XF56 f1.2 released and specs

Started Jan 6, 2014 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
dark13star
dark13star Senior Member • Posts: 1,583
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs
2

Bill Robb wrote:

I really wish people would stop trying to justify large sensor cameras based on the rather small advantages they have in a couple of parameters.

Especially when this is a forum where most people have chosen the smaller sensor through informed decisions. We don't go to the Nikon and Canon forums and compare everything to Phase Ones.

-- hide signature --

"I would be an historian as Herodotus was." -Charles Olson
http://herodot.us

 dark13star's gear list:dark13star's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Olympus Tough TG-4 Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T1 +12 more
Absolutic
Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,157
Re: Zeiss Distagon Otus....55 f1.4...4000 dollar....

Jorginho wrote:

Absolutic wrote:

For anyone who thinks the $999 price of 56/1.2 is too high, let me put it perspective. Panasonic just announced the price for its 42.5/1.2 (same 85mm equivalent, althoough DOF more like 85/2.4 on a full frame). Price in the USA - $1599. Makes that Fuji feel like a bargain, no????? Oh and it weighs more than Fuji, even though it has to cover a smaller, m43, sensor. $600 more for what? Image stablization?

Ziess Otus distagon 55 mm F1.4...4000 dollars...any comments? To my mind, you cannot just compare specs and say something sensible about a lens and its performance. Just wait and see. May be the Panny is indeed overpriced. May be the FUji has downsides. Who knows. Wait and see.

I am comparing lenses that cover circles smaller than full frame here.   Otus covers full frame and I dont see any problems with its price for what it does.    Based on Fuji's previous Xf lenses, I doubt there will be downsides, but we shall see.

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Panasonic ZS100 Nikon D800 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Nikon D500 +13 more
Jorginho Forum Pro • Posts: 11,349
Okey...nikon 50 mm F1.4...400 bucks

Absolutic wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

Absolutic wrote:

For anyone who thinks the $999 price of 56/1.2 is too high, let me put it perspective. Panasonic just announced the price for its 42.5/1.2 (same 85mm equivalent, althoough DOF more like 85/2.4 on a full frame). Price in the USA - $1599. Makes that Fuji feel like a bargain, no????? Oh and it weighs more than Fuji, even though it has to cover a smaller, m43, sensor. $600 more for what? Image stablization?

Ziess Otus distagon 55 mm F1.4...4000 dollars...any comments? To my mind, you cannot just compare specs and say something sensible about a lens and its performance. Just wait and see. May be the Panny is indeed overpriced. May be the FUji has downsides. Who knows. Wait and see.

I am comparing lenses that cover circles smaller than full frame here. Otus covers full frame and I dont see any problems with its price for what it does. Based on Fuji's previous Xf lenses, I doubt there will be downsides, but we shall see.

Covers a FF sensor too....1/10 of the cost of the Otus. What is the rationale behind such comparisons.

 Jorginho's gear list:Jorginho's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS +7 more
Chris G Hughes Regular Member • Posts: 391
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs
3

Ha! Another thread goes off the rails in typical DPR style. Very high noise to signal ration this time.

I'll be adding the 56 to my lineup for sure. It's the portrait lens I've been waiting for. It'll have to wait budget wise until after I replace my 18 with the 14 and add the 23 as well, but the 56 is on the list.  The only one that doesn't really make sense to me is the 27. Seems like it should have been branded XC.

So, eventually I plan on owning all the main primes except the 60 macro and the 27 pancake. I have the 18-55 and 55-200 zooms and they'll suffice for the foreseeable future. The constant aperture zooms on the roadmap look nice but I see no reason to upgrade at the moment. I shoot primes more often than zooms.

At this point I'd like to see an ultra-wide and a true macro. Hitting the long and short ends would round out the range IMO. a solid 90mm macro and a fast 12mm would be great.

 Chris G Hughes's gear list:Chris G Hughes's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Canon PowerShot SX260 HS Nikon D300 Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R +5 more
BarnET Senior Member • Posts: 3,406
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs
1

Man I hate that you are right.
The pana costs 1599 and that's plain robbery.
The 56mm f1.2 999 is reasonable especially since Fuji sensors are that close to fullframe.

 BarnET's gear list:BarnET's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS
BarnET Senior Member • Posts: 3,406
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs
2

On BH the Nikon d610 is 500 more then an xe2 with the now msrp price of the 56mm

 BarnET's gear list:BarnET's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS
Krich13 Contributing Member • Posts: 669
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs

Absolutic wrote:

For anyone who thinks the $999 price of 56/1.2 is too high, let me put it perspective. Panasonic just announced the price for its 42.5/1.2 (same 85mm equivalent, althoough DOF more like 85/2.4 on a full frame). Price in the USA - $1599. Makes that Fuji feel like a bargain, no????? Oh and it weighs more than Fuji, even though it has to cover a smaller, m43, sensor. $600 more for what? Image stablization?

My point exactly. FF is becoming the cheapest system to own, and since introduction of A7(r) (which will no doubt be followed by smaller cameras from Canikon, after all even the mirrorless A7 is bigger than the film FF SLR Olympus OM-1) is becoming comparable in size and weight.

Aethon Regular Member • Posts: 316
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs
1

Krich13 wrote:

Absolutic wrote:

For anyone who thinks the $999 price of 56/1.2 is too high, let me put it perspective. Panasonic just announced the price for its 42.5/1.2 (same 85mm equivalent, althoough DOF more like 85/2.4 on a full frame). Price in the USA - $1599. Makes that Fuji feel like a bargain, no????? Oh and it weighs more than Fuji, even though it has to cover a smaller, m43, sensor. $600 more for what? Image stablization?

My point exactly. FF is becoming the cheapest system to own, and since introduction of A7(r) (which will no doubt be followed by smaller cameras from Canikon, after all even the mirrorless A7 is bigger than the film FF SLR Olympus OM-1) is becoming comparable in size and weight.

You may be able to build a decent FF system that is cheaper than an equivalent Fuji X system, but you would have to go with Canikon and be very limited in your lens selection if you wish to stay under Fuji's pricing. Alternatively, Sony's A7 will give you a compact body but with higher priced, larger lenses.

The point about Fuji is that it's the right set of compromises (obviously a subjective view. you're perfectly entitled to have a different set of priorities):

APS is a good compromise between FF and crappy-tiny and Fuji X lenses are a good compromise between true pro-quality and cheap plastic lenses. Even their pricing is a good compromise between Canon L glass and the low-cost stuff.

For me, Fujifilm gets it about right. Canon, Nikon and Sony have lost the plot. YMMV.

georgehudetz Senior Member • Posts: 2,664
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs

Aethon wrote:

You may be able to build a decent FF system that is cheaper than an equivalent Fuji X system, but you would have to go with Canikon and be very limited in your lens selection if you wish to stay under Fuji's pricing. Alternatively, Sony's A7 will give you a compact body but with higher priced, larger lenses.

It is interesting. If your goal is to build a system of primes, and you want 20-24-35-50-85 mm equivalent focal lengths, and limit yourself to 1.8 lenses on FF (at least in the 35-50-85 range, wider lenses will be slower in both systems, naturally), both Fuji X & Nikon will run you almost exactly $5k by today's prices. That's with an XE-2 on the Fuji side, and a DF on the Nikon side.

The Nikon system will be about 550 grams heavier, but most of that weight is in the body, where it should be.

I do like the Fuji system, and the cost of entry is much lower ($3k for the DF & 50mm, vs. $1900 for the XE-2 & 35mm). But as you start buying lenses the cost evens out.

Of course, you could opt for a D610 instead of the DF and make the Nikon system a fair bit cheaper, but of course the weight goes up.

 georgehudetz's gear list:georgehudetz's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +7 more
Zardoz
Zardoz Senior Member • Posts: 1,249
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs

georgehudetz wrote:

Aethon wrote:

You may be able to build a decent FF system that is cheaper than an equivalent Fuji X system, but you would have to go with Canikon and be very limited in your lens selection if you wish to stay under Fuji's pricing. Alternatively, Sony's A7 will give you a compact body but with higher priced, larger lenses.

It is interesting. If your goal is to build a system of primes, and you want 20-24-35-50-85 mm equivalent focal lengths, and limit yourself to 1.8 lenses on FF (at least in the 35-50-85 range, wider lenses will be slower in both systems, naturally), both Fuji X & Nikon will run you almost exactly $5k by today's prices. That's with an XE-2 on the Fuji side, and a DF on the Nikon side.

The Nikon system will be about 550 grams heavier, but most of that weight is in the body, where it should be.

I do like the Fuji system, and the cost of entry is much lower ($3k for the DF & 50mm, vs. $1900 for the XE-2 & 35mm). But as you start buying lenses the cost evens out.

Of course, you could opt for a D610 instead of the DF and make the Nikon system a fair bit cheaper, but of course the weight goes up.

The Df is only $2.7k not 3.  The D610 would save you $700.

The D610 is only 50g heavier, not much in it.  And you gain resolution.

Qwntm Veteran Member • Posts: 6,142
Anybody who thinks this is "just" a Canikon 85 1.8 is clueless.

Anybody who thinks this is "just" a Canikon 85 1.8 is clueless.

And really doesn't get the X system concept at all. Just sayin'

This is the lens that makes the 14/23/35/56 combo the best bang for the buck in photography right now. Period.

Good luck with your Full Frames. LOL!

-- hide signature --

Edward
www.youtube.com/photouniverse
www.edwardthomasart.com
www.pbase.com/edwardthomas

 Qwntm's gear list:Qwntm's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Pentax K-5 IIs Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 80D +10 more
Absolutic
Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,157
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs

Krich13 wrote:

Absolutic wrote:

For anyone who thinks the $999 price of 56/1.2 is too high, let me put it perspective. Panasonic just announced the price for its 42.5/1.2 (same 85mm equivalent, althoough DOF more like 85/2.4 on a full frame). Price in the USA - $1599. Makes that Fuji feel like a bargain, no????? Oh and it weighs more than Fuji, even though it has to cover a smaller, m43, sensor. $600 more for what? Image stablization?

My point exactly. FF is becoming the cheapest system to own, and since introduction of A7(r) (which will no doubt be followed by smaller cameras from Canikon, after all even the mirrorless A7 is bigger than the film FF SLR Olympus OM-1) is becoming comparable in size and weight.

It is an interesting proposition I've not thought about it in that way.  So you are saying that FF gear (bodies) are going to be getting cheaper in price and you'd be able to pick up reasonably priced lenses equivalent or better than Fuji X.....    So assuming you are right, fast forward couple of years from now,  we would have the following choices:   One can have a cheap but large full frame system.   Or if one wants a small compact system, would have to pay more.     Sort of like when in the 70s,  4-Track would give you a better audio quality than cassette tapes, but the size of 4-Track player/recorder was significantly larger than smaller cassette players?

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Panasonic ZS100 Nikon D800 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Nikon D500 +13 more
Absolutic
Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,157
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs
1
 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Panasonic ZS100 Nikon D800 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Nikon D500 +13 more
Alan71410 Regular Member • Posts: 110
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs

The way I look at it, I paid full retail for the 14mm f/2.8 when it was released (AUD$865), which left me $1,000-odd in change from what it was really worth for me to buy a lens like the 56/1.2.

That 14mm is still the.best.lens. I have used in this digital era, and if the 56/1.2 even comes close to that ballpark it will equally be a must-have optic.

-- hide signature --

Alan

 Alan71410's gear list:Alan71410's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 +11 more
malcolml1 Regular Member • Posts: 222
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs

Yes, I follow your argument apart from one step which actually represents my original question:

>

For semiconductor sensors what matters is the total number of photons per photosite, pretty much regardless of the site area. Make two sensors: say an APS-S and FF ones both of say 16 megapixels. Expose them using the same scene for the same duration using 56/1.2 and 85/1.8 lenses respectively. Each photosite will receive the same NUMBER of photons (the number per unit area is 2.25 times larger in the first case, but the area itself is smaller by the same factor).

I agree with the area and scaling factor part, but my original question was whether it is true that the 56/1.2 will deliver the same number of photons per unit area on the APS sensor as the 85/1.8 lens on a FF sensor. I'd like to understand this part - Of course I understand that on an APS sensor the 56 lens results in an image with the same field of view as an 85 lens on a FF sensor.

Looking at the 85 mm lens and your statement that the 85/1.8 is equivalent to the 56/1.2:

Suppose we are looking at a uniformly lit scene.  Assume the 56/1.2 lens receives a total of N photons at its aperture.  These N photons are then spread over the APS sensor (ignore any losses at this point).  On the 85 lens, to get the same physical aperture area I agree that you need to stop down the lens to f1.8.  This will also capture N photons (uniformly lit scene, same number of photons per unit area).  However, in this case, the sensor area is now a factor of 2.25 larger, so those N photons result in fewer photons per unit area on the FF sensor (by a factor of 2.25).

To me, the only way to get the same number of photons per unit area on the FF sensor is to open up the 85 lens to f1.2........

The next stage - how those photons are transformed into an electrical signal is not something I know much about.  Maybe the FF sensor is so much more efficient than the APS one - but that is not an argument about the number of photons captured by different lenses any more.

Malcolm

Pic Man Senior Member • Posts: 1,310
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs

There is allot of talk about equivalence to FF here and I must admit it's a little confusing. From what I gather 56mm ASPC is 85mm on FF in FOV. 1.2 is 1.8 in DOF. But 1.2 is 1.2 in light gathering. FF owners argue that because the FF sensor has bigger surface area so it's roughly about 1 stop better in ISO performance which negates the difference in light gathering from the lens. So you would shoot at 1.2 ISO 800 on ASPC and 1.8 ISO 1600 on FF and you get a similar quality image. I realise this probably very simplified.

What I'm curious about is how the lens behaves. An 85mm lens is a short telephoto and with that you get some compression which is why the background looks quite near to the subject and also gives a flattering look in portraits. Will a cropped 56mm lens behave the same way?

Asylum Photo
Asylum Photo Senior Member • Posts: 1,277
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs

La Roque has a preview up:

http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/2014/1/6/the-razors-edge-fujinon-xf-56mm-f12r

Probably won't satisfy critics, but I'm liking the results so far. Can't wait to shoot portraits with it.

-- 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
RodxE2 New Member • Posts: 1
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs

This one is definitely on my list. One lens I  have not seen on the roadmap is a true telephoto, something like a 200F4. Hope they will eventually fill that void. Have had my XE2 two weeks, I love it.

 RodxE2's gear list:RodxE2's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2
Krich13 Contributing Member • Posts: 669
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs

malcolml1 wrote:

Yes, I follow your argument apart from one step which actually represents my original question:

>

For semiconductor sensors what matters is the total number of photons per photosite, pretty much regardless of the site area. Make two sensors: say an APS-S and FF ones both of say 16 megapixels. Expose them using the same scene for the same duration using 56/1.2 and 85/1.8 lenses respectively. Each photosite will receive the same NUMBER of photons (the number per unit area is 2.25 times larger in the first case, but the area itself is smaller by the same factor).

I agree with the area and scaling factor part, but my original question was whether it is true that the 56/1.2 will deliver the same number of photons per unit area on the APS sensor as the 85/1.8 lens on a FF sensor.

No, it will receive 2.25 times more photons PER UNIT AREA.

To me, the only way to get the same number of photons per unit area on the FF sensor is to open up the 85 lens to f1.2........

What is so damn important about number _per_unit_area_? I really don't get it. For all image quality purposes it's an irrelevant parameter.

The next stage - how those photons are transformed into an electrical signal is not something I know much about. Maybe the FF sensor is so much more efficient than the APS one

No, it isn't any more efficient. It doesn't need to be. It's just 1.5 times bigger, which is enough to achieve over one stop signal to noise gain (or to perform on equal foot at 2.25 times lower illumination level).

Krich13 Contributing Member • Posts: 669
Re: XF56 f1.2 released and specs
1

Asylum Photo wrote:

La Roque has a preview up:

http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/2014/1/6/the-razors-edge-fujinon-xf-56mm-f12r

Probably won't satisfy critics, but I'm liking the results so far. Can't wait to shoot portraits with it.

-- hide signature --

Not bad, but highlights outlines are pretty rough. Impossible to evaluate sharpness at this image size.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads