Here is a Fuji Roadmap, showing the release of the lenses month by month:
1) XF90mm – JULY
2) XF35mm – NOVEMBER
3) x1.4 Teleconvertern – NOVEMBER / DECEMBER
4) XF 100-400 – MARCH
5) XF 120mm – JULY
That 35mmF2 looks like a perfect kit lens for the X-PRO2. And don’t miss it to read the amazing Fuji X Camera dream list here… some suggestions amongst it, that I really would LOVE to see come true one day… and why not, join us over there with your dreams 😉
Thanks FR-reader Stalkdog for sharing here the roadmap.
58 Responses
Rather shuts down the f1.0 standard lens rumor…shame
no, it does not. do you really think, there are not at least half a dozen surprises along the way? because there certainly are.
So far the surprises have been pretty worthless. 56mm APD? Maybe someone cares about it, but that was definitely not a lens anyone was dying for.
Other surpises: New cheap XC zooms no one asked for, though those seem like great updates, especially the improved close-focus distance which makes them extremely versatile (50-230mm is already great for pseudo-macro even before the update).
yes, it was not a lens anyone was dying for, but as is the case with the f1.0. and nevertheless: there are people out there, waiting for just that case to happen. but to correct your two cents: even the 35f2 were “surprises”, as was the 90f2 – so you see. the curtain is not lifted entirely. there are some lenses down the road, which are going to be “surprises” or, for that matter (if you like it better), still not revealed. But as I can see above: you are on a mission right now to “correct” all the posts at all costs. Go ahead, do as you please. If it’s really worth the effort.
hm.. i hope the converter is really really good.. then the 16mm would become 23 2.0 and i wouldn’t need the x-100t extra..
There is 23/1.4, why would you need 16/1.4+teleconverter?
I think dr.Doom’s point was that they now carry an X100T to get the 23mm f/2, but that the TC would let them use the 16mm as 23mm without carrying the extra lens or camera.
Not a super great plan IMHO, not least because (as pointed out already) it won’t work.
Converter will only work with some telephoto lenses XF50-140mmF2.8 R LM OIS WR, XF120mmF2.8 R Macro, XF100-400mm
http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n150210.html
I have read this before too, but what is the reason? And why wont it work on the 55-200?
I remember reading that it WOULD work with the 55-200mm, Dis probably just forgot to include it in his long list.
Annoyingly it WONT support the 50-230mm, since the pair would make a great lightweight combo for reaching up to 322mm.
I imagine the extra lost light puts the f/6.7 over the f/9 line and makes some aspect of the AF stop working. Hopefully they didn’t cripple it just to sell the more expensive lenses.
Unfortunately not. If you open the link attached in my previous post you’ll see that there is no 55-200 on the list.
There is no official explanation but it looks like it depends on the lens construction. Converter has a very extending group. If a lens has a rear group near the mount the converter won’t mount on it. 50-140, 120, and 100-400 has to have the rear group located deeper from the mount into the barel.
Finally a more precise announcement! But 10 month for the 100-400mm… ARGHH!!
I guess it’s because AF has always been the biggest weak point of Fuji that no one ever complains about the absolutely abysmal long-zoom lens options, but damn, Fuji is really failing to get us an option for wildlife/sports/gumshoe-detective-work in a timely manner.
FWIW if you really need reach don’t write off the 50-230mm. It will barely register on your bank statement if you’re considering the 140-400mm and is very sharp and has great bokeh if you can live with the f/6.7. It’s also significantly smaller and lighter than the 55-200mm, so it’s not a burden to carry around in case you see something within it’s range.
I hope roadmap for 2016 will include more smaller f/2 primes and 35/2 WR is opening a new small f/2 WR line, which seems best for X-Pro2 with HVF and for other RF styled Fuji cams. I tried 56/1.2, 23/1.4 and 16/1.4 with X-E1/E2 but resigned from buying them because they are too big and hinder in my photography. Hope Fuji will bring – after 35/2 WR release – in 2016 new f/2 WR primes, such as 23/2, 55/2 and later 16/2 and 85/2.8
unfortunately the 35/2 seems hardly any smaller than the 35/1.4
to me it seems much smaller, and the f2 version has a conic shape which makes it not only shorter but also slimmer.
Also it might be that they are going to make an even bigger 35mm f/1.4 that fixes it’s issues but no longer looks good in OVF, with the excuse that the 35mm f/2 (with conical shape) is ideal for OVF.
SO will the Xpro2 be weather resistant too?
I hope so, otherwise it wouldnt make much sense to sell it as a kit with the 35 f2 WR. IMHO
on the roadmap, XF35mm f2 is not WR…
Saw this too… That’s a worry. Thought for sure it meant a WR X-Pro2 before but maybe not now 🙁
None of yet to be released lenses on official roadmap are marked as WR: http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/xf_lens/roadmap/index.html
…including 16 and 90. And it means just that: they are not marked.
Oh my mistake then. I thought the lens was WR
No not yours, the roadmap is mistaken.
Possible lenses for 2016-19:
XF35/1.2 Premium Normal.
Tele lenses: XF200/2.8 for sports photographers; X2 Tele converter; XF56/1.8 standard short tele; The perfect portrait tele compromise, XF70/1.7; A f/4 prime tele lens in the 300-500mm region, maybe using fresnel lens(es) for compact size.
Wide Angle lenses: f/2 versions of the 23 and 16mm lenses (in that order); Premium f/1.4 18mm lens, Fish-eye lens, A wider than 10mm Super WA lens; Possibly a 16mm PC/TS lens if there is enough demand.
Zooms: A cheaper smaller and lighter XC10-18/3.5-5.6.
That would make the X-mount lens line-up quite complete.
Now we also have potential aprture values for the 100-400 tele zoom…!
f/4.5-5.6 sounds great!
Patrick – is the roadmap from Fuji officially or rumours / estimates of release dates?
Where is the MF lenses roadmap ?
You’ve just missed it, it’s right next to Fujifilm tripods.
Yes, next to the Manual Focus lenses section 🙂
Not so many lenses left to deliver… quite some free time for updates or a new line-up 😀
How about they go back and put better (smoother, quieter) motors in the primes (particularly the 35, 56, and 60; sounds like the 90 is going to have that), make the aperture rings more clicky and less easily bumped, the focus rings smoother, and provide manual override of focus? And make the 60 into a good macro lens, with 1:1? Smoother, better-calibrated manual focus would be a big update, if nothing else.
+1 for an updated 35mm f/1.4…
That’s a tall order. The 35mm and it’s “pumping” focus is probably the most important thing they need to deal with, and I guess the 60mm is pretty bad at focusing (though with the 120mm coming out they might just lower the 60mm price and consider it the cheapo option).
Do people really complain about the 56mm? I thought it was universally loved.
Re: clickiness/smoothness They can never satisfy anyone and it’s largely personal taste.
Re: Manual override: That’s what the manual switch is for, as well as the new feature that lets you adjust focus after it locks on AF. I guess you want all lenses to have the on-lens manual thing from the 16mm?
At least the copy of the 56 I had shook the whole camera when it focused, and the focus ring was so still I almost needed pliers to turn it. NOT smooth.
To me, the aperture rings need to be stiff enough to not be continually moved inadvertently while shooting. That is all I am asking.
By manual override, I mean like my Canon lenses and my m4/3 lenses, where even with AF on, you can still move the focus ring to adjust focus, not a focus-ring clutch. If m4/3 can do it with fly-by-wire lenses, why can’t Fuji?
Manual override : that’s exactly what the AF+MF options allows you to do, not for some expensive lens ala Nikon but for all of the lens in the lineup
I expect to see a super-compact collapsable 18-50 released with whatever camera they put out next for the lowest end.
Don’t hold your breath. That’s not Fuji’s style at all AND they’ve just released updates to their XC 16-50mm and 50-230mm lenses (with closer focusing distances which IMHO Is awesome!).
They are unlikely to re-update those lenses again any time soon and if they did it probably wouldn’t be with some collapsible power-zoom like the competition, those things are anathema to Fuji’s manual sensibilities.
Pentax managed to do it well. That lens could easily pass as a low cost fujinon, I think.
The lipstick they put on the xc zooms dont make a terrible solid argument anyway.
Why would you call it lipstick? I’m pretty sure they look exactly the same as the old versions. The main changes were ones almost no one in the intended audience will ever even notice, they just make the lens more useful for all those people who pick them up with the X-M2.
I think for people who need a tiny package they’d hope either the X30 or X100T are satisfying. If anything I can’t understand why they don’t offer a larger-sensor X40. I’d be very tempted if it wasn’t so thoroughly incapable of shallow DoF (and the noise penalty that goes with a small sensor).
I sure would like to see a high quality 16-80mm f/4 WR Lens on the roadmap.
100-400….please come earlier 🙂
We’ll have to plan our vacations for after April 2016 it seems 😉
The good news is we have time to save up. Probably going to be the most expensive Fuji lens yet right?
Would have sounded slow until I started using the 50-230mm f/4.5-6.7, which really pushes it at the long end but is still Fuji’s longest lens (embarassing?)
I get a lot more interesting subjects with decent noise at f/6.7 than I thought I would, and it probably helps me have less out-of-focus dicards than if the lens could do F/4 or faster.
4.5-5.6 seems like a good speed for this lens considering the amazing reach it will give and it’s relatively small size (Can’t find anyone stating it’s weight but physically it seems very reasonable for the reach).
4.5-5.6 is standard for that zoom range. For people that use 400mm+ lenses often, anything better than f/8 is fast enough. Even when you get things like a 500mm f/4 lens, you usually stop it down to between 5.6 and 8 to maximise resolution and give you half a chance of actually getting something in focus! In 35mm terms, 400mm at f/5.6 is more or less like a 50mm at f/1.4. Making 400mm faster than f/5.6 is prohibitively expensive and most often a waste of time.
Where is the flash system roadmap?
Now that’s an interesting question. Somewhere in the Flying Dutchman’s cargo hold, I guess?
Nothing terribly exciting. My dream of 70mm in prime glass continues unfulfilled. The 35mm f/2 looks too damn ugly. 100-400 is sort of interesting, but god knows what use it will be; bird watchers are hardly going to ditch their 7D2s and trusty 400mm primes for a mirrorless zoom. 120mm macro is about as interesting as it gets, though I can’t say I have any use for such a lens myself. The teleconverter would have some use in my bag, if it actually worked with lenses I use. Which it doesn’t appear to.
Bleh.
Yes – and where is f/2.8 or f/4.0 300 mm for fuji?
The 35mm f2 is ugly? It’s small and compact, which is perfect for the Xpro-2
I think the 35/2 is supposed to look like an old rangefinder lens. Mimicing old stuff is a large part of the Fuji mystique.
Maybe make positive contributions to a Canon forum rather than negative ones to a mirrorless one?
35 f2 looks great to me. Or stick the the 1.4 if you need it. Easy.
Because I got sick of Canon, found I prefer Fuji and sold all my Canon stuff a while back and strictly use Fuji cameras now, maybe?
And I will gladly be keeping to my 35mm f/1.4. The 35mm f/2 is simply aesthetically a Frankenstein’s monster, is all I’m saying.
I’m also having doubts now that I’ve seen what the 35 mm f/2 looks like, as I would have preferred a much more compact lens. I would even have been happy with it being f/2.8 or f/3.5 (like the Takumar I currently use), just as long as it is as small as the 27mm.
Also agree … My last L-lens is picked up by its new owner next month; the 400mm f/5.6 went last year.
Are people really judging a lens (35mm f2) by how it looks? I, for one, don’t care how it looks. I’ll be taking pictures WITH it, not OF it.
I was hoping it’ll be a lot smaller (more pancake lens). Comparing to the 1.4, it’s only 1cm smaller (shorter).
Hopefully they would add more pancake lenses in their line-up. Maybe a 23mm f/2 or 50mm f/1.8.
Hope that the 120 F2.8 macro is soon joined by a XF 50-125 F2.8/4 OIS!