Fuji Lenses & Full Frame Camera

Started 1 month ago | Questions thread
norjens Regular Member • Posts: 419
Good question, bad answers

First of all, short and direct answer to OP

Most X-mount lenses would not fill and therefore not increase output from being in front of a larger sensor. They'd need to be cropped to APS-C mode like most systems with shared mount, multiple sizes. There are some exceptions; long primes generally have a larger and more forgiving image circle, so the XF200 and maybe some of the other telephotos (90/2, 80/2.8, maybe the 56/1.2) could make good use of the extra sensor area.

X-mount diameter doesn't fit FF sensor, so to adapt they'd need either the world's smallest adapter, which would be a pain to screw on and off, or a full remake of the mount-facing part of the lens...

-- hide signature --

------ ------ ------

Compact Full Frame vs. APS-C

There's a lot of concern going around about small, fast and affordable FF options eating Fuji's APS-C lunch. That's absolutely something that can happen, as there's not a separate market for each sensor size. There is one gradually overlapping market for digital system cameras.

The overlap in sensor size, body and lens sizes and customers for them also applies for [M43 - APS-C] and [FF - MF] the same as it does [APS-C - FF]. Photo equipment has always been sold in different formats. I see people here making selective arguments about the [APS-C - FF] market overlap and then ignoring or changing that argument when considering the other overlaps.

In my view, compact and affordable are FF cameras+lenses are threatening X-mount because X-mount has developed very little since X-T3 released, while the FF race between Canon, Nikon, Sony is on full throttle. Nothing to do with the inherent difference between APS-C and sensors measuring 36x24mm in particular. I write it in mm here to underline the point that FF is just one particular size, there's nothing special about it that Fujifilm would automatically gain from using it instead of 30x20mm, 44x33mm (MF) or some other size, except in marketing and competition.

The FF mirrorless competition has lit a fire under Nikon and Canon. Comparing Canon RF or Nikon Z mounts between summer 2018 and today is night and day. Fuji X-mount will fall way behind if they keep this up. But the people suggesting Fuji's answer should be to build a new FF portfolio themselves, 3+ years behind the others, simply don't understand what it costs.

Rough example:
To have a camera like the Nikon Z6 available to customers around the world, there might be 20 thousand (guesstimate, I have no inside info) of them stocked in stores, warehouses and shipping containers around the world at any time. Rule of thumb in logistics is that stocking cost is ~20% of product's value per year (space rental, depreciation, handling, inflation etc., not including shipping). That's $8 million in fixed, recurring cost for a $2000 camera or lens model, just to make it available for sale. Add the upstream side, marketing, re-configuring factories, instructing and qualifying employees for more models, research and development... You can see the real cost of adding a FF portfolio with 3-5 bodies and 10-20 lenses on top of their APS-C and MF systems adds up really fast. It's not at all a little thing to "just make an X-T4 copy with space for bigger sensor".

To conclude, it is only feasible for Fujifilm to go FF with interchangeable lenses on GF mount or by letting go of one of the others. X-mount is incompatible with FF and investment spread out over three systems would be inefficient. Inefficient is exactly what you don't want to be in a modern economy. A fixed lens camera with FF sensor would not have any these problems, so maybe, but don't hold your breath for it.

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