Question about the GF 250mm F4 lens

raymondg · Feb 15, 2025

Hi,

I have the opportunity to buy this lens at a reasonable price. However, it is now 6 years since the lens was released. Is it still a good lens given its age?

What are the chances that it will be updated soon?

Many thanks

--
======================
Warmest Regards - Ray
http://www.500px.com/raymondg
http://www.1x.com/member/raymondg
“We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams.”
- Roald Dahl

avalvo · Feb 15, 2025

I doubt it will be updated. I shoot the lens and it is really good, even with the converter.

Nokiron · Feb 15, 2025

raymondg said:
Hi,

I have the opportunity to buy this lens at a reasonable price. However, it is now 6 years since the lens was released. Is it still a good lens given its age?

What are the chances that it will be updated soon?

Many thanks

Yes, it's still excellent.

No it won't be updated soon. I'm basing that on that there has never been a release of an updated GFX-lens during the system lifetime (which is since 2016).

Joakim Danielson · Feb 15, 2025

raymondg said:
Hi,

I have the opportunity to buy this lens at a reasonable price. However, it is now 6 years since the lens was released. Is it still a good lens given its age?

What are the chances that it will be updated soon?

Many thanks

6 years is not much for a lens in my opinion.

Christopher D Mann · Feb 15, 2025

Well all I can say is that good glass is just that, good glass. You get F4 and awesome image quality. I wouldn’t worry about any updates to it anytime soon. So if you can get it on a good deal then get it. I had the Same opportunity to get one myself on a good deal as well and I didn’t even hesitate to do it. It’s really sharp either way with or without the converter. Now it will get alittle heavy if you hand hold it for awhile so get yourself a good tripod and your all set.

Stefan_Iacob · Feb 15, 2025

The 250 is an excellent performer on 100MP bodies. I highly doubt it will be updated any time soon (or ever, for that matter

) ) I feel the 63, 30, 45, 80, 32-54 and 100-200 would definitely benefit from an update, before the 250.

raymondg · Feb 15, 2025

[No message]

xtm · Feb 17, 2025

The 250 f/4 is my sharpest and best rendering GFX lens. It has smooth, fantastic bokeh. With the 100S, it becomes a "cheater" lens because I can shoot small birds with it and still have TONS of feather detail, even for a relatively short 250mm.

bobby350z · Feb 24, 2025

110mm f2 is older so are some other lenses. Haven't seen any version II of any of them.

Rich42 · Feb 24, 2025

raymondg said:
Hi,

I have the opportunity to buy this lens at a reasonable price. However, it is now 6 years since the lens was released.

Is it still a good lens given its age?

This is the critical question. It is wise that you are concerned with lens age, as you should be. There is no guarantee that any of the performance figures of this lens (or any Fuji GF lens for that matter) hold up today compared to six years ago.

Lenses go bad.

We all know that.

As Moderator Jim Kasson has thoroughly described in his blog, Fuji's secret coating on the back of the lens' rear element, emitting nanoparticles as the key element interacting with the sensor dissipates with time.

That essential nanoparticle field of floobydust has probably diminished significantly in six years.

I wouldn't touch that GF 250/4.

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/secret-behind-gfx-sharpness-with-native-lenses/

JimKasson · Feb 24, 2025

Rich42 said:
raymondg said:

Hi,

I have the opportunity to buy this lens at a reasonable price. However, it is now 6 years since the lens was released.

Is it still a good lens given its age?

Click to expand...

This is the critical question. It is wise that you are concerned with lens age, as you should be. There is no guarantee that any of the performance figures of this lens (or any Fuji GF lens for that matter) hold up today compared to six years ago.

Lenses go bad.

We all know that.

As Moderator Jim Kasson has thoroughly described in his blog, Fuji's secret coating on the back of the lens' rear element, emitting nanoparticles as the key element interacting with the sensor dissipates with time.

That essential nanoparticle field of floobydust has probably diminished significantly in six years.

I wouldn't touch that GF 250/4.

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/secret-behind-gfx-sharpness-with-native-lenses/

It's a little over a month too early for that.

Rich42 · Feb 24, 2025

JimKasson said:
[/QUOTE] JimKasson said:

Rich42 said:

raymondg said:

Hi,

I have the opportunity to buy this lens at a reasonable price. However, it is now 6 years since the lens was released.

Is it still a good lens given its age?

Click to expand...

This is the critical question. It is wise that you are concerned with lens age, as you should be. There is no guarantee that any of the performance figures of this lens (or any Fuji GF lens for that matter) hold up today compared to six years ago.

Lenses go bad.

We all know that.

As Moderator Jim Kasson has thoroughly described in his blog, Fuji's secret coating on the back of the lens' rear element, emitting nanoparticles as the key element interacting with the sensor dissipates with time.

That essential nanoparticle field of floobydust has probably diminished significantly in six years.

I wouldn't touch that GF 250/4.

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/secret-behind-gfx-sharpness-with-native-lenses/

Click to expand...

It's a little over a month too early for that.

Click to expand...

Stan Disbrow · Feb 25, 2025

Hi,

I think my local camera store has that in bottles over with the film processing supplies.....

Stan

Rich42 · Feb 25, 2025

raymondg said:
Hi,

I have the opportunity to buy this lens at a reasonable price. However, it is now 6 years since the lens was released. Is it still a good lens given its age?

What are the chances that it will be updated soon?

Many thanks

Sorry for the strange replies above, Ray,

I was engaging in a little (very little) photography humor at your expense.

But your question is a little odd, implying that the 250/4 may have "lost" some of its capability by "aging" for 6 years.

Other than potential mechanical problems, lenses don't get worse due to age. If you were concerned that there might be another, "more advanced" lens superseding the 250/4, there is not.

The 250/4 was met with acclaim as a superb lens when it was released and that acclaim has not diminished. It is, quite frankly, a special optic. World class.

If the specimen you are looking at is in good mechanical condition, and the price is right (for you), go for it!

Good luck!

Stan Disbrow · Feb 25, 2025

Hi,

The only lenses I know of which became worse with age were the ones, long ago, that used radioactive elements in the glass formulations.

Besides the obvious issue, the loss of neutrons over time changed the material properties.

Stan

Rich42 · Feb 25, 2025

Stan Disbrow said:
Hi,

The only lenses I know of which became worse with age were the ones, long ago, that used radioactive elements in the glass formulations.

Besides the obvious issue, the loss of neutrons over time changed the material properties.

Stan

I was aware of concern regarding the radiation from such lenses, but I didn't know their optical properties changed.

Wasn't the problem with the lens coatings?

Stan Disbrow · Feb 25, 2025

Hi,

Partly. Sometimes that was just a coating issue itself. Other times, the radiation changed the makeup of the coating.

Over a long period, the material which was added for a certain optical property turned into a slightly different material which altered how it worked. So, an element problem with an element, as it were.

I have some transparent glass dinnerware from my great grandmother which were of a blue hue originally and now they are greenish-blue. Too much of the cobalt which made the blue hue has gone.

Back when I first saw these as a kid, just after she passed away in 1970, they were mottled. About half of each item was still blue and about half was becoming greenish. When I took them from my mom's after she passed in 2016, they are pretty much all greenish now.

Still a little light radiation according to the old Geiger Counter. But less than from the NC clay bricks that make up the house foundation. I'm not worried.

Aside from all this, there are some things that can grow inside lenses which degrade their performance. But, that's more of a storage issue than anything else. Meaning it doesn't happen to every example of that production.

Stan

--
Amateur Photographer
Professional Electronics Development Engineer

xtm · Feb 25, 2025

Stan Disbrow said:
Hi,

The only lenses I know of which became worse with age were the ones, long ago, that used radioactive elements in the glass formulations.

Besides the obvious issue, the loss of neutrons over time changed the material properties.

Stan

I've had a few of those "Thoriated" Nikkor lenses throughout the years. They eventually develop a yellowish tinge over time but you can clear those out by leaving them under the sun for a couple of days. It would then take another 5 or so years before they become yellowish again. The glass elements were not affected throughout this entire process.

Is your name really Stan Disbrow?? This brow?

Stan Disbrow · Feb 25, 2025

Hi,

Yep. I use my actual name. The family name was originally Dubreaux on Grandpa's side. But we can't trace that back past 1800. Traver on grandma's side which has a longer history. Part of the Dutch colony Nine Partners in the NY Hudson Valley.

The Disbrow spelling is a change which came from the British.

Stan

raymondg · Feb 26, 2025

[No message]

Question about the GF 250mm F4 lens

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Community Leader

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts