georgehudetz
Veteran Member
I agree to an extent. Fuji is already ahead of the curve by delivering the XC zooms, which are slow, light, and affordable, but, unlike the Canikon equivalents, deliver excellent IQ. Others have pointed out the three "cheaper" light primes, which round out things but are a little pricey at full retail.Many, many year ago I bought the Canon 85mm 1.2 to shoot indoor volleyball. It was a very large lens. Large and heavy. It gave me much light through the viewfinder, but I could not use that largest opening, because it gave sharpness only in a very small area.
These days, with the X-series Fuji cameras you get acceptable images with ISO 3200. That means you are able to get images even in not-to-good lighting.
My favourite wide angle has been 24 mm (135 film), or 16 mm for my X-T1. I read here that many want this to be f/1.4. I do not! I got into mirrorless cameras because of the reduced weight. I do not understand why so many want/need heavy glass fore these cameras.
I have the 14mm and the 18-55mm (sold the fantastic 55-200 mm to my brother, I found it a bit on the heavy side). I will reconsider my lens choices later this year, but I know I want the 90 mm (135). I shall wait to the end of the year and see what Fuji comes up with.
Any comments?
--
Raymond
http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/1244032#author-bookshelf (my books)
http://osloray.wordpress.com/ (Image blog)
http://volleyray.wordpress.com/ (Image blog)
I do think a fully mature set of lenses would include more 1.8 or 2.0 primes that are similar in size, weight, quality & cost to the cheaper Nikkor 1.8 D primes, like the "nifty fifty." But I think we know at this point such lenses will come late in the roadmap, if at all.