Reading mode: Light Dark

The Fujinon XF50mm f/1 R WR looks huge

Go to last post
norjens said:
Mrspartan said:
9VIII said:
Compared to the stuff Sigma is putting out that looks rather conservative.

As long as it doesn't cost too much I have no doubt this lens will be one of the defining features of the Fuji X system.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

On this note, what should we expect pricewise? Anyone has an idea?
Click to expand...
When it was first shown in the massive 33mm form factor, I was guessing they would but it up as a halo/luxury product against the Canon RF 50mm/1.2 at 2000-2300$.

With the new optically simpler (I think) and physically smaller design, I think they'll put it at a point where many more will actually use it, not just aspiring to use it (as Nikon is doing with the Noct).

I'm guessing 1499$. At that price they can sell many of them and pull more people into the system, while at 2000+ it would be interesting only for us already in the X-mount system. As another already said, this could actually become a flagship piece of the X-mount. The attainable showpiece to really demonstrate that "you don't need full frame to get that look'" which Fujifilm likes to say in every interview. This lens for Fuji was always as much about marketing as about the actual sales.
Click to expand...
I expect similar to Canon RF 50 f/1.2. $2,300.
 
I know and I can only imagine how much bigger that one would have been as a prototype.
chaimav said:
cilucia said:
That actually looks smaller than I thought (I have a vague memory of a leaked image a few years ago, and the thing was massive)... or maybe I have just been desensitized to big lenses since then (glances to my 100-400mm lens)
Click to expand...
It was originally supposed to be a 35mm f1 that was switched to a 50mm to make it smaller.
Click to expand...
 
The 56mm f/1.2 is a perfectly good lens (if a tad overpriced in comparison to equivalent FF lenses). The 50mm has a narrower field of view and is only marginally faster, so I suspect the difference in the amount of background blur will be close to zero.

If you want more subject isolation, you could just get a 90mm f/2 (yes, that will blur the background more if that's what you're into) or the 50-140 f/2.8 (ditto).

A 50mm f/1 on APS-C is not a particularly flexible focal length, it sort of made sense when they were going for a 33mm f/1, but a 50mm f/1 when you already sell a 56mm f/1.2 it's just plain baffling.
 
Not near as big as Nikon's 0.95 58mm

86375f5b64c2473b86b0449459f6efd8.jpg
 
Manufacturers do this here and there for the exercise, bragging rights, and for deep pocket commercial customers. It doesn't have to make sense. ;)
 
Luis Augusto said:
The 56mm f/1.2 is a perfectly good lens (if a tad overpriced in comparison to equivalent FF lenses). The 50mm has a narrower field of view and is only marginally faster, so I suspect the difference in the amount of background blur will be close to zero.

If you want more subject isolation, you could just get a 90mm f/2 (yes, that will blur the background more if that's what you're into) or the 50-140 f/2.8 (ditto).

A 50mm f/1 on APS-C is not a particularly flexible focal length, it sort of made sense when they were going for a 33mm f/1, but a 50mm f/1 when you already sell a 56mm f/1.2 it's just plain baffling.
Click to expand...
I have the 56f1.2 and if the 50f1 is in the same optical excellence category, I'll likely tradeup purely for the faster focusing and WR. Those 2 criteria alone will let me use it more often and not just for portraits.

I would have preferred a 33f1 over a 50f1, but it sounds like Fuji had good reasoning to pivot.

--

Marc
 
norjens said:
Mrspartan said:
9VIII said:
Compared to the stuff Sigma is putting out that looks rather conservative.

As long as it doesn't cost too much I have no doubt this lens will be one of the defining features of the Fuji X system.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

On this note, what should we expect pricewise? Anyone has an idea?
Click to expand...
When it was first shown in the massive 33mm form factor, I was guessing they would but it up as a halo/luxury product against the Canon RF 50mm/1.2 at 2000-2300$.

With the new optically simpler (I think) and physically smaller design, I think they'll put it at a point where many more will actually use it, not just aspiring to use it (as Nikon is doing with the Noct).

I'm guessing 1499$. At that price they can sell many of them and pull more people into the system, while at 2000+ it would be interesting only for us already in the X-mount system. As another already said, this could actually become a flagship piece of the X-mount. The attainable showpiece to really demonstrate that "you don't need full frame to get that look'" which Fujifilm likes to say in every interview. This lens for Fuji was always as much about marketing as about the actual sales.
Click to expand...
Showing off and making something somewhat affordable? Definitely a good move. Lets just hope the price actually turns out to be in this ballpark.
 
LOL - Thanks for putting things into perspective.
 
I think you meant to say it has a wider field of view when compared to the 56. Maybe it is the next generation "replacement" for the 56. I know many folks really like the results they get with the 56, but I've seen comments regarding the slow focus. Possibly this lens fixes that but yet retains the positive things about the 56. Many folks consider the 90 to be the best lens Fuji makes, this could be a follow-up to that.
 
Last edited:
JayPhizzt said:
Sapere e potere said:
XF50mmf10Weibo1.jpg


https://fujiaddict.com/2020/02/06/new-fujinon-xf50mm-f-1-r-wr-images/

The Fujinon XF50mm f/1 R WR looks huge. I wonder how it will balance. Maybe it will fit the X-T4 better than it looks like it fits the X-T3.
Click to expand...
I don't think it looks that big to be honest. I don't like lenses that are too small anyway as I like to have something to grab on to. However the weight is a problem for me. The price will also be a problem :P
Click to expand...
I agree, and it will likely pair perfectly with the XT4. The size looks very reasonable for what it is. It's the price that may be... less than reasonable for many people. :-P
 
chaimav said:
Matsu said:
chaimav said:
cilucia said:
That actually looks smaller than I thought (I have a vague memory of a leaked image a few years ago, and the thing was massive)... or maybe I have just been desensitized to big lenses since then (glances to my 100-400mm lens)
Click to expand...
It was originally supposed to be a 35mm f1 that was switched to a 50mm to make it smaller.
Click to expand...
I'm curious why the switch to 50 was needed to make it smaller. I was under the impression that a high speed normal lens should be smaller than a high speed short telephoto.
Click to expand...
I am also curious. I guess it is just down to some law of physics.
Click to expand...
my guess it has something to do with distortion correction. 50mm generally don't have issues with distortion where as as you go into 35ish there's wide angle barrel distortion to correct, which means more glass. This is true of for FF but I'm not sure if it still applies to APSC since 50 focal length is no longer "normal" but "telephoto" in this format and 35 goes from being a wide lens to "normal".

--
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/14775462@N04/
 
Last edited:
G3_4_ME said:
Luis Augusto said:
The 56mm f/1.2 is a perfectly good lens (if a tad overpriced in comparison to equivalent FF lenses). The 50mm has a narrower field of view and is only marginally faster, so I suspect the difference in the amount of background blur will be close to zero.

If you want more subject isolation, you could just get a 90mm f/2 (yes, that will blur the background more if that's what you're into) or the 50-140 f/2.8 (ditto).

A 50mm f/1 on APS-C is not a particularly flexible focal length, it sort of made sense when they were going for a 33mm f/1, but a 50mm f/1 when you already sell a 56mm f/1.2 it's just plain baffling.
Click to expand...
I have the 56f1.2 and if the 50f1 is in the same optical excellence category, I'll likely tradeup purely for the faster focusing and WR. Those 2 criteria alone will let me use it more often and not just for portraits.

I would have preferred a 33f1 over a 50f1, but it sounds like Fuji had good reasoning to pivot.
Click to expand...
What would be super awesome is if after the 50f1 hits the market, Fuji gets brave enough to make an XC version of the 56f1.2. That would make an awesome mid-range plastic lens.
 
Last edited:
Given that (if it performs) this is roughly comparable in usage to a full frame 85 1.4 - the size and weight are really good. 540 grams is on the super light side for full frame 1.4 primes in the short telephoto range. I’m comparing that picture to my Sony 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 - and the Fuji lens looks like a dream in comparison.
 
To me this lens does trigger the question as to why can’t they just update the 23, 35, and 56 1.4/1.2 lenses to WR and modern focusing mechanisms.
 
9VIII said:
G3_4_ME said:
Luis Augusto said:
The 56mm f/1.2 is a perfectly good lens (if a tad overpriced in comparison to equivalent FF lenses). The 50mm has a narrower field of view and is only marginally faster, so I suspect the difference in the amount of background blur will be close to zero.

If you want more subject isolation, you could just get a 90mm f/2 (yes, that will blur the background more if that's what you're into) or the 50-140 f/2.8 (ditto).

A 50mm f/1 on APS-C is not a particularly flexible focal length, it sort of made sense when they were going for a 33mm f/1, but a 50mm f/1 when you already sell a 56mm f/1.2 it's just plain baffling.
Click to expand...
I have the 56f1.2 and if the 50f1 is in the same optical excellence category, I'll likely tradeup purely for the faster focusing and WR. Those 2 criteria alone will let me use it more often and not just for portraits.

I would have preferred a 33f1 over a 50f1, but it sounds like Fuji had good reasoning to pivot.
Click to expand...
What would be super awesome is if after the 50f1 hits the market, Fuji gets brave enough to make an XC version of the 56f1.2. That would make an awesome mid-range plastic lens.
Click to expand...
keep dreaming :D

I think the fujicrons would be the more likely lenses to be turned into XC versions IF Fuji decide to convert them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

O
  • Question Question
XF18mmF1.4 R LM WR vs new XF16-55mmF2.8 R LM WR II with X-H2 in the same focal length
Replies
5
Views
6K
RWN Photo
R
H
56/1.2 R vs WR
Replies
16
Views
13K
Erik Baumgartner
Erik Baumgartner
BeatX
List of lenses for Fuji X, that makes this system unique
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
132K
BruceBanner
BruceBanner
TumblingTiger
Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR or Viltrox Pro AF 27mm F1.2?
Replies
0
Views
10K
TumblingTiger
TumblingTiger
A
Considering Fujifilm X-T5 after longterm Sony use
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
53K
Waku Waku
Waku Waku

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top