The Australian store digidirect has set the price for the XF 18-135 WS lens to $1,149. So it will have, according to digidirect, the same price of the [shoplink 21554]XF 56mm[/shoplink].
At the moment I don’t have information if this will be really the final price.
At the store artencraft, the EU price for the X-T1+18-135 will be of €1799 (€200 more than the the X-T1+18-55)
44 Responses
This is a joke, right? I mean, I love Fuji…but 1000USD/€ for a 18-135/3.5-5.6? Are you nuts? Weather sealing or not…How much will the new 2.8s be then?
That can’t be right. Fuji has not even announced this lens officially. If this is for real then I predict either very bad sales figures or real “good” deals real quick after launch.
Despite being shocked, could be true…..i hope not but who knows….?
If you see that Oly recently announced the 7-14 2.8 Pro as m43 lens for 1799 US bucks……(got a Nikon 14-24 2.8 ff lens and still save some money as well!!!)
Fuji could easily asking for that price or 1800 US dollars for their upcoming WR 2.8 zooms….
If there are still customers/enough buyers….dont mind…..they make more profit…
Time will tell (end of june release/official announcement was scheduled ..)
R u sure? end of June? Then I may need consider another camera for my trip in June.
But I too think the price is … way too high.
I also think the kit price is a bit high.
Just wait 6 months and you will pay less than half of what Fuji releases the lens at. I’ve been burned by them 3 times..never again…better to have patience unless you really need the focal length:)
500-600$ maximum price of this lens
that would be less than the 18-55
It should be….it’s a slow ‘superzoom’….kind of like my ancient Tamron 28-200 from the film days. The 18-55 is likely a far better lens.
“The 18-55 is likely a far better lens.”
Why? The 18-135 will be slower but with more reach and weather resistant. I don’t think it will be optically weaker than the 18-55. There is already a cheaper line with less build quality. No need for another one.
It will be the “cheap” and “compact” alternative to the 16-55/2.8 and 50-140/2.8 combo. Not for the XC line.
“The 18-55 is likely a far better lens.” IMHO the 18-55 will likely have higher optical quality than the 18-135, since it is more difficult to design a long range zoom, than a 3x zoom which is the typical range for wideangle/normal and telezooms (UWA zooms tend to be more difficult to design and so have even shorter zoom range <= 2x). Fuji has shown that they are able to produce some really good lens designs though so it will be interesting to see the result also for the 18-135.
I don’t believe this price is right. Ridiculously expensive
Any word at all on the price for the upcoming 16-55mm f2.8?
Fuji is sometimes considered pricey, but I think that you generally get what you pay for – exceptional optics, good built quality, basically good value for your money. Except with this lens – this is a standard zoom with standard (slowish) apertures, can’t believe Fuji wants to ask $1000 for it (regardless of the weather sealing). Nikon has a new 18-140mm at $500! $600-700 would be acceptable, $1000 is way too much.
Well said, and if Fuji decided to go full frame you have to dump all these lenses if you decided to switch to FF.
when I bought my Canon 30D, I bought only FF lenses to shoot with it and then I used them all on my 5D. Same story goes with Nikon shooters, basically you lose nothing when you buy FF glass even if it was expensive.
Yeah, only you use bigger, heavier lenses that were not designed for your system, and have inappropriate focal lengths or ranges. All this “for my future FF use” approach just makes me laugh, sorry. If you want FF go FF, be a grown-up. I’m just happy with APS.
Agreed. I don’t understand why this idea of a 35mm sensor constantly looms over everyone here. If you feel you need a bigger sensor there are already a ton of systems that have that. Otherwise, keep investing in and enjoying the current Fuji gear.
No problem with what you said, but, for most professionals it’s absolutely handy to have both FF and APS-C bodies and can mix and match lenses with both.
I’m sorry, I don’t know what type of photographer you are, but to me what you say just doesn’t make sense. How do you ‘mix’ lenses between aps and FF? ef-s lens on FF body – won’t even fit. Great FF 16-35mm wide on aps becomes a so-so quality 27-56 standard. Generally all the expensive wides, where you pay for the wide angle, become just average standard lens. 50 mm becomes a strange 75 mm. With telephoto the effective focal length does make sense, but why would you carry around a several kilo FF 200 or 400 mm, if you could do with les than half of that weight?
Please read my post before you comment. Everthing I said implies that I’m against buying APS-C lenses, where did you get that I wanna use EF-S lenses on a FF body from?
Precisely – in my original post I wasn’t arguing for full-frame Fuji. Besides, lets be honest, the reason the parent poster bought FF lenses is that Canon doesn’t have a good EF-S line-up. This is also true of Nikon. And as you say, FX lenses come big, heavy, and expensive.
Regarding EF-S and DX lenses, it’s true that there are no quality glass, maybe some exceptions. My question is, if Fuji today makes 50mm FF and 50mm APS-C, and sure the FF is bigger and heavier, which one would you buy for your APS-C body?
I’m an FF shooter, but the only type of work where I see an advantage for FF is low-light events. And I don’t shoot them that often anymore.
For portraiture, landscapes, travel, and interiours/architecture FF doesn’t have that much of an advantage anymore. For the latter, my working aperture is F/8-11 and I use a tripod. Zero FF advantage there, in fact, for product photography, APS-C is better 😉 For portraiture, I do use shallow DoF at times, but basically with the 56mm F/1.2 you get 85mm F/1.8 equivalence, which is more than enough. More importantly, when you work with lights, you can use lighting to create depth, and my usual working aperture is somewhere between F/5.6-f9. No FF advantage for me there either.
So to answer your question, although FF has some marginal advantages, the significant reduction of size, good support, exceptional optics that Fuji offers are more important to me, and I would choose an 50mm equivalent (perhaps ver2 of the 35mm F/1.4) over an FF lens.
I couldn’t agree more, that’s why I was sticking with Canon 5D for the past decade – not the miraculous FF ‘look’, there just isn’t one really good ef-s lens. 17-40, 50, 70-200 – where is Canon’s ef-s alternative to that? Fuji is.
yeah, it’s amazing how Canikon ignored their APS-C lens line-up. Fuji did in 3 years what Nikon couldn’t in 10! We have what? a single good DX prime, and that’s it. And I’ve seen the same on the “other” side – countless iterations of consumer grade lenses (slow zooms) with very limited pro offers.
Another fan-baby speaking about being grown-ups. enjoy your APS, this is the way that suits you. If I like to start with APS-C and end up with FF, this is my way and at least everybody’s that I know.
This makes no sense. If 35mm is your end-goal than buying current Fuji gear is pointless. Why not buy into Canon/Nikon/Sony/Leica rather than wasting money on a system that doesn’t meet your needs?
Volume is an issue, though. Nikon’s 18-140 will sell in far greater quantities. I hope it ends up at $599-699 given that it will likely be built better than that Nikkor.
Absolutey but they should have made every lens/prime lens (exception of kit zooms and xc lens) as WR from the scratch/beginning on would be an outstanding argument/reason (even for pros more) and a sign for them buying into the fuji system….
And still the most major lack and most significant “building site” is:
– development and introducing of competive flash system /units like nikon cls and canon speedlite
– shutter speed 1/8000 (no one always likes carrying nd filter…) sunny australia could easily use 1/8000
– flash sync 1/320 not slowish 1/180
– base/ native iso really 100 or even 50
– make it possible as afeature to switch of completely the NR (noise reduction) !
Would be a step for Fuji system if they would do that becuase other competitiors offering that already..and it is for some people stil an argument agianst fuji ….its unbelievable and a shame that the xt1 doesnt offering these features as “their fuji dslr version”…..hopefully the new xpro 2 will offer these features at least / among others……..omd em1, nikon d7000/7100, sony a7 /7r/7s have these features (not every but at least one of the mentioned featueres)….
we will pray and see….
no reason/argument which fuji could use to defend themthelves why not 1/8000 and other features….
all interchangeable fuji x cameras use mechanical (or electronical-mirrorless ones) focal plane shutter mechanisms (curtain shutter) like all other dslrs form nikon, canon, mirrorless olympus omd em1/ em5,10, sony a7(r) …..
Only in the fixed fuji cameras they use leaf shutter mechanisms (e.g. fuji x100 (s) as used also in MF PhaseOne, Hasselblad which justify the fact of having only 1/4000 shutter speed (the limit of leaf shutter mechanisms!)
So Fuji no reason to whitewash/excuses and hurry up, being more competitive than now already, reduce arguments against investing in your system…time is running…
Oh yeah, the flash system. This is what I do (use off camera flash, on location lighting) and right now this is the biggest hurdle for me. I already decided to switch my backup system (d7000) to Fuji, while my main system, the d800 and selection of Nikkor FX lenses will remain my primary system.
I concur with most of what you write, though I’d be happy with 1/4000 if base iso was 100.
As to flash, now I’m investing in GODOX stuff, because they have a really neat triggering system that works with all their recent studio lights as well as fantastic flashes (with full remote power management in manual mode). I wish Fuji partnered with them or at least took a long hard look at what they are doing. This is what I hope for:
– At least 1/250 sync speed, 320 is even better.
– Radio based wireless flash system. Groups, remote power control. The fantastic thing about the Godox stuff is that the receivers are small and don’t need batteries. More on this later..
– HSS (high speed sync) support
– Lastly, TTL support. I’d be happy with all of the above, full TTL for remote flashes will be the icing on the cake 🙂
And please Fuji, go for something that kicks ass 🙂 I was thinking 2 options here
1) Implement remote control in firmware across all X cameras. Make the transmitter just a small dumb knob that sends signals. This will allow for a really small, energy efficient design that draws power from the camera/flash itself.
2) Make a transmitter compatible across the X line, something along the lines of the AC3 controller (mechanical wheels/knobs for setting groups, power levels).
I’d prefer the simplicity of 1)
Why not 11000 dollars?
I don’t get your post. Are you trying to tell us that it is that awesome?
I think he meant to be sarcastic.
sounds about right. AUD1149 is around 635 GBP. which is around 150GBP more than 18-55 F2.8-4 which is around 490GBP. (assuming IQ standard is similar)
I’m guessing they’ve had some indicative pricing, and are just charging a random premium so someone can order it and shout “first!”
I have a hard time believing this is weather sealed. More like weather resistant like what Canon and Nikon does. I think the price is pretty steep. And what all the manufacturers have taught us lately is that if you’re patient the discounts will come. So only the most gear obsessed will buy at this price.
huh, no one said it was “weather sealed” its WR = weather resistant
It’s actually said all the time. Read the comments on it and the X-T1.
Splitting hairs – weather sealed=weather resistant. Simply means they are a bit more sturdy in adverse weather conditions. Don’t confuse it with water-proof or something.
It isn’t splitting hairs when you read the warranty. Nikon used to write weather sealed and started changing the term to resistant when people expected that sealed lenses could withstand immersion.
This is ridiculous. It doesn’t surprise me too much though. Most likely they want to avoid cannibalizing sales of the the 18-55 and 55-200. Thankfully, if this is the real price it will not sell and it will be discounted in months.
GBP150 more then 18-55 seems right to me also, I won’t critisis until we get a report on performance. A cheap lens with Poor performace would be no use to me as I’d always use primes. I want an alternative with a mininum of performance drop off. All be it I’d rather it had the 4.8 top end F stop, then a premium is justified.
in Singapore, it cost SGD 1399….. =.=http://www.fujifilm.com.sg/Documents/news/2014/pdf/may/FujfilmGreatSingaporeSale.pdf