This is one of my favorite rumors of 2015. On April 20 a New Source told us Fujifilm is considering to produce a Super-Fast 1.0 lens (around 30mm). We all took the grain of salt… and started hoping.
Luckily, about a month later, on May 25, a source, who was right in the past, confirmed that Fujifilm has a 33mmF1.0 on the radar, but they were still discussing if they should really make it. Will the X-shooter community buy such a lens?
We tried to help Fujifilm in their decision, and dropped our vote in the following polls:
[poll id=”88″]
[poll id=”89″]
And we waited… patiently.
So what, did Fuji finally made its decision? According to a trusted source: Yes, the die is cast! And the answer is….
… drum roll…
Yes! Fuji will produce it!
When will it come? I still don’t know, but you can be sure I’ll put my best into it not only to get multiple confirmation about this rumor, but also to give you an expected release date as soon as possible!
so stay tuned…
Fuji X Forum, Facebook, Google+, RSS-feed and Twitter
69 Responses
Hmm, if that lens happens, I wonder if Fujifilm will then discontinue the venerable 35/1.4 lens to push their users to either the 33/1.0 or the 35/2.0 WR depending on needs and budget.
My thoughts as well. A line-up with 33mm/f1.0, 35mm/f1.4, and 35mm/f2.0 would start to be a bit too crowded in the 50mm equivalent segment.
Leica has four nifty-fifties as far as I remeber at F0.95, F1.4, F2 and F2.4. They’ve been keeping this line-up alive for years now and update all of them on a more less regular basis. I think the normal FOV is so popular, there’s a market for each of the version. Some users probably own even more than one 50mm…
However I would like to point out to Fuji that the 35mm equivalent isn’t much less popular, so offering a second 23mm lens would be very welcome! I personally would welcome a 23mm F2 in the size and weight category of the current 35mm F1.4 and WITH APERTURE RING!!! Thank you very much 😉
Actually, there are 5 current 50mm M-mount lenses. It seems as if the new APO-Summicron is so expensive (even by Leica standards) that they kept the plain-summicron..
They will never do it unless they wanna stop producing the X100 series.
Equivalent is not the same as focal length.
It doesn’t make much sense, given more pressing needs in the line-up.
I’d like a 23mm, 56mm, and 90mm with their current apertures but with a leaf shutter built in.
Indeed. But that would be worrying, since there is plenty of difference between the 3 imho, and any F1.0 like very expensive. Of course the 35/1.4 will have to get improved AF .. and it probably will – just won’t be shown on the roadmap.
Plenty of difference? Really? I’m missing something here. Essentially + or – a couple of stops with apertures that are already fast. The WR in the new 35mm is the big upgrade.
Size, cost, aperture, AF-speed, weather-sealing, rendering… In fact, only the focal length is similar.
I agree that Fuji should probably expand the lens line-up to the extreme (long tele, ultra-wide or even fisheye) but people probable buy more 35mm than anything else and a 35mm 1.0 could attract fullframe guyz (they need to improve AF in low light first…)
So far, I do not have a normal (50) lens for my x- system. the f1.4 seems dated at this point, and I am not too excited about the upcoming f2 either. WR would be very welcomed, but it doesn’t look terribly compact for an f2 lens either (and just not personally taken with the look of it). But I would like a 50-ish range that was at least a 1:2 with MFD. I agree with your other statements about greatly needing a true (1:1) macro upgrade though. But for some, including me, a very fast nifty50 would be useful too.
You do realize that every stop DOUBLES the light gathering. The difference between F2 or F1.4 is not “0.6” it’s 200%, with F1.0 again another 200% on top of that. Meaning you can shoot ISO400 where the F2 would need to be ISO1600, not to mention the flexibility in DoF control.
Nothing wrong with F2 though, or even F2.8 the 27mm proves that, but there is significant difference between all of these. Now if it were F1.2 versus F1.4 i might agree with you but it’s not, they’re full stops.
You do realize that every stop you open the aperture you LOSE DOF. Not every one is going to shoot wide open all the time (I dare say most won’t).
Ask most people using the 35 f1.4 if they really wanted/needed to open up more – like that razor thin DOF is going to better when it’s even MORE razor thin.
Yeah, I like artsy shots too and playing around with F1.0 would be cool, but not something I or most folks would do more than 1% of the time.
It’s a 33mm, and it’s not FF. It’s not that thin. Even wide-open you have (quite a bit) more DoF than the 56/1.2, or a 85/1.4 for example.
http://howmuchblur.com/#compare-1.5x-85mm-f1.4-and-1.5x-56mm-f1.2-and-1.5x-33mm-f1-and-1.5x-35mm-f1.4-and-1.5x-35mm-f2-on-a-0.9m-wide-subject
Whether or not F1 is useful (for you) was not the point. The point was that all 3 deserve a place and you confirm exactly that.
Sensor-size (e.g. “full-frame”) has nothing to do with depth of field.
Congratulations, you’ve found something to comment on. You’re right, but it does however cause the need to change focal length, which in turn causes the physical aperture to change, no way around it, just a bit easier to name the cause of the effect.
What you are doing is just perpetuating the myth.
Don’t worry about it.
Agreed. I did the DoF calculations for the 33mm and the 35mm at maximum aperture, and the difference is for practical purposes negligible: only at roughly 5 metres is the difference more than 10~20 centimetres.
Totally disagree…I shoot ‘fast’ lenses wide open (or close to it) most of the time. If you want to shoot a lens at f5.6 there are cheaper options just as sharp.
For example, why pay $10k for a Leica Noctilux to shoot at f5.6 when a $1200 Summarit will probably be sharper and way smaller and cheaper.
I’m not convinced your usage is typical. For a lot of lenses, even fast ones, the sweet spots in terms of sharpness aren’t at “wide open” – they are more like f5.6 or other intermediate aperture.
And it just seems odd to me that Fuji would add another XF offering in the 30-ish mm range without addressing other focal length needs in their lineup first.
You’re correct…the sweet spot for most lenses is around the f5.6 range…that was my point:) Most people in my circle of friends buy fast glass to shoot wide open, otherwise they would buy cheaper lenses that perform just as well at smaller apertures.
The difference does not only lie in the “light gathering” ability of the lenses, but also the way in which the different optical formulae manipulate the various colours of light.
Exactly. Among other things. But i didn’t want to make it too complicated for the guy. Focus on the most attainable aspect, but i don’t think it worked.
I’d buy it day one. The latest Fuji lenses (16-55, 16, 90) were nothing but outstanding. (The only lens that produces as nice creamy bokeh as the 90mm is the Canon 135mm L).
So please Fuji: compete with the Sigma Arts – that means f/1.0 versions of the most used focal length!
I think it will be a 52.8mm F0.34
Sony is said to be announcing 8 FE lenses at PhotoPlus. 8!!! And unlike their APSC lineup, many of the FF lenses don’t suck. And neither does the A7Rii.
An f/1.0 lens would be a great move.
“And neither does the A7Rii.”
For that price, it better not…
Sony is said to be announcing 20 XYZ lenses in 2016, for the upcoming Sony XYZ-Alpha+-NEX mount, which isn’t backward compatible with any other lens.
My 35 1.4 is good enough and not to mention that 33 1.0 will be huge.
can’t wait for this one! High hopes that it has decent bokeh, something with a rendering of canon 50/1.4 would make me super happy, and then a setup of 10-24, 33 and 50-230 is just perfect for me
If true = instant buy
Not even a little curious what it would cost? Surely it would be a huge asset to the line-up, but really the price could still be anything at this point.
Voigtlander has a $999 50mm F1.1, while Nikon has a 58mm F1.4 at $1700.
I would love them to release this lens and would buy it immediately. 1.0 lenses will be heavier, sure, but the combination will still be lighter than FF equivalent setups! Why make the argument that it isn’t needed when you know there are wedding, portrait and event pros shooting Fuji? I’d buy this and a 23 f/1 TODAY. Having these lenses on offer would only help Fuji differentiate themselves in the market.
And imagine this: built-in leaf shutter… 😛
I personally would not buy this lens. It’s usefulness doesn’t seem like it would be equal to what I’d imagine it would cost.
I guess it would be great in near darkness; it’s a shame the cameras focus at a slow speeds in these conditions.
The big question is “why?” With the new WR 35 coming out, this focal length is crowded. And the 35mm 1.4 ain’t too shabby either. There are certainly better holes to fill in the line-up.
Agreed.
As Trenton wrote in yesterday’s interview, a 10-24 f/2.8 would complete the trifecta along with the 16-55 and 50-140.
I’m currently holding on the 10-24 because of this.
The answer is: because there is a market.
35mm F2 WR: small, cheap, for RF
35mm F1.4: good compromise
33mm F1.0: large, heavy, excellent, costly
That’s not a crowded focal length, that’s what I call a premium selection of excellent choices in a very important focal length range. That’s for what you will be remembered of as a brand.
My thoughts, I don’t think he meant crowded in the sense of it being over saturated, but crowded in where Fujifilm could focus their attention towards feeling gaps.
The 35 f/2, f/1.4 and f/1 is no different than Canon’s 50 f/1.8, f/1.4 and f/1.2, but there are other needs that seem more important at the moment.
Like a smaller, slower XF 23, a faster ultra wide angle, a 16-85 zoom perhaps.
A faster UWW? Isn’t the 16/1.4 fast enough?
16 is not ultra wide on a crop.
16 isn’t considered UWA and I was speaking in terms of the zoom, I apologize as the 10-24 is only f/4 at the moment.
Canon has about 3 lenses for each “important” focal length too.
I could imagine, that Fuji would go that route too. 23mm, 35mm, 56mm
Pro Line: f/1.0 or even greater (f/0.85 0.95)
“Normal” f/1.4 (f/1.2)
“Small Line” f/1.8-f/2.0
The small would be especially interessting for people new to the system (I think the 35mm f/2.0 will be an kit option soon)
And people owning the f/1.4 version would (at least some of them) upgrade to the f/1.0 versions.
I know I would
Agreed – if it were awesome, even if expensive, I can see it. But if it’s just another lens you have to stop down to f2.8 to use….
Why? The 56 is more than useable at f1.2. Actually I use it at f1.2 almost all the time…
Sure – if it’s really good at f/1. But if it’s not really good at f/1 and only really usable stopped down, it kind of defeats the purpose. Esp. if it is expensive. If it’s just mediocre then it’s a novelty (IMHO) and doesn’t differentiate itself from the 27, Zeiss 32, or 2 35mm lenses (which is a pretty tight range of lenses)
Oooh. That is a very juicy rumour. (Calling it “rumour” because until I see an official statement, it’s still nothing more than that). However… I’m very much looking forward to that confirming statement. 🙂
Personally, I’m getting really close to saturation in my investment in Fuji-X glass.
Before I consider satisfying my lust for super shallow DOF, I want to see kick ass next generation sensors and AF that firmly cements Fujifilm’s ability to draw in more photographers to ensure that the Fuji-X future remains bright for many years to come.
I agree. Fuji is a niche brand of camera which I really like. However, I am waiting for the next generation of Fuji bodies and sensors to see if this system will be going forward. I would hate to be stuck with a lot of Fuji glass just to have them pull the plug on the system. Sony is getting stronger by the day.
I think a lot of X Photographer will love a lens that this one and will bring a lot of business to Fuji atracting the bokeh lover having the first f1.0 lens.
On the side, I still don’t get why they are releasing the WR 35mm f2.0. Being a WR is not a plus for me and going from 1.4 to 2.0….really ?.
I have the XF35mm f1.4 and I love the lens, is very affordable in the used market ($350~400).
Also I agree with umijin, that they have to cover other focals in the line up.
Even though the announcement would generate a lot of attention and could even be a driver for people, i voted no.
As a fuji owner i believe there are better niches to be filled. A set of tele primes, e.g. 200/2.8, 300/4, 400/5.6. Some specialties like a fisheye, a tilt-shift. That kind of stuff.
I’m totally with you. I honestly think they’re set with anything below 100mm. They need to work on the longer reach and better AF right now.
Yes I’d buy one…. And iirc (…….) didn’t Fuji say that FF wasn’t needed, because their lenses are so fast? Well ok then, as Picard said – make it so.
Just please don’t make it to be one of those focus clutch lenses.
Cost? No clue, but if Fuji can make the 56 1.2 cost what it does, then the 35/1 shouldn’t be ‘that’ much more…. Maybe 30% more?
No, Fuji didn’t say that at all, they said ‘APS-C is the best format for the optimum balance of body size and image quality’.
In no surprising news the poll shows 30% of respondents willing to pay ‘no more than $900’…..in other news those same 30% of respondents are going to be dissappointed.
Seriously… I’d honestly drop $1200. More than that, well, too rich for my blood but I could understand it being more.
I compared the build quality of the 35 1.4 and 90 f/2, the 90 is so much nicer. Fuji really learned something between making the 2 lenses.
I had expected the 35 f/2 to be much smaller, in the pre-release photos it looked smaller than it finally is.
So I am hoping Fuji makes the 35 or 33 f/1.0 with the 90 f/2 build quality.
With that said, Fuji should have made the 90mm a 90mm f/1.8 with OIS.
Also Fuji should make one lens for a portrait studio, I vote for a 27-90mm f/2 OIS (40-135 35mm equivalent, yes it would be big, but I could shoot all day without ever changing the lens).
And Fuji needs to put IBIS in the future X-T2
I’m still extremely happy with my 35 f/1.4. 90 f/2 is excellent for portrait but I actually expect more than that from Fuji. If Canon can make very compact 100 F/2 for full frame. I was hoping Fuji can make something like 100 f/1.8 with similar or more compact size. It turns out that the 90 f/2 is bulkier than the EF 100 f/2.
Fuji film system is excellent due to its amazing lenses. I strongly need fujinon 33 mm f 1.0. However if it will be very expensive, I won’t buy it. Price must be reasonable otherwise it is better to buy full frame lens.
Seriously, what is up with people like you who want specialized f1 lenses but don’t want it to be ‘expensive’. Guess what, if it isn’t expensive then it will be a lens of compromises and will probably suck. If you want a ‘reasonably’ priced standard lens then get the 35mm 1.4
There is zero point in Fuji making an f1 lens unless it performs at a very high level; it is after all a ‘specialty’ lens, not some cheap, novelty item.
I don’t need extremely expensive Fujinon 33 mm f 1.0 because I won’t buy it.
In other words it is better to buy full frame camera and buy excellent lenses which are significantly cheaper than Fuji lenses. Additionally they offer better bokeh. For example Nikkor 50 mm f 1.4 or Nikkor 85 mm f 1.8 (it is twice cheaper than Fujinon), or outstanding Sigma lenses.
Well…I agree with you to the extent that I would not buy an f1 lens for Fuji either since I also shoot full frame. That said, if you only shoot APS-C then I would imagine some people would like this lens.
It annoys me that they’re considering putting the widest aperture on the most boring angle of view lens.
I can’t really imagine this producing more interesting photographs than the f/1.4, it’s just a bragging rights lens; greater DoF is available on at least three other lenses in the range already (at a more than likely higher quality too, given the increasing amount of compromise at wider apertures).
Fuji makes better glass than Leica, but it’s all wasted since pros always downsample to 4 mp Jpegs!
Lame request, but: make it with a square hood, like the 35mm f/1.4? It just looks so darn cool.
I voted no. There is already a 35mm f1.4 and we are getting the 35mm f2 today. Not sure why they’d want to overcrowd this focal length. If anything, for the focal lengths that are already covered, I would have liked to see a faster version of the 90mm prime.
Or a 135mm f/2 perhaps?