New lens set please Fuji - smaller, lighter, but still top quality!

I am a convinced( and slightly fanatical Fuji convert), for all the usual reasons, having deserted my EOSII / L lens(s) system. I fully understand the need for Fuji to produce fast pro spec lenses to establish its credentials as a pro contender and I delight in using mine.


However, now that we have a reasonably comprehensive selection of fantastic fast lenses, can I argue the case for a few of more modest spec but of equally high (or better!) IQ and build quality.


One of the main reasons for mirrorless cameras is their lower size and weight and, now we have some wonderful, very fast, lenses of superb IQ, I feel it would be useful to create some lighter, slightly smaller aperture lenses, along the lines of the 27mm f2.8, but keeping existing very high standards of construction and optical properties. Indeed the slightly smaller apertures I’m suggesting might enable improved IQ at a reasonable cost!


For me a 10mm f4, 16mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8 or f4 (this one with OIS) and 300mm f5.6 (with OIS) would ideally complement my wonderful, very fast but quite large, heavy and expensive lenses.


In saying all of this let me repeat that I wouldn’t want to sacrifice build quality or IQ in any way whatsoever!


Are there any like minds out there?



Phil

I read somewhere that these pancakes are coming out soon. This is just a rumor though.

A 23mm F2 lens like the one on the X100 would be nice.

Phil1 said:

I am a convinced( and slightly fanatical Fuji convert), for all the usual reasons, having deserted my EOSII / L lens(s) system. I fully understand the need for Fuji to produce fast pro spec lenses to establish its credentials as a pro contender and I delight in using mine.

However, now that we have a reasonably comprehensive selection of fantastic fast lenses, can I argue the case for a few of more modest spec but of equally high (or better!) IQ and build quality.

One of the main reasons for mirrorless cameras is their lower size and weight and, now we have some wonderful, very fast, lenses of superb IQ, I feel it would be useful to create some lighter, slightly smaller aperture lenses, along the lines of the 27mm f2.8, but keeping existing very high standards of construction and optical properties. Indeed the slightly smaller apertures I’m suggesting might enable improved IQ at a reasonable cost!

For me a 10mm f4, 16mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8 or f4 (this one with OIS) and 300mm f5.6 (with OIS) would ideally complement my wonderful, very fast but quite large, heavy and expensive lenses.

In saying all of this let me repeat that I wouldn’t want to sacrifice build quality or IQ in any way whatsoever!

Are there any like minds out there?

Phil

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that the APS-C camera would then only have a rather limited bandwidth between the largest aperture and diffraction e.g. maybe only a couple of stops.

The DOF would then not be very exciting either, e.g. the 100/4.0 would translate into a 150/6.1 on Full Frame, not really compelling stuff ...

At F2.8 the DOF equivalent would be F4.3 again not really compelling.

The only argument other than small size is price. Give up on quality and versatility?

So me not like minded on this one, sorry.

Deed

Hi, i would be all for a set of lenses which have a slower aperture speed. A 23mm 2.8, 90mm 2.8 would do me fine. I predominantly shoot landscapes etc and find myself stopping down to f8 - f11 on most occasions, even when i do portraits i prefer to stop down a bit so more than just one eye is in focus.

I have the 18 f2, 35mm 1.4 and 60mm 2.4, i really like all the lenses and im very happy with the depth of field offered by them. Cheers, jon

deednets said:

Phil1 said:

I am a convinced( and slightly fanatical Fuji convert), for all the usual reasons, having deserted my EOSII / L lens(s) system. I fully understand the need for Fuji to produce fast pro spec lenses to establish its credentials as a pro contender and I delight in using mine.

However, now that we have a reasonably comprehensive selection of fantastic fast lenses, can I argue the case for a few of more modest spec but of equally high (or better!) IQ and build quality.

One of the main reasons for mirrorless cameras is their lower size and weight and, now we have some wonderful, very fast, lenses of superb IQ, I feel it would be useful to create some lighter, slightly smaller aperture lenses, along the lines of the 27mm f2.8, but keeping existing very high standards of construction and optical properties. Indeed the slightly smaller apertures I’m suggesting might enable improved IQ at a reasonable cost!

For me a 10mm f4, 16mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8 or f4 (this one with OIS) and 300mm f5.6 (with OIS) would ideally complement my wonderful, very fast but quite large, heavy and expensive lenses.

In saying all of this let me repeat that I wouldn’t want to sacrifice build quality or IQ in any way whatsoever!

Are there any like minds out there?

Phil

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that the APS-C camera would then only have a rather limited bandwidth between the largest aperture and diffraction e.g. maybe only a couple of stops.

The DOF would then not be very exciting either, e.g. the 100/4.0 would translate into a 150/6.1 on Full Frame, not really compelling stuff ...

At F2.8 the DOF equivalent would be F4.3 again not really compelling.

The only argument other than small size is price. Give up on quality and versatility?

So me not like minded on this one, sorry.

Deed

Click to expand...

Any time someone mentions defection I immediately stop reading. It's a non factor in real world usage.

davman said:

A 23mm F2 lens like the one on the X100 would be nice.

Click to expand...

Most of the lens assembly on the x100 series is in the body. So it's not as small as you think.

deednets said:

Phil1 said:

I am a convinced( and slightly fanatical Fuji convert), for all the usual reasons, having deserted my EOSII / L lens(s) system. I fully understand the need for Fuji to produce fast pro spec lenses to establish its credentials as a pro contender and I delight in using mine.

However, now that we have a reasonably comprehensive selection of fantastic fast lenses, can I argue the case for a few of more modest spec but of equally high (or better!) IQ and build quality.

One of the main reasons for mirrorless cameras is their lower size and weight and, now we have some wonderful, very fast, lenses of superb IQ, I feel it would be useful to create some lighter, slightly smaller aperture lenses, along the lines of the 27mm f2.8, but keeping existing very high standards of construction and optical properties. Indeed the slightly smaller apertures I’m suggesting might enable improved IQ at a reasonable cost!

For me a 10mm f4, 16mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8 or f4 (this one with OIS) and 300mm f5.6 (with OIS) would ideally complement my wonderful, very fast but quite large, heavy and expensive lenses.

In saying all of this let me repeat that I wouldn’t want to sacrifice build quality or IQ in any way whatsoever!

Are there any like minds out there?

Phil

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that the APS-C camera would then only have a rather limited bandwidth between the largest aperture and diffraction e.g. maybe only a couple of stops.

The DOF would then not be very exciting either, e.g. the 100/4.0 would translate into a 150/6.1 on Full Frame, not really compelling stuff ...

Click to expand...

100mm f4 is interesting in fact....

You are talking about dof, but the background blur is interesting. What matters is the ratio focal/aperture.

So a 100mm f4 has the same amount of background blur (at infinity) than a 35mm f1.4 (about the same ratio) but with more dof. Of you shjppt a portrait, you can have a very sharp face and have background blur

A cheap and light 100 f4 pancake lens would be interesting in my opinion.

F4 is fine, no worry about diffraction...

deednets said:

At F2.8 the DOF equivalent would be F4.3 again not really compelling.

The only argument other than small size is price. Give up on quality and versatility?

So me not like minded on this one, sorry.

Deed

Click to expand...

100/4 pancake? Don't hold your breath.

Lyle From Canada said:

Lyle From Canada said:

Phil1 said:

I am a convinced( and slightly fanatical Fuji convert), for all the usual reasons, having deserted my EOSII / L lens(s) system. I fully understand the need for Fuji to produce fast pro spec lenses to establish its credentials as a pro contender and I delight in using mine.

However, now that we have a reasonably comprehensive selection of fantastic fast lenses, can I argue the case for a few of more modest spec but of equally high (or better!) IQ and build quality.

One of the main reasons for mirrorless cameras is their lower size and weight and, now we have some wonderful, very fast, lenses of superb IQ, I feel it would be useful to create some lighter, slightly smaller aperture lenses, along the lines of the 27mm f2.8, but keeping existing very high standards of construction and optical properties. Indeed the slightly smaller apertures I’m suggesting might enable improved IQ at a reasonable cost!

For me a 10mm f4, 16mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8 or f4 (this one with OIS) and 300mm f5.6 (with OIS) would ideally complement my wonderful, very fast but quite large, heavy and expensive lenses.

In saying all of this let me repeat that I wouldn’t want to sacrifice build quality or IQ in any way whatsoever!

Are there any like minds out there?

Phil

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that the APS-C camera would then only have a rather limited bandwidth between the largest aperture and diffraction e.g. maybe only a couple of stops.

The DOF would then not be very exciting either, e.g. the 100/4.0 would translate into a 150/6.1 on Full Frame, not really compelling stuff ...

At F2.8 the DOF equivalent would be F4.3 again not really compelling.

The only argument other than small size is price. Give up on quality and versatility?

So me not like minded on this one, sorry.

Deed

Click to expand...

Any time someone mentions defection I immediately stop reading. It's a non factor in real world usage.

Click to expand...

Sure, stop reading! Then of course an el-cheapo quality lens is for you! Nikon has gone down that road many, many moons ago, so you suggest to copy from the best?

I wasn't actually mentioning any defection!

Deed

Lyle From Canada said:

Lyle From Canada said:

Phil1 said:

I am a convinced( and slightly fanatical Fuji convert), for all the usual reasons, having deserted my EOSII / L lens(s) system. I fully understand the need for Fuji to produce fast pro spec lenses to establish its credentials as a pro contender and I delight in using mine.

However, now that we have a reasonably comprehensive selection of fantastic fast lenses, can I argue the case for a few of more modest spec but of equally high (or better!) IQ and build quality.

One of the main reasons for mirrorless cameras is their lower size and weight and, now we have some wonderful, very fast, lenses of superb IQ, I feel it would be useful to create some lighter, slightly smaller aperture lenses, along the lines of the 27mm f2.8, but keeping existing very high standards of construction and optical properties. Indeed the slightly smaller apertures I’m suggesting might enable improved IQ at a reasonable cost!

For me a 10mm f4, 16mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8 or f4 (this one with OIS) and 300mm f5.6 (with OIS) would ideally complement my wonderful, very fast but quite large, heavy and expensive lenses.

In saying all of this let me repeat that I wouldn’t want to sacrifice build quality or IQ in any way whatsoever!

Are there any like minds out there?

Phil

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that the APS-C camera would then only have a rather limited bandwidth between the largest aperture and diffraction e.g. maybe only a couple of stops.

The DOF would then not be very exciting either, e.g. the 100/4.0 would translate into a 150/6.1 on Full Frame, not really compelling stuff ...

At F2.8 the DOF equivalent would be F4.3 again not really compelling.

The only argument other than small size is price. Give up on quality and versatility?

So me not like minded on this one, sorry.

Deed

Click to expand...

Any time someone mentions defection I immediately stop reading. It's a non factor in real world usage.

Click to expand...

I'm assuming you meant diffraction, and that defection was a defective rendering of it.

Lyle From Canada said:

Lyle From Canada said:

Phil1 said:

I am a convinced( and slightly fanatical Fuji convert), for all the usual reasons, having deserted my EOSII / L lens(s) system. I fully understand the need for Fuji to produce fast pro spec lenses to establish its credentials as a pro contender and I delight in using mine.

However, now that we have a reasonably comprehensive selection of fantastic fast lenses, can I argue the case for a few of more modest spec but of equally high (or better!) IQ and build quality.

One of the main reasons for mirrorless cameras is their lower size and weight and, now we have some wonderful, very fast, lenses of superb IQ, I feel it would be useful to create some lighter, slightly smaller aperture lenses, along the lines of the 27mm f2.8, but keeping existing very high standards of construction and optical properties. Indeed the slightly smaller apertures I’m suggesting might enable improved IQ at a reasonable cost!

For me a 10mm f4, 16mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8 or f4 (this one with OIS) and 300mm f5.6 (with OIS) would ideally complement my wonderful, very fast but quite large, heavy and expensive lenses.

In saying all of this let me repeat that I wouldn’t want to sacrifice build quality or IQ in any way whatsoever!

Are there any like minds out there?

Phil

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that the APS-C camera would then only have a rather limited bandwidth between the largest aperture and diffraction e.g. maybe only a couple of stops.

The DOF would then not be very exciting either, e.g. the 100/4.0 would translate into a 150/6.1 on Full Frame, not really compelling stuff ...

At F2.8 the DOF equivalent would be F4.3 again not really compelling.

The only argument other than small size is price. Give up on quality and versatility?

So me not like minded on this one, sorry.

Deed

Click to expand...

Any time someone mentions defection I immediately stop reading. It's a non factor in real world usage.

Click to expand...

Diffraction would be a non factor in real world usage ????

Stop reading if you want but please start learning.

18mm, 27mm, 35mm, 60mm are all pretty light/small/high quality

14mm*, 23mm, 56mm, 90mm are all pretty big/uncompromising for what they are

I'm not saying that Fuji shouldn't bring more options, just that the options are already pretty good.

* - the 14mm is actually pretty small/lightweight too. It's about the size of the 60mm, and smaller than a ~21mm prime on FF DSLR. But, compared to the 18mm, its kinda big.

--
http://jasonhaven.photography / http://jasonhavenphoto.tumblr.com

Yes defraction, darn auto correct. If defraction bothers you, you have bigger issues.

Lyle From Canada said:

Yes defraction, darn auto correct. If defraction bothers you, you have bigger issues.

Click to expand...

I'm assuming you meant to reply to someone else, I made no mention of defraction in my post.

I'm also hoping for these kinds of lenses. Maybe Sigma will beat Fuji in timing, if they bring out their Art primes for mirrorless in X mount?
And let's not forget the XC lenses. I really like both XC zooms on the market but what I miss in this line-up is a wideangle. Something like an 8-16 or 10-20, which could be 3.5-5.6 for all I care. As long as the IQ is as good as the current XC's, I'd be fine with that aperture. Would probably keep them small and light (and not too expensive).

Hi,

Agreed. I've long been a proponent of some small light lenses in what I see as FL gaps. I'll say up front that I don't want pancakes for the sake of being pancakes. I'd simply like a bit smaller, lighter, slower and razor sharp lens options but still with an aperture ring and a quality build. My goal is not cheaper (which they may be) but a line of smaller high grade lenses. Even if a new small, light and very sharp XF R 23mm f2.4 lens cost the same as the f1.4, I'd still prefer the f2.4.

We've got lenses I would call 'light' and fairly small in the 14mm, 18, 27, 35 and 60mm. The heaviest is the 14mm at 235g. It's the 23, 56 and forthcoming 16/1.4 and 90/2 that are too big for me. I recognise their role in the lens line-up for other photographers, but I simply have no interest in them myself. I'd like to see a 23mm f2-2.4-ish lens and an 85-100mm f2.8-4-ish with OIS. And a separate long macro. I think others can argue for small lenses in other FLs if they want to, but that's what I'd like. (A 50mm f1.8-ish lens has been mentioned by other people in the past).

FWIW Fuji Rumors has a new tip of a pancake 20mm with no aperture ring :-(. Obviously I don't know if there's anything in it. I just wish Fuji would get the aperture ring thing right - the whole system is designed around classic controls.

Regards, Rod

I would prefer a 16mm f2.8 pancake rather than a 20mm pancake. 20mm is too close to the existing XF 18mm which is already small.

It’s good to know that I’m far from alone in wanting slightly smaller (aperture) but top quality lenses with aperture control rings to complement the very fast lenses I have. I tend to use the faster lenses on the X-T1 and I feel the smaller ones might fit better with the X-E2 which I use for out and about stuff.


Fast lenses wide open are great, but there is a role for lenses with smaller apertures provided the IQ is really high. As a responder said, not all portraits need to have only one eye in focus and for group work a fast aperture can be counterproductive. Also, for landscapes very often small apertures are needed.


For very wide angles AF is not needed, meaning again even smaller size, weight and cost.


(I suppose I’m hankering after the equivalent of the Voitlander 15mm (FF) I used when I had a Minolta CLE. I just wish they would make a Fuji X equivalent (10mm). The Samyang 10mm is a fine lens but it is comparatively large and has a very wide aperture for such a high angle of view. A top quality 15mm f4 with an aperture ring & no AF would really make my day!)

Phil

16mm f2.8 - absolutely!!!

Phil