Fujifilm updated its lens catalogue (download here). It now includes the new XC 16-50 and 50-230 OIS II lenses and shows also the 16mmF1.4, 90mmF2 and 140-400mmF4-5.6 lenses.
Fuji has shown mock-ups of the 16, 90 and 140-400 in the past, and in this catalogue we can’t really see more specs about them than already known. You can get an idea of the size of these lenses compared to other Fujinons (size can change until their release, though).
FR-reader Jonavin made a list (published after the poll) with all his findings after looking at the catalogue. And I agree with Markus, who wrote an email saying: “Fuji is bringing all the right stuff. ” 🙂
But tell us, of the three lenses, which is the one you are waiting for more than any other?
[poll id=”71″]
XF 16mm f/1.4
– has push-pull clutch focus
– size looks to be around XF10-24 but not as “thick”
– filter size looks like 67mm?
XF 90mm f/2
– can’t tell if it has push-pull.
– size looks to be just under the size of the XF18-135; closer to XC50-230 OIS II
– filter size looks like 62mm
XF 140-400mm
– looks like f/4-5.6
– size, it’s as tall as the XF50-140 but a lot beefier/thicker; and no doubt heavier
– filter size? probably 82mm [86 according to FR-reader The Green Balbo]
– Nano GI coating
[UDPATE: MJr posted in the comments an image of the 16mm mock-ups at Photokina (shared on Fujirumors here) compared to other lenses.]
80 Responses
Wow the 16mm is big compared to the 14mm !
(typo on the catalogue : XF16-55mmF2.8-4 R LM WR)
at least this time they did not write “OIS” 😉
Still hoping that the size of 90mm is reduced, I assume the lenses shown are the mockups we saw last year. I can’t see why a 90mm f2 should be the same size as a 50-230 zoom.
I voted for the 90 mm, but I hope it will not be too expensive. I’d buy it if it will be under 700 EUR/USD.
I think that is higly unlikely as a MRP, if you take a look at the other lenses.
90mm F2 metal lens manufactured in Japan= $999.00 US or higher. Same on the 16mm F1.4.
I’m with you on this one, if it’s above 600 USD they can keep it. Nikon’s and Canon’s 85mm 1.8 are well below, and they cover full frame. I’d pay extra for IQ and build quality, but not that much. 700 USD is the upper limit of what’s reasonable.
You can’t really compare prices with Nikon and Canon, they have such a huge user base they can afford to sell things more cheaply and make it up in volume. Fuji doesn’t have that luxury. Also Fuji lenses are better built and typically made in Japan so you also pay more for that. The good news is Fuji lenses do gradually drop in price and Fuji is quite good about offering cash back deals etc.
Also, let me just say as a previous owner of the Nikon 85 1.8G… that thing had all kinds of purple and green fringing up to f/4 at times depending on light sources. Haven’t seen that much at all on Fuji lenses… plus it was all plastic and the focus ring didn’t feel that great.
I had the 50mm 1.4 G and that was also completely plastic and had rather unpleasant green fringing on highlights when shot wide open.
Come on, this is nonsense. We’re talking about tools here, not jewels. I don’t really care where my lens is made, and I’ve heard nothing but great things about the Canon 1.8 – not 2.0 -, which I have also owned and was greatly impressed with.
Re the smaller margin, Fuji is the one buying its way into this game. Sorry, I won’t pay a premium any longer for what appears to be little benefit in size and weight and incremental benefit in IQ. Along those same lines, I’ll gladly pay over the going rate for a A7 for a X-Pro2 with IBIS and 30 MP and incredibly fast AF, but not for an X-Pro1s marketed as X-Pro2, with 24MP and AF barely faster than the X-T1.
We’re talking about highly precision instruments that have to be hand made with the slightest error leading to problems like de-centreing. Like it or not there’s a perception that Japanese built stuff is better quality. Typically people move manufacturing to China to save money, not to increase product quality.
What ever your photographic demands are they don’t seem well suited to Fuji so maybe you’d be better off with Sony. Then you can whine about the price of Zeiss lenses!
Good line about the price of Zeiss lenses :). I just have reasonable expectations, and am not willing to pay excessive prices, irrespective of the brand. And no, the photo lenses we use are not high precision instruments, but rather instruments with reasonably small tolerance, while the ones costing in excess of 50k are indeed high precision instruments
You’ve heard this…
Try using the Canon 85mm f/1.8. It is a CA nightmare. You have to stop it down to like f/4 to get rid of it. The lens isn’t very sharp either. The optics are very dated. All it did well was focusing fast. I had it and sold it. Just like Canon’s 50mm f/1.4, the 85mm f/1.8 is in desperate need of a refresh. Canon is still selling lenses they brought out in the 90’s. Tech has improved in the last 20 years.
Waiting for the 16mm, but I also want a newer faster weather sealed 35mm f/1.4
16mm, 23mm and 35mm mkII. My dream team.
I have the 23mm and 56mm and I am very happy with them.
Me too! I’m fine with the 1.4 aperture but I’d love a DOF scale, newer construction & MF from the 14,16, 23, 56 primes.
I’d like a 35 f/1 or f/1.2 with fast af and WR. But short of that a better 1.4 version would be nice.
The 16mm looks closer in size to the 23mm. I think you’re getting thrown off on scale by the positioning of the lenses, personally.
That’s exactly what it is. 🙂
https://flic.kr/p/n8ccVA
Lovely 16/1.4. I think this mockup doesn’t have the rear cap so it might be like 5mm longer than the 23/1.4
Dammit Fuji! 5mm longer. DAMMIT!!!
If “5mm longer” is a deal breaker for you, would you mind sharing where did you plan on storing this lens?
nevermind. .
I’m happy with the 16mm size. This will be my next lens.
Surpised the 90 f2 wont have OIS ??? Sonys 90 2.8 maro will have one called oss at least….
Would make sense for a tele prime lens and as a 135mm equivalent ff portraiture lens……..
Slight bummer but fuji is fuji………personall for fuji it would make more sense than for sony (with its new IBIS probabyl built in every new coming cameras…)…anyway….
At least it will be much more compact than wit ois….;)
Because this is not a Macro, so they ‘traded’ it for F2. It’s likely that a true 1:1 Macro would be on the next roadmap (currently missing in the line-up), one that is F2.8, and undoubtedly will have OIS, and possibly WR.
Wouldn’t bet on it. Extension tubes are not WR.
nevertheless sladko’s points are valid….OIS would be useful, appropriate and would make sense for a longer tele prime lens aimed for portraiture 135 mm ff equiv……and that fuji would need it more than sony with its ibis technology….
Yes, I think the 50-140 might be the better choice for a lot of people, as the IQ is excellent, it has IS, and the zoom range offsets the smaller aperture.
Those lenses are HUGE! Have the 56mm myself, previously owned the 60 and 35mm. 56mm paired with X-T1 makes it a little too huge for a walk-around setup. My walk-arounds are a little different because I have a 4 year old, a 1 year old HUGE puppy Samoyed. I need to control those two, maybe a backpack, maybe we’re cross country skiing… Or fishing… I would never be able to use tha 90mm on one of those occasions. I found the 35mm a little too big somethimes.
But I have no second thoughts that these lenses will deliver stellar results.
think seriously about m43 lenses are much smaller but decrease in IQ esp. low light is obvious….
The 90mm is huge, the others are pretty much what they’re supposed to be. (like it or not) 🙂
When the X-Pro1 came out with the 18, 35 and 60mm, those lenses where rather small and compact. The hole system was very compact. But after that the lenses has just increased in size.
I am not complaining, this is just my observation. The system is not as compact as it came out in the first instance. I am very happy with my X-T1 and 56mm when its used in a scenario it is suited for. For my trips a X100T, XQ2 or X30 would be better suited. There exists a camera for every situation.
I feel ya. The 56mm is pretty big on my X-Pro1 but for quick one handed shots and something light to easily carry… that’s why I got the X100T. I’m really looking forward to the 16mm. Even if it looks like it’s almost as big as the 56mm, they’re all still pretty small for what they are.
I just put a pixel ruler on the catalogue image: The 16mm is definitely smaller than the 10-14mm. I would say it is about 65mm long (23: 63mm, 10-14: 87mm) and has a 62mm filter, just like the 23 and 56.
Is it just me or did they pick some really uninspired images for the catalogue? The shot from the club they used for the 16-55mm looks like it was taken with a smartphone. And don’t get me started on these blurry doves 😉
Another thing I found interesting in the catalogue: Not a single image of the brand new X-A2, though they show every other X-camera, even the discontinued X-E1 and X-M1. Another sign for the death of the entry level? (I noticed that some images were taken with a X-A2 though)
or a sign the brochure was finalised before the X-A2 was ready.
Those interested can have a clearer view of the top of the xf16mmf1.4, xf90mmf2 and xf140-400f4-5.6 with full names and filter sizes on my blog here: https://grittymonkey.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/xf-lenses-2.jpg
The catalogue says this about the BLC-XT1 half case: “Users can access the SD card and battery without removing the camera from the case.” Is it correct that the SD card can be accessed? Everyone complains about this case because the SD card CAN’T be accessed. Who is right, Fuji or the people?
I handled BLC-XT1 in the store, didn’t like it so haven’t bought it… But nevertheless, there’s a cutout flap under your palm that allows for the access to SD card door.
i have to say Fuji really shows its commitment in the system by providing on-going roadmap of lens to come in such a short time frame since its first X camera. I mean how many companies really do that. Keep it up, Fuji!
I would really like a weather-sealed 16-80mm f/4 lens. It should maintain similar image quality as the 18-55mm lens, and be around the same size as the 18-135mm lens. It could be priced where the 18-135mm lens is currently at ~$800 (I think the 18-135mm is priced $200 too high). It should also have smoking hot autofocus. Man… this would be a sweet combo with the X-T1!
The XF90mm has a 72mm Filter Thread (as per photo by MarcoLarousse.com).
Indeed, a full (almost, if you are so exigent) range of wonderful lenses. In the pool I voted for the 90mm F2.0. For my type of photography, I don’t cross the 135mm FL. And for that, a Samyang is coming.
Fujifilm have done a great job of filling out their lens line-up in a short space of time.
They need better proof readers though. The main shot in the catalogue showing all the lenses laid out has a glaring error. The new 16-55mm WR is labelled as f/2.8-4. It’s a f/2.8 constant aperture lens, no?
I hope that 16mm f/1.4 isn’t a typo!
Well, the glass is OK now. Who doesn’t find the right lens in it has the same problem with any other manufacturer. But what about the R&D for technical progress of your cameras, Fuji? Where is the X-Pro2? Where is the groundbreaking sensor, outperforming anything else on the market in true resolution, DR and ISO? Being flawlessly supported in the market by any RAW-convertor, without artifacts, mushy greens, wax skins & other ugly smearing? R&D in that area seems to have come to a complete standstill versus competition. And I really regret it, I’m even convinced it will jeopardize the complete potential of this once so promising system.
Just a thought : may be they’ve had an issue with the super-duper sensor they were planning to get…
The fact that Software manufacturer do not all implement the best possible algorithms is hardly their fault; Now to be fair there are various free and paying options (LR latest, Fuji supplied prog, Rawtherapee …)
Silkypix, Rawtherapee? You’re really not caring too much about a decent workflow, Sorry. This is all crap and only for this kind of problems (I’ve been coping with for more than 6 months) I wouldn’t buy Fuji ever. It tells me one thing, most of the people owning this system shoot only jpg. About LR, I want to stay in the sideline. The market decided this had to become the mainstream tool, well it is now. What a deceiving one coming from Aperture.
“You’re really not caring too much about a decent workflow, Sorry” – Interesting how you see the world through your colorized glasses: I can’t tell for Silkipix, but raw therapee has been written as an element in a “decent workflow” in “my” world (Linux) we are used to use a chain of tools to achieve an end goal – from Image transfer (Rapid photo downloader) to fast image culling (any image browser, using jpegs) to raw development (native Darktable or Rawtherapee … even LR in a Windows virtual machine) to advanced image editing (Gimp) to printing ( Qimage (Windows), Darktable, PhotoPrint, TurboPrint) …
“It tells me one thing, most of the people owning this system shoot only jpg” – Sorry, here is Raw+JPEG no mindless 1 soft-does-all but an array of choices.
” I wouldn’t buy Fuji ever ” : so why are you asking for the xpro2 ? Where’s the guarantee that software devs will implement the algorithms any better ? There are options today – but I guess it is much easier to complain
I want to apologize, Didiergm, I didn’t intend to offend you. I’m using multiple camera systems, was used to Aperture for my workflow. When the X-series took off, I have been 6 months balanced between OOC jpgs, Silkypix (one of the most weird and user un-friendly RAW convertors I’ve ever seen) and a few other quirky solutions that appeared on blogs like this – suffered so much with the mix of my other cameras – so much, I’ve really lost work by swapping back and forth files between directories and programs. The other six months, I’ve still been unlucky and completely off-track at moments, since more programs started supporting the X-series, but everything I looked at, was disappointing – I’ve never seen a camera system showing pink and fluo-green pixels in the middle of a landscape, well? We’ve gotten into a better support situation now, but has really taken a very long time before I dared to shoot using RAF-files only. During this time, I’ve really had during a few of these crisis-moments the finger on the trigger to sell all my Fuji stuff, to be honest, if I would have known all the hassle and quirks I experienced during the first year (…I was not the only one, the internet is full of people that really had a very hard time with Fuji X), I’d never bought into this system. Well, other stories have forced my workflow to LR now. I still hate the inflexibility of the picture & version management across multiple servers and desks (poor Adobe, Aperture is a database, LR is just a value added directory browser), and the Fuji conversions, well, we’ve all accepted what they are at the end of the day. Most real prints really look great now so why should I complain so much – but we all know that the DNA of those X-trans pixels still suck in some cases. And I don’t find you can accept something like this from a camera system that appeals to a highly advanced/pro segment. Indeed, where is the guarantee that the X-Pro2 will be better. What do I love my old, original X100 that never had all those issues. Will I go to the X-Pro2, I still don’t know, if the X-series still exist in 2016 (you never know), I’ll take a decission it when it really is a proven system – I won’t ever be the first to test something new again.
No offense taken.
I can understand it is (was hopefully) frustrating and error-prone. I can also empathise with your dislike of LR – I don’t find it’s cataloging part very convincing and I have never been able to really commit lots of images to it. That said, their demoisaic algorithms and general darkroom functionalities are fine, so I guess one needs to compromise at some point. My biggest worry with LR ? to be forced to go to the Cloud and stop being offered a stabd alone version.
Just the 90 f2 and their Lens line up is complete (Which looks huge unfortunately, but yeah it’s a 90mm…)
Now focus on the cameras, AF speed needs to be improved, and new sensor with better ISO and DR would be welcome, but general speed and responsivness should be top 1.
I dream of a X-V1 (V for video) to compete against the GH4, I hate having 2 systems and different lenses, I just love fuji ergonomics and lenses…
What I wish for future X-T1 update:
– Add Silence Mode as an Fn choice
– Make only ES when in Silence Mode
– When halfway release of shutter, AF stays locked
– In AF+MF mode, make MF available directly not only after AF tries to hunt……
– Better video capabilities
– And of course as usual, better AF
– Maybe there is a work around this one but I haven’t found it, on my X-E1, while I choose focus area and click on middle button, the AF area goes directly to the center. Probably the only thing I really miss from the X-E1
I completely agree Oscar; Fuji needs better bodies. While the X-T1 had great build quality, a great viewfinder, and (in my opinion) great controls and ergonomics, Fuji really needs MUCH better video, speed (AF and shooting), and better image quality (although it is good already). An X-V1, maybe with 4K and slo-mo (or at least usable 1080p) would be a dream.
My X-Pro 1 can quickly switch to Silent Mode by holding down the Disp/Back button…but my X100T can’t 🙁
I actually like that pressing the Menu/OK button centers the AF point and the shutter button confirms any other position. I really liked this feature on my Nikons for quickly going back to center single focus points. The XP1 has this but I wish my X100T did as well!
I like the idea of ES during Silent Mode as an option.
Now I want 300/2.8 OIS II WR and a set of teleconverters.
With f/2.8 300 mm selection is comprehensive.
Here’s the list of manual focus telephoto lenses that I want for my Fuji X system:
Even better if they could make it an f2 or 2.4
Better dream big, how ’bout f/1.8?
Pray you never have to buy a filter to fit such a lens 😉
Easy peasy, such lenses typically use drop-in filters in very modest sizes 🙂
Yes, a fast prime telephoto lens is needed.
FUJI has build now an impressive lens line-up.
Patrick, do you know when FUJI will publish their new lens roadmap, including the new 35mm f/1.4 mark II ?
🙂
I didn’t vote-these fast primes are cool for pro’s or for people with deep pockets ;-). I would be more interested in small lenses like a 14mm f/3,5 35mm f/2 or a 56mm f/2…
Hopefully these will come, they really are running out of useful prime focal lengths for 1.4 glass.
Hmm… 200/1.4? Or f/1.4 fisheye? 🙂
Hmm that’s an interesting thought actually, I wonder if they’ll ever make a fisheye? I imagine a f1.4 200mm would need a dinner plate size front element 😉
Well, they’re basically done with “bread and butter” primes, now it’s time for a specialty/novelty glass. Fisheyes, fast superteles, tilt-shifts and all that jazz. I’d love to see a 10-24mm offered in f/2.8 or faster, but that’s about it. The system is nearly complete.
Oh, and yes, it’s also time for some slow (and cheap) ultralight/ultracompact primes for landscape/travel photography, just like Maurice said 🙂
The 90mm for an aps-c is huge , about the same size samsung’s 85mm is f1.4.
That’s one sexy lens lineup 🙂 Can’t wait for 16 1.4 to compliment my 23 1.4+56 1.2…
Fuji, please make a prime, anywhere between 15 – 20 as a pancake anywhere between 2 and 2.4 It can be done.
If they can improve the dynamic range and resolution significantly, they will have one of the best systems. The lens lineup is becoming one of the best. They need fast prime telephoto lenses, a 100 mm 1:1 macro, and some tilt-shift lenses and it will be a superb line. Upon doing so, if they could introduce f/0. 95 35mm and 56 mm lenses, that would be cool too.
The real question is whether they can significantly improve the APS-C sized sensor in dynamic range and resolution. The lenses are already great and the cameras are very good: even my X-Pro 1 is still a very good camera, which I may turn into a monochrome (strip it of the colour filter) camera once I get the X-Pro 2 (assuming I will get that). Stripping it of the colour filter should increase the sharpness and resolution, as colour filters are the weak link in digital cameras (which is why everyone is seeking even higher megapixel counts – don’t resolve at the stated resolution due the the estimates involved).
i want middle level same as a6000,em10 or gx7,
same system like x-m include evf res-about 1.44-2.0 mdot,
tile screen (no selfie) ,
i interest fuji x system and wait for suitable body,reasonable price 🙂
The push/pull MF will not be on the 90mm. They only put that on the wider primes. It makes sense on such lenses with the deeper depth of field allowing easy zone focusing. That doesn’t work in longer lenses like a 90mm. It doesn’t even work on a 50mm equivalent.
Mock-ups at Photokina had the following filter thread sizes: 16/1.4 = 67mm, 90/2 = 72mm, 140-400/4-5.6 = 86mm. Having said that, as you say “size can change until their release”, and there have already been changes between mock-ups and final designs before now. Can anyone make out whether the 90mm in the catalogue photo is 62 or 72mm thread?
Read this please:
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/canon_ef_85mm_f18_review.html
or this
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-85mm-f-1.8-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
Just to sum it up – 50-100mm prime lenses are easy to design and cheap to manufacture and no, the Canon 85mm 1.8 is nowhere near the poor performer you indicate. Just because a lens is old does not mean that it’s not performing adequately – I don’t really see a lot of people arguing that the Leica lenses produced 20-40 years ago are lacking in performance.
XF 18mm F2.0 R is already there…