XF90mmF2 WR
USA: AmazonUS / BHphoto / Adorama EU: AmazonDE / AmazonUK / AmazonFR / WexUK / PCHstore / AUS: Camerapro
The XF90mm Review is up at admiringhlight. From the conclusions:
“The lens focuses quickly and quietly, is brilliantly sharp right from f/2, has beautifully even and smooth bokeh, has virtually zero CA, no distortion and outstanding color and contrast.
I noted the $949 price as a Pro above, and that’s because typically lenses this good cost a fair bit more than this.
It’s hands down the best lens Fuji has created for the X-Series and one of the finest lenses I’ve used for any system. If you like the medium telephoto focal length and shoot Fuji, simply get it.”
And here are more reviews:
Fusion Festival with the XF 90mm F2 at olafphotoblog / Review at photographyblog / Spanish field test at dslrmagazine (translation) / Review at lenstip / Fuji X-T10 with 90mm (and 16mm) in Finnish at sulantoblog (translation)
18 Responses
By the sounds of it, we’re never going to get it at a discount price.
Fuji’s price is not very firm especially after 6 month.
The price will be discounted after a time, most manufacturers are, however I collected my pre ordered one on Monday and I already think that it is worth every penny that I paid for it.
You Save $0.95. Best. Deal. Ever.
Clearly, every new Fuji lens is the best Fuji lens.
I was going to say the same thing. All this hyperbole is not just tiring, it also dilutes the credibility of these reviewers.
Credibility of search results, too. Let’s say someone googles “Best Fuji lens”…
PS: How many SEO experts does it take to change a light bulb, lightbulb, light, bulb, lamp, lighting, switch, tungsten, LED, CFL, floodlight, spotlight, flashlight, candlelight, romantic, xxx, hardcore.
LMAO. 🙂
Recently released Fuji lens are all great lens. The only real downsides are weight and price.
But how does one then review things if it is truly superior? It’s not hyperbole when it’s true. And I can assure you, I didn’t write such a positive review for search engine optimization, I wrote it because it’s the best Fuji lens I’ve used, and I’ve used almost all of them (Only the 18/2 do I lack any real experience with). It’s sharper than the 56 /1.2 wide open, has smoother bokeh than the 56/1.2, virtually zero CA, virtually zero distortion, minimal vignetting, fast and silent autofocus….how exactly should I make that sound bad?
Trust me, if I find something negative, I’ll tell you about it in my reviews. Aside from the lack of IS here, I honestly found nothing to complain about. There’s a reason the reviews for this lens have been stellar.
As far as traffic to a site goes, I’ve found that controversial things get significantly more traffic than overtly positive things, so if I (or any other reviewer) wanted to compromise a review to drive traffic, it would be more advantageous to pan a lens that otherwise receives good reviews. Not that I do that…I think it’s far more important to get what I truly think about gear out there.
Point taken.
Please don’t take my comment personally. It’s just that when so many reviews sing these lenses’ praises, it’s getting increasingly difficult to make any sort of informed decision anymore based on the information provided therein. This sentiment is compounded by the fact that I personally do find the AF of the XF 90 decidedly less than stellar (in fact, it’s worse than any of the other XF lenses I own) so I personally don’t share the unconditional euphoria that I am reading left and right.
FWIW, I generally appreciate your reviews and have always come to your site for a level headed, real world view on the gear you tested.
Perhaps I was just disillusioned by the fact that my own personal experience does not live up to the hype, so again, don’t take it personally. It was more of a critique against the seemingly obligatory rose tinted goggles worn by so many Fuji reviewers.
And truth be told, apart from the (at least IMO) lacklustre AF performance, and the controversial issue of the all too freely floating lens group (i.e. the clunker), this is in fact a stellar lens that I’m quite happy with. Just not as unequivocally as those glowing reviews led me to expect.
I’m curious what body you’re using. Lens tip also had issues with AF speed , but they were testing on an X-E1. Using the T1 with firmware 4, I found the AF quite quick. If it has to hunt through the whole range it can take a second, but I found that a very rare occurrence. I got consistently quick short movements to the focus point without having to search. It’s not as fast as the wide lenses, but it has far more focus travel so I wouldn’t expect that.
I’m using an X-E2, so I do have PDAF in my arsenal. Perhaps things will improve with the rumored upcoming firmware update for this camera, but so far I’ve seen the XF 90 hunt even in bright daylight which none of my other lenses do to the same extent. One moment it can in fact be quick to acquire focus, and the next it can completely overshoot the same contrasty target and fall back onto a glacially slow hunting phase.
As is often been the case with Fuji: when it works, there’s magic – when it doesn’t, it drives you up the wall. I guess my m43 gear left me spoiled in the AF department.
I’ll agree with you there. In single shot, nothing on the market in mirrorless is as fast as Panasonic’s latest bodies. I find the X-T1/10 on fw 4 to be up there with the a6000 in continuous focus though.
Love how such good lenses are kinda wasted on water painted Raf files.
bollocks.
If you use a proper RAW converter, there is no such problem. I use the in-camera converter with minor adjustments in Capture One/Photoshop, and I don’t see the water colour effect.
I want it. I don’t need it. But I want it.