This is the first image and here are some specs of the final production version of the Fuji XF 90mm lens that will be announced on May 18:
– 62mm Filter size
– Dust and Splash resistant.
– Lens construction: 11 elements in 8 groups
– Three ED glass elements
– Circular aperture diaphragm
via Digicameinfo.
XF 56mm vs 90mm size comparison by FR-reader Victor
116 Responses
Beautiful. I’ll get one.
Good job, Patrick!!
(Can’t be compared to the Rokinon 85mmF1.4 that I’m using now as a substitute.)
to be fair, this leak is “sponsored” by digicame-info (as linked in the article). So all the merits to him. My only merit is to wake up at 6AM to check the internet for leaks 😉
It will be on my Xmas shopping list for sure
How have you found the Rokinon 85mm on your Fuji? I can;t afford to get the 90mm so am considering the Rokinon. Cheers
Overall, I like it a lot. It’s a very sturdy, well-built, impressive-looking lens. Optically sufficient for my amateur needs. I never pixel-peep anything. However, I often use -1 exposure compensation to increase color saturation which I never do with Fuji lenses.
My best shots with this lens happened by using single point light metering at night, focusing on a bright face or something at a night market or in harsh contrast situations, especially at night. So, for me it’s basically a night lens.
The focusing ring is stiff, but I like it. It feels very good, no tolerance, high quality.
One downside you probably already know: this beast is heavy. You’ll instantly notice how your body language changes, from happy holding your camera all day long to where can I put this beast and rest for a moment! 🙂
If that is no problem for you, and you like manual focus, then this lens is probably worth considering. Yet, I’ll still go for the 90mm, because it’s optically better, less heavy, and it has AF.
It’s lovely, but I will probably same my money and stick with my Rokinon 85mm 1.4. I tend to use manual focus, and I like the extra couple stops of aperture.
Yep, I also like MF and F1.4. But to be honest, the Rokinon isn’t exactly a sharp lens. Not awful though. But surely no match against this 90mmF2. Full spec aren’t available yet, but I expect nothing less than stellar quality.
Oh, I have no doubt this is going to be a sharp and gorgeous lens with and appropriately high price tag, and it is going to be the better choice for some people. Me, I gotta save my pennies if I am going to get an X-Pro2 in the fall.
F1.4 to f2 is one stop, not a couple. This will probably have higher transmission, so in actuality probably less than one stop.
I’m not sure this will be worth it for me. I already have the 50-140. That lens is already beyond amazing and 1 stop faster for the 90 doesn’t make a huge difference.
it is all about the size difference. Many of us don’t want to carry a behemoth of 50-140 (I sure don’t) on a mirrorless body. If they can keep this lens under 500 grams, should be a good buy
Well this 90mm isn’t exactly ‘compact’, but compared to the 50-140 there is no comparison. Not to mention weight, the different bokeh character (yes that’s a real thing), and shooting prime might simply be a preference as it is for me. Likely going to be a few hundred dollars/euros cheaper as well. 🙂
“bokeh character (yes that’s a real thing)”
Actually, it’s a tautology.
It’s actual physics. Like it or not. Why do you think circular/rounded aperture and APD filters exist. Or do you honestly believe that is just marketing.
Perhaps you should look up the definition of tautology. 😉
I did (not natively english), this is my response. It’s not tautology, it is a real thing, it is significant, and proven by physics. But of course you’re free to value it any way you want, like price, size, weight and sharpness, that are all equally real factors of consideration.
He means that ‘bokeh’ means ‘the character of the blur’. So ‘bokeh character’ means ‘the character of the character of the blur’.
Hah good catch, it seems you’re technically right about that, but i doubt it’s what he meant.
This. 🙂
It’s all in good fun though. English is not my mother tongue either.
Then you need to look up tautology 😉 Because far as i know it has nothing to do with writing something down twice. ^.^
Um, that’s exactly what it means.
tautology |tôˈtäləjē|
noun (pl. tautologies)
the saying of the same thing twice in different words, generally considered to be a fault of style (e.g., they arrived one after the other in succession).
Lol, i just read ‘repetition of an idea’, as an offspring of ‘taunting’ or something, but this works too. ^.^
Department of redundancy department )
Stop taunting me with tautology! ^,^
Lol!!!
Well it might be cheaper. But the difference is that I already have the 50-140. Not saying it’s a bad lens. But saying that it may be overkill for someone to have both.
Let me also add that I have the 56 1.2. Reason behind that is that 1.2 is quite a bit faster than 2, let alone 2.8. If this lens was faster than f2, then my argument wouldn’t apply.
You HAVE the 50-140, it is a fantastic lens, what is it with people always trying so hard to look for reasons to buy whatever is announced !? :-/
I am reasoning to NOT buy the 90.
Exactly what i’m saying. 🙂
Is this it? Is this the lens that’ll make me change over? (I hope so.)
Notice that it says “LM” on the lens, which would be the first prime to feature a linear motor! This lens should have fast AF if thats the case. Nice innovation.
good catch….. so normal manual focusing? not by wire?? that’ would be the first for mirrorless market. problem with these motors had been that mirrorless cameras were not equipped with strong enough motors to drive such lenses…..
Most cameras don’t have motors anymore
“The Linear Motor technology directly moves lens elements in the
non-contact state, enables silent operation and excellent response.”
http://fujifilm-x.com/xf-lens/ja/drive_control/images/img_control02.jpg
http://fujifilm-x.com/xf-lens/en/drive_control/#2ndPage
Looks to be all I was hoping for. Anybody like to guess/estimate how long it will be before a Mk2 56 mm LM WR appears.
Nice,this is my next lens
Will it have OIS?
“Full specs” Would include weight and size, yes?
is this the size difference ? wow..the 90 is huge.
this is a better rendition
huge in size but also huge in image quality I guess 😀
It is longer than the mock-up for sure. But it’s not out of line in comparison to the size difference between, say, the Canon 135/2 and 85/1.2 for 35mm. And both these lenses are smaller for the APS-C sized sensor. It’s an appropriate scaling down IMO.
I wonder how much money they will ask for it. Zeiss will release the 85mm for Sony’s FullFrame camera for 1300$… I hope it will be significantly cheaper T___T
it should be cheaper, I expect it to cost less than 56 1.2, since it is slower lens, no image stabilization. But add WR…. I think the MSRP in the US would be like $899 (my guess based on what it should be priced at).
Given that the number and grouping of the glass elements are the same, and will be approximately the same physical size, I would think that it will be slightly more than the 56 mm f1.2 because of the WR and LM features. Perhaps £800 in the UK.
What has pleased me is the 62mm filter thread, which means that I can use my Zeiss Softar 1 on this, and the 56 f1.2. The two lenses will make a superb set for portraits,
The Zeiss 1.8/85 will be $1199 and will be optically stabilized and weigh 475g. I think it will be popular both with Sony FF and APS-C shooters.
…and yes, the Fuji should be significantly cheaper if they want to be competitive with this lens.
Sorry for that stupid question: What is a 90mm lens usually used for?
I would use it to take portraits
135mm (on 35mm film) traditionally excelled at headshots.
Could have just said head shots. Not necessary to talk about the 135 equivalents.
Talking about FOV equivalents is still politically correct.
DOF equivalence is a no-no.
You can’t have it just one way.
Sure you can.
This looks like a good tool, Trenton. What app / software are you using here?
This one: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/dof-viewer/id427477409?mt=8
Trenton which app/program did you used to take this screenshot?
Seems to be a very useful one!
Here: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/dof-viewer/id427477409?mt=8
This is a pretty cool app.
I’m not sure how comparing a 90mm on MF to 90mm on APS-C makes sense. One’s a moderate wide angle or normal and one is a telephoto.
Why so serious?
FOV equivalence makes some sense, as many photographers are conditioned into thinking in 135 terms. DOF equivalence, on the other hand, makes even less sense than comparing apples to oranges horses.
For the simple reason: here at Fujiland we somehow discount small sensor/fast lenses with equivalent FOV because they are inferior, but as soon as it comes to larger than APS-C, we’re all: “But nothing changes” and compare only exact focal lengths even though a 90mm lens on a medium or large format will return a completely different angle of view, not to mention, an f/4 on FF being similar to f/2,8 on APS-C in DOF.
People have bought fast lenses to eliminate as much DOF for quite a while. Sure, the angle of view of the iPhone 6 is similar to a 32 or 33mm lens on FF, so why don’t we compare them directly? The answer: DOF.
F/8 lenses are popular because they are cheap and/or compact. And FF lenses often come in various speeds. You purchase a 2,8 or 3,5 lens because it is small and cheap.
And the 135 equivalent in DOF terms to a 90mm F/2 APS-C is set at an aperture of F/2,8. F/2 135mm lenses for FF exist. You know that, I know that. Everyone knows that.
And unless a specialist 135mm lens, DOF 135mm F/2,8 cost quite a bit less and are much smaller than DOF 135/2 lenses.
And those are the lenses against we should be comparing the output image of the APS-C 90/2. I’m not crapping on the lens, I’m crapping on the idea that DOF doesn’t matter, because it does. If it didn’t, we’d all shoot Pentax Q or Nikon 1, or superzooms and be hog-happy.
I’m sure the 90/2 will be awesome. It just won’t, for anything but exposure speed on the camera, return images similar to 135/2 lenses.
As a matter of fact, I am greatly enjoying additional DOF provided by APS-C “crop factor”. Just the right amount to still destroy the background when needed, yet in most cases you can focus and recompose with no penalty – all at the same aperture value.
If background destruction is the main goal, I’ll resort to traditional big guns (such as 300/2.8), but in reality it’s rarely needed. I don’t get the fad of always using glass like the 85/1.2 wide open.
Speaking of 90/2… it’s a focal length that does all the magic here, not DOF. I used to be a big fan of 135mm primes, no matter what speed. Some people love this FOV, some hate it, just like with any other lens.
I often shoot at f/5,6 and smaller apertures, so I understand what you’re talking about. But with smaller sensors, we pay a big penalty in price/size in order to equate medium or cheaply priced lenses on larger formats.
And 90/2 is great on FF, but I’ve not used so many 135/2,8 equivalent lenses. I love the small/light and cheap as chips 135/4 lenses out there for FF cameras.
I guess the whole weight/size/cost savings we were promised by APS-C marketers doesn’t work unless we really give up a lot in DOF/lens speed. When manufacturers opt for lenses that equate the same FOV/DOF of larger format lenses, there are no advantages except at the camera level.
And the 90/2 is in no way, apart from exposure speed, equivalent to a 135/2 on FF.
I used to have a Canon 135 f/2, I used it often at f/2.8 and the image was only slightly different to that at f/2. This Fuji lens will be like that, but probably a whole lot sharper. I’ve also used a canon 100 f/2 on the fuji system with an adapter, and I can assure you blurring the background is not a problem.
And yet you had the option to use f/2,8 or f/2,0 and you could also purchase an f/2,8 lens in the same focal length. Of course the Fujifilm lens will be sharper: it’s much newer.
But it’s also AS big and much, much more expensive than any non-specialist or non-luxry 135mm lens for a FF system and it only equates the final output of f/2,8.
The differences can be as small as you want or as large as you want, it depends on how you use it. But this is a BIG lens that makes images similar in DOF to an f/2,8 lens, which for years was a second-tier, price-conscious lens.
It won’t be this time. And it can’t be.
Agreed. In addition, one thing I feel is commonly overlooked in these discussions is that compression is a property of the real focal length of the lens. Which is very important in the kind of uses these lenses (56/90) are going to be put to. It doesn’t just matter how much you can blur a background it also matters if there is simply too much shit in the background to begin with.
Thinking of replacing the 56 with the 90 for this reason. Get closer to that magical 135 look. I don’t think the change in working distance will really matter cause I never use the 56 indoors anyway.
Compression is a property of the field of view rather then the focal length. The wider the field of view, the more background shit there is, as you would put it 🙂
I checked my information again and it turns out you are spot on. Thanks for correction
Just as you say “Of course the Fujifilm lens will be sharper: it’s much newer.”, I would say “Of course the Fuji lens will cost more than a Canon 135 f/2.8, it’s newer.”
That Canon lens (which cost over £500 on amazon, hardly cheap!) has been around for decades, when this new Fuji lens reaches that sort of age it will be cheaper than it is right now as well I’m sure.
But it’s totally pointless to compare a brand new tack sharp lens with one that is decades old and has much worse IQ, even if they are equivalent in DoF and field of view.
If Canon or Nikon have a newly designed 135 f/2.8 you can compare it to, that’s a different matter, but in that case I wouldn’t be surprised if the Canikon lens actually costs more than the Fuji.
I afraid don’t understand your statement regarding giving up a lot in DOF/lens speed, as normally ‘a lot’ signifies a significant amount.
Firstly DOF. At a distance of 10 ft, a typical distance for a tight head shot portrait at 135 mm on 35 mm format, the 90 mm aps-c lens has a depth of field of 3.5 inches at f2, at the same distance a 135 mm 35mm format lens at f2 has a depth of field of 2.3 inches. I am sorry but I cannot see that 1.2 inches, 0.6 inch either side of the subject’s eye, is “giving up a lot of depth of field”
Regarding lens speed. Firstly you say that with the crop sensor a lot of lens speed is given up when using an aps-c lens, then in your final paragraph you say that the 90 f2 is equal to the 135/2 in exposure speed. Normally when taking of lenses the speed of the lens is defined as its aperture, so I don’t understand your statement.
natural OIS kickin’ in at 1/500
I’ll be you could do better than that.
http://www.webmd.com/parkinsons-disease/tc/tremor-home-treatment
I can be as blunt and/or sarcastic as anyone, but I think that the link is going a bit too far, because of my age I know several people afflicted with it and it is no joke.
Sorry about that, I’ve edited the original comment. Originally posted the link for “tremor” as a syndrome, and only an hour later (thanks to you) noticed that it’s a chapter of larger article about particular disease.
Going on the tone of your posts I thought it was unusual for you. We’ve all posted links thinking it led to somewhere and found to our chagrin it was something else.
How much will this weigh? The Leica Summicron 90 weighs 480g. The 56 weighs 405g. Do you think 600g is a fair guestimate?
600g sounds heavy to me, Nikon’s 85mm f1.8 which isn’t far off in terms of focal length or max aperture is only 350g for example and is probably a better comparison than the all manual, metal Lecia. Depending how much air is in that thing vs. glass it may be similar to the 56mm or just a little heavier, say 500g. I still don’t quite understand why the 90mm is so big given the typical size of faster 85mm lenses and the lack of IS…
Well, it will be interesting to see. I don’t think we’re going to see a low-weight lens.
Because Fuji’s lenses are built up to a standard and not down to a price. I was considering buying the Nikon 85mm f1.8 last year, as a lighter alternative to my 85 mm f1.4 D, for use with my D700. When I tried it in my local camera shop I was shocked at the cheap plasticky feel, and trying to accurately manually focus it was a joke.
Since a lot of people insist on quoting ‘equivalence’ when it suits them, I will do it the other way for once. The ‘equivalent’ Nikon lens, in both focal length and quality of construction, is the 135 f2 DC, it is 120 x 79 mm and weighs 815 g. It doesn’t have any form of vibration reduction either, just like any of the Canon or Nikon prime lenses under 200 mm focal length.
There are several canikon primes with IS such as the 105/2.8, 35/2 and a few more
1. flange distance
2. optical correction
sorry. typo. wrote that at 6AM before even having my coffee 😉
Sorry to repeat myself, but if you wanted to stay agile the Olympus 75mm will likely come in cheaper, with excellent sharpness and bokeh and just 305g.
MFT doesn’t always compete, but I’ll be keen to see how the 75mm shapes up.
what is an Olympus and why would anyone want it?!
As a Fuji aficionado, i have to say Olympus has some pretty good options too.
Gosh, yeah. I’m jealous of the Oly 75mm. This Fuji lens looks huge.
lol umad… I love Fuji too.
I’m just saying, the 75mm might be quite competitive in sharpness, bokeh and size, and probably much cheaper.
I’m tempted to buy a second hand GM1 and stick it on the 75mm and leave it there.
I know, the 75mm is Olympus’ “freak lens” – the one lens that makes the whole system really interesting.
Personally I’d go for an Pana body, since I don’t like most Olys (and their stupid menu!)
But I don’t see the XF90mm to be much more expensive. Personally I am even hoping to see a price tag of under 1000$ (so at the same price or cheaper than the 75mm)
Oh come on, one lens? There are so many! Not to mention the Panasonics and PanLeica, and third party options like Voigtlander. Plenty of reasons to envy their options. I couldn’t live with myself without a Fuji, lol, but there is most definitely a lot to appreciate over there. And since we are confessing anyway, i want a Sony for the manual focus Loxia greatness, and that ‘standard’ 35/2.8 is pretty damned great too. But can’t have it all. ^.^
yes, one lens.
It is the ONE outstanding lens. Yeah, the Panasonic 42.5mm is great too (like the bokeh more than the Fuji 56mm), but it is expansive and you can get similar in other systems.
For the other lenses: there are a few (like the 25mm pana) that have character (the 25mm oly is only sharp but lacks the character), the 45mm is good value and the 12-40 is light for what it does. But all those lenses can be had on other systems too (if I want cheap, I get a 100$ 50mm f/1.8 Canon).
There are only a few outstanding lenses and the 75mm is one of them
edit: the 40-150 is an interesting lens technology wise
Attaching the photo from admiringlight last year.
Looks like 90 f2 has been undertaken a complete redesign (again)
Fuji again listening to their customers. There were a lot of comments that it was physically too big, being short and fat, and the filter size was, I think 72 mm. They noted all this and the production lens is longer, thinner and has a 62 mm filter thread to match the 23 and 56.
I am now more convinced than ever that the replacement for the current 35 f1.4 will be f1.2 or even f1.0, have a 62 mm filter thread, a linear motor and be WR.
That would be quiet amazing if true. Carrying four different adapters for one ‘compact’ lee big stopper gets tiresome.
Yes, I am waiting for the replacement of 35mm as well, that would be amazing.
Did Fuji confirm somewhere that the lens was in fact redesigned based on customer feedback?
What do you mean ‘again’, that was the first mock-up, people complained, they fixed it, and the one shown at CP+ a few month ago is apparently what it has become. 🙂
Fuji had histories of redesigning lenses from scratch after their mock-up. I didn’t mean it is a bad thing and I truly appreciate that.
Of course, it’s way better! It’s just the first and only redesign that we’ve seen for this lens, far as i know. 🙂
No.
And be even bigger and heavier? No thank you.
Wow this is the first lens on my “want” list. I “need” the 23mm and the 56mm, but this one has me interested.
Looks like it will be around 110mm long and (nearly 2cm longer than Batis), is 1/3 stop slower (not much) and has no IS. I would expect weight to be similar or slightly more.
i just looked at my 56mm and yes, 11cm seems to be right (if the mockup/overlay is right). Seems long. If it has less distortion, a more pleasant bokeh (in summary: better overall), I don’t mind the extra CM. But let’s wait and see 🙂
And remember – size does not matter.
Ok, I am out of here 🙂
Remember: 1/3 slower on apsc. Same speed lens on full frame should be much more big. So the Batis seems a miracle compared to this… Hoping it will be not very expensive…
The 105 is a macro lens so IS is of benefit when hand holding when close focusing without a tripod, the 35 is designed mainly for video use so again IS is of benefit. However none of the medium telephoto large aperture prime lenses, designed for optical quality above all else, have IS.
Never heard of a Nikkor 35mm f/2 with VR, but I could stand corrected
*edit* sorry I was too quick reading your comment, that’s a Canon. So I was right too 🙂 but I nevertheless stand corrected 🙂
I like the short fat version of the lens better. I think this will look too long on the system.
Price?
Super Super happy it is a 62mm thread. Looks like a nice piece, and I am sure it will match the quality of its predecessors. Sign me up… I will buy in a heartbeat when available…. Looking forward also to a remake of the venerable but noisy 35mm f/1.4 – perhaps a 1.2 with a 58 or 62 thread? Thanks Fuji!
Buy this OR the 56mm ?
WR not important to me.
What’s the opinion?
What’s your intended purpose? I’m looking at this lens to fill the niche my 135mm f/2 was used for, tight portraits, beauty shots and being quick enough for indoor action shots. I use my 56mm for 3/4 length and tighter portraiture & fashion, when I want very shallow dof or in low light situations.
Just portrait. Thanks for your comments.
got a 56mm for portraits. Great lens. But I have been waiting for this. Headshots (Head and Shoulders) – I just love the 135mm equivalents (doesn’t matter, that it’s only f/2.8 equivalent, it will produce some nice background blur :))
Other things that could make the difference: even if you don’t want the WR, it comes in handy some times
If it is true: LM (standing for Linear Motor). This would be Fujis first prime with this AF motor type (until now only the zooms had it). Probably going to focus quicker. So it could be a nice lens for some “near sports”