthusiast photographers, with an impressive collection of high quality primes, and some well-above-average zooms too.


Press release:

Fujifilm release 2014 and early 2015 roadmap for X mount lenses

Featuring five new lenses including four zooms that boast advanced optics and fast apertures

Fujifilm Corporation (President: Shigehiro Nakajima) has released its latest roadmap for X mount lenses, adding five new lenses including four zoom lenses to the lineup of X mount products.

Since they were introduced in January 2012, the X mount series of lenses have boasted advanced resolution to all corners of the image, and fast aperture across their focal lengths. They produce sharp images and beautiful bokeh which expands users’ expressive potential.

The latest roadmap shows that the lineup will be enhanced with the introduction of the following lenses: 

  1. A bright XF16-55mmF2.8 R OIS standard zoom lens
  2. A bright XF50-140mmF2.8 R OIS tele-photo zoom
  3. A high magnification XF18-135mmF3.5-5.6 R OIS zoom lens
  4. A super telephoto zoom lens (Focal length and Aperture TBC) 
  5. A high speed wide angle prime lens (Focal length and Aperture TBC)
  6. This will bring the total number of lenses in the X mount lineup to seventeen.

Fujifilm will continue to integrate the rich optical expressions made possible by the X mount lens series with the company’s color reproduction and other image processing technologies to further expand its photographic offering.

Comments

Total comments: 108
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (3 months ago)

These 3 and X-T1:
10-24mm OIS
35mm f/1,4
50-140mm f/2,8 OIS

0 upvotes
Third Eye Focused
By Third Eye Focused (3 months ago)

There is not much wrong with Fuji camera bodies. What is poor is the firmware which often takes a year or more of upgrades to get the bodies doing what they should have been doing to start with. As a X100 owner I speak with personal experience of this.

0 upvotes
Rooru S
By Rooru S (3 months ago)

This lineup is way better than Sony E-mount... and I say that as a Sony E-mount shooter. Not going to buy anything else for E-mount until I see something interesting from Sony (both E and FE lenses) and will consider seriously switching to Fuji.

0 upvotes
wyldberi
By wyldberi (3 months ago)

The longer you wait just means you're missing out on the fun that awaits you.

0 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (3 months ago)

Attention Nikon and Canon: Game over.

3 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (3 months ago)

Thank you Fuji. You are great and you care. Wonderful news and thank you so much. Wow, it just gets better and better. Thank you Fuji.

Not sure if this post belongs here on on the firmware update thread.

8 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (3 months ago)

It looks like Fuji is betting on lenses rather than bodies. Their lens offering looks great, their bodies suck. The enthusiasts put lenses ahead of the bodies, the general public does the opposite. I wonder if Fuji will be able to make enough money of the tiny enthusiast niche.

0 upvotes
Jeff Charles
By Jeff Charles (3 months ago)

I have an X100 and an X-E2. They do not suck.

7 upvotes
Ranford Stealth
By Ranford Stealth (3 months ago)

Likewise. First time I've heard that their bodies "suck". God bless America for this delightful (and in this case, inaccurate) term. There's always one. Must be a Leica user.

5 upvotes
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (3 months ago)

I suppose all those pros shooting with these cameras and lenses - and loving it - suck too. Odd, very odd.

0 upvotes
neilc1
By neilc1 (3 months ago)

Bless Japan - what's God or America got to do with anything?!

0 upvotes
Ranford Stealth
By Ranford Stealth (3 months ago)

I was referring to the Americanism "suck". In photographic speak it usually refers to a brand the user doesn't own, OR anything not made by Sony ;-)

3 upvotes
Beat Traveller
By Beat Traveller (3 months ago)

XE-1 is the best camera I've ever owned. Having great glass to go with it is a real sweetener.

0 upvotes
MonteCarlo67
By MonteCarlo67 (3 months ago)

I've owned more Nikon's and Canon's than I can remember (D700, 7D, 5D's, you name it). When I switched to the Fuji X-Pro 1 I was worried I was making a big mistake. A year later, I can honestly say this is the finest camera I have ever owned and I have been shooting for over 25 years. With the lenses on the new lens road map, I can safely say Nikon and Canon have see the last dime of mine they will ever see!

0 upvotes
wyldberi
By wyldberi (3 months ago)

Canon and Leica and Nikon all make the bulk of their profits from lenses. Fuji's the same.
=
If you don't have great glass, you'll never capture great, sharp pictures. The claim that Fuji's X Camera bodies suck makes no sense, given the quality and functionality that's there. I guess the OP likes the big, heavy, clunky plastic bodies Canon and Nikon put out. As for me, my X-E1's been a great companion for the last year; looking forward to upgrading to an X-E2 in the near future.
=
Can anyone name any other manufacturer in any field that continually updates the performance and functionality of the products they sell, after the sale and for free? This alone should convince the nay-sayers that Fuji values their Customers. And with all the people complaining that Fuji continues to avoid putting out a camera with a "full frame" sensor, because they want to use the wonderful Fujinon lenses Fuji's putting out for its X Cameras, that says a lot about the lenses the competition is putting out.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 14 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
jl123
By jl123 (3 months ago)

Can someone explain why DP review says there is an equivalence of fuj lenses to Full-Frame but not an equivalence of its lenses to micro four/thirds?

SO if an "XF 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 R OIS is a 28-200mm" equivalent in full frame, than what would a 135mm in four-thirds be equivalent to? thanks, j

0 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (3 months ago)

The lenses scale (FL, F-stop, etc.) proportionally to the crop factor. The only complication is the different aspect ratios of m43 and APS-C/FF, so you get different numbers depending on how you crop them for comparison. In DPR tests they are matched by height, which gives unrealistic advantage to m43 in those tests. Now, assuming m43 has crop factor of 2, and APS-C - 1.5, you get an equivalent 14-100mm f/2.6-4.2 m43 lens.

0 upvotes
jl123
By jl123 (3 months ago)

tricky stuff thanks a lot for the info, here's one last one.. as I've never heard the Sony cams given equivalencies like to Fuji?. Does the sony Aps-c line have different lens equivalences than Fuji? thanks, jeremy

0 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (3 months ago)

They're writers, not Boeing engineers, give them a break.

0 upvotes
wyldberi
By wyldberi (3 months ago)

The common practice of stating the "equivalence" of a lens comes into play when a lens is designed to work with a sensor or film negative stock that does not measure 24mm x 36mm. This is the case for both APS-C and micro 4/3 sensors; this is where a camera's "crop factor" comes into play.

The term "full frame" refers to a sensor that does measure approximately 24mm x 36m. In the instance to which you were referring, the reference had to do with the sensor size, not the brand of camera.

The term equivalence alerts the reader to that fact that, while the focal length of the lens being discussed may measure 14mm, (as with Fuji's $899 wide angle lens) the field of view it produces is the same as that produced by a traditional 21mm wide angle lens mounted on a standard "35mm" camera from 1963. <14 x 1.5 crop factor>

To get the 135mm equivalent for your 4/3rds, multiply 200mm by the crop factor of your sensor. That is how you compare the focal length of the Fuji to your 4/3 lens.

0 upvotes
samhain
By samhain (3 months ago)

Still no long prime? Smh.
90/2 would be nice...

2 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (3 months ago)

congrats Fuji, even as a Sony shooter I say a great line up.

8 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

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.

1 upvote
Dennis Linden
By Dennis Linden (3 months ago)

Perception is never reality. As a former m43 user, they had lots of lenses, but that's only part of the equation. As I now look at Fuji vs SONY, if you look at the Sony lineup, at each focal length, the Sony lenses appear just a bit slower, heavier, and cheaper too. It all depends on what it is you perceive as your need.

2 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (3 months ago)

Dennis, without getting into the sensor size debate, as a E-M1 shooter, the sony lenses are not slower if you take the format into account.
Remember that f2.8 on E-M1/M4/3s is equivalent to f5.6 on A7.
Just saying
rgds

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Dennis Linden
By Dennis Linden (3 months ago)

Harold, I was tyring to compare fuji x vs sony e on only apsc size sensor. eg Sony 1.8/35 vs Fuji 1.4/35

1 upvote
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (3 months ago)

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.

0 upvotes
kecajkerugo
By kecajkerugo (3 months ago)

some of you do not understand what is equivalence of a lens compared to the "full frame" and some say that 2.8 on m43 is equal to 5.6 on FF.....this is NOT TRUE as regards exposure equivlance: the 2.8 on any system is still 2.8 and the corresponding shutter speed value shall be identical on any system (not exactly because thins really depends on T value of a lens but this is a separate story). There will be more depth of field on smaller sensors cameras (higher crop factor) so there will be disadvantage of the depth of field on the FF (or advantage for those who look for shallow DOF).

7 upvotes
Ember42
By Ember42 (3 months ago)

I think people understand perfectly well.
A is Aperture is the optical pupil, in mm.
F is Focal length in mm.
Fe is equivalent focal length, in mm and = F * crop.
F/A (or 'f/' ) is the aperture ratio. If you use Fe for the focal length, you have to use it for the aperture ratio as well.

Describing a lens as a F=42.5mm, F/A = 1.2 with crop of 2.0 is fine, as is Fe = 85mm, Fe/A = 2.4 is also fine. Fe=85mm, F/A = 1.2 is dishonest. Since the subscripts are not shown, it implies that the aperture is 70mm, not 35mm as is the case.

Remember ISO is an arbitrary scaling value to make the exposures seem to come out the same. Just because it is numerically the same between formats doesn't make the process the same.

2 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (3 months ago)

Actually f/2.8 on m4/3 is exactly like f/5.6 on FF. The smaller sensor gathers much less light and having a two stops faster lens allows it to gather the same amount of light as an f/5.6 lens on FF. The ISO performance of the smaller sensor is ~ 2 stops worse (all things being equal). Thus shooting a 42.5 f/1.2 @ f/1.2, ISO 100 on m4/3 gives same results as shooting 85 f/2.4 @ ISO 400 on FF, in terms of noise, DOF, background blur.

1 upvote
rfsIII
By rfsIII (3 months ago)

Background blur may help beginners get acceptable shots, but it is a crutch.
Real photographers control every element of their image from the film plane to infinity. They do not rely on cheap optical tricks like shallow depth of field. How can such an important aspect of our art be overlooked? I blame the reviewers for neglecting this aspect of reader education.

1 upvote
atone2
By atone2 (3 months ago)

If Fuji gave us an non X-trans option with OVF and EVF then I would be really excited. Meanwhile I´m considering the X-A1 (Bayer) + 14mm for landscapes. I did own the X-E1 but I did not like the output (raws in lightroom). Come on Fuji - I´m ready to use a lot of cash on your system, but I don´t want X-trans sensors....

The three year old Fujifilm X100 with bayer sensor is fantastic :-)

3 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Yes please. In the mean time a GR with WA adapter is probably a more cost efficient choice than the X-A1 + 14mm and you get 2 FLs into the bargain (21mm and 28mm).

0 upvotes
geirole
By geirole (3 months ago)

I think the X-trans sensor is better than a traditional Bayer pattern sensor. Adobe is not doing a good job on the de-mozaicing of the X-trans pattern. Other raw converters, such as Silkypix, RPP, Capture One, Lightzone, Irident and Aperture do a much better job than Adobe, according to what I have read. I don't think that the fact that Adobe does not do a good job with the X-trans sensor raw data is a good reason to discard the X-trans cameras. I have seen the oil-painting-like smearing out of details when you look at the photo in 100% view in Lightroom after sharpening and noise removal. The Clarity setting also matters. The out-of-camera jpegs do not have this artifact, so it can't be the sensor's fault. I am now experimenting with other raw converters than LR. I also have to say that the OOC jpegs are pretty nice and the need to convert from raw is smaller than I am used to with Nikon D700, for example. As soon as Apple find out that X-E2 exists, I will try with Aperture also.

2 upvotes
atone2
By atone2 (3 months ago)

Problem it that I have a huge Lightroom library and I don´t want to mess around with other programs. I want a non X-trans option that works well in Lightroom. I´m pretty sure I´m not alone...

1 upvote
wyldberi
By wyldberi (3 months ago)

I don't know how long ago you tried lightroom; but it supposedly has improved from the early disastrous attempt to interpret X Trans data.

I'm can't imagine that the raw data from the X-E2 differs significantly from the X-E1.

0 upvotes
bdhufnagel
By bdhufnagel (3 months ago)

I like that Fuji is still 100% behind APS-C with their lens roadmap. As sensors get better, I think APS-C will continue drawing more users away from full-frame. Fuji is obviously betting that their target customer base will settle on APS-C as the best compromise between light gathering power and size/weight and it is good to see them stick to their plan.

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

They don't need to 'draw away from FF', APS-C is already the dominant format, despite a complete lack of support from its biggest sellers.

4 upvotes
bdjansen
By bdjansen (3 months ago)

Awesome. That 50-140, the 35 and the 14mm on a XE1/2 would be all the kit I need. Looking forward to late 2014.

1 upvote
kimchiflower
By kimchiflower (3 months ago)

Fuji has gone from a niche product to something approaching a full system with some nice bodies and lenses in what seems like almost no time at all.

One has to wonder whether they've overstretched themselves, or whether swinging for the fences will pay off.

They blazed a trail with their X100. Good look to them

11 upvotes
Bjrn SWE
By Bjrn SWE (3 months ago)

"We have to applaud Fujifilm for being so open about its lens release schedule, and helping potential customers to gauge whether the X system is likely to meet their needs in the foreseeable future."

Oh yes, that's great. The big question is why other companies in this business don't do the same? Canon introduced their M-system with only 2 or 3 lenses I believe, and no roadmap. Does that make you confident that Canon are dedicated to this and are you willing to invest in their new system?

2 upvotes
Kendunn
By Kendunn (3 months ago)

I wouldn't preach their funeral just yet. You can dig up lenses for Canon and Nikon anywhere and even though the Fuji lenses are top shelf (as is their camera) you still have to wonder how long they will be around. Canon and Nikon lenses have been around since time began and will be here until the end. In 5 years Fuji may have moved on to the next trend.

0 upvotes
Dennis
By Dennis (3 months ago)

The other guys don't want you to know what they have planned because they have nothing great planned.

2 upvotes
Kendunn
By Kendunn (3 months ago)

Sorry my reply somehow got shuffled to this post when it was meant for another. Cold weather has made our Internet crazy

0 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (3 months ago)

The weather?

0 upvotes
D Roberts
By D Roberts (3 months ago)

Fuji has been making lenses for decades not only for themselves, but also for Hasselblad. They do a great job making fine lenses and have made wonderful cameras. Their image quality was superior to Nikon using a Nikon body. Where they are missing the boat is with external flash and lack of a flash pot for studio lights. As it stands, I'll have to buy a Wein Safe Sync to use my X-E2 in the studio. Their lens map is getting there. By the end of this year's wedding season, Fuji will have more than enough glass in both primes and zooms to handle pretty much any wedding. I used my X-E2 last Saturday at a wedding in conjunction with my Canon 5d. Both worked well for what I needed them to do. I have to say, my Vivitar 285 also worked well on the Fuji at the reception!

1 upvote
rfsIII
By rfsIII (3 months ago)

Agreed. I was able to get very nice shots with an X-E1 and a Nikon SB80.

0 upvotes
eraserfish27
By eraserfish27 (1 month ago)

@ D Roberts-
How is the Vivitar 285 on the xe2? It seems pretty large for that body. Without TTL is it still pretty easy to dial in? I'm in the market for a flash that I can take with me probably the Ef-20 since it is good and small, and also something bigger that I can use as a trigger or even as a handheld with a cable for creative work or macro. I've seen a few guys fry their camera by plugging in flashes that weren't made for there camera, so I'm going with tried and true.

0 upvotes
historianx
By historianx (1 week ago)

D Roberts I use Buff Cybersync/Cybercommander triggers on my X-E1 and X100S in the studio with NO problems. You only need the Wein IR transmitter for X100S x-sync speeds at 1000/sec or faster, due to radio signal latency from a conventional trigger.

0 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (3 months ago)

Wow! Fuji is actually serious about taking some market share. Good for them. They had some great announcements today.

4 upvotes
Nick8
By Nick8 (3 months ago)

So far Fujifilm impressed with the quality of their lenses “X” lenses.
The new additions make the Fujifilm system a very strong competitor.
I will definitely move into Fuji camp.

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

"High speed wide angle" - 16mm f/1.8? They have 18/2 and 23/1.4 already. And 14/2.8 on the UWA end.

1 upvote
fabio pascale
By fabio pascale (3 months ago)

16mm f/1.4

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

How come Fuji is able to produce lenses about 5 times faster than Sony (with its Minolta division)? It has no market share at all, but in less than 2 years, it has more mirrorless lenses than Sony has in 4. And much better ones. And looks like in a year it will have a complete system, behind only m43.

5 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

On the other hand they started from niche offerings, while mass choices like slow light normal and tele only came this year and other popular choices like superzoom, UWA and f/2.8 zooms only promised for the next year.

0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Sony have 16 E-Mount lenses, plus a couple variants. Fuji have 12 now and 17 by the end of the year. Sony are promising another 5 this year on their roadmap. Both have an additional 3 Zeiss, but Sony have an additional 1 from Tamron and 3 from Sigma.

Totals at the end of this year, based on the road maps:

Sony - 28
Fuji - 20

Oh and Sony has a bunch of AF legacy glass that works with it's system, Fuji have exactly zero.

I applaud Fuji and dig their cameras (though their AF in the past has been somewhat frustrating), but this continual 'bashing' of Sony has got to end at some point, right? Especially when the facts don't corroborate the stories.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

It is not about the number, it is about what they are. Sony has 3 18-200 lenses, it does not make them any better than 1. Don't count 4 FE lenses also (2 of which are still in "promised" land), they are too expensive to be used on APS-C E-mount cameras.

The reality is, compared to X-mount, Sony already misses UWA prime like 14mm, fastish standard and tele zooms (like 18-55/2.8-4 and 55-200/3.5-4.8, zeiss f/4 is too slow by comparison), fast portrait prime like the just announced 56/1.2. What Fuji misses compared to Sony E ranges? Short macro, having more useful and much faster mid-range macro instead? Well, yeah, superzooms, big omission - but it is on the roadmap already.

3 upvotes
Ranford Stealth
By Ranford Stealth (3 months ago)

More is better? No. Even the dopiest gear junkie wont buy that many lenses, let alone actually USE them. It'll fill a very big bag though. As for Fuji "bashing" Sony, sorry, no again. I've come across some VERY angry Sony fanboys on Fuji forums though. They're as mad as hell and they're not gonna take it anymore...apparently. Whatever "it" is.

0 upvotes
D Roberts
By D Roberts (3 months ago)

Hmmmmmmm, adapter to X mount. Lets see, what can I mount to my X-E2 . . . uuuuuum, anything! M mount to X and I can use any Leica M mount lens I could afford to buy/rent. Same story for Zeiss or even C mount movie lenses. I don't mind manually focusing a lens to use their goodness. While modern glass formulas are wonderful, so are the design results for M39 mount lenses. Lenses are to the photographer what paint brushes are to the portrait painter. Each have their signature look as does how different brushes apply the paint. Someone who has the gift for photography can make beautiful and interesting images with a Polaroid or cheap point/shoot. It's about skills with a camera, not a camera making up for a lack of skills.

0 upvotes
d3xmeister
By d3xmeister (3 months ago)

And this will be the official death of most APS-C dslrs. Unless Nikon and Canon decide to learn from Pentax and really support their apsc cameras with lenses, features an ergonomics at pro levels they are doomed much quicker than we thought.

1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Lies! Show me a Pentax 20/21mm equiv lens? How about a 24mm? How about a 28mm? No? How about a 35mm? No?! Seems like Pentax are woefully neglecting their APS-C customers (basically all of them). What's that? A 50-135mm f2.8 zoom?! Wowsers! Oh wait, that's a rebadged Tokina you can buy for Canon and Nikon.

Pentax make nice stuff and I loved shooting with them, but they certainly are falling miles behind in supporting their only (major) format :(

0 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (3 months ago)

Lies? Pentax has a 14mm F2.8 and a 15mm F4 limited. A 21mm F3.2. Hater

3 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (3 months ago)

The vast majority of interchangeable lens cameras sold are APS-C DSLRs, mostly Canon Rebels and Nikon D3xxx/D5xxx, and they are mostly bought by people who don't buy many lenses, and don't care about pro-level ergonomics. The Fuji system is more enthusiast-oriented, and so has a different, much smaller, target market. The X-system is excellent, but thinking that it will overthrow the Canon/Nikon dominance anytime soon is not realistic at all.

3 upvotes
photodesignch
By photodesignch (3 months ago)

And Pentax 12-24, pentax 20-40... Yeah.. Sounds like abortabort is a hater.. Fuji does have more UWA "prime", "zoom" options, but over all it doesn't cover all the useful ranges. However, Pentax covers all ranges, including some UWA. The only difference is that Pentax doesn't really have roadmaps for mirrorless, so majority of lenses are bigger compare to Fuji X mount. However, for Pentax to stay compact on lens sizes with APS-C DSLR, they don't offer super larger aperture either. That's the sad thing.

0 upvotes
gary396
By gary396 (3 months ago)

Credit to Fuji for publishing such a roadmap - others could learn from that.

11 upvotes
Opinionator
By Opinionator (3 months ago)

I think Fuji would be more successful dropping the prices on its APS-C cameras and lenses. They need to attract more buyers who would otherwise forgo the brand for a less expensive Nikon or Olympus. they could be marginalized by the announcement of a full frame mirrorless from Canon. It's hard for all but the most eager entrenched fan to belly up and pluck down for a reinvented E2 or an even more expensive Olympus M1. Not that they're great additions to the growing list of remakes by all the brands. But by now the cost of R&D has been written off several times and they're just suckering the public. None of the manufacturers can burn enough cash publicizing their credo to attract enough repeat buyers. Imagine when Google glass puts the cell phone craze in the bygone era of the rotary phone. Laugh now.

5 upvotes
Der Steppenwolf
By Der Steppenwolf (3 months ago)

"Google glass" kinda killed EVERYTHING you wanted to say. That thing is a bad joke gone sour and I for one will be handing out blackeyes to people wearing it around me.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Paul JM
By Paul JM (3 months ago)

that'll be the day, that Canon does anything radical like produce a novel camera like a FF mirror less. Having been exclusively Canon for 2 decades, I have given up. Too slow to move in the market, and to improvise. My 5Dmk2 collects dust while I travel with my XE1 now

1 upvote
mr moonlight
By mr moonlight (3 months ago)

Fuji's offering a higher quality product than Canon or Nikon's lower end consumer gear and their prices reflect that. You can pay less, but you also get less.

2 upvotes
malteser01
By malteser01 (3 months ago)

I disagree. The X-E2 is a significant step up from the X-E1, the X-A1 and X-M1 have only been out for 5 minutes, the X-Pro1 is awaiting a revamp. Sure, they sold a bunch of cameras and lenses, but I wonder if they've really written off the cost of R&D considering the X-E2 and X100s use a new sensor. As for the lenses, just compare them with the equivalents from the big three and you'll see that they're easily as nicely made and have easily as good, perhaps better optical quality than their equivalents and yet the Fujis are cheaper.

Sony, on the other hand, comes out with a mirrorless FF camera with barely any lenses (though I accept they have a nice plan).

I think Fuji is on the right track (I would - I had an X-E1 and when it was stolen I looked at all the options again and replaced it with an X-E2). Hopefully they'll make enough turnover for them to continue with their plans.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
D Roberts
By D Roberts (3 months ago)

Fuji has their niche as does Leica. I don't think you'll see Leica drop their prices to compete for numbers with Canon or Nikon. Fuji has a great product in the X-E2 and some wonderful lenses to go with it. Fuji will reach further for high quality lenses that in comparison to image quality and price, might prove a better value than Leica. There are reasons why folks still drop over 5k on a lens.

0 upvotes
eraserfish27
By eraserfish27 (1 month ago)

I'm just happy with Fuji for being one of the first companies to really give Leica some healthy competition. I used to drool over the Leica gear like many do, but after shooting both and having a better budget now, I am more than happy with Fuji's newest focusing sysytem, I love their IQ, and their lens line up is awesome. It is also a blast shooting lenses from other manufactures as MF lenses on the Fuji. Old DSLR lenses are getting a new workout for me!

0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (3 months ago)

Well done Fuji. Especially the fast standard zoom is very useful. With 16mm it can well serve for landscapes (and with f2,8 also for interior shots), as well as for portraits (55mm at f2,8 enables sufficiently shallow DOF). Paired with expected decent optical quality os XF lenses this looks like the perfect lens for Fuji CSC users.

5 upvotes
Tapper123
By Tapper123 (3 months ago)

Still no real 1:1 macro lens. *sigh*

Something like a 100mm f2.8 true 1:1 macro would make this system much more appealing to macro shooters.

8 upvotes
Asylum Photo
By Asylum Photo (3 months ago)

I'm hoping the macro tubes out there get massaged a bit in quality, so I can pair them with the 55-200.

0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Not a macro shooter, but couldn't you just adapt one of the millions of Macro lenses that get mostly used in MF anyway?

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

Adapters ruin sharpness which is critical for macro.

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (3 months ago)

Are you all being serious ?

Macro tubes, just like Adapters for mirrorless have AIR in them, and i'm telling you the air quality is good.

'abortabort' is right for once.

*Not that Tapper is wrong in any way either. But there are options.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
eraserfish27
By eraserfish27 (1 month ago)

As for macro lenses from other makers I've tried the Nikon 55mm 2.8 and due to it's small size it's a nice handheld macro for the fuji. You can get up to about 9 inches away, and I believe it renders at 1:2. But if fuji made a 100mm f2.0 macro with OIS so I could use it for headshots and macro, I would pay up to a grand for it!

0 upvotes
InTheMist
By InTheMist (3 months ago)

Awesome job Fuji!

If only the cameras themselves were faster.

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

they are getting faster day by day!!
and are responsive enough for general purpose!

2 upvotes
Asylum Photo
By Asylum Photo (3 months ago)

I'm sure it'll happen in time. The X-E2 is about on par with it's peers currently. Mirrorless in general is still a baby compared to DSLR. On sensor PDAF, along with faster processors and higher EVF refresh rates will continue to improve things going forward.

2 upvotes
OliverGlass
By OliverGlass (3 months ago)

whoa! That 16 to 55 2.8 is looking pretty attractive to me. The 18-55 is nice but the 16-55 is likely a better landscape and travel lens for those who want something wider.

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (3 months ago)

Exactly. I have a 17-50/2,8, but I would apreciate both a bit wider and longer ends and this Fujinon gives it both. Well done!

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

Will probably be very heavy though.

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting
1 upvote
eraserfish27
By eraserfish27 (1 month ago)

@ Judex, What 17-50 are you using on a fuji? A Tamron? Whatever it is must be manual focus only. The 18-55mm kit lens is outstanding if you don't already have it, and going for cheap used.

0 upvotes
Daniel from Bavaria
By Daniel from Bavaria (3 months ago)

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.

Daniel

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (3 months ago)

most probably .. yes!

but I am not too bothored
as in the meantime I can play with the new f4 ultrawide lens and this latest prime!!

0 upvotes
D Roberts
By D Roberts (3 months ago)

I wish they'd make some effort to build some real flash options capable of high-speed sync!

0 upvotes
smatty
By smatty (3 months ago)

@Dpreview

The new "high speed wide angle lens" only at f2.8???

We have the XF 18mm at f2 and the XF 14mm at f2.8 already.

I have a feeling that we are talking f1.4 - 1.8 here :)

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

I suspect so too, in fact I don't think Fuji ever described the 14mm as 'high speed' when it was sitting on the roadmap. I suspect a 24mm f1.4 equiv lens (so 16mm). I suppose it could be an f2 like the 18mm. Plus there is going to be a 16-55mm f2.8, so unless it was wider than the 14mm (doubt it) it must be faster than the 16-55mm.

1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

I should also point out, that the images Fuji have used in the roadmap are reused images of their closest counterparts:

16-55mm is the 18-55mm
50-140mm is the 55-210mm (with little mount bracket)
Super Tele is the same but elongated
18-135mm looks like 18-55mm elongated
'high speed wide angle' is the 23mm f1.4

Obviously they aren't using real pictures yet, but it's probably a safe bet this new prime is closer related to the 23mm f1.4 than any of the other wide primes.

0 upvotes
smatty
By smatty (3 months ago)

I suspect it to be a 16mm f1.4. It's the classic 24mm f1.4 equivalent to the Canon and Nikon fast wide angle lenses.

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

On the chart it is placed between 14mm and 18mm, so must be 16mm. And both "high speed" wording and future availability of 16-55/2.8 zoom indicate it should be significantly faster than f/2.8. Fuji hasn't released a single f/1.8 lens yet, it is possible though, but f/2 or even f/1.4 are more probable - seems Fuji product managers don't like f/1.8 much.
16/1.4 would make biggest business sense to differentiate from both 14 and 18 (and 16-55/2.8).

0 upvotes
mr moonlight
By mr moonlight (3 months ago)

I'd say it looks like we have a 16mm f1.2-f1.4 in the pipeline. A faster version of a 14mm or 18mm seems unlikely and a 24mm equivalent is a classic focal length that Fuji hasn't covered yet.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

16mm f/1.2 is unlikely, their 14mm is not a small lens already, and 16/1.2 would be huge. And who needs short DoF on a landscape/interior lens anyway?

0 upvotes
Northbound
By Northbound (3 months ago)

16mm f/1.4 would be an ideal night sky lens for stars, auroras, milky way, and all that stuff. DOF becomes irrelevant as long as you nail focus on the stars - and that's when f/1.4 becomes important for drawing in as much light as possible without making too many ISO and exposure time compromises. So I can see a lot of people using a superfast wide angle lens. :)

0 upvotes
Absolutic
By Absolutic (3 months ago)

not sure about 16-55 for me...but that 50-140/2.8 IS could be an answer to those of us looking for something around 135/F2 full frame equivalent.
18-135 - perfect vacation lens.

0 upvotes
freelancer I
By freelancer I (3 months ago)

...go FUJI!

1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Filling out very nicely indeed.

Though looks like no new primes (other than the 56mm just announced) for the foreseeable future, specifically no 85/90. Still one of the best and fastest growing out there.

0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (3 months ago)

There are enough primes already, while there were no fast zooms, so it is a very welcome addition. While I am not so sure about the telezoom, the standard zoom looks perfect and for many it could be the only lens.

1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Yeah but they already had the excellent 18-55mm f2.8-4, the new lens only gains a stop at the longer end (and slightly wider wider end), its a difference for sure, but is it really that necessary?

The f2.8 Tele looks interesting I must admit though.

And I stand corrected, the 'fast aperture wide angle' is a prime, guessing a fast 24mm equiv?

1 upvote
iudex
By iudex (3 months ago)

abortabort: yes, considering the basic zoom for X mount is 18-55/2,8-4 tha gain in speed is not huge; however for portraits (where shallow DOF is desired) you need wide aperture at the tele end and 1 EV is perceptible. Not mentioning lower models like X-A1, where the standard zoom is 16-50/3,5-5,6.

0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Yes true, but that's where the 56mm f1.2 comes in ;)

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

"Yeah but they already had the excellent 18-55mm f2.8-4, the new lens only gains a stop at the longer end (and slightly wider wider end), its a difference for sure, but is it really that necessary?"

Operationally, constant maximum aperture makes a lot of difference for A and M mode shooting. You simply set it and it does not change on zooming, you don't have to check and fix it after every zooming and this is huge for real life event shooting (not for amateurs walking around slowly taking shots of static scenes though).
16mm is very different from 18mm too.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Ouch! Sorry, but to me 'amateurs' use zooms only ;)

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 are the most pro lenses, primes are for those who's time is worth nothing. ;-)

0 upvotes
vintoe
By vintoe (3 months ago)

:)

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Total comments: 108