Lenses: Did they get it right??

Started Jun 9, 2013 | Discussions
deednets Veteran Member • Posts: 8,213
Lenses: Did they get it right??
1

For my personal taste the lens selection available for the Fuji's is just plainly wrong! There is the 18/2.0 (since this is a wide angle the difference versus the zoom not compelling enough for me). The 35/1.4, there seems to be a lot of people here who like that lens? The equivalent of 52.5mm on FF, close enough to 50mm. I find this lens is neither here nor there, neither close enough to be a portrait lens nor wide enough for landscapes. Close enough to the "normal" viewing angle, the way we allegedly perceive the world. Beats me what is so great about 50mm?

But then it gets better: Fuji releases the fantastic (IMO) 14mm lens - and Zeiss releases a 12mm lens. I understand that those 2 mm are in fact quite big, but again: compelling enough or more a matter of this one or the other rather than both? Is this wise policy? Is it? Really?

The 32mm Zeiss (48mm versus 52.5) spot the difference?? Get both? Sure, but again: really??

Regarding the bigger zoom the 55-200, why not make a 50-150/4.0? I personally don't care about the extra 50mm (not that huge anyway) on a mirrorless system, 300mm on the wobbly EVF. Would Zeiss, not really known for their expertise re zooms fit the bill here?? I doubt it, they might make a 59/1.3 ... for some reason the lenses have to be so close to the originals, but why not a 75/1.8 by Zeiss?? Or a 90/2.0? It just had to be a 32/1.8 ...

Well done, right??

Am I alone here thinking that there was a great opportunity here starting from scratch so it doesn't take rocket science, as a taxi driver/hairdresser equivalent of a photographer anywhere in the world and they might have given them some ideas. Hard to believe they would have come up with a statement like: We want a 35mm lens - and a 32mm, we would in fact buy both! Simply because some people just "need" the extra 4.5mm ...

Why not release a 38mm lens? 2.0?? And then a 41?? You think I am exaggerating?? Well they did the 32/35 ... some people here might think this is great, I think it is wasted engineering and could have been spent differently ...

Just frustrating to see how opportunities are being wasted, but maybe they have got it right and I am just a dino with no concept as to what people really need or want these days??

Cheers

Deed

 deednets's gear list:deednets's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR +4 more
David McGaughey Senior Member • Posts: 2,246
Uh, what?
22

Are you aware the Zeiss and Fuji are independent companies? Are you aware that Fuji's roadmap was released long before Zeiss announced their lenses? Are you aware that those Zeiss lenses make a lot more sense to Nex users? Are you aware that a lot more Nex bodies have been sold than X-E1s and X-Pro1s?

The rest of your ranting appears to be of the "I don't like this focal length, so Fuji is stupid" variety....

Davidgilmour Senior Member • Posts: 1,443
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??
1

deednets wrote:

The 35/1.4. Beats me what is so great about 50mm?

Best lens available on the X-series. I am very happy Fuji released it.

 Davidgilmour's gear list:Davidgilmour's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Sony RX1 Fujifilm X-A1 Fujifilm XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS
scst48 Contributing Member • Posts: 572
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??

deednets wrote:

For my personal taste the lens selection available for the Fuji's is just plainly wrong! There is the 18/2.0 (since this is a wide angle the difference versus the zoom not compelling enough for me). The 35/1.4, there seems to be a lot of people here who like that lens? The equivalent of 52.5mm on FF, close enough to 50mm. I find this lens is neither here nor there, neither close enough to be a portrait lens nor wide enough for landscapes. Close enough to the "normal" viewing angle, the way we allegedly perceive the world. Beats me what is so great about 50mm?

But then it gets better: Fuji releases the fantastic (IMO) 14mm lens - and Zeiss releases a 12mm lens. I understand that those 2 mm are in fact quite big, but again: compelling enough or more a matter of this one or the other rather than both? Is this wise policy? Is it? Really?

The 32mm Zeiss (48mm versus 52.5) spot the difference?? Get both? Sure, but again: really??

Regarding the bigger zoom the 55-200, why not make a 50-150/4.0? I personally don't care about the extra 50mm (not that huge anyway) on a mirrorless system, 300mm on the wobbly EVF. Would Zeiss, not really known for their expertise re zooms fit the bill here?? I doubt it, they might make a 59/1.3 ... for some reason the lenses have to be so close to the originals, but why not a 75/1.8 by Zeiss?? Or a 90/2.0? It just had to be a 32/1.8 ...

Well done, right??

Am I alone here thinking that there was a great opportunity here starting from scratch so it doesn't take rocket science, as a taxi driver/hairdresser equivalent of a photographer anywhere in the world and they might have given them some ideas. Hard to believe they would have come up with a statement like: We want a 35mm lens - and a 32mm, we would in fact buy both! Simply because some people just "need" the extra 4.5mm ...

Why not release a 38mm lens? 2.0?? And then a 41?? You think I am exaggerating?? Well they did the 32/35 ... some people here might think this is great, I think it is wasted engineering and could have been spent differently ...

Just frustrating to see how opportunities are being wasted, but maybe they have got it right and I am just a dino with no concept as to what people really need or want these days??

Cheers

Dee

These are two totally independent companies. FUJI is a welcome source for ZEISS but not the opposite since they more or less competing. Beside that Sony is in the game and they are married with ZEISS.

-- hide signature --

Stefan

 scst48's gear list:scst48's gear list
Nikon D810 Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro +7 more
Lisa O
Lisa O Senior Member • Posts: 2,505
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??
1

I've had the X- Pro 1 since it first came out in late winter 2012. The 18mm and 35mm were the first lenses Fuji released followed closely by the 60mm and then 18-55mm, 14mm and now the 55-200mm. I think Fuji has the best lens map for the next year. M4/3 has good lenses available now but it had a 2.5 year lead on X, though it has the smallish sensor. NEX has good sensor but he lens selection is not there and it has a odd menu system. So for now and the near future Fuji is one of the best of all the mirrorless choices.

-- hide signature --

see about me in my profile for more info
http://500px.com/LisaOsta
http://www.flickr.com/photos/losta

 Lisa O's gear list:Lisa O's gear list
Sony RX1R II Olympus E-M1 Nikon D810 Olympus E-M5 II Nikon D7200 +27 more
Asylum Photo
Asylum Photo Senior Member • Posts: 1,277
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??
3

I'm happy with all 5 of my lenses. The lenses are what sold me on the system, actually (and manual control dials).

If the lens selection isn't there for you, I believe MFT and NEX systems have pretty large lens selections and might suit you better. There's a beauty in healthy competition in the market... lots of choices.

-- hide signature --
 Asylum Photo's gear list:Asylum Photo's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R +2 more
OP deednets Veteran Member • Posts: 8,213
Re: Uh, what?

David McGaughey wrote:

Are you aware the Zeiss and Fuji are independent companies? Are you aware that Fuji's roadmap was released long before Zeiss announced their lenses? Are you aware that those Zeiss lenses make a lot more sense to Nex users? Are you aware that a lot more Nex bodies have been sold than X-E1s and X-Pro1s?

The rest of your ranting appears to be of the "I don't like this focal length, so Fuji is stupid" variety....

Availability of lenses I had in mind and this is the Fuji Forum! I wasn't speaking for NEX users, why you think I should consider them on the Fuji Forum I find puzzling.

You got a few thumbs up for your rather constructive response so you must be right!

Good on you!

Cheers

Deed

 deednets's gear list:deednets's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR +4 more
nspur Senior Member • Posts: 1,042
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??

Davidgilmour wrote:

deednets wrote:

The 35/1.4. Beats me what is so great about 50mm?

Best lens available on the X-series. I am very happy Fuji released it.

I like the 60/2.4 best but the 35/f1.4 is up there with the Leica 50/f2 R on full-frame. And though I'm no great fan of zoom lenses the new 55-200 is surprisingly good and not as large/heavy as one might think. I do find the 18/f2 a little bit disappointing until stopped down. Overall I think the Fuji lens roadmap is well thought out.

-- hide signature --

Nick Spurrier

 nspur's gear list:nspur's gear list
Ricoh GR Sony RX10 III Fujifilm X-T10 Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-T2
OP deednets Veteran Member • Posts: 8,213
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??

Asylum Photo wrote:

I'm happy with all 5 of my lenses. The lenses are what sold me on the system, actually (and manual control dials).

If the lens selection isn't there for you, I believe MFT and NEX systems have pretty large lens selections and might suit you better. There's a beauty in healthy competition in the market... lots of choices.

True regarding choices, but why make them so close? Believe me I have a fairly good idea as to why they make lenses that are so close, one of them the above discussed relationship with Sony, so the Fuji X-mount just being a by-product of what seems to make far more sense for the Sony crowd. That's fine with me, but I wasn't speaking for Sony users! I couldn't care less about the NEX system.

I was merely expressing an opinion about the availability of quality lenses for the Fuji system, not for the NEX or any other system!

Deed

 deednets's gear list:deednets's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR +4 more
Asylum Photo
Asylum Photo Senior Member • Posts: 1,277
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??
2

deednets wrote:

Asylum Photo wrote:

I'm happy with all 5 of my lenses. The lenses are what sold me on the system, actually (and manual control dials).

If the lens selection isn't there for you, I believe MFT and NEX systems have pretty large lens selections and might suit you better. There's a beauty in healthy competition in the market... lots of choices.

True regarding choices, but why make them so close? Believe me I have a fairly good idea as to why they make lenses that are so close, one of them the above discussed relationship with Sony, so the Fuji X-mount just being a by-product of what seems to make far more sense for the Sony crowd. That's fine with me, but I wasn't speaking for Sony users! I couldn't care less about the NEX system.

I was merely expressing an opinion about the availability of quality lenses for the Fuji system, not for the NEX or any other system!

Deed

Fuji has made 4 primes and two zooms. The only ones that are "close" are the 14mm and 18mm, but they are significantly different lenses.

Zeiss has made two prime lenses, that are primarily for the NEX system, but they were able to adapt the design with little work for the Fuji system and released them for Fuji as well. Ask Zeiss why they chose the focal lengths they did. Fuji has been releasing a pretty logical set so far, imo.

-- hide signature --
 Asylum Photo's gear list:Asylum Photo's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R +2 more
Jeff Seltzer Senior Member • Posts: 1,792
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??

I have no problem with the lens selection. So, my answer is "yes" they got it right. Do I wish there were more choices? Of course. I wish there were more choices for my 5DII. But, I'm very satisfied with what's available and the roadmap.

OP deednets Veteran Member • Posts: 8,213
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??

Asylum Photo wrote:

Zeiss has made two prime lenses, that are primarily for the NEX system, but they were able to adapt the design with little work for the Fuji system and released them for Fuji as well. Ask Zeiss why they chose the focal lengths they did. Fuji has been releasing a pretty logical set so far, imo.

So all is good then? I am happy for you that the lens selection works for you! I was reflecting on lens availability for the Fuji system, why you bring up the NEX system I don't understand, since I don't have a NEX camera and this is the Fuji forum! I appreciate that Zeiss being mainly interested in Sony, but this doesn't really address my concern. I believe that Zeiss is working on a 50mm Macro? Certainly not another "must have" for people who already own the 60mm.

I started this thread because I kept on bumping into 12 vs 14 mm, first tests on 32 vs 34 etc. links on the internet and hardly anybody asked the question why so close etc. Obviously the wrong mindset I seem to be in. Not much point discussing this then aye??

Cheers

Deed

 deednets's gear list:deednets's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR +4 more
OP deednets Veteran Member • Posts: 8,213
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??

Jeff Seltzer wrote:

I have no problem with the lens selection. So, my answer is "yes" they got it right. Do I wish there were more choices? Of course. I wish there were more choices for my 5DII. But, I'm very satisfied with what's available and the roadmap.

It seems to me I am the only one who thinks the overall choices are a tad too close to each other, but as other posters here have pointed out, the Zeiss is mainly concerned about NEX so barking up the wrong tree here. To even remotely compare the lens selection of your Canon to the Fuji is an interesting approach! I just checked the New Zealand website for Canon and there are 90 lenses listed ...

Will leave it at that!

Deed

 deednets's gear list:deednets's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR +4 more
Asylum Photo
Asylum Photo Senior Member • Posts: 1,277
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??
6

deednets wrote:

Asylum Photo wrote:

Zeiss has made two prime lenses, that are primarily for the NEX system, but they were able to adapt the design with little work for the Fuji system and released them for Fuji as well. Ask Zeiss why they chose the focal lengths they did. Fuji has been releasing a pretty logical set so far, imo.

So all is good then? I am happy for you that the lens selection works for you! I was reflecting on lens availability for the Fuji system, why you bring up the NEX system I don't understand, since I don't have a NEX camera and this is the Fuji forum! I appreciate that Zeiss being mainly interested in Sony, but this doesn't really address my concern. I believe that Zeiss is working on a 50mm Macro? Certainly not another "must have" for people who already own the 60mm.

I started this thread because I kept on bumping into 12 vs 14 mm, first tests on 32 vs 34 etc. links on the internet and hardly anybody asked the question why so close etc. Obviously the wrong mindset I seem to be in. Not much point discussing this then aye??

Cheers

Deed

Are you trolling, or just dense?

Zeiss and Fuji are SEPARATE companies. I quite clearly explained why Zeiss is making the lenses they are making (because Sony), and they have nothing to do with what Fuji is making.

Fuji's lens lineup has been nicely balanced so far. Is there something for everyone? Of course not, they still have releases to go. But your insinuation that Fuji is releasing Zeiss lenses that are close to their own releases is absolutely false.

If you don't find Fuji's releases up to your needs, there is plenty of wonderful other systems out there. OR you can be patient, as the 23mm and 56mm primes will be released soon. As well as the WA zoom (10-20?).

-- hide signature --
 Asylum Photo's gear list:Asylum Photo's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R +2 more
Asylum Photo
Asylum Photo Senior Member • Posts: 1,277
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??
6

deednets wrote:

I just checked the New Zealand website for Canon and there are 90 lenses listed ...

Will leave it at that!

Deed

The Canon EF mount has been around since 1987.

The first Fuji XF mount camera was released in March of 2012. That was 15 months ago. In 15 months, they have released a total of 6 lenses.

-- hide signature --
 Asylum Photo's gear list:Asylum Photo's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R +2 more
OP deednets Veteran Member • Posts: 8,213
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??
1

Asylum Photo wrote:

Are you trolling, or just dense?

Zeiss and Fuji are SEPARATE companies. I quite clearly explained why Zeiss is making the lenses they are making (because Sony), and they have nothing to do with what Fuji is making.

Fuji's lens lineup has been nicely balanced so far. Is there something for everyone? Of course not, they still have releases to go. But your insinuation that Fuji is releasing Zeiss lenses that are close to their own releases is absolutely false.

If you don't find Fuji's releases up to your needs, there is plenty of wonderful other systems out there. OR you can be patient, as the 23mm and 56mm primes will be released soon. As well as the WA zoom (10-20?).

Why trolling? Noticed that whenever somebody is critical the troll-baton comes out ...no need for this really!

I was merely pondering the close range of the options available for the FUJI (not the NEX system!!!) system. Now you mention the 56/1.2 an interesting lens and I will possibly get one, but (!!!!) will then sell my 60/2.4!

You will then have the 50/2.8 Zeiss Macro, the 56/1.2, the 60/2.4 Macro and the zoom covering 55mm @4.8 ...

I was looking at what is available for the Fuji system, not for the NEX system, I wasn't pondering changing over to another system, but would have been happier than most if there had been a tad more variety rather than have a crowded space around the 14mm mark (Zeiss 12, Fuji 14mm, Voigtländer 15mm, only M-mount but mentioned here as an alternative to the 14mm Fuji) or the 56mm mark. If there are only less than 10 lenses in total why make this such a crowded affair? I get your point that Zeiss is not really worried about complimenting the Fuji range but going directly against the Fuji equivalent, because their main interest is Sony and the close proximity to the Fuji range is purely accidental, but I was commenting from a user and not so much from a manufacturer's point!

Is this really that difficult to understand where I am coming from?

Deed

 deednets's gear list:deednets's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR +4 more
samhain Senior Member • Posts: 1,340
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??
2

What's so great about 50mm focal length? Wow.
Spoken like someone whose never actually used one. It's probably the most used portrait focal length in the history of lenses. It's also the most versatile focal length ever made.
And the rest of your post is... Yeah.
Tbh you sound like someone who's spent more time on camera forums than using a camera. Am I right? Good luck finding your 38mm.

The only fault I find in Fuji's lineup is putting out the 60/2.4 macro before the 56/1.4.

OP deednets Veteran Member • Posts: 8,213
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??
1

samhain wrote:

What's so great about 50mm focal length? Wow.
Spoken like someone whose never actually used one. It's probably the most used portrait focal length in the history of lenses. It's also the most versatile focal length ever made.
And the rest of your post is... Yeah.
Tbh you sound like someone who's spent more time on camera forums than using a camera. Am I right? Good luck finding your 38mm.

The only fault I find in Fuji's lineup is putting out the 60/2.4 macro before the 56/1.4.

Why you think there is a need to make this personal is beyond me. Why not let people have their opinion about the way they use their gear? I used 50mm lenses on Zeiss Icon in the late 60 and early 70 but found 85mm better suited for portraits and 24mm better for landscape. This is not exactly exotic stuff.

50mm the most used portrait focal length? Really? But for landscapes, right?? Just my opinion, your's obviously not only different, but also right!

Right??

Deed

 deednets's gear list:deednets's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR +4 more
lnbolch
lnbolch Senior Member • Posts: 2,318
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??
8

A tribute to history—in the golden age of photojournalism half a century back, the classic kit was a rangefinder body with a 28, 50 and 90mm lens. The great shooters with Look, Life and the FSA used this combination for their timeless images. With the design of the X-Pro1, it certainly seems appropriate. Interestingly as well, the fourth lens was the 14mm—21mm equivalent view. Those who felt cramped by the 28mm added a 21mm SuperAngulon, which was the widest lens for a very long time. Fuji nailed the digital equivalent of this classic kit—perfectly appropriate for the initial offering.

The Zeiss Touit lenses are designed for only two cameras, and I expect primarily designed for the Sony, so it is appropriate that they too will be mentioned. Even though this may be a Fuji forum, mentioning this is simply a matter of context. Clearly Fuji is pleased with Zeiss, since the lenses are now shown in the roadmap. The Samyang/Bower/Rokinon are not.

The choice of focal lengths was almost certainly the decision of Zeiss—not Fuji—and to a degree may be somewhat redundant. And, it is not unusual. Among CaNikon SLRs, Sigma, Tokina and Tamron mirror the line-ups of the host brand to a high-degree, plus you will also find Samyang/Bower/Rokinon and Zeiss making lenses in similar focal lengths and even apertures.

-- hide signature --
 lnbolch's gear list:lnbolch's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix Real 3D W1 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Nikon D700 Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +8 more
Jeff Seltzer Senior Member • Posts: 1,792
Re: Lenses: Did they get it right??

It seems to me I am the only one who thinks the overall choices are a tad too close to each other, but as other posters here have pointed out, the Zeiss is mainly concerned about NEX so barking up the wrong tree here. To even remotely compare the lens selection of your Canon to the Fuji is an interesting approach! I just checked the New Zealand website for Canon and there are 90 lenses listed ...

Will leave it at that!

Deed

Lens manufactures don't necessarily sit around and try to fill holes with different focal lengths. For example, Zeiss doesn't think "what focal lengths doesn't Canon make? Let's make those." Zeiss, in fact, makes many of the same focal lengths as Canon. Same with Sigma, etc. The reason to go with one vs. the other is not focal length, but rather quality or optical performance.

What kind of photography are you doing that isn't covered in the Fuji road map??

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads