Fujifilm updates X-mount lens roadmap through end of 2015

this is great but..... it's almost as expensive as full frame....

Jul 26, 2014permalink

Very true. I guess you are paying for the build quality (based on their metal primes, should be exceptional) and a bit more overall compact system size relative to FF. Certainly trade offs here and there.

Jul 30, 2014permalink

it's hard to justify... sony a7 is almost the same price and about the same size. sure no compact lens yet... but full frame.... don't know. it's tricky. it's a small niche because with samsung nx and sony nex you have about the same quality at a much lower price.

Jul 31, 2014permalink

True true but at the moment Fuji is a bit more complete than the A7 series. Not really familiar with the Samsung, heard interesting things about it though. Shot an a6000, exceptional camera and arguably equals the Fujis with much better autofocus but then again lower built quality, quirky (but still excellent) lenses.

I suspect part of confidence Fuji inspires among its following, besides the cameras, are the intangibles such as its commitment to its system, good support, willingness to add substantial firmware updates to its camera, and its transparency.

Aug 1, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Take a walk with a Turtle, and behold the world in pause.

Jul 26, 2014permalink

samhain

Fuji is deadly serious about lenses. Deadly serious. They are not messing around at all.
If I didn't know any better, I'd think Fuji is trying to take over the aps-c market.
Within a few years they've built a catalog of aps-c lenses that puts every other brand to shame.
Seriously, who offers a comparable selection of small, fast, metal aps-c primes like:
-16mm 1.4
-23mm 1.4
-35mm 1.4
-56mm 1.2
-90mm f2
No one even comes close. Fuji for the win!

Jul 26, 2014permalink

I wouldn't say that their "trying to take over the APS-C market", but I would say that they are very serious about making a system that caters to real photographers. They seem to actually listen to what photographers say and want.

Jul 26, 2014permalink

no image stabilization....

samsung has
16-50mm f/2-2.8 ED OIS
45mm f/1.8
85mm f/1.4

sony has
E 1.8/35mm OSS
E 1.8/50mm OSS

can't see any shame.

Aug 8, 2014permalink

maxnimo

If I wait for an 18-600mm F1.4 OIS zoom, razor sharp wide open, am I being too picky?

Jul 26, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Nah !!!!!

Jul 26, 2014permalink

MarcosV

Sounds more like you want an excuse to not buy any more lens. Might be a great way to control G.A.S.

Jul 28, 2014permalink

how would you carry around 500kg?

Aug 8, 2014permalink

Androole

Seems like they missed a big opportunity by not making the 90mm f2 a 1:1 Macro lens. That would be a really unique proposition (well, unless you want to pony up $1300 for an Olympus OM 90mm f2 macro from 30 years ago, or $1800 for a Zeiss 100mm f2 makro...)

This goes double, because the Fuji X system lacks a 1st party 1:1 macro anyway, and the Zeiss Touit is quite short for APS-C.

Jul 25, 2014*permalink

samhain

Lol screw that.
The x system isn't designed to be a macro shooter's camera. Look at their cameras. Is their anything about them that says 'macro shooters'? Might as well say Leica needs a 300mm Tele while your at it :D
You want macro- buy a Canon 6d + mp 65e. Get you a big boy macro system.

A 90mm f2 portrait lens fits the Fuji lineup like a glove.

Jul 26, 2014*permalink

Canon 6D for macro?

With macro you NEED the extra depth of field.
So why go fullframe for this aspect of photography?

Jul 26, 2014permalink

Androole

@ samhain

Honestly, that's the most absurd thing I've ever heard. How a camera looks doesn't in any way define what you do with it.

Does Micro Four Thirds say "macro shooters?" Because I'm having a blast shooting macro photos with some great legacy glass on my GX1...

Jul 29, 2014permalink

Mft is a great system for macro.
They have 2 native macro lenses. The 12-50 can do macro top.
Then you have those neat focwa something automated extension tubes. And the shorter flange means you have a longer working distance from your front element.

Then the smaller sensor means more depth of field at the same aperture.
And you get all the best manual focus aids.

Ow and 1:1 magnification on a smaller sensor means your more zoomed in to boot

Jul 29, 2014*permalink

RealXenuis

Macro43 does better micro than pico de gallo, and it's to boots are smaller! Honestly, I'm having a small Sensorberry Sonic Blast in a legacy glass, so read 'em Androol. You guys offer a unique proposition, with longer working distance, front office elements, telecommutes, by pony, OR extension tube zoom (this goes double), and big boy depth of field. But manual focus? Lol screw that. I'm holding out until I get a round Touit. I'd rather stand at the short end of a lineup of 12-50, 300mm Canons than be defined by a system that portraits the shooters as magnifiers.

Jul 31, 2014permalink

I like the fact that the lenses are starting to get bigger than the cameras. Everyone is always going on about how they want a light compact camera, but then they insist on having these enormous fast lenses. Where's you're weight savings gonna be when your lugging around a 90mm f/2?

Jul 25, 2014permalink

And so continues the myth that people only switched to mirrorless because of weight...

Jul 25, 2014permalink

BPD7

Exactly
Plus, if I want a 90mm f2 I KNOW it's going to be a bit big and used for say portraits, not street photography where I want to be stealth.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

It's not as if you're going to always be using the 90 f/2. Besides, you still have to keep in mind that a 90 f/2 mounted on a mirrorless body is still going to be more compact than a 90 f/2 mounted on a DSLR. There's always a place for bodies that are more compact and slimmer than a DSLR. I think of mirrorless bodies as being the modern equivalent of rangefinder bodies of the past: slimmer, low-profile bodies with no mirror slap. The SLR is not the end-all and be-all of camera body form factors. If you really want "enormous" lenses, just look to DSLR lenses!

BTW, these lenses are not "enormous". In fact, they are typically more compact than their DSLR lens counterparts. They only appear "enormous" in photos. But in real life, they are actually more compact than you might have initially thought. If you want "enormous" lenses, just look to DSLR lenses!

Jul 25, 2014*permalink

Digimat

a 90 2 for mirrorless will basically be the same size and wheight as that lens for dslr cameras. with longer lenses you loose the advantage of the shorter flange distance and the optics basically are the same regardless of camera type.

that sad with "only" f/2 it will be around the size of the 56 1.2, maybe a bit longer, but not heavier or fatter. i find that size to be perfectly okay on the X-T1. but yes, there is no wheight and size advantage over, for example, a canon 85 1.8.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

No way around it, you want a fast lens, prepare for bigger lenses. I would bitch about it if it was the only option but you still have the lighter and smaller primes and the rather nice variable 18-55mm zoom to choose from. At least if you want to go big and fast you can do so.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

Joe Braun

The beauty of a mature mirrorless system (like m43 and now Fuji-X) is that you can have it both ways. You can get a pocketable camera and/or an SLR-like camera with small lenses and/or big bright lenses. Having both options in the same system is wonderful.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

Andreasfe

A 90mm f/2 for Fuji X-mount don't need to be big and enormous. Just look at Canons 85mm f/1.8 and 100mm f/2. They are covering fullframe very well, so a 90mm f/2 designed for a mirrorless camera with APS-C size sensor can be quite a bit smaller than that.

But with Fujis build quality on their XF lenses, i think we shall expect a size and weight comparable to the 56mm f/1.2. Maybe a tad longer, but not more weight.

Jul 25, 2014*permalink

Sorry buddy, there's still weight savings.

Quick comparison:
Camera Body Only 35mm 50mm 85mm
Fujifilm X-T1 440 740 627 845
Canon 6D 755 1090 935 1180
Nikon D610 850 1155 1035 1445

(annoying, tabs don't post correctly... hopefully you can parse the info)

Jul 25, 2014*permalink

Haha, how the mirrorless set does get upset when they think they're being attacked. Settle down guys.

@dorkington:

Comparing weight with AP-S cameras and lenses makes more sense.
a D3300 body is only 410g
35mm is 210g
50mm is 185g
85mm is 350g

Jul 25, 2014permalink

Those DX lenses are slower and have different equiv. Focal length.
All of them are great lenses and total bargains though.

At least I assume you took the f1.8g versions

Jul 25, 2014permalink

random78

@JDThomas: Yes it is true that in the telephoto range the mirrorless design does not provide much of an advantage in lenses. But it does provide an advantage in the wide to normal / short telephoto range. For me that covers 80% of my shooting needs and I am willing to accept that in the 20% remaining cases I wont have a size/weight advantage (though there will still be considerable savings in the overall system weight and size). If, on the other hand, I was a sports or wildlife shooter using mostly long lenses then yes I would question the gain I get out of mirrorless.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

samhain

So you guys have seen the 90mm f2 in person & know how much it weighs?

From the roadmap chart it doesn't look much bigger than the 56mm 1.2, which isn't big at all imo. Quality portrait tele's are usually big & heavy. It just comes with the territory. Smh...

If you're a weight weenie & Fuji is too big for you then get a m43 system.

Jul 26, 2014*permalink

@JDThomas - seems like you're the one who's a bit insecure. Why does it matter to you that we have another form factor other than DSLR? Many of us mirrorless shooters use both DSLRs and mirrorless. People who want to make it a "DSLR vs mirrorless" argument are really just being childish. These are just tools. DSLR has its pros and cons. Mirrorless has its pros and cons. I really love being able to use both DSLRs and mirrorless.

Jul 26, 2014permalink

@T3:

I've been shooting mirrorless for years my friend. Leica M system. I was also an early adopter of the XPro-1.

Try again.

Jul 27, 2014permalink

@JDThomas

Starting your post with "Haha, how the mirrorless set does get upset when they think they're being attacked," is unnecessary and inflammatory. Everybody who replied to you did so in a mature manner with good points. This is not a political issue that will affect the lives of your family and millions - these are just silly cameras. Settle down, no need to be snarky about it.

Jul 27, 2014permalink

Focal length equivalents are off when you switch to a DX body... you need to pull different lenses at that point... I'm wasting my down time at work playing with weights... made a thing in Google Docs which I linked in the Fuji forum if you wanna see... I'll likely add DX bodies and zoom lenses today.

Basically, there is no perfect answer for everything, but imo, saying there's no weight savings with mirrorless systems is being disingenuous.

Jul 28, 2014permalink

@ Under The Sun

*yawn

Jul 28, 2014permalink

RFC1925

Next stop: stabilized body.

That is the only reason I haven't switched yet (a decent video implementation would help too).

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Menneisyys

I'd love in-body stabilization too. The lack of IIS is the sole reason for my sticking with zoom lens (most importantly, the 18-55, albeit will definitely consider the 16-55 2.8 if and only if it's at least as good as the 18-55 optically) and not having purchased the 35 f/1.4.

The majority of my handheld museum / low light shots made with the 18-55 (at 18mm) at 1/4s (using the EVF all the time) have turned out to be excellent and blur-free. That would have been impossible with any non-stabilized prime lens at 28mm equiv, let alone longer FL's.

Jul 25, 2014*permalink

Joele

Agree, I don't mind so much for the wide lenses 14/16/23 but as we push into the normal to short tele range 32 and 56 I would prefer to have IS, especially for the 90mm..

Think I will wait for the 40-150mm f2.8 with IS..

Aug 11, 2014permalink

Tapper123

If the XF90mmF2.0R was a macro lens I'd go Fuji next year...

Someone earlier asked for a 150mm macro, and that would be even better. Especially weather sealed. And before anyone asks, yes I know it'd be a big lens and that's just fine as long as it's good.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

BPD7

I agree. I think I'm gonna suck it up and buy the 60mm OR use my nikon adapter and and use an old nikkor for CHEAP. I know it will only be 1:2 but it will be cheap and I will get good results.
The Zeis Tout is just too much money for me sadly.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

BPD7

This is one reason I chose Fuji over Sony and am leaving Canon

Jul 24, 2014permalink

abortabort

Because they have equivalent lenses coming in the future that Sony already have?

Jul 25, 2014permalink

abortabort

Because they have equivalent lenses coming in the future that Sony already have?

Jul 25, 2014permalink

amipal

The Sony lenses are incredibly weak compared to Fuji's offering, both current and future. Coupled with Sony effectively dropping APS-C now the the A7 system is out.

Jul 27, 2014permalink

MonteCarlo67

This new lens road map just made my day! The 16mm & 90mm will be on my shopping list. After 25+ years shooting both Canon & Nikon (more Nikon than Canon) I was hesitant to jump to Fuji. I thought, "nobody can compete with Canon & Nikon"! Now, I not only could care less about what Canon & Nikon releases, I could care less if I ever hear there names again!

Jul 24, 2014permalink

thx1138

That's nice, but they could care even less about you leaving as do the rest of us.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Qwntm

I think Canon and Nikon do care and will really start caring when enough people start doing the same. It's about selling cameras and every Fuji sold is one less Nikon or Canon sold to a person who shot Nikon or Canon. What people REALLY don't care about is you telling people how much nobody cares about what other people think. LOL.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

thx1138

Nor do they care about you telling people they don't care about you telling people they don't care.

Maybe you need to adjust your reality distortion field and check the DSLR sales vs mirrorless worldwide and then tell me who's worried.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

Thematic

Jul 25, 2014permalink

km25

That 90mm is gooing to a very sallow DOF, it will be 135mm f/2.0. The lens I may want is 16mm f1.4. For me 24mm is wide enough, f/1.4 would be nice. What agreat combo, 16mm f1.4, 23mm f/1.4 and 56mm f/1.2 low light heaven.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Kodachrome200

not quite you didnt find the equiv aperture. dof wise i think it is like f4.5

Jul 24, 2014permalink

2x1.5=4.5?!

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Kodachrome200

sorry i dont know what i was thinking the correct answer was f3.2

Jul 25, 2014permalink

24hrexposure

Fuji has a 1.5x crop factor, not 1.6x like Canon.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

km25

I agree, a 23mm F/2 and/ or 35 f/2 would be nice lens. For a zoom, 16-48mm F4.0 IOS. would make for nice compact lens, they do have the 27mm f/2.8, not only small low cost, but a good general lens.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

I'm in the same boat as you. I wish they would release more small lenses, especially pancake ones because the small size (relative to quality) is the main reason I'm using my Fuji more then my 5dm3.

Jul 30, 2014permalink

Joachim Gerstl

Fuji makes great lenses my only wish is that they focus more on small lenses.

The main reason to use my XP1 instead of my FF Canon is size and weight. Beside the first primes most newer lenses are rather big and heavy. The 1.4/23 is borderline, the fantastic 1.2/56 already too heavy for my taste. The f2.8 zooms will be huge.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

thx1138

So you want slow kit lenses that dominate other manufacturers lin-ups. IMO if you buy into a system like the Fuji, it's not as a backup for a FF DSLR it's as a long term replacement. Fuji is clearly targeting the more serious photographer that appreciates DOF control and getting you somewhat close to what FF provides. APS-C is still a big sensor, so glass is going to be relatively large.

I was not prepared to make a huge investment in a mirrorless system that really does a serve as a backup for my FF, so I went the m4/3 route with it's fast yet much smaller lenses.

I applaud Fuji for taking the path they are on with their glass and if they can make a camera that can AF as well as a 1D X, shoot at 10fps+, have abattery life measure din the thousands of shots and offer true supertelephoto lenses I'd probably jump ship. Throw in a few TS-E lenses for good measure to round out the line-up.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

nathondetroit

I think Fuji picked the perfect sensor size to future-proof the system. In the same way that great glass makes MFT get APSC results, Fuji's lenses clearly land them in Full Frame territory. As cameras get smaller and faster, these lenses will last the test of time.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

KameraFever

As the differences in capabilities of the camera bodies from different manufacturers pretty much equalize in the future, what will set them apart will be their lens lineup. Fuji seems to be in a great spot going forward. Adding new features to bodies is the easier part, but building a great lens ecosystem is the critical factor for the entire system's longevity.

Fuji's lenses are the best compromise between image quality and compactness I have seen. As the speed and handling continues to improve with each new body, I expect Fuji to be a strong force to be reckoned with.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

samfan

That's how it's done Nikon...

Jul 24, 2014permalink

JEROME NOLAS

That's how it's done Sony!!!

Jul 24, 2014permalink

That's how it's done EOS-M!!!

Jul 24, 2014permalink

samfan

Sony and Canon with EOS-M don't even pretend they're serious about their lenses. Also Canon has always pushed their FF line more than the APS-C line.

Now Nikon on the other hand... First DX is the future, then CX is the future... yea right.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Sony i am not so sure.
canon your absolutely right
http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/23/3176697/canons-eos-m-arrives-a-799-99-aps-c-mirrorless-camera-competitor

"If you want to step up from a point-and-shoot, reps said, buy a T4i."
They have never been serious about that system and they never will be

Jul 24, 2014permalink

photo nuts

Hoping they'll release a 150 mm macro lens

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Tapper123

Heck yeah! I'd go full out Fuji X if that happened.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Menneisyys

"Hoping they'll release a 150 mm macro lens"

BTW, even inexpensive lens-less (that is, ones that just increase the flange distance) macro adapters work pretty well with current lens. I've posted a quick review of some of them to http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54070303

Jul 25, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Fuji aren't just building new lenses, they are building confidence with photographers in a camera system.

Take note, very important.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

I totally agree.

The Xpro-1 already had the looks and the image quality.
But it still had a ton of quirks.

With every update or new camera fujifilm adressed those problems and fixed them.

Focus speed went from terrible to one of the best in class.
EVF lag same story
screens same story

The interview Dpr had with an rep early this year was also great.

He just acknowledged the problems and strengths. making sense with every sentence.

Fujifilm they really deserve their praise these days.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

disraeli demon

I've been really impressed by Fuji - I swapped from Nikon DSLRs to mirrorless back in 2011, before they were around, but if I was making the move now they'd provide a very tempting proposition

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Josh152

Yeah Sony especially should take note.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

vscd

...but on the other side you can call Fujisoftware "banana firmware". Ripes at the customer.

Jul 28, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

No I don't think so VSCD. Adding functionality after customer input is FREE functionality. Other makers don't do that nearly as often or not at all and you have to hope that if there is a successor camera at all, its going to have the features or fixes you want.

Jul 28, 2014permalink

vscd

It's mostly no new functionality but more speeding up the AF-algorithms or fix spelling errors.

Jul 30, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Haha, yeah right. Maybe you should shoot with Canon or Nikon then :). The firmware ripens through new models. :)

Jul 30, 2014permalink

vscd

Yes, I use my Canon and the firmware was finished when I purchased the cam. Sorry, fujifanboy.

Aug 4, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Haha, fanboy, is that all you got? C'mon hit me harder than that.

Your a fanboy apparently if you praise something that a company is doing right. You'd like me to point out all the firmware updates that Canon have done that have fixed bugs and NOT added features? Or would you rather save face right now instead?

Canon are probably the most feature free brand of all of them, bar Leica out there.

I don't even own a Fuji camera of my own, but I have reviewed a few.

Aug 4, 2014*permalink

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5988185050/cp-2014-fujifilm-interview-the-only-way-is-to-keep-innovating

Don't be too harsh on canon they have released 12 p&s this year alone. Imagine the work to market all of those crappy products.

Aug 4, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Good point. I retract what I said about Canon despite the facts. I shouldn't be so mean. ;)

Aug 4, 2014permalink

peevee1

DPR wrote: "while the 'super tele-photo prime' will now arrive near the end of the year."

The roadmap says "Super Tele-photo _zoom_".

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Esteban Mac Allister

Fuji introduces new lenses for their APS cameras mount X

Will there be a body Fuji Full Frame?

DP-Review:
Do you you want to compete against professional full-frame cameras?

Toshihisa Iida:
Inevitably yes, we have to compete against full-frame. The professional market is very segmented, and for example for sports photography I think the X-T1 is already competitive. So yes, I’d like to challenge full-frame.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

(unknown member)

The new 90mm could be a nice competitor to the M.Zuiko 75mm. Fuji en m4/3 lead the way in lens development.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Jogger

FYI: The 75/1.8 "Zuiko" is a Sigma design. The best Oly lenses were the pro 43.. e.g. 7-14/4, 14-35/2, etc.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

FYI: It's rumored to be a Sigma design, it isn't a fact. But it doesn't matter. Its a great tele-prime lens for the m4/3 system and Fuji (and any other mirrorless system) could use great tele-primes like that.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

Jogger

Sure. Sigma just happens to own a patent on a lens with exactly the same specifications and design.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

samfan

Sigma? Now it makes sense why that lens is so nice.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2013-08-28

thanks jogger that reply confirmed the rumour in my head.
Let's hope people will not use that to say that olympus can't make proper lenses.
They can do an magnificent job and they have proven that countless times.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

cjhwang

just because Sigma owns a design, it doesn't mean they make them all, they could have licensed their design. Zeiss created the "Planar" lens design that is used by Canon, Nikon, Fuji, etc. Although their patent expired now, but a good cheap design is a good design.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

cjhwang

jogger: FYI: The 75/1.8 "Zuiko" is a Sigma design.

what are you trying to say again?

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

lbpix

Excellent set of lenses from Fuji. However I just need them to bring in a tilt shift before I dump my Nikon kit completely. Fuji - please take note!

Jul 24, 2014permalink

http://www.ukdigital.co.uk/samyang-ts-24mm-tilt-shift-sony-emount-lens.html

i would ask samyang about this.
It may already be on the wat=y.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Photomonkey

The Samyang tests poorly and would not be the choice for the user looking for the high quality its competitors deliver.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

iAPX

I think Fuji is building cautiously lenses that are here to last, that target quality both as image quality and construction quality.

This announcement is pretty interesting, clearly stating that the X Body serie is here to last and maybe expand, and I think it's an awesome system at this point!

Jul 24, 2014permalink

steve mallen

Excellent. The medium telephoto prime finally arrives. Glad I stuck with Fuji - my XE-1 is still my main camera - although I suspect these new lenses will be just as expensive as the others; shame I can only really afford one lens per year (if that). The 90mm f/2 is going on my wish list though!

-S

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Exactly, when you go through the current Fuji primes offer, you have nice choice of wideangle and standard FL (14, 18, 23, 27, 35, 56, 60mm), but no telephoto prime (85 or 100mm), so the 90mm is a welcome adition.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

For wedding photographers, that should have been a 16-55 F2 lens.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Der Steppenwolf

You obviously have no clue about optics or physics I see. That would be one VERY big, heavy and expensive lens. And there would be very few of them sold.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Just as wolf said: f2 zoom would be huge, physical rules cannot be avoided (my Sigma 18-35/1,8 is only 2x zoom and has 800g). I am afraid even this f2,8 zoom will be huge, considering small mirrorless bodies like X-E2 the combo will be too "lens-heavy" and not easy to hold.Even on the biggest X mount camera - the X-T1 the lens is too big: http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj524/picrumors/picrumors001/63_zps2772f5c3.jpg
Anyhow 16-55/2,8 was my dream lens, better than usual 17-50 lenses with f2,8 so kudos to Fuji for making such lens.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Hmmm. Yes a 16-55 f2.8 would be possible and perhaps not too big for the xt1 at least.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

@ squire: you can see the lens on the link I posted above; as you see the 16-55 is big, with filter thread of 77mm it is bigger than some DSLR zooms. Anyhow for those who don´t mind the bulk it will be surely a great universal lens and for those who care about size there is great selection of primes.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

"You obviously have no clue about optics or physics I see.

Thanks for that.

"That would be one VERY big, heavy and expensive lens. And there would be very few of them sold."

Sure, it would be big, but not that big. Certainly not as big as the FF f2.8 equiv. And not so big as to put off a wedding pro. We're talking APS-C physics here, not FF.

Haven't you been taking notes from Sigma's recent zoom f1.8?

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Dennis

"Haven't you been taking notes from Sigma's recent zoom f1.8?"

Haven't you ? It's only 18-35.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Photomonkey

Sigma's lens, while quite a feat, is still a far cry from the range you are looking at.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Samsung has one and it's huge and f2.8 at the long end.
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/samsung-s-16-50mm-f-2-2-8-ed-ois-lens-review-25474

Jul 24, 2014permalink

"Haven't you ? It's only 18-35."

Sure, but it's not big, and we're only talking another 20mm.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

"Samsung has one and it's huge and f2.8 at the long end."

It's only a bit bigger than the Fuji 18-135. We are talking pro lenses here, so a big lens is not a big deal.

The talk of HUGE lenses is just exaggeration.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

http://j.mp/1t06zTn
huge was indeed the wrong sentence.
Made that in my head after seeing a picture of an nx3000 with that lens.

still it's an 620gr beast of a lens. 50% heavier as the 24-70 F4 for the A7 tripplets.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

straylightrun

Come on Sony, get your **** together!

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

Yes. I seriously considered Sony for a long time before coming to Fuji X. The lack of lenses (and the lack of quality lenses in the lineup at the time) was a main factor in not choosing Sony. Fuji has done it right with a new system with lenses to support it. Way to go Fuji :-)

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Same... I actually got a NEX 5 at a very good discount... nice camera, but the lack of decent native lenses made me switch to Fuji. So happy with it, and even happier when I see a new firmware update for my xpro1 and new great lenses coming out (16mm f1.4 is amazing!) :)

Jul 24, 2014permalink

I am torn between going Sony or FUji mirrorless. By all accounts the 50mm and 35mm primes from Sony are good, and a decent price too. The 16-70 is a good super-kit-zoom with better range than Fuji's 18-55, but costs a lot too. BUt now... a 90mm f2 is really tempting me towards Fuji. Nothing similar for Sony unless I hook-up their Alpha adapter to my excellent 100mm f2.8.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

@ squire: well, a big dilema: fast Sony bodies vs. great Fujinon lenses. If only we could combine them ;-)
For nothe best choice seems to be the a6000 with 16-70/4 as an allrounder or a set of small and cheap Sigma primes (19,30,60 mm). Or accepting the slower AF of Fuji and choosing whichever of their great lenses (I would go for the X-E2 with 18-55 plus 14mm and 56mm).

Jul 24, 2014permalink

@iudex since Fuji uses Sony sensors as base, it's very likely the next generation of X100/XE/X-Pro/X-T1 will be using the 24mp sensor from the A6000. We'll find out this fall/winter. :)

Jul 24, 2014permalink

BillGarrett

Same here. When I decided to try mirrorless I started by looking at Sony because of their bodies and feature set. But the lenses weren't there. Lack of lenses is what caused me to LEAVE Nikon DX in favor of mirrorless. I chose Fuji because while their lens portfolio wasn't (and still isn't) complete, they 1) show they are building it out quickly and 2) release quality lenses.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Out of interest, what do you *need* to consider a system? For me, a convenient high-quality super-kit, then fast (<f2) primes near to 35mm, 50mm and 80mm. That's a 'complete' system for me.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

Menneisyys

"since Fuji uses Sony sensors as base, it's very likely the next generation of X100/XE/X-Pro/X-T1 will be using the 24mp sensor from the A6000."

Yup, hope it'll be the flagship 24 Mpixel sensor (A6000, D3300, D5300 etc.), not the considerably lower-quality, more noisy 20 Mpixel one in the A5000 / A3000.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

Dorkington: it´s not about sensor, those of Fuji (X-trans) are APS-C top; I meant AF speed, what is Fuji´s weak point. Also I like the shape, grip and size of NEX bodies (sorry, a now) more.
Squire: I aggree, one good standard zoom plus 2-3 fast primes and that´s it. However in this field Sony looses (no decent kit zoom, few fast primes). As I wrote: Sony a6000 plus Fuji lenses: 18-55/2,8-4 + 14mm/2,8 + 90mm/2, that would be a perfect combo.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

@iudex e-mount Zeiss 16-70 f4 (if you prefer range over the Fujis fast wide end), and both the 35mm and 50mm get good reviews. Just need something in the 80-100mm range plz.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

@iudex - the sensor has PDAF elements to it, combined with upgraded processing, I imagine the speed will continue to improve. So basically, Fuji being half a generation behind Sony sticks, simply because they use Sony for much of their internal technology. The other half is lenses, and having a whole collection of them... most are quick enough to get the job done mechanically. The first gen lenses, need to be updated sometime though.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

photogeek

Too bad most of their lenses have noisy, slow motors and are worthless for fast moving subjects. FWIW, I ended up going with MFT after trying both X-T1 and E-M1 side by side. E-M1 is just much better made and all their lenses (at least all I have tried) have ultrasonic motors. The only real flaw that I could see in Oly lineup is their 17mm f/1.8 lens, which, while not that bad in absolute terms, is not that good either, and worse than their f/2.8 zoom.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

I feel the lens quality, IQ, etc. will beat m4/3; however, if focus speed is a priority, the E-M1 is a fantastic option. I like them both :-)

Jul 24, 2014permalink

photogeek

Optical quality, maybe, by a hair. Mechanical - nope. Also, Fuji primes are about twice as large than their Oly counterparts, and quite a bit heavier, too.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

Yes, they are bigger and heavier due to the larger sensor, just as FF glass is bigger and heavier than Fuji. This is an advantage in size for m4/3

Jul 24, 2014permalink

photogeek

Still, though, would it kill them if they put ultrasonic motors into everything, like Oly did?

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Tim McClanahan

When you multiple the focal length to get 35mm equivalence, you also need to do the same to the aperture, so it's actually equivalent to a 135mm f/3. :(

Really should have IS on that thing.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Beat Traveller

Yeah, I don't know if it's been explained why they don't use USM.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

"When you multiple the focal length to get 35mm equivalence, you also need to do the same to the aperture, so it's actually equivalent to a 135mm f/3. :("

Are you talking of the 90/2? Because the f3 is only true of background blur not light. You'll still get the benefit of f2 light on the sensor.

Macro closeup change in apaerture really does mean a change in light levels, but not non-Macro Full Frame equiv comparisons.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

Adrian Tung

Does Fujifilm own or know any patent or tech to implement USM though? Any of their existing lenses have USM tech in them?

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

Tim McClanahan

"Are you talking of the 90/2? Because the f3 is only true of background blur not light. You'll still get the benefit of f2 light on the sensor. "

True. It's not the true equivalent of a 135mm f/2 is what I'm saying. :) It just depends on what you're using a large aperture for.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

jshaffer

"Does Fujifilm own or know any patent or tech to implement USM though? Any of their existing lenses have USM tech in them?"

Yes, the 18-55 "kit" zoom has silent focusing. I believe many (if not all) of the other current and planned zooms do as well. I'm not sure why they didn't incorporate that into the primes as of yet. Perhaps size considerations? Or price point?

In any case, most of the primes focus just as fast as the "USM" variants, so personally I'm happy they chose to put the money into image quality as opposed to silent focusing for the primes.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

Usually to gather more light. I think shallow DoF is way overestimated in these days! I don't want portraits in which I've the eye on focus and the tip of the nose out of focus already. :)
And for bokeh, it's not at all true that a lens with wider aperture has a better bokeh, it simply has more oof.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

BJL

When you say "USM", you mean "linear stepper motors" ["LSM"], which seem to be the best type for working with CDAF, whereas USM is the best with SLRs and their PDAF, but is sluggish with CDAF.

Several mirror-less system offer LSM focusing, so I doubt patents are a major barrier, and I loo forward to the X system getting something like LSM AF soon.

P. S. Olympus uses the marketing name MSC (movie and stills compatible), but the underlying technology is linear motors.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

dengx

All the LM zooms feature linear motors.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

BeaverTerror

Will the 16-55mm F/2.8 not be stabilized?

Jul 24, 2014permalink

drwho9437

There were rumors of an update to the 35mm and maybe the Macro as well? I hope these are true, but I doubt it.

I think this is probably now as solid a lineup at m4/3 which is impressive given the single company vs 2 that m4/3 has. I wish the 10-24 mm was smaller but it seems a good lens so far.

I will continue to save my pennies for an X-T1. The only real downside of that camera for me probably will be in cases of snow and sand where my eyes are super dilated which makes non-optical finders hard to see.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

rjx

Looks great!

But they need a tele 1:1 macro.

When Fuji released the 56mm, it had a wider aperture than they told us it would be. A nice surprise. I hope the 90mm is faster. Imagine if Fuji released the 90mm as a F1.4.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

88SAL

90mm is more than adequate. Its a 135/2 which really as fast as they come

Jul 24, 2014permalink

88SAL

90mm is more than adequate. Its a 135/2 which really as fast as they come

Jul 24, 2014permalink

88SAL

90mm is more than adequate. Its a 135/2 which really as fast as they come

Jul 24, 2014permalink

rjx

But a wide open 135mm F2 on full frame has a shallower DOF than a wide open 90mm F2 on a 1.5 crop.

And Nikon's 85mm F1.4 and Canon's 85mm F1.2 are nice on crop cameras, wide open.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

88 sal repeating it 3 times does not make it true.

an 90mm F2 is an 135mm F3 equiv.
I have a lens here that is older then me that is faster then that.
That said it will probably an great lens.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Tapper123

F3 equivalent in terms of DOF, but still F2 for light gathering.

That is still an excellent spec.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

and here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Im4W_9blhY&src_vid=DtDotqLx6nA&feature=iv&annotation_id=annotation_4154551181

well there is a catch well explained here
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care

Jul 24, 2014permalink

The thing is in terms of light gathering it's also an 135mm F3
But the light INTENSITY is F2.

A fullframe sensor is not more sensitive to light. it just captures more light with it's larger surface area. leading to better ISO performance.

If you want the same performance as fullframe you simply need an sharper faster lens. For instance the sigma 18-35mm zoom.

That said 90mm f2 isn't a great spec. Since you can mount 85 F1.2's and f1.4's on Apsc dslr's right now. which will give you a very similar field of view.

The Nikkor 85mm F1.8G is 499 and pretty much flawless. So i hope fujifilm will be realistic with the price.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

madeinxyz

The only camera / lens maker where I'm poised to say:

"Put it on my tab, Fuji".

16mm 1.4
35mm 1.4
56mm 1.2
90mm 2.0

Drooling...losing too much water...Faint...Unconscious.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Joriarty

You forgot the 23mm f/1.4 ;)

Jul 24, 2014permalink

madeinxyz

Yes, yes, yes...indeed!
Put that one on my tab, too, Sir! =)

Jul 25, 2014permalink

Two fast zoom's Sony's e-mount could really do with:
1. 16-55/2.8.
2. 50-140/2.8

...and two useful fast primes (one already available):
1. 56/1.2
2. 90/2.0

Jul 24, 2014permalink

EthanP99

Sony already has equivalent 24-70 and 70-200 f4

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Not everyone wants to go full frame... and anyway that would expose an even wider list of missing lenses.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Not everyone wants the bulk nor the price of fullframe.
The Sony A7's seem to cure both of those issues in the future.

They do miss a ton of good lenses in that system. But the ones available will yield better results then the fuji system.

take a look at both f4 zooms and the 55mm.
The 35mm is dissapointing.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

I own both cropped (NEX-5n and A6000) and FF (A7) e-mount bodies and I'd rather use a good zoom on the former due to size. I owned the FE 24-70/4 but sold it on after 2 months after switching to the much lighter (and arguably better) Zeiss 16-70/4 for my A6000.

Yes, the 55/1.8 is a gem, which I'll be keeping... but you cannot argue that it's not several times larger than what an equivalent aps-c version would be. As I said, not everyone wants to go full frame. I just hope Sony finish what they've started with cropped e-mount before shifting all their resources to FE lenses.

Jul 25, 2014permalink

Or if I do go FF I want some modest lenses not high-end Zeiss stuff. My a-mount Sony 50/1.4 is excellent, and much smaller and cheaper than the e-mount Zeiss 55/1.8. I'd buy a A7s if I could get a kit zoom and the primes I need (around the 50mm and 80mm range) for less than £1000 (for the lenses).

Jul 25, 2014*permalink

lyricalmotion

as a sony E mount user.... Fuji lens lineup makes me jealous :(

Jul 24, 2014permalink

MarcosV

The rumors that Sony will concentrate on F E-mount lens and not crank out any new E mount lens designs really turned me off. I'm coming from the FF DSLR camp and want small/light weight compromises. As good as the A7/A7R bodies are, fast FF mirrorless lens aren't small enough to be worth the cost of switching from FF DSLR.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

I do love how Fuji is about as open and transparent as they can be to help their users make informed decisions. It enhances loyalty to the brand IMO.

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

arhmatic

Agreed, when it comes to lenses. On the other hand, there is some ambiguity if they will go full frame or now, which makes some users hold off purchases in lenses --- myself included.

Latest rumors say it will stay aps-c, which I like better.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

I wouldn't buy into those rumors too much at all until it happens. I see no reason for Fuji to go FF. If they do anything, they should do a MF like their classics. No need for FF with their APS-C, skip it IMO.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

I definitely don't think they will go FF... why should they?
I think that Fuji is, thanks god, not like sony that released the third lens line-up in a few years without having even decently completed the second one...

Jul 24, 2014*permalink

@BorisAkunin - Yes, it's too small. They'd have to create a whole new mount.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

peevee1

No, it is not too small. Even m43 mount is not too small for FF sensor, given proper lens design rules (to which most lenses follow anyway).
But to understand that, you'll probably need to draw a picture if geometry is not your thing. ;)

Jul 24, 2014permalink

MarcosV

The Fuji lens roadmap and their track record of cranking out lens on a regular basis are major reasons why I pulled the trigger on the X-T1, too.

It is sad that other companies don't announce their plans as visibly as FujiFilm does posting roadmaps on their website.

Jul 24, 2014permalink

Photomonkey

@Dorkington,
Is it? Leica still uses its M mount on a FF sensor.
Also, Fuji seems to be making such a great line of nice fast primes the opportunity to miss shots with a low DOF is easily available on APS-C. :)

Jul 24, 2014*permalink