Previous news story    Next news story

Fujifilm unveils XF 56mm F1.2 R portrait lens for X system

By dpreview staff on Jan 6, 2014 at 08:00 GMT
Buy on GearShop$999.95

Fujifilm has announced the XF 56mm F1.2 R, a fast short telephoto 'portrait' lens for its X system mirrorless cameras. With an angle of view equivalent to an 85mm lens on full frame, it uses an internal focus design for fast, silent autofocus.

The lens has an aperture ring which Fujifilm says has been engineered to give positive click stops, something that hasn't really been the case with previous XF lenses. Like the older XF primes (but unlike the more recent wide angle primes), the focus ring is of the continuously-rotating type with no distance or depth of field scales - although Fujifilm claims it should have improved 'feel'.

The XF 56mm F1.2 R will be available in February, with a suggested retail price of $999.99 / £999.99.

Jump to:


Press Release:

Fujifilm announces fast portrait lens for X-series cameras that surpasses picture quality of full-frame equivalents

Fujifilm Corporation (President: Shigehiro Nakajima) has announced the release of the FUJINON XF56mm F1.2 R lens. Available from February 2014, this latest addition to the company’s line up of professional-grade lenses for X-series interchangeable-lens cameras features a fast maximum aperture of f/1.2, a focal length of 85mm*1 and delivers beautiful bokeh, making it particularly suitable for high quality portraits. 

The XF56mm F1.2 R is less than half the size of an equivalent lens on a full-frame camera*2 and offers fast, quiet autofocusing that ensures stress-free shooting for both the photographer and the model. It also delivers incredible resolving power for high quality results that are enhanced by the unique skin tone reproduction technology found in Fujifilm’s X-mount cameras. Using the XF56mm and selecting one of two PRO Negative modes from the Film Simulation menu on the camera body will ensure users can capture beautiful portraits with rich tonal gradations reminiscent of images from film cameras.

Like all other lenses in the XF line up, the XF56mm F1.2 R is designed with an impressive attention to detail. It has a design that sits comfortably in the hand and exterior features including a metal aperture ring for a premium quality feel. 

Advanced optical design for professional portraits

The lens’ new optical design featuring 11 elements in 8 groups delivers impressive results. The design includes two ED (extra low-dispersion) elements and one double-sided aspherical element, plus four elements with a convex surface facing the subject, which combine to reduce spherical and chromatic aberrations. They also ensure the best possible image resolution, even when the lens is at its widest aperture of f/1.2. 

Image quality is further enhanced by Fujifilm’s proprietary HT-EBC coating that’s used on all lens surfaces to reduce ghosting and flare, while the seven-blade rounded diaphragm produces the creamy smooth bokeh effect that’s become synonymous with XF series lenses.

Attach the XF56mm F1.2 lens to a body that supports the Lens Modulation Optimiser*3 and picture quality leaps even higher thanks to the automatic correction of diffraction when shooting at smaller apertures.

Fast autofocus, silent operation

The XF56mm F1.2 R combines an inner focus mechanism*4 and a DC coreless motor for rapid autofocusing speeds, which are boosted further when used with a X-series camera body that supports phase detection AF. The structure and positioning of the focusing unit reduces sound and vibration for silent operation and with no lens barrel movement during focusing, the structure effectively prevents dust particles from getting into the lens and degrading picture quality.

Premium build quality 

In keeping with the XF lens legacy, the 56mm F1.2 R features a durable, metal construction - including the aperture and focusing rings - to ensure a high quality feel. The aperture ring is designed to ensure it’s easy to detect ‘clicks’ between f-stops, while the focusing ring is both comfortable in use and has the perfect amount of torque so it’s simple to focus precisely.

*1  35mm format equivalent
*2  According  to Fujifilm data
*3  Fujifilm X-E2 as of January 2014
*4 A mechanism that moves small elements in the middle or at the rear of the lens, while keeping the large, front elements stationary

Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R specifications

Principal specifications
Lens typePrime lens
Max Format sizeAPS-C / DX
Focal length56 mm
Image stabilisationNo
Lens mountFujifilm X
Aperture
Maximum apertureF1.2
Minimum apertureF16.0
Aperture ringYes
Number of diaphragm blades7
Aperture notesRounded diaphragm
Optics
Elements11
Groups8
Special elements / coatings2 ED glass elements, 1 double-sided aspheric element
Focus
Minimum focus0.70 m (27.56)
Maximum magnification0.09×
AutofocusYes
Motor typeMicromotor
Full time manualUnknown
Focus methodInternal
Distance scaleNo
DoF scaleNo
Physical
Weight405 g (0.89 lb)
Diameter73 mm (2.88)
Length70 mm (2.74)
MaterialsMetal barrel, metal mount
Filter thread62 mm
104
I own it
198
I want it
5
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R

Comments

Total comments: 254
12
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

Nathan made some stunning fashion shots with this lens.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52945989

here is the link to his own website which contains some great samples
http://nathanelson.com/fashion-shoot-bts-with-the-fuji-56mm-1-2/

0 upvotes
JonB1975
By JonB1975 (3 months ago)

A thousand dollars or a thousand pounds........ even taking VAT into account that is a complete rip-off for the UK.

2 upvotes
write2alan
By write2alan (3 months ago)

Hey, you need to feed the Queen and the Royal Family too. LOL....

1 upvote
kewlguy
By kewlguy (3 months ago)

hmmm where is that $1000 I hid last time...

1 upvote
rogerhyam
By rogerhyam (3 months ago)

I the words of the cookie monster: "Me wants it but me waits". The $/£/€ thing gets to me. Even with UK VAT it should be 20% cheaper.

0 upvotes
PG Thomas
By PG Thomas (3 months ago)

£ to $ is 1:1.64 Which, if $999 is correct, should be £609 or £730 with tax. So I for one wont buy until I'm out of the Eurozone! Shame as the UK could do with the Tax revenue.

0 upvotes
Monkey Queen
By Monkey Queen (3 months ago)

Can't help thinking that the $999/£999 bit in the press release is an error. Looking at the release for the XF 10-24 which was only issued a few days earlier, Fuji gave the price as $999/£849 - not perfect, but an acknowledgement to the difference in the value of the currencies..

0 upvotes
Ricardo Maia
By Ricardo Maia (3 months ago)

OIS would be a welcome add on, as in the Panasonic 42.5 f1.2 for m4/3. Sometimes it helps a lot...

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
km25
By km25 (3 months ago)

This one lens I will pass on. I have the 60mm F2.4. So far Fuji lens have been excellent. The 27mm is a good lens and the 35 F1.4 is a very good lens. Fuji lens so far have a better track record then most. Even CZ makes a lens or two that are not great. I would think that the 56mm F1.2 is going to at least a very good, if not excellent lens. Using Fuji's track record.

1 upvote
Keytsa
By Keytsa (3 months ago)

Specs are one thing, real life data is the other. We'll have to see samples to make conclusion.

0 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (3 months ago)

...and a, ll I wanted is 24mm, f1.8 for decent price, well maybe later...

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

You mean 23/1.4 is not enough? ;-) You'll be waiting for a long long time then... It does not seem it makes sense for Fuji release lenses 1mm apart, and for 3rd party lensmakes it does not makes sense to support a system which did not have a single camera in top 20 mirrorless in 2013, even when EOS M and Pentax Q7 were there.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

not exactly the same spec but EF-M 22/2 is a really good lens, good optics (not excellent but at least better than Sony 24/1.8Z), compact, low cost.

2 upvotes
Jon Ingram
By Jon Ingram (3 months ago)

Let me clear up some misunderstandings: FF lenses do NOT allow for faster exposures at the same aperture. In other words, the 56 1.2 is equivalent to an 85mm 1.8 FF system ONLY in terms of DOF for similar compositions. In the field, the 56 1.2 is about a full stop better, meaning that it could use a shutter 2x as fast as the 85 1.8 on a FF system, but with an equivalent DOF, all else being equal. However, the FF system has the advantage of (usually) cleaner noise at high ISO's, which is the "one stop light advantage" that many people refer to. This advantage applies to the sensor, not to the lenses, and in case you haven't noticed Fuji does EXTREMELY well at controlling noise at high ISO's, even when compared to FF systems. In my opinion, this lens is perfectly designed because it retains the perfect DOF of a FF 85 1.8 lens, while allowing for faster exposures. Anything wider than 1.8 on FF creates DOF too shallow or difficult to work with for my tastes anyway.

15 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> ONLY in terms of DOF

then it applies to all and every other results by the aperture for all of them: light gathering capacity, DoF, bokeh, diffraction limits, ... are controlled by one aperture.

good or bad there is no way we can divide and adjust only part of them. physically impossible.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Gordon L
By Gordon L (3 months ago)

There seems to be a huge mis-understanding here. A 57mm lens on an aps sensor will NOT give you the same depth of field as an 85mm on full frame at any given aperture. That is to say, at f2.8, the depth of field of an 85mm lens is much shallower than that of a 57mm lens at f2.8. To achieve similar depth of field, the 57mm lens would have to shoot at f2 or wider. Put another way, my Canon 85mm f1.8 lens will have similar depth of field wide open at f1.8, as does the Fuji 57 will have wide open at f1.2. This sort of negates the size and weight advantage of the Fuji if you are looking for shallow depth, as we are when we shoot portraits. The Fuji 57 is actually about the same size as the Canon 85 1.8 only 20g lighter, and actually slightly bigger in diameter with a filter size of 62mm vs 58mm for the Canon.

0 upvotes
rogerhyam
By rogerhyam (3 months ago)

Ah - and you haven't even mentioned the final image size or the distance you intend people to view the image from. DoF is about the size of circles of confusion on the sensor which translate into resolvable points on a print or a screen.

Look at this image close to then look at it from 12ft away and it will appear to have a greater DoF.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rogerhyam/11717143425/in/set-72157633827453301

OK ... more in focus...

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Jon Ingram
By Jon Ingram (3 months ago)

@ Gordon L - I agree with your overall point, but nobody said that a 56 APS-C lens will gave the same DOF as 85 FF lens at the same aperture values. Seriously, no one. I said that DOF is the same at 57 f/1.2 on APS-C compared to 85 f/1.8 on FF when the photographer uses the SAME composition. Several things are in play here affecting the DOF including focal length, focus distance, and aperture values. Although these will render the same DOF, the 56 f 1.2 is still one stop faster allowing faster shutter speeds when all else is equal. As for size/weight advantage, in my opinion DOF can be a little too shallow for much of my work on FF 85mm at aperture values wider than 1.8. For this reason the fuji 56 1.2 has a great advantage in my book because I can have the exact same DOF at 1.2 as I do on my FF 85 1.8, but I still have a one stop advantage at base ISO.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Jon Ingram
By Jon Ingram (3 months ago)

@ yabokkie - Not really sure what you are saying, but I'm fairly certain you misunderstood my post. Cheers.

@ rogerhyam -Yup, good points.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> Not really sure what you are saying

then please learn something about photography
people won't make mistake with basic knowledge.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

sorry but too much technical debate nonsense here. why not wait for lens to try. important is pictures produced by lens. argument with technical spec will not improve pictures.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
1 upvote
D Roberts
By D Roberts (3 months ago)

Jon, by any chance, are you from the Dearborn, MI area?

0 upvotes
technotic
By technotic (3 months ago)

Yabokkie only understands what he wants to and likes to make rude comments.

0 upvotes
jhinkey
By jhinkey (3 months ago)

Lenses like this (assuming it's excellent) are making it harder and harder to not buy into the Fuji X system . . .

14 upvotes
CeleryBeats
By CeleryBeats (3 months ago)

Not to mention they have the most sexy looking camera's of them all. IMO.

...Not to mention verrrry good image quality.

Comment edited 9 seconds after posting
10 upvotes
Backstage
By Backstage (3 months ago)

When I see the quality and pleasure I have shooting with the X100 and the quality of portraits with the X-E1 armed with the zoom or the xf 35mm I am quite sure to have soon a rather good portrait lens in my hands. What the 14mm is at the wide end I hope the 56mm will be for portraits.

I am happy to face an f1.2 lens, but I will not use this aperture all the time. I hope to have a firm “click” for the major stops at the aperture ring. Yes – I think I will like the lens for its feeling, for the image quality and the challenge I will face to manage my model in the same quality the Fuji engineers already did to design and build it.

1 upvote
KL Matt
By KL Matt (3 months ago)

The proof will be in the pudding for this lens. None of us can know what it will render like until it hits the market and the first real-world samples are published. Those who have never bothered to look at images made by lenses like these at f/1.2 and below may be unaware, but the rendering of these lenses varies widely with respect to contrast, accutance, veiling, and bokeh. Some 50 1.2 like the Rokker are simply magical wide open, with plenty of contrast to make fantastic images despite not being tack sharp. Others are quite competent if a little soft/lower contrast, like the Pentax 50mm 1.2. They all have a very pronounced signature as far as their bokeh is concerned, and it makes up a great deal of the character of the lens. How will this Fuji look? Might be magical, might be rough. We'll see what they optimized for. I have high hopes!

6 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

there are a lot of things we don't know yet.
for what we know from the spec, it's same as an 85/1.8 lens.

0 upvotes
SyedSadaqatAli
By SyedSadaqatAli (3 months ago)

Nathan Nelson has been shooting with it for last few weeks. He has posted one photo here;
http://instagram.com/p/i1KkIKGIYQ/

0 upvotes
BorisAkunin
By BorisAkunin (3 months ago)

I think you mean the Rokkor 58mm f/1.2, just the right amount of undercorrected spherical aberrations makes for some great bokeh.

3 upvotes
dava1
By dava1 (3 months ago)

Yabokkie, you are wrong. IT is not the same as 85/1.8 on FF. It is similar only in field of Dof. That's it. And you should be clear with it. As for light gathering, this lens is an f1.2.
I have xp1 with 35/1.4. And my friend does not have the same exposure on FF with it's 50mm 1.8 stopped down to 2 or 2.2.
Equivalence bulls..t is true only for depth of field. Other stuff is absolutely a lye.
And at low light, everyone will see this ff 85/1.8 being unable to have a decent shot with ff when you need a dof not so shallow. You will have to close it down to 4 or 5. But you dont mention it in your trolling comments.

0 upvotes
KL Matt
By KL Matt (3 months ago)

Yeah Boris, that's exactly the one I meant. Lens is magical. I have high hopes for wide-open contrast on the Fuji being a modern design with modern coatings and all, but I'm a little concerned how busy/rough/in-your-face the bokeh will be. We shall see!

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> It is similar only in field of Dof. That's it.

if DoF is the same at a certain angle of view,
all the following photographic effects will also be the same:
light gathering capacity, bokeh, diffraction, ....
anything that's controlled by aperture will be the same,
for we have only one aperture.

0 upvotes
Dimit
By Dimit (3 months ago)

Have a happy new year people!
Well,I presume this is going to be a more or less fine prime with a reasonable price.
Apart from this bunch of equivalence remarks that all these ''Helmut Newton'' commentators tend to say over and over again-as if we don't know-my humble opinion in minor issues is:
1. Dof marking isn't a ''must'' in today's evf oriented cameras
2. Ditto for focus distance scale
3. I'm not nevertheless convinced regarding the quality (not the optical one) of the fuji lens in general as compared with the zeiss ones that I own..and..
4. Up to date I don't think x trans sensors are something special indeed.I have used for a week both X-A1 and X-M1 for a week EXTENSIVELY and frankly I haven't noticed any profound difference,not to say that -X-A1 was more acceptable..and my thought is why a more harmonic colour array is vs xtrans should be worse??

1 upvote
historianx
By historianx (3 months ago)

>drool<

1 upvote
typhoonka
By typhoonka (3 months ago)

"A suggested retail price of $999.99 / £999.99" I see a big difference between them.

0 upvotes
BorisAkunin
By BorisAkunin (3 months ago)

$999

= 845-911€ (incl. 15-24% VAT),
the Eurozone pays 999€ (10-18% more)

= £730 (incl. 20% VAT),
the UK pays £999 (37% more)

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (3 months ago)

I was about to buy GX7 ..

Now You are confusing the hell outta me, Fuji!!
So many great lenses in such a short time ..

2 upvotes
jhinkey
By jhinkey (3 months ago)

Well, the 42.5/1.2 Pan-Leica is coming out soon . . . .
http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-official-panasonic-nocticron-specs-hope-it-gets-like-the-new-fuji-f1-2-lens/

I've been very happy with my GX7 - sure it doesn't have the DR of the XE-2, but it's very snappy for AF and pairs excellently with the 20/1.7II and the 75/1.8 Oly. It's IBIS is also pretty good (~2 stops or better for the most part).

It's good we have very competing choices . . .

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

Hi Juinkey .. totally agree .. GX7 is hell of a camera, specially for a person who is in love with Pany GH1 for last 4 years and 20mm f/1.7 always stays on my GH1. Dynamic range at base ISOs on Pany flagship bodies are top notch, I never had any problem with it, that I couldn't fix in post processing ..

Having said all that, XE-2 with these new fuji lens announcements is very tempting, specially for its higher ISO noise performance and as you very correctly said for its Higher than normal dynamic range beyond base ISO.

I am very confused!!! but thanks anyways for your feedback!!

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

20/1.7 is a good lens for m4/3", rubbish otherwise.

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

> 20/1.7 is a good lens for m4/3", rubbish otherwise

all your recent activity belongs to m4/3 and the newly announced 42.5mm f/1.2 .. the above moronic comment is forgiven .. I can understand it must be very hard for you, these days!

1 upvote
technotic
By technotic (3 months ago)

That's a very good comment for Yabokkie, rubbish otherwise.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
samhain
By samhain (3 months ago)

Nice price. But only 7 aperture blades? Hmmm....

1 upvote
wy2lam
By wy2lam (3 months ago)

If they are rounded even 6 can work...

4 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

All those making ridiculous FF comparisons, you do realize the only FF options in this kind of body are made by Leica, right?

So we get a higher end Fuji with a 56mm f1.2 for about $2000-2500 total, depending on the body. That works out to 85mm f1.8 in FF equivalence.

Or we can buy a Leica with a Summicron 90mm f2 or 75mm f2 (both $4000 lenses) for about $11000 with body. Gee, a 1/3 a stop slower even with "equivalence".

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

Leica is kicked out of the market half a century ago.

1 upvote
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

Living under a rock and missed the Sony A7r

4 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

A7r isn't rangefinder styled. But if you want to include it, which compact 85mm lens would you suggest I include in the comparison

3 upvotes
Monochrom
By Monochrom (3 months ago)

A Leica is using a rangefinder for focussing, Fuji X is a autofocussystem. That explains some of the pricedifference.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

A7r has not lenses to compete in that focal length. So far only 28-70/3.5-5.6 comes close, and no, f/5.6 on FF is not even close to f/1.2 on APS-C. Even with upcoming 24-70/4 it is going to be far behind.

1 upvote
BorisAkunin
By BorisAkunin (3 months ago)

There are heaps of fast manual 85s out there, the slower ones (f/1.7 to f/2.0) can be quite compact, too.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

Manual. With DoF that thin, very hard to focus right, unless the camera is on a tripod and your subject is stationary.

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

At this moment A7/r got no lenses beyond its usual kit lens!

0 upvotes
technotic
By technotic (3 months ago)

Another moronic comment from Yabokkie. They are still around. Get over it and see your therapist.

0 upvotes
CeleryBeats
By CeleryBeats (3 months ago)

Damn am i glad that i just bought the XE-2!!!! :D

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

have fun .. share your photos mate!!

0 upvotes
matveich
By matveich (3 months ago)

I wish Nikkor 58/1,4G be that build quality and price. Yes, I know about DX and FX but anyway...Go Fuji go!

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

I don't think Nikon will for that won't meet their quality requirement but never say never (Df is a good example).

0 upvotes
Ryan_Valiente
By Ryan_Valiente (3 months ago)

jesus Fuji.

bringing the A-game on your lenses.

I'm this close in switching from Sony to Fuji.

4 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

I made the decision but my bank account is refusing

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

having money does mean have to be ripped off.
a grand is just the MSRP, so the street price could be reasonable (half price).

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jun2
By Jun2 (3 months ago)

$1000 is pre-order price.

0 upvotes
BorisAkunin
By BorisAkunin (3 months ago)

yabokkie, none of the other Fuji lenses has street prices anywhere near 50% of MSRP, why would the 56/1.2 be any different?

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> why would the 56/1.2 be any different?

I just said it will be reasonable at half price. but we'll still have the issue of XTrans which Fuji won't improve soon (but they will eventuallly).

0 upvotes
technotic
By technotic (3 months ago)

Sorry Fuji don't make lenses and price them just for you yabokkie. Perhaps choose something else mate?

0 upvotes
DDWD10
By DDWD10 (3 months ago)

Looking forward to seeing some samples. If this is anything like my 14/2.8 or 35/1.4, I'm sold!

4 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

what I like of lens.

56mm and 1.2

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

56/1.2 = 85/1.8 = 47mm

0 upvotes
my username was already taken

???

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

How much is a Leica M with an 85mm f1.8, yabokkie?

.....Oh wait, the fastest lenses in this range for Leica are f2. Oops.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

47mm tells light gathering capacity, depth of field, bokeh, diffraction limited aperture, ... any photographic result that's controlled by an aperture, at an angle of view of about 28.5 deg diag, are the same.

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

I guess he means
56 X 1.5= 84mm
85mm x1=85mm
42.5mm x2=85mm

edit
Oh you mean maximum aperture diameter
Which is of course the basis of aperture calculations.

These should never be used as price reference. Why are 24-70mm F2.8's just as expensive as 70-200mm F2.8 lenses. They have much smaller maximum aperture diameters but still costs just as much

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

24-70/2.8 is cheaper but you got a point.
lenses got more difficult to make when it goes wide.
not the case here for 56/1.2 so irrelevant point.

0 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

@yabokkie

obviously, I know this is for APS-C. and like this for APS-C. I do not care of equivalence to FF. I don't buy this for FF.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

anyone has full right to waste money and get happy.

1 upvote
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

@ BarnET

I do not see intelligence of equating price with aperture diameter. it is depend on marketing factor.

1 upvote
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

it is waste on someone sad with no money.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

"Why are 24-70mm F2.8's just as expensive as 70-200mm F2.8 lenses. "

Because you refer to DSLR lenses made for cameras with 44-46mm flange distance, and 24mm << 46mm. No matter which way you go from the flange (or rather minimum design distance which could be a little less than flange or a little more if you want decent close focusing) at any given aperture, the more it is going to cost you. That is why 40-50mm on DSLRs and 18-20mm on mirrorless are so small and cheap.

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
1 upvote
technotic
By technotic (3 months ago)

Happiness is what it's all about yabokkie. If someone buys something YOU don't like then they are wasting their money. Is that your definition mate?

0 upvotes
kimchiflower
By kimchiflower (3 months ago)

Assuming it's optically excellent (which I have little doubt that it is), I think that's a fair price..... Unless you buy it in the UK, obviously.

I'm clenching in anticipation of the announced price of the m4/3 Leica 42.5mm f/1.2

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

for a quick calc, (42.5/1.2)^2 / (56/1.2)^2 = 0.576
so if Pana is going to ask for the same premium price
as Fuji, it'll be about 576 US MSRP.

Comment edited 50 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
kimchiflower
By kimchiflower (3 months ago)

?

0 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (3 months ago)

@ kimchiflower

Lenses are exactly proportional to the square of the focal length divided by the aperture now. Go buy your Nikon 6mm/2.8 now! This math says $2! That's a 99.99875% savings!

Ridiculous assumption on yabokkie's part here.

11 upvotes
Cameracist
By Cameracist (3 months ago)

Yabbokie, you cannot calculate the price only from aperture:D Less so from some aperture equivalency!

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

that's the dominating factor for focal length > back focus.
I said quick calc which means with error, like volume.
Pana and Fuji cannot sell as many as Nikon so higher cost for them.

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

@cameracist

that what happen when gearhead try to be financial analyst.

number of revolution per minute = cure for cancer. laugh.

4 upvotes
attomole
By attomole (3 months ago)

@yabokkie Those classic full frame primes Nikon and Canon have been making for years all the development costs have been written off many times over, and they are as cheap as chips, based on your analysis new product will never be able to compete, having said all that $1000 seems quite a premium, A Sigma 50 1.4 on any mid range APSC DLSR would be more bang for buck

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

"Assuming it's optically excellent (which I have little doubt that it is)"

You should have doubts. Not all Fuji X lenses are good corner to corner wide open - 35/1.4 and 18/2 come to mind. Moreover, a portrait lens (unlike macro or landscape lens) does not have to be - so at $999 I bet it is not. Probably corners are OK by f/4.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> all the development costs have been written off many times over

that's not an important factor,
but a good hint that the reasonable price could be lower.

> Not all Fuji X lenses are good

most are not,
and the levels of their optical design are really not high.

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

Taking rubbish again yabokkie? Yep. If you hate Fuji so much why comment on their products SO much?

0 upvotes
GrahamSeventy1
By GrahamSeventy1 (3 months ago)

The XF 56mm F1.2 R will be available in February, with a suggested retail price of $999.99 / £999.99.

That sounds about right

£999.99 = $1,639.56
or
$999.99 = £609.78

Britain being ripped off again.

5 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

I know just order it at BHphotovideo and they will send it to brittain.
You can pay Vats to them before sending and they will not charge a single penny more. That's what i did with the GX7 to the Netherlands. Saved me €150,- after vat and transportation costs.

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

The fujifilm Xe-2 also an $999 product on BH costs $1342 to get to the UK all in. Takes between 3-5 days to get there by ups.

that's 817 sterling. an saving of 182 British pounds sterling.
I guess you could find an 220v battery loader for that change.

SubTotal: $999.00
Duties & Tax : $294.45
Shipping: $48.75
Order Total: $1,342.20

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
JF69
By JF69 (3 months ago)

……and that ($1342) is €986……
Moral: sometimes it's not worth it buying outside the EU.

Comment edited 41 seconds after posting
1 upvote
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

true. This was just an calculation based on britain.
I bought the gx7 becouse it was $749 dollars instead of €879
That was an really screwed exchange rate so i made the decission and imported it

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

The UK price automatically includes 20% VAT, the US price does not include any sales tax charged in many states.

Importing legally into the UK will wip out any difference, 'hiding it in your suitcase' is not really a valid argument considering that's illegal.

If you're going to compare to moan about the differential, at least adjust it so it's vaguely comparable. Never mind the fact that direct US/UK comparisons make no sense whatsoever when considering a product that will have started life in Yen.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

"Britain being ripped off again."

Don't you deserve this? ;-)

0 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (3 months ago)

Can Fuji make an M4/3s version of this lens? I would pay twice that for an M4/3s version that auto focuses and has image stabilization.

1 upvote
Raskolnikow90
By Raskolnikow90 (3 months ago)

Panasonic/Leica Nocticron 42,5 f1.2 with OIS ?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/08/01/panasonic-anounces-leica-dg-nocticron-42-5mm-f1-2-fastest-lens-for-micro-four-thirds

3 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

Do you know the price of that leica branded 42.5

0 upvotes
Raskolnikow90
By Raskolnikow90 (3 months ago)

The price of the 42.5 will be announced in a few days...

0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

As long as it's reasonable. That means below $1000 and it should be below $900

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> As long as it's reasonable ...
using Nikon 85/1.8G as reference (500 US),
Fuji (56/1.2)^2 / (85/1.8)^2 * 500 = 490 US
Pana (42.5/1.2)^2 / (85/1.8)^2 * 500 = 280 US

0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

Yabokkie
The 85mm F1.8g needs an siginificant more expensive body for the same results. The D610 is double the price of the XE-2.

Don't take vital information out of the equation.

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

XE-2 got significantly lower performance of course.

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

@yabokkie are you measuring the cost per gram of glass and metal? this whole physical aperture size with respect to US $ .. how you are making it?? and most importantly why .. you are making it?

4 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> are you measuring the cost per gram of glass

if you don't know it yet, you can list all lenses in an Excel worksheet and analyze what's closely related to lens prices.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (3 months ago)

Well the point was, precisely not to do such silly things :))

0 upvotes
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (3 months ago)

@yabokkie
Sorry for being a bit rude, but your repetitive calculations are pure nonsense. They might work between Nikon and Canon, but not for much else.
Just take a look at Panasonic's other prime lenses and you know your totally off. What you call 'reasonable' is simply not an affordable price for most companies. The 42.5 will be higher than 1.000 USD in my opinion.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> Michael_13

I understand that the cost for Fuji, Pana and Oly should be higher at smaller volume. but that's not users' fault.

0 upvotes
jenbenn
By jenbenn (3 months ago)

"The XF56mm F1.2 R is less than half the size of an equivalent lens on a full-frame camera" That is debatable --an equivalent FF lens would be an 85mm 1.8. At least with respect to field of view and dof. The Canon version of such lens happens to be very comparable in size and weight to the Fuji - certainly not double that of the Fuji.iF one conisders the 50mm 1.2 L USM as an "equivalent" lens the statement might be true, however a 50mm on FF has a diffeent application than a 56mm on Aps.-CC and is not comparable. Anyway, apart from the stupid marketing taklk, a real nice lens. Hope Sony release a Zeiss 85mm for their A7r soon, though

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

It's just marketing. The equivalent lens in terms of speed and focal length would be Canon's 85 f1.2L which is a beast to carry around. DOF may not be equivalent, but your low light capabilities will be. Canon's 85 f1.8 is good for a low end plastic portrait lens, but the Fuji 56's IQ and build quality appear to be quite a few steps above that. It's just really how you look at it.

6 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

The comparison between an 85mm F1.8G or 85mm F1.8 USM is a good one. The 85mm F1.8G is in particular very good. Even wide open. However when considering system price the differences are still there.

Fujifilm Xe-1 $999
Fujifilm 56mm F1.2 $999
Total $1998

Nikon D610 $1999
Nikon 85mm F1.8G $499
total $2498

Canon 6D $1899
Canon 85mm F1.8 usm $419
Total $2318

prices taken from BHphoto
The price of the 50mm F1.2L was taken as a reference about how much an F1.2 costs.

Considering the X-trans sensors are very good and the body relatively small(compared to an FX Dslr) It can be an gamechanger.But only if this lens is good wide open which no one knows yet.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (3 months ago)

Not sure how much of a gamechanger this will be.. people who need to shoot 85/1.8 or 1.4 arent going to be moved by this and the small difference in size doesnt matter. The X system form factor is horrible for portrait shooters.

3 upvotes
WT21
By WT21 (3 months ago)

@BarnET -- the price differences are there, but those two DSLRs actually AF consistently and with some speed, as opposed to the XE1.

0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

XE-1 has made dramatic improvements with the firmware update.
And since we are comparing it to expensive fullframe bodies we should use the Xe-2 i made an Typo above since the XE-2 is $999 at BH

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

"Canon 6D $1899
Canon 85mm F1.8 usm $419
Total $2318"

Canon 6D is $1400 now, and 85/1.8 is $320. Total $1720.

3 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

i am not going to use every website available to check for cheapest prices peevee,

I take one well known shop(bhphoto) for just reference.
The fujifilm is probably also cheaper at an local pawnshop.

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

Canon 85mm is a slower lens, even if it's same wide aperture comparative to fuji!

If you can only leave your Dof obsession behind!!

3 upvotes
jenbenn
By jenbenn (3 months ago)

Its not an obsession. If you want to recreate the look of an 85mm 1.8 lens shot on a FF-camera you need to use a 56mm 1.2 lens on an Aps-C camera. The 1.2 lens will give you the option to use a faster shuter speed ( rarly relevant for portraits, once you exceed the hand hold limit of about 1/80-1/125 s) or a lower iso. Since FF has about one stop high iso adavatage over Aps-C the practial difference in the final results created by the two lenses boil down to the difference in shutter speed assuming you use the same iso - which is not necessary, since you can go a stop hgher with FF.So however you look at it: 56mm 1.2 is an 85mm 1.8 for Aps-c without any obsession.

4 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

OK, it is $1,550 on Amazon now, prices have gone back up. But I am sure it still can be found for $1,400 new on ebay from a decent seller. It has been $1,400 on ebay for months. Even seen it with 24-105/4L for $1,850. That is a huge crash in FF prices, just 1.5 years ago you couldn't buy a new full frame camera with such a lens for less than $4,000.

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

The fullframe 1 stop ISO noise advantage over APSC is no longer valid for X-Trans.

If you are asking for narrower/smaller DoF then fullFrame f/1.8 equivalent over 85mm length then its the best example of DoF obsession! or DOFO syndrome!!

I would suggest you to take some photos yourself with that fullframe lens at maximum magnification and then reflect!!

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

Few fullframe 85mm f/1.8 lens .. samples from flickr; for DoF considerations. It should be same/similar to this fuji for DoF measurements. Please enlighten me, why would you want shallower Dof than these:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/80739256@N00/4393023313
http://www.flickr.com/photos/58806471@N02/6708977171

stopped down to f/2.8
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ineedmoresleep/5716490874/

and this one is even stopped down at f/4
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dancl/3904957328/

1 upvote
xiod_crlx
By xiod_crlx (3 months ago)

"to ensure a high quality feel" = LOL =)

yes, in 2014 it should FEEL rather than to BE,
selling points proudly brought by marketing dept.

otherwise - well done Fuji! judging by tech data this is a really nice lens!

the bad thing that fuji has a bit stupid pricing and rubbish x-trans sensors
(so rubbish they had to add regular bayer-pattern sensor to their lineup - well done!)

p.s. please tell me - if it is a fully automatic digital lens - why I can see an aperture ring there? the obvious answer - it looks "cooler and more retro" but what is the real reason? /thnx

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Giklab
By Giklab (3 months ago)

Trooooooooolololoooooooool
trololoooooooloooooololol

2 upvotes
Zerixos
By Zerixos (3 months ago)

Because some people still prefer to adjust aperture by hand, and as a Leica user I prefer it to be on the lens rather than a dial. And yeah, it is retro looking!

2 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

Fujifilm added the bayer sensor for cutting the cost of the entry-level Xa-1.

A lot of Fuj X-mounts have dedicated shutterspeed and exposure comp dials. Fujifilm Xe-1 Xe-2 Xpro-1.

So an aperture ring on the lens just adds another intuitive dial.
It does not make much sense on the Xm-1. but since it's digital you can also set it on a rear dial of the body.

That's called best of both worlds.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 36 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
xiod_crlx
By xiod_crlx (3 months ago)

2BarnET

e.g. the aperture ring it just a dial and not mechanically connected to the aperture mechanism?

0 upvotes
xiod_crlx
By xiod_crlx (3 months ago)

2BarnET

external dials?

have you ever shot with professional reportage DSLRs?
like Nikon D300(s) or Canon 7D?

have you seen there these fancy shutter speed dials or iso dials

in cameras forged in a world of quickest action...

otherwise all these dials are making nice selling points for lists of features =)

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

Xiod i own and prefer an dual dial Camera.
The Pentax K30 has it at an very competitive price.

But the point i was making that dedicated dials have their charm and do still work. But you need an lens with an aperture ring for it to work fine. Which this lens like all other R lenses have.

2 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

XM1 is not X-trans I think.

0 upvotes
xiod_crlx
By xiod_crlx (3 months ago)

2BarnET

I cannot imagine the use for SHUTTER and ISO speed dials in 2014

I am shooting Auto ISO @ Aperture priority mode most of the time and I make changes to these settings once a month and it makes me no problem to press selector button + [ok] couple times

I do not like the idea that I have to pay for these dials, there is no benefit in it, just retro styling from times when there were no auto exposure feature in cameras.

- it is nothing about fuji, it is only about these dials - it is not for me =)

in all dSLR made in pas decades you can change aperture with a camera dial without removing camera from your eye - that is why neither Nikon\Canon or any other brand without "retro" styling features has no aperture in modern lenses - it is atavism

0 upvotes
xiod_crlx
By xiod_crlx (3 months ago)

sorry - I went far off topic by starting discussing fuji system in general but not the 56\1.2 =]

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

@xiod_crlx its fine mate, you can go as off topic, as you want, as long as it make sense, and it is not a waste of a read.

I agree with you on this .. these dials seems bit redundant to me as well. I can live with an ISO button and not dial too.

However, it's for those folks who like to get as retro as its earthly possible .. and Fuji is quite successful in attracting them!! Doesn't matter how little conveyance it is, its easier to look at wrist watch then unlocking your mobile phone and see the timer there!!

0 upvotes
veritalens
By veritalens (3 months ago)

I didn't want to comment, but as someone who NEVER uses the AE features on the multitude of cameras that I own I felt the need to correct you.

1. Not only do I prefer having direct access to my shutter speed and aperture, I actually prefer the tactile sensation of changing them via dials.

2. You mentioned that all DSLR's in the past decade have no dials, and that Nikon/Canon don't make retro-style cameras. Have you seen the Nikon Df yet? It has both shutter speed and ISO dials. The success of that DSLR would indeed suggest that people do enjoy/appreciate having direct access to their exposure dials.

I don't think that the X-system is for you. If you don't like manually calculating your exposures, and all those dials, may I suggest looking into Sony's fantastic NEX lineup?

0 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

well done Fuji for making performance specialty lens. make other people jealous and wish it not made by Fuji.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

knowledge is power.
ignorance is power to the maker.

0 upvotes
Calvin Chann
By Calvin Chann (3 months ago)

Why would people be jealous. I think most main stream manufacturer's make a specialty high performance lens.

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

But none of the so called main stream (CaNikon, Pentax) does it for a mirrorless camera and none of them actually have a mirrorless camera like this. and whatever mirrorless they are making, they are lensless too!!

0 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

I see lot of other brand fanboys getting angry.

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

@Graham Hill,

I think 4/3" users are the best, for makers' profit.

0 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

So that's why camera devisions of olympus and Panasonic were losing money last year. µ4/3 is an very good compromise between Size and weight of the bodies, lenses and image quality.

Image quality is now very close to Apsc and surprisingly above one of the biggest brands(canon).

So µ4/3 is best when you need to pack a small but highly versatile high image quality kit. Fujifilm is slightly bigger as µ4/3 but is trying to rival FF quality. and it's getting really close these days.

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

can't agree more BarnET

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

thanks BarnET.
but sorry to say I don't need your proof what I said
(and I didn't go far to say 4/3" people are stupid).

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
samfan
By samfan (3 months ago)

Well, this shows how much are the 2 traditional DSLR makers outgunned in this era.

I don't like Fuji cameras very much, but heck, they can do amazing stuff and I wish them good luck. Now, if they'd hire some designer who can help them make a user-friendlier, non-retro camera.

0 upvotes
Tap0
By Tap0 (3 months ago)

Outgunned ? Not quite. Fuji is only playing catch up to CanNikon. Sales do no reflect 'outgunned'.

0 upvotes
Akaretler
By Akaretler (3 months ago)

Design is a matter of opinion, key reason for liking the Fuji line up is the traditional set of controlls for speed and light...

3 upvotes
xiod_crlx
By xiod_crlx (3 months ago)

it is good to know that canon's full frame 85mm 1.8 with equiv. FOV & DOF would cost you $420 brand new today

the major problem is "2 traditional DSLR makers" are making money by selling big numbers of budget SLRs with kit lenses and do not want to create interesting lenses anymore - it is just not profitable right now

fuji have to create something interesting at least to try to compete and take their 2-3% of the market

nothing more than that

1 upvote
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

Tap0
Compare the image quality of the Xm-1 vs the EOS M2 and then come back with your tail between your legs

Apples to apples Tap0.

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

xiod_crlx
Canon's 85 f1.8 is a great low end plastic budget lens, but it's a pretty hard sell as a comparison to Fuji's 56mm f1.2 if we assume that the quality is similar to Fuji's other lenses.

4 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

Canon has had a 50mm f1.2 and 85mm f1.2 for like 10 years. Outgunned?

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

Not even as expensive as expected. Probably corners are not sharp to f/2.8-4?

0 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

complaining because it's not expensive? it's a portrait lens. use common sense.

2 upvotes
EricWN
By EricWN (3 months ago)

Probably best to not speculate, rent the lens when available and take it for a test run!

3 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

I am not complaining. Why would you think that? Just speculating based on the price and usual Fuji XF price/performance ratio.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

a low cost portrait lens? (if street price less than half of MSRP).
would be interested in how it will compete with old 85/1.8.
better on a new Bayer X mount camera with 24M or more pixels.

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

"if street price less than half of MSRP"
How the f... would that happen?

2 upvotes
hiZis
By hiZis (3 months ago)

7 blades? This cannot be good.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

Fuji should have squeezed the cost hard.
even the old Nikkor 85/1.8D got 9 blades,
straight ones though, for about 36k JP.

0 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (3 months ago)

Seven is a perfectly good number of diaphragm blades. Even numbers are undesirable (Canon being the main culprit there), but the number itself isn’t hugely important. Hasselblad lenses, famed for their rendition, had just five blades for years.

11 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> Even numbers are undesirable

the market prefers odd numbers but there are considerations for even numbers for the star light (more invisible ones all across the frame) is a poison to the image.

anyway, Nikon 85/1.8G also uses 7 blades (others Nikkors got 9). hope Fuji 56/1.2 can perform similar as good.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

I read 7 rounded blades.

2 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

agree with samuel. do not know what is big fuss of number of blades.

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

7 rounded blades can easily outperform 9 straight ones. It's the implementation not the number. We'll see how it performs and judge it by the images it produces.

5 upvotes
Cameracist
By Cameracist (3 months ago)

Nice! I am curious how will it do against some old F1.2 50-58mm lenses used today as popular and 'cheap' portrait lenses for APSC (like Pentax A 50 F1.2, Revuenon 55 F1.2 or Minolta Rokkor 58 F1.2 ...)

0 upvotes
BorisAkunin
By BorisAkunin (3 months ago)

Well, the old f/1.2s were a lot worse at f/1.2 than comparable 85s at f/1.8. The Fuji has to compete with current 85/1.8s on FF, it needs to be a lot better than the old 1.2s...

Frankly, I'd rather get an A7 and use the old gems on the right format.

1 upvote
Plastek
By Plastek (3 months ago)

No DoF scale on f/1.2 lens? o_O Seriously?
On a 1000 pound lens they can't add stupid DoF window? Ridiculous.

0 upvotes
Antonio G
By Antonio G (3 months ago)

Maybe they thought the viewfinder indication can be good enough for a 85mm equivalent lens whose users are not likely to use range focusing that much.
But this doesn't justify not having a focusing distance scale, that is a bad decision.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (3 months ago)

A depth-of-field scale would be unusable on this lens unless the focus throw was multiple full rotations – and even then it would have very limited usefulness.

I’m the first to cry foul over depth-of-field scales on new lenses, but Fujifilm was wise to abandon the scale for this lens rather than implement a mockery of a scale like the ones on recent Nikkors (and most other autofocus lenses, in fairness to Nikon).

2 upvotes
Kirigoi
By Kirigoi (3 months ago)

From the sounds of things it's a focus-by-wire lens. There's no direct connection to the focus ring so a DoF scale may be tricky. Doesn't seem to have stopped them implementing one on the Canon 85L mind...

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

DoF scale isn't as important as it used to be, but distance scale I still rely on for I always set the lens at expected distance for next subject. I can AF to a subject of similar distance but that's less reliable and I cannot check it later (have to AF again, and actually shoot to be sure).

anyway, this is just a low cost lens.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

It has digital DoF and focus distance scale, in the viewfinder and rear LCD, I find these more useful on modern cameras and wish more manufacturers did this.

3 upvotes
Chaitanya S
By Chaitanya S (3 months ago)

Fuji is on right road, bringing more choice of glass to the users.

4 upvotes
SunnyFlorida
By SunnyFlorida (3 months ago)

wow that is a great lens and decent price, nikon just introduced a 58mm F/1.4 for $1,600, and their Nikon mirrorless lens 32mm F/1.2 is $900 with an output of 86mm F3.2 for a sensor 2/3 smaller than APS-C !

6 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

Indeed and while these are facts people here are whining that an FX 85mm 1.8G is cheaper. The Canon 50mm F1.2L is $1600-1700
So unless you take the ridiculous exchange rate to pounds in consideration the price is right.

0 upvotes
Bogdan_M
By Bogdan_M (3 months ago)

Yepp, and the performance of the Canon is far from stellar.
Let's see how the IQ does on the Fuji.
It probably won't beat a Canon 6d + 85mm f 1.2 combo, but it is lighter and cheaper, and being a 56mm instead of 50 makes me quite optimystic.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (3 months ago)

Preordered

6 upvotes
HBowman
By HBowman (3 months ago)

Unlike Nikon, Fuji is in serious business !!

17 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

unlike canon too. They have the most extensive lens line-up of 3 lenses. Ow and since that is so many they've decided not to launch the wide-angle in the US.

8 upvotes
Martin.au
By Martin.au (3 months ago)

Trés Sexy!!!

2 upvotes
tecnoworld
By tecnoworld (3 months ago)

gorgeous lens, I envy the "x"rs out there :)

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

Too bad it doesn't fit on my X100. :(

1 upvote
Timbukto
By Timbukto (3 months ago)

Love footnote 2. A nice way of saying its a lie?

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

Never mind press-release jargon, they have shown what they can do in 2 years, i expect it to be worth every penny. Doesn't need to set any records. :)

*Unless you're in the UK, then it does require records. ;)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
1 upvote
topstuff
By topstuff (3 months ago)

Delicious lens.

Bravo Fuji.

5 upvotes
Piggy the bad
By Piggy the bad (3 months ago)

Cost $999/£999 $999=£628 at today's exchange rate. Yet another rip off for the British consumer.

7 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (3 months ago)

Bhphoto ships to England. Looks look importing camera gear ourselves is the only option to not get ripped off.

0 upvotes
racketman
By racketman (3 months ago)

Although you will be billed for VAT, customs duty, customs handling and of course pay postage.

0 upvotes
rb59020
By rb59020 (3 months ago)

Not if you bring it back in a suitcase.

4 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

Fly to NYC, drive to Delaware, or fly to Boston, drive to New Hampshire - if they have any stores left who sell Fuji. Or pay 9% NY City tax.

0 upvotes
mgrum
By mgrum (3 months ago)

The $999 is without sales tax which will be added on depending on which US state you buy the lens from, whereas £999 includes VAT so it's not a like for like comparison.

$999 = £628 + VAT @ 20% = £754

so we're only really being ripped off by 25%...

1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Only thing wrong with this lens is that there is no camera with a 1/8000th shutter to take advantage of it in good light, so your expensive f1.2 lens often is forced to be a f2 lens (not suggesting a lens like this should only be shot wide open, far from it, it's about choice... A choice which is robbed in good light).

And yes, I know about ND filters.

7 upvotes
chooflaki
By chooflaki (3 months ago)

No big deal. if you can afford this lens you can easily afford a full set of ND filters which would be more usable wide open at all shutter speeds. I use them on my 35mm f1.4 with great effect.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (3 months ago)

1/8000 would definitely be a welcome addition, but it isn't a dealbreaker without it. That's the thing about lenses, you can get one now and still enjoy it on future camera's. Unlike the X100(s) that's also very limited in shutter speeds due to its leaf-shutter.

@chooflaki, that's not the point is it.

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (3 months ago)

Now, what is then the sense of owing a 1.2 lens if you need an ND filter to use it. Ok, we know all this high ISo and night shooting stories by now, no need to repeat that again. The only reason for the aperture is DOF, and that is what it is made for. But here, the price is ok, nothing to say against Fuji. They should tell Sony how to build those things.

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (3 months ago)

Not a deal breaker, but certainly a huge annoyance.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

nm

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
KL Matt
By KL Matt (3 months ago)

Bet the new xpro has 1/8000 when it comes out.

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (3 months ago)

Same size as Canon 85/f1.8 and slightly smaller than equivalent Nikon. About the same low light performance (FF vs APS-C), more than twice expensive (three times more expensive than Canon). And the performance will be worse than those full framers, because to be better it should be better than Otus 55 (which is about on par with Nikon 85/1.8G at equivalent apertures mounted on D600, Otus mounted on Nikon D7100).

2 upvotes
KL Matt
By KL Matt (3 months ago)

Since when does Fuji have a 24MP sensor in the X-series bodies?

1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Yet the cheapest FF's that can give you this performance are 3x as expensive as the cheapest X-Series that can use this lens.

6 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (3 months ago)

@abortabort
what?!
Nikon 85/1.8 costs 2.5 times less, most likely provides better high ISO performance with modern FF Nikon camera, definitely better performer (http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Zeiss-Carl-Zeiss-Distagon-T-STAR-Otus-55mm-F14-ZF2-Nikon-on-Nikon-D7000-versus-Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-85mm-F18G-on-Nikon-D4___1242_680_823_767)

0 upvotes
tjboothe
By tjboothe (3 months ago)

f 1.2 is half stop faster than f 1.4.This should perform as a 1.4 lens on ff not a 1.8.

Now go look up the price for 1.4 lenses in the 85 mm focal length and tell us about how overpriced this is.

4 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (3 months ago)

@tjboothe
Are you about high ISO performance? If so, you confused things there. XTrans < Nikon D7100, which is more than a full stop worse compared to modern FF cameras.

0 upvotes
KL Matt
By KL Matt (3 months ago)

So f/1.2 is a half stop faster than f/1.8, then?

0 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (3 months ago)

There should be a ban on this dreary equivalence dogma that gets trotted out by someone or another in every thread these days. We get it, since we’re not outright novices. But it’s far from the only way to compare cameras and lenses.

6 upvotes
DrugaRunda
By DrugaRunda (3 months ago)

It is still a smaller combination overall, and so what? - with the right lens in most other circumstances your combo is half size or less than FF cameras, while if you need low light performance, you are up to FF levels now.

While you can put this lens on your Fuji, you cannot shrink your FF camera in good light no matter how much you pay (unless you get a Sony that is :) )

0 upvotes
topstuff
By topstuff (3 months ago)

Jeepers - it's a full retard invasion here… Whats with the Nikon vs Fiji hysterics, guys ? Feeling your manhood being threatened or something?

I don't care what Nikon equivalent competes or does not with the Fuji. Who should? And the kind of shooter buying this lens for his X series camera is likely to be using the X series as well as a Nikon or Canon rig because they dig the lighter weight of the body and want something other than a DSLR…

So comparing them is a utterly lame exercise. Once again the DPR forums prove their reputation for being infected with keyboard clowns.

7 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (3 months ago)

> So f/1.2 is a half stop faster than f/1.8, then?
LOL? Where did you take this "half stop"?
FF Nikon sensor is more than a stop better than APS-C, no matter what color mosaic it uses. The difference in light transmission between f1.2 and f1.8 is full stop, and both have the same DOF. The only difference Nikon 85/1.8G is much sharper than 56/1.2 on APS-C :)

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (3 months ago)

Sure, Samuel. I see bunch of photogs taking the Nobel prize after being more experienced ;)

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (3 months ago)

@topstuff
It is about lens price. The Nikkor is better performer and 2.5 times cheaper.

0 upvotes
dengx
By dengx (3 months ago)

@Emacs23
I don't think that anyone cares really.
Either you have one of the systems and buy the lens for it or have both and chose cheaper/better performing/lighter one based on preferences.
No need to feel insecure you know.

1 upvote
Corwin Lee
By Corwin Lee (3 months ago)

I would suggest not to compare apple skin to orange skin, but look at complete system level.
I'm happy with this lens in term of size, weight and price(if this lens perform well like other fuji prime)

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
57even
By 57even (3 months ago)

Emacs...why do you feel so easily threatened? Try taking some pictures and you may feel better.

3 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (3 months ago)

I use an ancient 50 year old Nikon 50/1.8 on my NEX, was 120$ at E-bay and makes stunning shots. So, 999$, if you need that, why not? With an adapter, the Nikon 50 fits also on the Fuji x.

0 upvotes
Alberto6674
By Alberto6674 (3 months ago)

Yes, the Nikon 85mm 1.8G is a bargain at half the price, giving equivalent performance, and similar size and weight (actually it's probably lighter). But it's not a premium, metal lens, but a cheap, plastic one. And you still need a D610 to use it (so the combo camera-lens is still bigger, heavier and more expensive than the Fuji lens with the X-E2). In the end, it's a matter of preference.

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> a premium, metal lens, but a cheap, plastic one.

plastic should be better than metal.
uncoated metal means cheap and low performance.

0 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

@emacs, who cares? it is fast lens made for X camera, not Nikon FF. why you angry?

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

@Emacs23 - the cheapest new Nikon FF (from your own comparison) to use with an 85mm f1.8 will cost ~$1800, the cheapest Fuji that can use this lens will cost around $550. $550+$1000 = $1550, for the Nikon setup you are looking at higher total cost for the same (roughly) result.

Not saying one is better or worse, but you can't just compare the price of the lenses, its the total cost of ownership.

2 upvotes
mgrum
By mgrum (3 months ago)

@abortabort

It's not the same result though, in good light the Nikon will be sharper and better all round. In low light it will be sharper but potentially noisier.

If you're looking at total cost of ownership, then yes it's higher if you only buy one lens for the Nikon, but once you buy two or three the relatively more expensive camera body will be evened out and the lower cost of ownership goes to the full frame system.

But if you'd rather use the Fuji then that's absolutely fine.

0 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (3 months ago)

$1k for an f1.2 lens ? Nice. :)

13 upvotes
KL Matt
By KL Matt (3 months ago)

With AF, no less. :-)

2 upvotes
DuxX
By DuxX (3 months ago)

Well, to be more precise, that's a $1K for f1.8 lens compared with FF systems. ;)

4 upvotes
KL Matt
By KL Matt (3 months ago)

Does anyone here realize the x-system uses an APS/C sensor, not m43?

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

@DuxX
No an f1.2 lens still gathers more light then f1.8 lens. In terms of DOF you are correct though.

2 upvotes
jannefoo
By jannefoo (3 months ago)

Same size of aperture, same light gathering abilities. Physics, how does it work?

2 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (3 months ago)

@duxx, it is 1.2 lens made for APS-C Fuji X. use common sense.

2 upvotes
ijustloveshooting
By ijustloveshooting (3 months ago)

if it had an effective image stabilization like sony sel50 has, it would be my reason to switch to Fuji...a dream low light street lens, it would be...

0 upvotes
smatty
By smatty (3 months ago)

In street situations you have to choose your shutter speed according to people movement in order not to get blurry images. 1/100s or faster should eliminate visible camera shake and most motion blur.
An IS would be useful for landscape and this will not be the domain of this lens.

So if you are a street photographer, the lack of IS does seem to be neglectible. ;)

12 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

Why do people think that IS is better or more useful than more light? I will take the extra stop of actual light gathering over the 'only sometimes useful' IS.

7 upvotes
KL Matt
By KL Matt (3 months ago)

If you shot with IS, you'd know why people don't want to be without it. It's just so much easier to have one less thing you need to concentrate on. Frees your mind up for more important things like composition and recognizing the moment you're looking for. And then... you get lazy. When you switch to a camera with no IS, everthing is blurry! And noisier, too, because you're shooting at higher shutter speeds which require higher isos...paper-thin DOF is not ok for every shot.

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

" When you switch to a camera with no IS, everthing is blurry! "
You do realize that people have been shooting without IS for over 100 years right ?
So because you don't know how to handhold properly lens is bad ? Get a grip man.

5 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

"For over 100 years without IS" people were shooting either from tripos or blurry pictures (at least blurry by modern standards).

1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (3 months ago)

I've shot plenty with IS, it isn't the be all and end all. It certainly doesn't stop you subject moving shooting at super low shutter speeds, unless you are only ever doing 'test shots' of inanimate objects and going all googly-eyed over how many stops of IS you have.

Also didn't answer the question of why people think IS is the savior when more light is somehow not?

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

With modern sensor resolution, IS works not just for super-slow shutter speeds. Remember, 1/FL applied to 135 film for 1000 lines of sharpness most of the time. Want the same on APS-C - divide exposure time by 1.5. Want the 4000 lines your sensor promises? Divide by 4. For 56mm lens, it is already 1/336s, not a slow shutter speed at all. And want more success rate - continue dividing.
And then there is video, which handheld is simply useless without stabilization, no matter what is your aperture.

0 upvotes
KL Matt
By KL Matt (3 months ago)

I shot a lot without IS, I have a very steady hand when I apply proper technique. With IS, I don't have to nearly as much, and it's nice to not have to concentrate on that so hard. Being solid takes concentration. I know how to do it, but it's not exactly what I would call rewarding or fun. It is also a habit one can quickly forget with IS. To each his own.

0 upvotes
JSTB
By JSTB (3 months ago)

Yeah I recently saw some William Eggleston prints. Funny he doesn't have IS or AF yet his prints sell for thousands of dollars. But hey those prints were just hanging in a museum, I mean gosh darn, it wasn't like they were in Popular Photo......

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

Yeah, "Black Square" was also sold for a million, yet it is just a square, nothing special.

0 upvotes
photogeek
By photogeek (3 months ago)

Sony better hurry up with their lens lineup. If Fujifilm cameras had an articulated screen I would have switched already. No articulated screen - no deal, though.

4 upvotes
Qoion
By Qoion (3 months ago)

The mid-range X-M1 (or X-A1) have articulated screens, they don't have an EVF though. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-m1

5 upvotes
JurijTurnsek
By JurijTurnsek (3 months ago)

I was looking at Fuji before opting for Sony NEX, because I also need a lot of video-centric feature. But, damn, Fuji's lens line-up is looking extremely nice and let's not forget their commitment to firmware updates.

7 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (3 months ago)

Strange that people find always one valuable thing a camera has not, to justify not to buy it. There are many things my NEX-7 has what I don't need, and there are things I would like to have and has not. But, on the end, it was the camera I wanted, period.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Plastek
By Plastek (3 months ago)

Sony's not interested in lenses or building system. They're interested in selling you new body every 2 years (or less).

9 upvotes
attomole
By attomole (3 months ago)

One advantage with Fuji is that they only have one horse in the race APSC mirrorless.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

Sony would rather introduce another lens system than actually fill out of of their 5 existing ones.

1 upvote
veritalens
By veritalens (3 months ago)

Wow. Reading these forums is somewhat depressing. No articulated screen = no deal? I'm only 27, but you make me feel old. I hate relying on my screen at all. In fact, I bought a Epson RD-1 so that I wouldn't look at the screen after shooting.

I can't even imagine thinking about whether or not a screen articulates, when deciding whether or not to buy a new camera.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 254
12