Jump to content

Recommended Posts

well, the reason is that quality and speed came at a price and that price is size.

 

anyway, on line there are many other asking the same question. The answers are, of course only speculations.

 

 

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1318898

 

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3843781

 

http://www.fujixseries.com/forums/topic/7985-xf-90mm-and-the-size-of-fuji-lenses/

 

You could write a letter:

 

“ Dear Mr. Fuji..."

 

I held it for 5 minutes in the shop and thought that one has to have lost of the FUJI mirrorless unique selling point ( size and practicality) to buy this lens, but I think the same of all the ginormous X lenses , they have some sort of function but I can’t see mylsef ( a person who chose this system for its compactness) ever buying any of these large lenses.

Edited by milandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

The QLM assembly could be one of the reason. If you look at the lens design, there is a lot of space between element groups making the lens longer. The design probably calls for the spacing for excellent focal plane edge to edge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't one reason be that the Fuji has the focus motor in the lens, whereas the Nikon doesn't?

 

Plus the Fuji would have been designed to be sharp for a much higher pixel density - I would imagine that it performs better optically than the 85m 1.8 D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Other reasons might include reduced vignetting, sharp wide open (f/2 is probably de-rated to ensure high IQ), possibly reduced internal reflections, possible margin for anti-reflection coating control near lens periphery (one factor in sharpness wide open), more structural rigidity.

 

These are just guesses, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe that's because one is a Nikkor and the other is a Fujinon!

 

Personally I don't regard the XF 90mm as a big lens, don't forget the XF 90mm is really a 135mm!

sorry Mike - the XF90 is a 90mm lens - on a smaller sensor (APS-C)  it shows the same angle of view as a 135mm @ FF

 

To be honest - i never got the problem people have mixinbg up focal lenght/aperture and dof - 90mm stays 90mm, F2 stays F2 (dof is the very same) - just the image circle for FF has to be bigger than for FF.

 

Back to the inital question: Why ist XF90 sooo big (is it really??):

 

every optical design has several restrictions and the challange of lens design is to find the best compromise out of it

 

- buget

- volume

- biggest lens diameter

- availible manufacturing technology

- glass selction

- focussing system

- weight

- amount of lenses

- number aspherical elements

- form of aspheres (deviation from sphere)

- machanical stability (e.g. lenses not to thin & heavy)

- size image circle

- all the optical parameters like vignetting/flat image and all the other zernike stuff

- ...

 

so Fuji decided to balance it in way the XF90 is made ...

 

compare a Zuiko OM 2/85 to OM 2/90 or  Zeiss Milvus 85/1.4 vs Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 vs Zeiss Planar 85/1.4

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • All three of my bodies (X-E2, X-T4, GFX100S II) have shoot without lenses enabled and they have all had it set since I bought them.  No harm in it at all. Just remember to set the focal length when you fit a manual lens with no electronics otherwise the IBIS (if you have it) goes nuts. I regularly use vintage film lenses from Minolta, Zeiss, Mamiya, Rollei and others on my X mounts along with more modern manual focus stuff from TTArtisans. I also use Nikon AF-S lenses with a Fringer so the world is your oyster! Vintage lenses can be an absolute bargain too - For example the Zeiss 135 f/35 in M42 is as cheap as chips and very sharp as is the excellent Minolta 35-70 Macro (which is also rebadged Leica). 
    • I'm not exaggerating when I say that I have searched with great vigor (and at great expense) for a way to capture IR images with a Fujifilm camera for which I didn't have to use major amounts of sharpening to bring out the best. Zooms, primes, Fuji, Tamron, Viltrox, Sigma, Zeiss ... probably 20 lenses all told. Plus multiple IR converted Fuji cameras, X-T1, X-T3, X-T5. I even tried different ways of filtering IR, such as using the Kolari clip-ins and lens-mounted front filters. I was ready to give up until I almost accidentally tried one of the cheapest lenses out there -- the little TTArtisan 27mm F2.8. No hotspots that I could see, and best of all ABSOLUTELY SUPERB SHARPNESS across the entire frame. It's this attribute that I search for, and until now, never achieved. In my prior attempts, I listened to the advice from the "pundits", picking up a copy of the venerable Fuji 14mm F2.8, the Zeiss Touitt 12mm F2.8, Fuji 23 and 35mm F2.0, even the very similar 7Artisans 27mm F2.8, and none of them come even close to the TTArtisan for edge sharpness in infrared. Incidentally, I'm using a Kolari 720nm clip-in filter. Sure the TT has its issues -- vignetting at 2.8, tendency to flare with sunlight nearby, but all in all, this lens is glued to my X-T5 for now. This image was taken hand-held with this lens -- completely unedited!
    • Hy there When Im using the fan001 on the XH2s and I flip the LCD Screen vertically by 180 degrees then the image flips vertically, what is good but it also flips horizontally. The clean feed on HDMI is not flipping horizontally but its also flipping if the HDMI output info display is on. When I unmount the fan then the image flips only vertically. My firmware is updated to the latest version. Any ideas if there is a fix for that?
    • In reply to the original question, it all depends on what you mean by infrared.  If you mean "see thermal information", then I agree with the comments here.  However, if you mean near-infrared, the X-T4, or basically any digital camera can be modified to "see" it.  Check out Lifepixel.com and Kolarivision.com for more info. As regards lenses, I'm not exaggerating when I say that I have searched with great vigor (and at great expense) for a way to capture IR images with a Fujifilm camera for which I didn't have to use major amounts of sharpening to bring out the best. Zooms, primes, Fuji, Tamron, Viltrox, Sigma, Zeiss ... probably 20 lenses all told. Plus multiple IR converted Fuji cameras, X-T1, X-T3, X-T5. I even tried different ways of filtering IR, such as using the Kolari clip-ins and lens-mounted front filters. I was ready to give up until I almost accidentally tried one of the cheapest lenses out there -- the little TTArtisan 27mm F2.8. No hotspots that I could see, and best of all ABSOLUTELY SUPERB SHARPNESS across the entire frame. It's this attribute that I search for, and until now, never achieved. In my prior attempts, I listened to the advice from the "pundits", picking up a copy of the venerable Fuji 14mm F2.8, the Zeiss Touitt 12mm F2.8, Fuji 23 and 35mm F2.0, even the very similar 7Artisans 27mm F2.8, and none of them come even close to the TTArtisan for edge sharpness in infrared. Incidentally, I'm using a Kolari 720nm clip-in filter. Sure the TT has its issues -- vignetting at 2.8, tendency to flare with sunlight nearby, but all in all, this lens is glued to my X-T5 for now. This image was taken hand-held with this lens -- completely unedited!
    • No - I don’t think so - it means you can take pictures if you remove the lens completely - but I’m not sure that is a problem
×
×
  • Create New...