Tamron’s mirrorless offering at Amazon
_ _ _
Earlier this months, I’ve shared the rumor that Sigma has no plans to offer Fuji X mount lenses. According to the source, Sigma believes that the X-market share is too small and Fuji should have better used the M4/3 mount. This statements lead to a very hot debate in the comments, which you can follow here.
But today it’s about Tamron.
When a FR-reader asked Tamron via email, if they will ever make Fuji X mount lenses, Tamron replied that they currently have no plans to offer Fuji X-mount lenses but that they are always developing new lenses, so they may produce X-mount lenses in future.
Unlike Sigma, that’s at least a cautious opening.
While it’s true that Fuji already offers a wide range of excellent lenses, more competition in the X-mount market is always a good thing.
And don’t miss to check out quincy’s masterpiece: the complete Overview over ALL existing and upcoming Fuji X-mount lenses.
In his very clear & well structured list, you’ll find:
- the name of ALL (currently) 69 X-mount lenses
- links to reviews for each lens
- link to product page for each lens
- short comments to each lens
- regular price in Dollar & Euro
- specs such as number of aperture blades, close focus distance, filter thread and more
- an updated lens chart
24 Responses
As with Sigma, the reason is obvious: all the FUJINON lenses are superior to anything that they can offer for the same price.
I gotta agree, Sigma and Tamron make some fine glass (esp Sigma IMO) but neither are going to produce anything superior or eq for the same price.
It would still be good for the system if Tamron and Sigma would join.
True, but with what?
Maybe a few Sigma primes from their ART series?
Looking at the ART (and C) lenses, you’re right. Some of them will fit nicely in-between the existing FUJINON lenses.
The ART primes are overlapping with Fuji’s current line in focal length and provides shallower DOF if one cares. So I consider ART higher end models. They are going to push ART golden trio next year. However I don’t like that company due to QC issue, although Fuji is not totally problem free.
of course they don’t, Zeiss also stopped developing Touit lens, cuz they don’t want to waste their time on APS-C cameras.
Is that their stated reason? I assumed it was because their offering didn’t sell as well since the Fuji glass is outstanding and the competing lenses from Fuji are faster. I myself decided to go with the less costly Fuji lens that was faster when I compared and played with both.
If X-system is profitable they will continue to be involved as they are not backing off on any FF mount. However current user base is not large enough to support them. Unlike Fuji, Zeiss and Tamron are companies supplying products in a variety of mount. Fuji is too small of a bite for them to earn easy money for.
One thing that’s similar with Fuji and Sony’s apsc users is that not a lot of people are willing to invest heavily on lens. Sony targeted at budget tight users and Fuji just a small market to begin with. This is reasonable.
This while statement is wildly inaccurate, Fuji, Pen, even 1 or users all most often own more then one lens, I’ve worked in retail and have multiple friends with camera shops as well as work myself in the industry, I don’t know a single Penn or Fuji user that only has one lens.
Sony’s cameras that are on par with Fuji’s are also in a higher or equal price bracket, and contrary to your point about them not being willing to invest in glass…. Fuji’s numbers and users show the opposite to be true, many of the users buy because of the glass. It’s amazing, and honestly higher end the most of the CZ glass on the market right now. Zeiss doesn’t sell as well as the Fuji glass because it’s slower, more pricey and manual. Fuji offers fantastic glass, that is “world class” (as described just today by a good friend who is a Leica M user of 20+ years), and I myself switched from Nikon – known for some of if not the best optics from Japan – to Fuji because I was so impressed by the lenses.
I was just thinking about buying some Touit glass today, and honestly is I didn’t like the unique feel between the two brands – Fuji and Zeiss – there’s not a single reason too. The Fuji glass is just as good or better in every objectively measurable way.
Zeiss lenses aren’t making them money because they brought their B-Game, you want better sales? Make a lens Fuji users are craving. Not slower more pricey lenses that don’t fill a gap. I’d spend the extra cash on a real German made Zeiss lens, you know, real Zeiss optics.
Another side point before I go back to work – Fuji glass is already considered collectable, I’ve actually met a few collectors that don’t own a fuji camera but do own the glass.
Owning more than one lens doesn’t equal to invest heavily on it. You can have 18-55 and 35 prime, maybe 23 as an addition or 55-200. These are all couple of hundred dollars. XF16-55/50-140 are about the same with Tamron’s golden trio at equivalent focal length.
Typical price for zeiss, even the worst from them might cost around $1000 USD in F and EF mount, while the best around $2k-5k USD and mostly manual. I don’t care who makes it but that’s what people typical pay for. Nikon and Canon have a very large user base and not short of high-end users in absolute NUMBERS. Many would just collect the Otus primes. One Otus 55 is enough to pay for most XF lens you would want. And many have 3 of them. That’s HEAVILY INVESTING.
Assume the same ratio of high-end users is the same with Fuji, the absolute number is much much smaller due to a rather tiny market. So why Tamron has to bother developing new lens for it? Why Zeiss bother sales among X mount users?
I don’t want to walk into the Sony talk but it’s above Fuji without a question.
Another thing. Most Fuji primes (f<2) are not top-tier wide open. If you step down most primes are just great regardless of manufacturer. I am okay with how they perform but there are better things a little more money can buy.
Don't drag Leica in. Their lens are not for pixel-peepers.
I think you got it right there — The Fujinons aren’t the best design in terms of uncompromized performance (think otus and beyond), but contrary the best design in terms of compromized performance.
They manage to offer good (not the best) lenses at good (not the best) value, and they do that by focussing closely on a very homogenous product system for a very homogeneous customer base.
I think the current system does very well. If the prime lens are just 10% cheaper. I’d be happy to live with 3 primes, 14, 23 and 56.
FF all the way right?
I think the official statement from Zeiss was: “We got our asses handed to us by Fujinon”
Psssst: Tokina currently have no plans to offer Fuji X-mount lenses;-)
Psssst^2, neither does Leica!
There isn’t much market for third party lenses on Fuji, outside of specialist optics. Even before taking into account the size of the market, Fuji has two cheap general purpose lenses fines for the budget conscious. You can also find their early primes going cheaply (18, 35, 60) and no 3rd party is going to touch them on their top of the line primes (14, 16, 23, 56, 90 etc).
Honestly, tamron would only bring their existing 18-200mm lens over from E-Mount and that we can all live without.
Sigma should still make their 19, 30 & 60mm f/2.8 mirrorless lenses available in X-Mount because their nice cheap alternatives to XF lenses. But Sigma’s production capacity is stretched thin due to all the great dslr stuff they’ve been coming out with lately.
I too could live without the Tamrom 18-200 but super zooms tend to be popular and Fuji has no equivalent product. I guess it is a question of market size and perhaps production constraints.
Good Riddance.
Tamron will tarnish the Fuji name.
Man this is grasping at straws.
However I’d love for Tamron to offer their 150-600 lens in X mount. It is an amazing wildlife lens and fills a huge gap in the fuji lens lineup (even after the 100-400+teleconverter comes next year).