RUMOR
According to a new source Fuji decided to produce a Fujinon XF90mm f/2.0 lens. The lens won’t be available before December 2014/January 2015.
I’ve updated the roadmap and noted the source of the rumors (new, trusted or source that was right in the past).
115 Responses
Patrick, we really need it to have macro capabilities!
No, please, no macro. A macro lens needs features (flatness of field, not much difference between center and borders) that seldom help in normal use, portrait or landscape. Anyhow great news.
I think we rather need two different lenses: a big and heavy 120mm f2.8 prime with 1:1 capabilities for serious macro work and a not too big and light 90mm portrait/travel lens 😉 A 90mm f2 lens with 1:1 would be bigger than the nikkor 105 Vr which is no small lens in any regards.
90mm 1:1 macro is unlikely because of the ff equiv. that Fuji is repecting. 70mm (105mm equiv) is more likely 🙂
photobyandrei.wordpress.com
I’d expect an 85 f3.5, like what nikon has.
why not a new 14mm at 1.2? Would be great to upgrade the existing one.
I’m not sure current lens physics would even allow that. An 85 f3.5 1:1 macro is a lot more useful than a super-wide-wide angle lens.
But if it’s not going to be a macro lens, then a 90mm @ f/2 would make perfectly sense, since it would be equivalent to a 135mm FF, which is what most Fuji shooters are craving for… 😉
180mm is a very common macro focal length, especially when shooting wildlife.
I’d like to see a 120mm 1:1 macro with no image stabilization. 120mm x 1.5 = 180mm. I’m all for that!!!!
135/2 eqiv looks more like portrait, not macro lens. Macro lens would probably be slower. There are gaps both in portraiture and macro. I expect portraiture to be a little more in demand. And the existing 60mm is quite close to 90mm. If I were Fuji i would release a longer macro lens smth like 105/2.8 (155 eq). IMHO that’s far enough from 60mm. Although I’m not a macro photographer. The good news that 18-135 could have small close focus as most superzooms do.
nice 🙂
A 90/2 with AF that suits portrait photography (i.e. like the 56/1.2 not the 60 2.4) would be a nice addition to the Fuji lenses.
Super!
oh dear, there goes another grand from my bank!
It’s a good thing that Fuji is releasing good lenses that have a classic ff equiv. This lens is a 135 f2 equiv. A 70 f2.8 macro 1:1 (105 equiv) will also be a great addition, replacing the current 60 f2.4 macro 1:2.
photobyandrei.wordpress.com
yeah but rather 2.0 or at least like the 60 2.4 than 2.8……more flexible, different purposes (candid/portrait shots as well better wide open shallower dof control etc.)….
and 1:1 macro….
Very interested! Together with the upcoming 16/1.4 good news. There is only a macro left for me to be happy (the Zeiss 50/2.8 is nice, but has not enough working distance). I use the Tamron 90/2.8 with Novoflex adapter, works great.
BTW, I yesterday tried my Nikon 85/1.8G on the XT1 with adapter, very nice image quality and shallow DOF at f2.0. Having autofocus and aperture ring would be even nicer.
Quick question for you is the manual map really usable on that lens, I am just concerned that the map throw is very short and hence difficult to use.
It’s usable. It’s not as accurate as with the Tamron 90mm but using focus peaking and magnification it works, The only thing I miss is the knowledge of the current aperture (Novoflex adapters don’t have clicks but change continuously). One can guess it from the required change in shutter speed though. I tried other Nikon lenses, too, like the 35mm/1.8 DX I still have. But this one is useless. Cheap construction, inaccurate throw. My impression is nevertheless, that manual focussing works better with the viewfinder of the OMD EM1, because it is clearer and seems more detailed. Maybe I need to dig into the details of the menus to find a different option. I couldn’t resist to have three cameras now, D610, EM1 and Fuji XT1. MY wife always uses the D610 so I was left with the OMD. It’s image quality, however, I felt to be far inferior to the FF D610. Fuji is much closer and I happily use it together with the 56mm prime. This is really a great lens and is on par with what I get from my FF D610 with Nikon 85mm/1.8G (after using PhotoNinja for Raws).
Thanks mate, I might hold off selling it then and give it a try.
Hi Patrick,
I’m afraid the DigitalRev deal isn’t valid worldwide. I’ve checked and it costs 1,376.37 US$ when ordered from Israel.
ok, updated the post, thx for telling. It’s valid in many other countries, but not all
I needed the 16-55 yesterday hope they get it out soon, The 18-55 works fine but a bit wider would helped. A 90mm will fill a gap.
Question: is the new source the same who predicted medium format fuji camera or that the X-pro2 was going to be 35mm frame size?
no. First rumor I got from this source.
I’ve been writing on several boards about the need for a 135mm equivalent lens for some times now, I’m glad to see Fuji is listening to their costumers (you would think that is a given in business, yet it is not very frequent). Why?
– It’s a classic focal length.
– Lenses in that range are gnerally very good (check out the Olympus 75mm and the Canon 135mm).
– It should be smaller than the tele-zooms, which is very important on a mirrorless camera.
I’ve been saying the same everywhere I can post: a wide-aperture tele lens beyond the 56 is a must-have. With my Olympus M4/3 system, the two lenses I use most are the 45 and the 75. The existing 56 plus a 90/2 would let me cover a similar range with Fuji.
Now, please oh please, Fuji: Give it image stabilization. That’s really helpful for low-light shooting with lenses in this focal-length range.
=1 for OIS
100mm – 150mm f2.8 Macro (true 1:1) weather sealed, please Fuji.
That’s the only lens I really need to see before buying into the X system. X-T1 with its great EVF, weather sealing, and manual focusing features could be so nice for in-the-field macro work.
Wedding photogs and photojournos rejoice. A 90mm f/2 and a 16mm f/1.4, each on its own body, is a fantastic kit.
(Buy some photobooks until December while you’re waiting 😉
Well done again by the sound of it, Just a 1:1 Macro to go and you have a dream system of very high quality lenses in a convenient and highly usable sized system.
Agree…
Once the 100-400mm is released as well, all that is left for me will be a 100mm f/2. 8 1:1 macro with OIS. Perhaps they will make the 90mm 1:1 macro.
Yes, I am thinking in a couple or three years, Fuji will be at the place I can move to that system, and have it meet all my lens needs. AF should be even better by then, and who knows, they might even release a modern-style body, where you can use control dials and button+control dials to change settings, instead of knobs and knob followed by control dial. Awesome!
Absolutely! Now that they have the 56, and the 60 doesn’t need to serve two purposes, they could revise it to be a great macro lens.
Would allow me to sell my remaining Nikkor 1,8/85mm and get something that is AF compatible. I used my Nikkor quite a bit when covering events like the recent Seabreeze Jazz Festival so it is a lens I can definitely use.
what only took them so long…
We can only guess. A 135mm is the classic “portrait” focal length, and pretty much every single lens maker is trying to make it somewhat special. Minolta/Konica/Sony have an STF, Nikon – DC, Canon… ugh, Canon has a focus limiter 🙂
Lessee what Fuji will have to offer.
yeah but why not 1.8 would be an outstanidng feature only the sony zeiss 135 1.8 is avaiable…
If they manage to make it 1.8 (heck, why not 1.4?!), OIS and add some sort of STF (read: bokeh control)… I’ll even preorder this lens.
f/1.8 is only 1/3 stop faster than f/2… not much advantage in terms of picture-taking. On the other hand, the “numerical aperture” (actual diameter of the opening in the lens) would have to be 11% larger — so all other things being equal, the overall lens diameter also would be about 11% larger.
As an example, look at the 56mm f/1.2 lens, which has about the same numerical aperture as a 90mm f/2 lens would have (90/2 = 45mm; 56/1.2 = 46.667mm.) The 56 is very cool (I just got one) but it’s already pretty chunky; a lens 11% bigger around than that might be hard to handle and inconvenient to carry. I think a 90/2 would be a good tradeoff.
Yes, at f/1.8 or f/1.4 the lens will be enormous. But you know what? With lenses this fast, we are entering a “super portrait” glass territory, and these are usually behemoths. Take a Nikkor 200mm f/2, for example…
If this is a macro lens I will regret having buying the 60mm macro instead of the 35mm as my second lens. I really like macro work and so, got the 60mm, but 90 or 100mm with 1:1 would be much better for macro.
Good thing I don’t have any money now to buy new lens. I’ll have time to wait for the new releases and decide what to get next.
Knowing Full Frame is the future, we will not buy aps-c frame fujifilm, no matter what. Fujifilm needs to think of what does market think of. For those who buy apsc lenses will get burned soon or later. The once popular APC cameras and 110 620 128 film cameras have taught consumer plenty of lessons,
Enjoy your 35mm digital cameras.
Sometimes the market is smarter than expected.
Short of knowledge ?
I don’t accept your premise. Full frame is great—don’t get me wrong—but the lenses are large, heavy, and expensive. Even the a7/a7r/a7s, while small, require large, heavy, expensive lenses. And while there can be noise and shallow DOF advantages to FF, the DOF thing works in the other direction too. For example, the APS sensor can achieve a given DOF at a wider aperture than FF meaning that a lower ISO is necessary for the shot. This negates some of the noise advantage of FF. My point is that the argument for FF isn’t as clear cut as many believe. As a 5D/5D2/5D3 user, I am in the process of transitioning to the Fuji X System and I am hardly alone as I do so.
Well put Arnold. Enthusiasts can postulate endlessly about the future direction of camera manufacturing trends, with direct reference to sensor size. Why? Well it’s fun. Personally I applaud all formats and innovation. Panasonic, Olympus, Sigma & Fuji are all doing great work with there chosen sensor size. Sony is probably the most prolific innovator of the lot, and deserves credit for keeping things interesting. Ultimately all of these cameras are tools. We take the pictures.
Fuji APSC lens also very expensive…
The argument for FF isn’t as clear cut for sure, but then same goes for APS-C. I entirely disagree that FF lenses are more expensive. Also, large and heavy is very relative. The FE55 1.8, for example, is hardly large or heavy.
look at this with a real sense of history. How many Speed Graphics or TLR Rolliecords do you see around? Everyone knew that these would be fads, and that 5 x 7 and the other real film sizes would come back into popularity. Maybe 35mm was a fad too. Having the market develop into three categories—better than smart phone (small sensor, pocketable); enthusiast and much pro work (aps or m43), and serious studio or fine art (larger than 35mm sensor size)—makes more sense then hanging onto to a legacy size that is getting pinched out from both sides.
I think even if Fuji go full frame in the future..thanks to the EVF, you could still used your APS-C lenses (perhaps with an apdapter) and not really notice any difference (except for a reduced Megapixel count)… its not like you would have to deal with a small crop of the viewfinder like a nikon DX lens on a FF camera
Fuji has no, repeat NO, plans to introduce a full frame X camera anytime soon. It’s just an Internet wet dream.
Full Frame isn’t my future. Physics dictate large lenses are needed for full frame digital cameras. I’ll stick with the Fuji APS-C system for now, best middle ground between size and quality, imo.
Organic Sensors are the future. Or let’s say, the next step in the evolution of digital photography. They will pretty much negate all the advantages FF is currently holding over APS-C – apart from the slightly shallower DOF FF is offering. Of course an organic FF sensor probably still would be superior to organic APS-C, but if the technology will live up to the promises/espectations, it will be so much better than what FF is offering today that it won’t matter. (For instance if noise really will be reduced by a factor of up to 40…)
A Fujifilm XT1, the best APS-C Fujifilm camera and a first generation full frame Sony A7, guess which once would a consumer be interested in buying?
Considering digital APS cameras outsell 35mm about 20:1 I think I might have an idea.
Probably the A6000! Its cheaper … and faster 😉
great!! i use a Leica 90mm 2.8 on the x-e2, its a nice focal length for portraits and events. 90mm with AF will be amazing!
I’m going to be trying out a M mount 90/2 on my X Pro 1 once I get it back from a loan to a needy college friend. This is intriguing news. 🙂
Last weekend I was able to borrow an X-Pro 1 and tried several lenses including a 100mm f/2 Canon rangefinder lens. The 100 worked well optically but was REALLY difficult to hold steady! Also, I couldn’t use it with the X-Pro’s optical finder, since the finder won’t show frame lines for lenses longer than 60mm (maybe to avoid issues with parallax?)
So if Fuji does bring out a 90, two requests: (1) OIS please! (2) update to provide an optical-finder frame line, ideally with more accurate parallax compensation. Another idea: maybe the rumored X-Pro 2 could include a three-magnification finder, with a higher-magnification option in addition to the X-Pro 1’s 0.6x and 0.2x choices. The Canon VI-T rangefinder camera I used back during my “film era” had a three-mode finder, and it was very handy.
What a bummer please…..not 2.0 change it to 1.8 you have easily lots of time…..would be lice the sony zeiss 135 1.8…..
Please, please….fuji….
Is that 1/3 stop ever going to make or break a photo? I think not.
Fuji after you completed the lens line up with a 135mm 2.0 and 1:1 longer macro lens 105 2.4 or 2.0 (lens equiv. ff!) as well as updaign the 35 1.4 for wahtever reasons please concentrate on :
1. creatinga a competitive flash system/new flash units like nikon cls sb 910 and canon ex speedlites ex-rt 600…..and start from the beginning on with radio transmitter (like canon ex-rt 600 speedlite, not IR)
2. new much better performing pancake lens (a new pancake series Fuji XPancake, XSmall, XInkognito..doesnt matter the name…just suggestions) Series for people who wanna travel as light as possible and have the focus on inkognito street photography…
3. 1/8000 shutter speed
1/320 flash sync
native/base iso 100
Noise reduction turn off “completely feature!”
Get the knowledge and make it possible/get it done that the next x generation cameras probably the xpro2 or xt2 have 1/8000 shutter speed we need that in australia and sunny places….nobody wants to carry a additionalt nd filters for different lenses…increase the flash speed to 1/320…..all other comeptitiors omd em 1 nikon d7100, sony a7, a7r have 1/8000, faster flash speeds and lower base iso too (not all 100 iso and 1/320 but faster anyway)!
Or is it not possible? Why takes it so long to impelment this in your cameras??
Unbelievable that the xt1 doesnt got 1/8000 and faster flash speed and base iso 100 already…
Is a huge impact and downside in comparion / competiton to other contenders…..
I hear you on the 1/8000 sec shutter speed…would like to see that too….same goes for a better flash system. I don’t understand your complaint with the Fuji pancake lens…you already have the 27mm available to you and it is a pretty impressive performer.
http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x/855-fuji27f28?start=1
My problem is not all fuji x cameras use leaf shutters in order to justify and accept the 1/4000 limit (which it is for leaf shutter mechanisms) but only the x 100/100s and other fixed lens x cameras use this!
All other x cameras with int. lens using the more common focal plane (curtain shutter) as all dslrs having….so it should be no problem or there should be no /any reason why not implementing /having 1/8000 and higher flash sync 1/320 in a fuji xe,xt,xpro camera….
Next step could be integrating a leaf shutter in the lenses.
Or maybe the work with Panasonic on the organic sensor will bring the Pana electronic shutter, that allows super fast speeds.
Nice to see more primes on the way. Any update on the release date for the 16mm?
Please please please let it be a 1:1 Macro. PLEASE.
Please include OIS, I can’t hand-hold 90MM (135mm) without OIS.
Really???? Man I must be good…I’ve hand held my Canon 70-200mm 2.8 (no IS) for the last 8 years…
Let’s not confuse what you ‘can’t’ do, with what you ‘don’t want’ to do.
Some people have natural stability issues due to age, medications, or physical ailments. No need to be snarky.
In the past 2 years I’ve gone from being able to hand hold 1-2 stops under 1/focal length to needing at least 1/focal length and sometimes faster. I’m 49.
Yeah but you also developed a taste for good coffee at the same time 😉
Having a larger monitor doesn’t help either 🙂
Well, you go settle for your less sharp photos then while the rest of us will stick with our sharper photos with the help of OIS.
You ‘can’ settle for less than stellar IQ. As for the rest of us, we ‘don’t want’ to.
For those of you who are hoping for a 1:1 macro lens, why is 1:1 important these days? My understanding is that 1:1 macro lens refers to a lens that can project a 1:1 life-size image on a 35mm frame.
But in this day of multiple sensor sizes, and viewing of digital images on a variety of monitors, I’m not sure that the 1:1 specification means as much as it did. It seems to me that as long as I have a lens that can take a close-up picture of a flower or an insect and have it fill the frame of the photo, and eventually my monitor, whether that photo was taken with a 1:1 or 1:2 macro lens is besides the point, unless I’m missing something.
1:1 is really independent of sensor size. It means that you can get close enough to achieve a life-size image on your sensor, whatever size it may be. This allows the photographer to get more detail than 1:2, for example.
One can think of the benefit in a similar way to the benefit of shooting wildlife with a 600mm lens vs a 300mm lens. You can crop in on the 300mm shot to get a similar look but you won’t have all the detail.
Doesn’t focal length come into play as well, then? Without knowing how lens numbers exactly work, could it be that a 60mm 1:1 macro lens gives you the same image as a 120mm 1:2 macro lens?
No on the 120mm the size in the picture of the subject will be half
No, the focal length is merely how much working distance you have. 1:1 is the ratio of the image you’re photographing and the image on the sensor (film). A lot of us want more focal length in our macros for skittish subjects that don’t want you close. 150mm would be really good for a lot of subjects.,
I thought what determined working distance was the low end of the focus range, which can be different for lenses with the same (or similar) focal length. For example, the 60mm/f 2.4 macro has a near focus limit of 26.7 cm, while the 56mm/f 1.2 lens has a near focus limit of 70 cm. That’s what makes the 60mm suitable for use as a macro lens and not the 56mm.
I was generally referring to focal length when lenses are at 1:1. The longer the length the more working room.
To put what nwcs said in a slightly different way, a 120mm lens that achieves 1:1 will do so from twice as far away as a 60mm 1:1 lens.
The key spec here is close focusing distance. This is really what determines how close a lens can get to 1:1. If lenses could all focus infinitely close to a subject, then 1:1 would be no big deal. It takes a sophisticated optical design to allow focusing closely enough to get 1:1 w/o compromising IQ as you move toward infinity.
In your scenario, let’s say that the 60mm lens is at its closest focusing distance of 3 inches to get 1:1. Your 120mm lens could reach the same 1:1 magnification from 6 inches—if it could focus at 6 inches. But your closest focusing distance is going to be 12 inches, reaching its limit at 1:2.
For me, I could even live with the lower magnification, but I would want a better manual focus. The one on the 60 was horrible. Turning it, it felt like it was packed with heavy grease with sand mixed in, hard to turn and gritty at the same time, and it took like ten turns to do anything. Worst of all, there were focus positions it just wouldn’t hit. I would turn and turn, nothing happened, then the focus would jump past where I needed it to be. I finally gave up and just focused it as short as it would go, then tried to scoot my tripod so I got focus where I wanted it. Not fun.
Sounds like you have a bad one. My focusing on the 60mm is not bad at all. And there are some things you can do with regard to focus speed in manual in the camera setup. I’ve never had any issue with close fine tuning.
If you want real control, though, a macro from the manual focus age (like Minolta 50 f3.5) is the way to go. Smooth and designed for MF needs.
I dunno, maybe I should have tried another copy. Some people rave about that lens, I really hated it operationally. Optically, it was great, if you got it to focus.
I am fine with manual focus for macro, in fact is what I always do. I am not so fine with not having EXIF, or even worse, not having aperture control. I really prefer native lenses. A non-AF macro from some third party would be fine.
my best lens lens ever was den 135 2.0 ; great news about the 90 2.0
A 1.4 teleconverter would be great with this lens. I’d probably get rid of my 55-200 if that were available.
No macro, no OIS for me please.
I would like just a small, low-profile, lightweight lens, not a DSLR-sized lens.
A small sharp and cheap lens in the spirit of the 35mm f/1.4 would be great. 🙂
No OIS? I sure hope Fuji doesn’t listen to you. If you don’t like it, turn the OIS off — let’s see who gets sharper photos at that focal length.
The OIS can be turned off, the 1lb of additional glass can’t be left home.
Turning the OIS off won’t get rid of the motors or the tolerances required for the moveable parts. Plus you don’t need additional glass if you leave the OIS out. ^^
Let’s see if your moving subjects are sharper with OIS. 😉
Sure hope it’s image stabilized.
Love my 85mm 1.8 Canon on 60D for portraits. This 90mm f2 would be my perfect choice when I jump to Fuji. You Fuji guys, and girls, will this lens be compact? I know it should be pretty light.
i would’ve preferred a 90mm 1.4 (giving an equivalent 135mm f/2.0) but I can’t really complain. a 90mm would be useful
Where and when is XF macro 1:1?
The XF60 macro is slow and not much impressive.
Agree! I used to have Pana Leica 45/2.8 macro with my E-M5. I’m really impressive with 1:1 magnification and its AF speed/accuracy.
Now I need genuine 1:1 macro with OIS for my E-E2. In fact I’m planning to use Nikon 105/2.8 AI-S but using 105mm macro wiithout stabilization is painful.
1. If Fuji is giving a new version of the 35 (IMO v1 was good enough) why not at 1 or 1.2 instead of 1.4? Just the same (+ weather sealed I guess) would be a petty.
2. Why not replacing the 14mm first with better aperture ring and at 1.2 or 1.4 instead of 2.8? 16mm is coming but not wide enough IMO.
Physics is against you. And affordability.
14mm at 1.4 not possible?
With a comparable optical performance it would be so much larger, heavier and expensive. Nobody would buy it.
tks for the info. so the existing 14 still the best option for landscape I guess.
Name one 14mm f1.4 lens in existence today.
What would be the poit of having such shallow DoF on something that’s aimed towards landscapes? You’d be stopping down more often than not.
Dreams come true. 90mm F2.0 is what I need.
This vs the 50-140 f/2.8 would be a tough choice for me. Will depend on the 90mm’s size, and macro capabilities, compared to the 50-140, I assume.
Either way, glad to see Fuji is paying attention to customer requests. 🙂
I am shooting a 50-135 on my nikon APC. Hard to give up. If this lens is as good as their 56, it will be time to jump ship.
I’d love to see Fuji commit to weather sealing all new products. This should be a great lens
I love the thought of a 90mm F2 (or wider) portrait lens. I’ve been wnating this for a long time and almost (on many occasions) purchased a Nikon 85mm 1.8 G + adapter.
And the line-up is very close to complete !
Then it will be about updating the most popular ones from time to time to fix the small issues and harmonize the models.
Good job Fuji!
I really wouldn’t mind a decent 1:1 macro lens… That’s the one thing that is holding me back from selling the Nikon gear – I suppose I could keep my 105VR and get an adaptor but I think I’d rather have a proper Fuji item with all the usual AF and bits and pieces…