Why is the 42.5 F/1.2 $1600 when the Fuji 56mm F/1.2 is only $1000?

Started Mar 2, 2014 | Discussions thread
amtberg Veteran Member • Posts: 6,108

Seems like the OP thinks that lenses can be quantified entirely by focal length, aperture, and price, with no concern given to what actually matters: performance.

We're starting to see some reviews of the Nocticron which show that it's a very high performance lens. As yet I haven't seen any reviews of the Fuji lens. So it seems to be an open question, but maybe ... just maybe ... the QUALITY of the lenses in part explains the price differential?

Or how about another example? Nikon recently released its AF-S 58mm f/1.4 lens with a price of $1,695.00. Well, it's a bit slower, but perhaps it's a great performing lens like the Nocticron, so not such a bad deal? Nope. According to Lenstip center sharpness is poor wide open and really not good until f/2.8. The edges and corners are even worse, prompting Lenstip to describe the Nikon's price:performance ratio as "abysmal".

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow