Fujifilm Launches the “MK lens” Series of Innovative Cinema Lenses // Samples - First Looks

[Patrick FR]

Fujifilm Launches the “MK lens” Series of Innovative Cinema Lenses

#Press Release: http://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-launches-mk-lens-series-innovative-cinema-lenses-also-x-mount/

first looks: http://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-mk-cinema-lenses-first-looks-sample-footage/

[kimcarsons]

Wow.

[milandro]

unless this means that they are going to vastly improve their performance for video cameras or even produce a dedicated video camera how is this going to impact the average Fuji X camera user?

 

I know Fuji has always done great things for TV and Cinema but that is a sector that is very far from the scope of the X cameras.

[kimcarsons]

I, for one, think it's a great sign. There's money to be made in e-mount, so they're going to make it--without some prideful lock in to X-mount. Just look at the new additions to Sigma's Art line of lenses... The Fujinon line is not going to be king of the APS-C hill for very long. And if Sigma starts releasing lenses like their Art series in E-mount, there's going to be one less reason to buy in to Fuji's system.

Edited February 22, 2017 by kimcarsons

[milandro]

but how is this relevant to the

 

X forum 

[kimcarsons]

They'll probably be coming along in X-mount soon. They're manual focus lenses, so swapping the mount is not a huge deal. But how many X-T2 owners do you think will buy these lenses? 1? 0?

[EddieX]

"Their X Mount versions (focal lengths of 18-55mm and 50-135mm) are being developed for launch by the end of this year."

[Larry Bolch]

Fuji has long made video lenses on the industrial level. B&H in NYC shows 87 different lenses from $3,900 to $233,490.00 in their pro-video site. Highly affordable if you are buying for a major network or even for a cable news station. These appear to instead target independent producers, which may be growing market.

From the press release:

"The entire “MK” series is designed with the ‘emerging’ cinematographer in mind, whether shooting a live event, online programming, documentary, corporate video, wedding, independent or short film production."

 

The current X-T2 seems to have nailed 4K video, and these lenses would eliminate the potential problems of using lenses designed for still photography. Again to quote Fuji:

"Our MK’s have a seamless manual iris, zero breathing, no ramping or zoom shift, and 200-degree focus rotation. They maintain focus completely throughout the zoom range while covering Super 35mm sensors.”

 

I see it as step one in futureproofing and expanding the X-camera into a broader and more versatile system. Kodak died because it could not get past the idea that it was a film company. Fujifilm prospered by vastly diversifying its product line.

[milandro]

I agree. Fuji has always had special cinematic & video lenses and they were always a quite separate line in the company.

 

They are different in just about anything and, most importantly, they are VERY different in price.

Edited February 23, 2017 by milandro

[Sluw]

The X-T2 is actually quite good at 4K video and usable for professional web and tv video's. Lots of dslr video websites which often adore canon and panasonic have great things to say about the X-T2. For example eoshd, noamkroll and nofilmschool.

 

It's not my cup of tea but I can imagine it's a smart move to offer a few very good cinema lenses for people who use the X-T2 as a small film kit.

[milandro]

if you spend that much for  a lens you probably want a more dedicated to film camera

[Sluw]

if you spend that much for  a lens you probably want a more dedicated to film camera

 

Why? 

[milandro]

because there there are better video cameras more suited to film with such expensive lenses than a camera eminently made for photography that can ALSO shoot videos but it is not only bult for videos.

Edited February 24, 2017 by milandro

[Sluw]

because there there are better video cameras more suited to film with such expensive lenses than a camera eminently made for photography that can ALSO shoot videos but it is not only bult for videos.

Can't think of anything. It can record external, has 4k, f-log, in- and outputs. The X-T2 is an affordable camera (in video gear perspective) perfectly capable of producing professional video and now with the advantage of having the option of an affordable cine lens. 

[milandro]

Are there no exclusively video cameras better at filming than the X-T2? 

 

I don’t think that the X-T2 is even marketed as a  predominately Video Camera, but as a Photographic camera which can take videos.

 

Let me re-formulate this. Are you going to buy the new lenses to film with the X-T2? Would anyone buy the X-T2 to use mostly as a video camera? 

Edited February 24, 2017 by milandro

[Sluw]

There are exclusively videocameras which are better than the X-T2 but they're also way more expensive. If you're making video for web and tv it's awesome. Boundaries between photo and video are fading for a while and there are already people buying and X-T2 exclusively for video (or Panasonic GH-4/GX80, Canon 80D or Sony A7). Compared to dedicated video camera's the X-T2 + cinema lens is a cheap and valid option.

 

On Cinema 5D

 

If you thought the Fujifilm X-T2 is just another ordinary attempt by a stills manufacturer to implement video as an additional selling point, then you were wrong. This small mirrorless camera shows us how image detail and an organic in-camera look is supposed to be executed and in our opinion brings it into the class of best mirrorless video cameras.

 

Edited February 24, 2017 by Sluw

[mdm]

Compared to dedicated video camera's the X-T2 + cinema lens is a cheap and valid option.

 

 

you mean $5500 is cheap?

[milandro]

So there are better cameras, and they are more expensive, but they are more expensive ( a lot more expensive) for good reasons, exactly like these lenses are more expensive than photographic ones for many a reason.

 

Yo put expensive lenses on expensive cameras but you don’t put expensive lenses on cheaper cameras.

 

 

There are reasons for that!

 

Are you buying this new lenses to film with your X-T2 or are you just saying that you like your X-T2?

 

Are you saying that the next generations of videographers are going to abandon dedicated video camera such as Panasonic, Canon , Sony ditching them to buy a X-T 2 and fitting them with lenses costing 200% to 300% more than the camera body?

 

And why do you think that the other camera bodies are so much more expensive? Just for fun? Are those who buy them idiots or just have too much money?

 

How about the overheating questions? Has the X-T2 overcome this problem and will be able to shoot long sequences without an hitch like a proper film camera equipped with a very expensive lens should?

 

 As far as I know the longest that the X-T2 camera can film (4k) is 10 minutes then it should shut off because of overheating. Then, and to the professional point, Hol long do you have to wait before you can shoot again?

 

Do the expensive cameras do the same? Are they more expensive for this and other reasons?

 

Edited February 24, 2017 by milandro

[Sluw]

you mean $5500 is cheap?

It's not cheap, but for a cinema lens it's cheap (camera + lens is around 5000 not the lens alone), it's built completely different than a normal lens. You keep focus when zooming no framing differences when focussing etc. Loads of "standard" cinema lenses are around €3000 - €5000 alone. Of course there are cheaper lenses which pretend to be cinema lenses but they are not.

 

@Milandro there were problems at first with overheating, it was a software problem, now you can film 30 mins no problem. So yes there are trade offs and there are better camera's + lenses, but it will be an amazing set up for loads and loads of situations especially at this pricepoint. Check this preview of the lens by CamerastoreTV.

Edited February 24, 2017 by Sluw

[Larry Bolch]

 

So there are better cameras, and they are more expensive, but they are more expensive ( a lot more expensive) for good reasons, exactly like these lenses are more expensive than photographic ones for many a reason.

 

Yo put expensive lenses on expensive cameras but you don’t put expensive lenses on cheaper cameras.

 

 

There are reasons for that!

 

Are you buying this new lenses to film with your X-T2 or are you just saying that you like your X-T2?

 

Are you saying that the next generations of videographers are going to abandon dedicated video camera such as Panasonic, Canon , Sony ditching them to buy a X-T 2 and fitting them with lenses costing 200% to 300% more than the camera body?

 

And why do you think that the other camera bodies are so much more expensive? Just for fun? Are those who buy them idiots or just have too much money?

 

How about the overheating questions? Has the X-T2 overcome this problem and will be able to shoot long sequences without an hitch like a proper film camera equipped with a very expensive lens should?

 

 As far as I know the longest that the X-T2 camera can film (4k) is 10 minutes then it should shut off because of overheating. Then, and to the professional point, Hol long do you have to wait before you can shoot again?

 

Do the expensive cameras do the same? Are they more expensive for this and other reasons?

 

 

 

According to the press release: "The entire “MK” series is designed with the ‘emerging’ cinematographer in mind, whether shooting a live event, online programming, documentary, corporate video, wedding, independent or short film production." pretty much defines the target market. And no, this does not indicate a mass migration from Arri, RED and others. Where the demand warrants it, they will most certainly continue to be used.

 

Those in the above categories may simply not have the budget for higher end equipment, and the X-T2 plus MK lens will do the job to the client's expectations and within the budget. A lot of people make a decent living serving these markets even though they may go unnoticed by the general public, weddings excluded. These are working professionals, not soccer-moms trying to film junior's whole game.

 

A ten minute take from a single viewpoint would be paralytically boring to the point of ending the ‘emerging’ cinematographer's career. Watch this kind of product, and you will see an ever-changing viewpoint with clips just seconds long. Even with live sports or events, there is constant cutting from camera to camera. Cinematography 101. There are endless examples on the web to verify this or simply turn on the TV. In real-world video making, takes are in seconds, not minutes. 

 

Fuji sees a new market opening up, and has designed two lenses to serve it. The X-T2 is getting respect from the potential customers for such a system. If the market continues to grow, Fujifilm might well decide to use the core technology of the X-T3 or X-T4 to offer a dedicated cine body. This is just step one in what might eventually become a quite profitable new line.

 

Only the iPhone generation camps on a single viewpoint, single focal length and expects it to be watched. This is not Fuji's target customer. 

[milandro]

we shall see how many of this will be sold to the emerging film makers.

 

I still don’t understand if Sluw is going to buy the lenses for his filming or if he just likes the idea.

Edited February 25, 2017 by milandro

[mdm]

A ten minute take from a single viewpoint would be paralytically boring to the point of ending the ‘emerging’ cinematographer's career. Watch this kind of product, and you will see an ever-changing viewpoint with clips just seconds long. Even with live sports or events, there is constant cutting from camera to camera. Cinematography 101. There are endless examples on the web to verify this or simply turn on the TV. In real-world video making, takes are in seconds, not minutes.

 

It sound's like if you don't have a proper background (special education) you hardly film anything that worth watching. Isn't it?

[Larry Bolch]

It sound's like if you don't have a proper background (special education) you hardly film anything that worth watching. Isn't it?

If you are working at any of the tasks that Fuji defined as their target market, you probably have either education or work experience to be able to do the job. While I have not met anyone who got wealthy in the career, I have known a number of people who earned a good and steady living well away from major centres of production.

[mdm]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

GFX lens, MK lens, Sony, ... anything else to screw up x-mount dev.?

[milandro]

I thought It was a bayonet fitting    

Edited February 26, 2017 by milandro