RUMORS: X-E4, 27 f/2.8 MK II and 70-300 f/4-5.6 to be launched/announced on January the 27th

io_bg said:

Meetmer said:

SilvaticusBlues said:

Looking forward to the mk2 of the 27mm. I intend to get it and not take it off my x-pro2 (and hey with the addition of the aperture ring it’ll probably be impossible to take off anyway).

Let’s just hope it retails at a reasonable price point - the original was priced kind of high on release I recall.

Click to expand...

But why is this lens going to be useful if it’s only a 2.8? It’s not good for indoors, hard to blur the background for portraits, I just don’t see the draw. I would rather have either the 23 or 35 mm 1.4, seems more useful.

Click to expand...

'Only 2.8'? All pro zooms are of the same aperture and no one has considered them useless.

The lens' use is the focal length and tiny size. It has served me well for many purposes, including indoors and portraits. Oh, and you can definitely get background blur with the lens.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but the 2.8 zooms are still zooms so that’s why they are limited to only 2.8. Again, my point is if you are going to take the trouble to manufacture a new prime why only limit it at 2.8? Even the fujicrons are 2.0. No, it was a weak move. You mentioned size but the fujicrons are also compact.

biza43 said:

Meetmer said:

SilvaticusBlues said:

Looking forward to the mk2 of the 27mm. I intend to get it and not take it off my x-pro2 (and hey with the addition of the aperture ring it’ll probably be impossible to take off anyway).

Let’s just hope it retails at a reasonable price point - the original was priced kind of high on release I recall.

Click to expand...

But why is this lens going to be useful if it’s only a 2.8? It’s not good for indoors, hard to blur the background for portraits, I just don’t see the draw. I would rather have either the 23 or 35 mm 1.4, seems more useful.

Click to expand...

Cheaper.

Smaller.

Good for reportage, street, travel.

Even indoors with flash and/or IBIS, with ISO 3200.

Click to expand...

Seems like a gimmick. The selling point is that it’s a pancake lens. The selling point is not that it’s a fast bokeh monster, versatile lens, it’s for people who just care about pocketability. I wished they had come out with a mark ii of the 35 mm 1.4, I would love to trade my meh 35 f2 for one.

Meetmer said:

biza43 said:

Meetmer said:

SilvaticusBlues said:

Looking forward to the mk2 of the 27mm. I intend to get it and not take it off my x-pro2 (and hey with the addition of the aperture ring it’ll probably be impossible to take off anyway).

Let’s just hope it retails at a reasonable price point - the original was priced kind of high on release I recall.

Click to expand...

But why is this lens going to be useful if it’s only a 2.8? It’s not good for indoors, hard to blur the background for portraits, I just don’t see the draw. I would rather have either the 23 or 35 mm 1.4, seems more useful.

Click to expand...

Cheaper.

Smaller.

Good for reportage, street, travel.

Even indoors with flash and/or IBIS, with ISO 3200.

Click to expand...

Seems like a gimmick. The selling point is that it’s a pancake lens. The selling point is not that it’s a fast bokeh monster, versatile lens, it’s for people who just care about pocketability. I wished they had come out with a mark ii of the 35 mm 1.4, I would love to trade my meh 35 f2 for one.

Click to expand...

All systems have their pancake lenses, they are very useful for what I mentioned above. It is a selling point that is appreciated by many, but not by you. Fine. you would prefer it if Fuji made other lenses or updates. Fine. But no reason to diss on the options for others.

Canon EF 40

Canon EM 22

Nikkor AIS 45

Pentax 43

And so many other pancakes, for decades. Pocketability and small size is, and has been, very important for lots of people.

Meetmer said:

Yeah, but the 2.8 zooms are still zooms so that’s why they are limited to only 2.8. Again, my point is if you are going to take the trouble to manufacture a new prime why only limit it at 2.8? Even the fujicrons are 2.0. No, it was a weak move. You mentioned size but the fujicrons are also compact.

Click to expand...

Again, f/2.8 is a relatively fast aperture and the lens is the smallest one available on the X mount so that makes it attractive enough for many.

The fujicrons are still noticeably bigger as you can see below. You can fit a small camera like the X-E3 coupled with the 27 in your coat's pocket but a fujicron? Doubt it.

Meetmer said:

biza43 said:

Meetmer said:

SilvaticusBlues said:

Looking forward to the mk2 of the 27mm. I intend to get it and not take it off my x-pro2 (and hey with the addition of the aperture ring it’ll probably be impossible to take off anyway).

Let’s just hope it retails at a reasonable price point - the original was priced kind of high on release I recall.

Click to expand...

But why is this lens going to be useful if it’s only a 2.8? It’s not good for indoors, hard to blur the background for portraits, I just don’t see the draw. I would rather have either the 23 or 35 mm 1.4, seems more useful.

Click to expand...

Cheaper.

Smaller.

Good for reportage, street, travel.

Even indoors with flash and/or IBIS, with ISO 3200.

Click to expand...

Seems like a gimmick. The selling point is that it’s a pancake lens. The selling point is not that it’s a fast bokeh monster, versatile lens, it’s for people who just care about pocketability. I wished they had come out with a mark ii of the 35 mm 1.4, I would love to trade my meh 35 f2 for one.

Click to expand...

"Seems like a gimmick" Have you ever tried one?

Saying the existence of the 27 f/2.8 is unjustified, because it doesn't appeal to you, is the same as if a smartphone user said he doesn't get the appeal of dedicated cameras, therefore their development should be halted. We wouldn't want that would we .

Maybe disputing the point of the 27 f/2.8 based on objective facts, such as its build properties, optical performance, pricing or comparing it to other 40mm e.q. pancake lens, would be met with a better response. But that's up to you .

yayatosorus said:

As always before a Fuji product launch, crucial specs of to be announced products are being leaked.

This time, Fuji will be holding its press conference on January the 27th , during which it the X-E4, XF 27mm f/2.8 MK II and XF 70-300 f/4-5.6 will be launched (on top of that the GFX100S and the GF 80mm f/1.7 are to be launched as well).

To do a quick recap of what is known:

X-E4

• Will feature a tilting screen, similar to the one found in the X70.
• Will feature the current gen 26MP X-Trans IV sensor.
• Will NOT feature IBIS.
• Will probably feature a new film simulation called "Nostalgic Negative".

27mm f/2.8 MK II

• Will feature weather sealing.
• Will feature an aperture ring.
• Will have the same optical formula as the current XF 27mm f/2.8 lens.

XF 70-300mm f/4-5.6

• Will feature weather sealing.
• Will be compatible with 1.4x and 2x teleconverters.

Click to expand...

UPDATE: Fujirumors has released product images of the 27 f/2.8 and the 70-300 f/4-5.6:

XF 70-300 f/4-5.6











XF 27mm f/2.8 MK II

Meetmer said:

SilvaticusBlues said:

Looking forward to the mk2 of the 27mm. I intend to get it and not take it off my x-pro2 (and hey with the addition of the aperture ring it’ll probably be impossible to take off anyway).

Let’s just hope it retails at a reasonable price point - the original was priced kind of high on release I recall.

Click to expand...

But why is this lens going to be useful if it’s only a 2.8? It’s not good for indoors, hard to blur the background for portraits, I just don’t see the draw. I would rather have either the 23 or 35 mm 1.4, seems more useful.

Click to expand...

I have both the 23/1.4 and the 27/2.8. Although close in focal length they are vastly different lenses. If you need a faster aperture then sure go for the 1.4. It’s a great lens but it is much more expensive and larger and heavier. That’s the compromise. It’s very much apples to oranges, yes there’s overlap in use but they are intended for different purposes. What do you prioritise ? Bulk or speed? Let that determine your choice. I can certainly empathise, if I had only one lens it wouldn’t be the 27mm, it’d be my 23/1.4, but thankfully I don’t have to limit myself to just one!

It’s also about the right tool for the job. If you want to shoot portraiture then change lens, we are for the most part using ICL systems. If I want bokeh I reach for my 56/1.2. I really like the pair of 27mm+56mm.

As a prime shooter I’m also not afraid of constraint. If I miss a shot for having too slow a lens or the ‘wrong’ focal length it doesn’t bother me. In the hypothetical situation where I need those extra two stops of light gathering but I only had my ‘slow’ f/2.8, I would either just underexpose my shot and fix as best as possible in post, crank the iso (a bit of grain is better than missing the chance altogether), or I just wouldn’t take the photo.

yayatosorus said:

Meetmer said:

biza43 said:

Meetmer said:

SilvaticusBlues said:

Looking forward to the mk2 of the 27mm. I intend to get it and not take it off my x-pro2 (and hey with the addition of the aperture ring it’ll probably be impossible to take off anyway).

Let’s just hope it retails at a reasonable price point - the original was priced kind of high on release I recall.

Click to expand...

But why is this lens going to be useful if it’s only a 2.8? It’s not good for indoors, hard to blur the background for portraits, I just don’t see the draw. I would rather have either the 23 or 35 mm 1.4, seems more useful.

Click to expand...

Cheaper.

Smaller.

Good for reportage, street, travel.

Even indoors with flash and/or IBIS, with ISO 3200.

Click to expand...

Seems like a gimmick. The selling point is that it’s a pancake lens. The selling point is not that it’s a fast bokeh monster, versatile lens, it’s for people who just care about pocketability. I wished they had come out with a mark ii of the 35 mm 1.4, I would love to trade my meh 35 f2 for one.

Click to expand...

"Seems like a gimmick" Have you ever tried one?

Saying the existence of the 27 f/2.8 is unjustified, because it doesn't appeal to you, is the same as if a smartphone user said he doesn't get the appeal of dedicated cameras, therefore their development should be halted. We wouldn't want that would we .

Maybe disputing the point of the 27 f/2.8 based on objective facts, such as its build properties, optical performance, pricing or comparing it to other 40mm e.q. pancake lens, would be met with a better response. But that's up to you .

Click to expand...

Hi yayatosorus. I could not have put it better myself. I doubt that Fuji would have gone to the trouble and expense of improving the design, adjusting the manufacturing processes and new marketing if there were insufficient customers. Clearly, there must be sufficient people who like and use this lens (and I am but one) and who and willing to continue to do so to justify the commercial decision to upgrade it and get a return on their investment.

I am a believer in having a choice. The 27/f2.8 is small, light and svelte, especially on a XE body, and it delivers great IQ.

I sold my 100-400 at the beginning of December its a great lens but bulkier than I want to the point I simply didn't take it with me often.

Hoping for a positive review on this and I will buy it day one.

Meetmer said:

SilvaticusBlues said:

Looking forward to the mk2 of the 27mm. I intend to get it and not take it off my x-pro2 (and hey with the addition of the aperture ring it’ll probably be impossible to take off anyway).

Let’s just hope it retails at a reasonable price point - the original was priced kind of high on release I recall.

Click to expand...

But why is this lens going to be useful if it’s only a 2.8? It’s not good for indoors, hard to blur the background for portraits, I just don’t see the draw. I would rather have either the 23 or 35 mm 1.4, seems more useful.

Click to expand...

To be fair I don't think anyone is going to try to sell this lens as a portrait lens, but if you take a close-up portrait of someone at f/2.8 I think you'll still get plenty of subject separation.

I used to have the 27mm f/2.8 and currently use a manual focus 28mm f/2.8. I find it to be the ideal walk-around focal length, and easily fast enough for most purposes. I also use an X70, so am used to the f/2.8 aperture on that. It's more of an issue on the X70 though, because that sensor isn't great at higher ISOs, but on the newer cameras I think it's fine. I still might make sense to choose an f/1.4 lens at night, but you lose the ability to slip it into a jacket pocket.

Having said all that you may well be right, and maybe it won't be a very popular lens. The low prices you can get the mk1 version for suggest to me that that version isn't particularly popular. The market is increasingly about fast apertures so the mk2 might get overlooked, although the WR and R designations might help!

Do we know what the red button on the barrel of the 27mm is? Aperture lock?

I wonder why the 27mm wasn’t released in the form we saw in the original prototype photos?

18 1.4, can't wait

Possibly the 70-300, as I've now got the 55-200 and 100-400 not sure I'll add this lens unless it's very cheap which it won't be.

Possibly the 27 2.8 mk ii, again I like the idea of it more than I would probably use it as the 35 1.4's will be far more practical, again depends on the price.

yayatosorus said:

As always before a Fuji product launch, crucial specs of to be announced products are being leaked.

This time, Fuji will be holding its press conference on January the 27th , during which it the X-E4, XF 27mm f/2.8 MK II and XF 70-300 f/4-5.6 will be launched (on top of that the GFX100S and the GF 80mm f/1.7 are to be launched as well).

To do a quick recap of what is known:

X-E4

• Will feature a tilting screen, similar to the one found in the X70.
• Will feature the current gen 26MP X-Trans IV sensor.
• Will NOT feature IBIS.
• Will probably feature a new film simulation called "Nostalgic Negative".

27mm f/2.8 MK II

• Will feature weather sealing.
• Will feature an aperture ring.
• Will have the same optical formula as the current XF 27mm f/2.8 lens.

XF 70-300mm f/4-5.6

• Will feature weather sealing.
• Will be compatible with 1.4x and 2x teleconverters.

Click to expand...

eric333 said:

I wonder why the 27mm wasn’t released in the form we saw in the original prototype photos?

Click to expand...

So Fuji can sell us the mark II 8 years later

Planning to get the X-E4 but is not sure if I should get the 27 or 18-55. I am mostly using it for street and travel. I love the compactness of the 27 but also the versatility of the 18-55. Haha...

Anyone torn between these before?

After some real world (non-you tuber) reviews come out for the 70-300, I will get one assuming the lens performs well.

matcha said:

Planning to get the X-E4 but is not sure if I should get the 27 or 18-55. I am mostly using it for street and travel. I love the compactness of the 27 but also the versatility of the 18-55. Haha...

Anyone torn between these before?

Click to expand...

It's a tough choice.

I started with Fuji with a X-T10 and a trio of primes (Rokinon 12, 27 2.8 and 60 2.4) as I was looking for compactness coming from a DSLR.

All three lenses perform great but at some point I decided to get a XC 16-50 as it's a useful range and found it dirt cheap used.

The 27 is so tiny and when paired with a small body the kit looks like a point & shoot camera, thus you might get away with taking photos in places where big cameras are not allowed. With a zoom lens however, I don't know.

I still use the two lenses although I rarely take both at the same time.

Both have their pros and cons so it's up to you to decide.

yayatosorus said:

Click to expand...

Very interesting - is that pic showing the lens hood?

Meetmer said:

biza43 said:

Meetmer said:

SilvaticusBlues said:

Looking forward to the mk2 of the 27mm. I intend to get it and not take it off my x-pro2 (and hey with the addition of the aperture ring it’ll probably be impossible to take off anyway).

Let’s just hope it retails at a reasonable price point - the original was priced kind of high on release I recall.

Click to expand...

But why is this lens going to be useful if it’s only a 2.8? It’s not good for indoors, hard to blur the background for portraits, I just don’t see the draw. I would rather have either the 23 or 35 mm 1.4, seems more useful.

Click to expand...

Cheaper.

Smaller.

Good for reportage, street, travel.

Even indoors with flash and/or IBIS, with ISO 3200.

Click to expand...

Seems like a gimmick. The selling point is that it’s a pancake lens. The selling point is not that it’s a fast bokeh monster, versatile lens, it’s for people who just care about pocketability. I wished they had come out with a mark ii of the 35 mm 1.4, I would love to trade my meh 35 f2 for one.

Click to expand...

I agree, pancake and wr will be its selling points. Nowadays, however for portability and small size, I now feel there are overall much better solutions such as the 1" cameras (Canon G5X II is better than my XT3+27mm) or the good mobile phones.

It's a walkaround lens. Its virtues are small size, light weight, a discreet appearance, and incredible flexibilty. Once you learn to understand it, it can do a lot of things very well. It's highly useful indoors if you put It on a small camera (where it really belongs) and develop your hand holding skills. You produce blur for portraits by manipulating the distance between subject and background.