Your X Lens wishlist

[Tikcus]

If Fuji make a fisheye I would prefer they go down the Sony route, and make a normal lens with an optional adapter.

 

 More lenses would sell, then the people that want the fisheye adapter could buy the optional adapter

[cug]

For my taste, the bokeh wide open is excessive, resulting in rather artificial / surreal-like images. When stopping down it does sharpen up, but at that point I prefer using the Leica 50mm f1.4 Summilux ASPH.

 

I hope you aren't forgetting that a f/1.4 on a FF sensor renders roughly the same out of focus blur as an f/1.0 on an APS-C sensor. That is one of the reasons why I like the really fast Fuji glass. 

 

From a rendering perspetive you can compare the XF23 and XF35 f/1.4 with Summicron 35 and 50 lenses. Not with Summilux lenses. From an exposure perspective on the other hand they are Summilux speed. 

 

That's the downside (and sometimes upside) of a smaller sensor: a deeper depth of field. For me it is mostly advantageous as I find f/1.0 or f/1.2 or even some f/1.4, depending on the focal length, nearly impossible to focus properly at shorter distances – typical people shots in low light. There I appreciate the lens speed while enabling me to focus a little bit easier.

 

Personally, I'd love an XF35 f/1.0 lens as long as the quality wide open is more Summilux than Noctilux. 

[Phil]

I've said it before, but I'd still drop everything and save for a ~33mm f/1.0. I love the 35mm but it's a little tight for me for every day use, so it's more of a specialized portrait lens for me, and I wouldn't mind dealing with the size.

 

Another lens I realized I'd really like to see is an XC ~10-16mm zoom. I've almost rounded out my kit, and just need something legitimately wide (my widest lens is the 18mm right now). I'd love the versatility of the 10-24mm, but since my jobs are primarily events and portraits, the speed of the 16mm is probably more valuable. But if they made a cheaper XC ultra wide zoom for $300 or so, I'd definitely pick it up for when I want to do really wide landscapes and dance floor photos.

[deva]

I'd be interested in a tilt/shift lens that focused close... 1:2

[Nero]

I'd love to see a 10-24mm WR. Other specs could stay the same. I'd also like to see a 55-200mm WR with improved autofocus. Those two lenses plus one of the 35mm versions would be my ultimate travel kit. The 50-140mm is an amazing lens, but I want more reach than aperture. I have the 16mm and the 10-24mm and although the image quality is higher on the 16mm, I would take a WR 10-24mm any day for a travel kit. The missing pieces from 24-34 and 36-54 wouldn't really be a concern for me if I had this setup.

[mdm]

_{18mmF2 WR - the same size as old one, new motor, optically better than 18-55mm at 18mm, as soon as possible please! Yes, it might battle 16mm but we want to be light.}

[EddieX]

I currently have the 16mm 1.4 & 35mm 1.4

 

Wish list as follows:

 

90mm f2 (which I hope happens on the 15th of this month)

120mm f2.8 (maybe later in the year)

 

 

Maybe the 56mm 1.2.  I need to see if I'll need it after I purchase the 90mm, maybe I'll rent it first.

[KeeKee-FL]

Only been a Fuji owner for a couple of weeks now; switching over from Nikon D610. I have the 18-55 and the 50-230, but am considering adding the 10-24. Any thoughts or advice in that regard?

[frod]

Consider the samyang 12mm instead. It's faster, cheaper and weighs a lot less. It's manual focus but at that length it's not hard to nail focus.

[KeeKee-FL]

I think I want to stick with Fuji lenses only. Has anyone used the 10-24? It has me intrigued.

[Contrera]

I want:

 56mm 1.2

 

I have:

XF10-24 F4 R OIS

XF27mm F2.8

XF18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS

XF60mm F2.4 R 

F18-135mm F3.5-5.6 R R LM OIS WR

XF55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

Leitz Wetzlar Elmarit R 90mm F2.8 - Fotodiox LR-FX

Leitz Wetzlar Elmarit 135mm F2.8

Carl Zeiss 32mm 2.8

[Warwick]

You already have the 56mm field of view, or close to it, four times - in three of your zooms and the 60mm. Is a fifth version overkill?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[johant]

I'm on repeat; 23mm pancake please!

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Marc G.]

You already have the 56mm field of view, or close to it, four times - in three of your zooms and the 60mm. Is a fifth version overkill?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah, and the versions he has are pretty simialar. f/3.5, f/4.0, f/4.x (in the 18-135) and f/2.4. f/1.2 sounds like a useful variety if one is into portraits.

[KeeKee-FL]

Went to the local camera shop and got a chance to physically compare the 23 and 35 and 10-24. Looks like the 23mm will be coming home with me as soon as I sell my Nikon D610. 

[frod]

The transition from focus to out of focus on the 23mm is absolutely delicious. 80%+ of my photography is done with that lens.

[KeeKee-FL]

Very excited to get the 23. Nikon gear goes on eBay tomorrow.

[TaffyTheGog]

I'm curious - how many people out there would like to see PROPER manual lenses in the X-range?

Imagine the 56mm, 35/1.4, and a host of other fast primes, fully manual (not focus-by-wire), weather-sealed (or not), made by Fuji and costing half or a third as much.

That would definitely get me buying Fuji X-glass. As it stands, I am a film convert and really prefer to shoot tactile legacy glass, but if Fuji's lenses were actually proper manual and built specifically for the system, well, that'd be tha shiznit.

Anyone else have similar thoughts?

[frod]

I do enjoy using my old Nikon lenses with focus peaking. I'd want to know what it does for size and weight though, assuming they'd also support AF - or else what's the point when so much legacy glass exists.

[addicted2light]

A 23/2 (with a proper aperture ring) and a (relatively) small 300/5.6

[Jürgen Heger]

Something like the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 but with aperture and focus ring with stops on both ends and with marks. At this focal length I even could forego an OIS. The lack of it so far hold me back from trading my 18-55mm f2.8-4.0 for a 16-55mm f2.8.

[Jürgen Heger]

@TaffyTheGog

I think it is not really focus by wire that is wrong in general but Fuji could have implemented the operation a little bit smoother.

 

I also tend to rant about that many Fuji lenses do not have stops at the ends for the focus and aperture ring and other things. But this mostly comes into my mind when I am sitting at home, playing around with my Fuji gear and dreaming of all the wonderful pictures I could take if just Fuji would finally make the right equipment for me.

 

However when I am actually out and shooting I normally do not really miss these things. Instead, I find that I get more and more used to my equipment. Things that started as a work around become normal and convenient. I believe it was Zack Arias who said: "It's the moron behind the lens that makes the picture."

 

Regarding the price I think, that today, normally, it is more expensive to manufacture high quality mechanical parts than electronic parts. So I do not think that a full manual focus lens can be manufactured significantly cheaper than then AF lenses.

[Hauxon]

The lineup is quite complete as it is.  The only lens I'm actually  waiting for the 33/1.0.  I think it would be wise to do version II of the original primes, especially the 18 and 60.   The 60 would be great with the same optics but faster focus and possibly OIS ..and a retractable hood. They could make a 200mm f/2 or a 300/2.8 but I would probably not buy em since the 100-400 is all I need.

[KwyjiboVanDeKamp]

The f/1.8 Sigma zoom lenses are very intersting. Maybe Fuji should make it as well but starting from 16 mm.

[fujiXphotog]

Ive tested and used ALL of Fuji X lenses, and own 13 of them.

 

 

only lens im waiting for is the 120mm macro.

 

 

 

16mm is Fujis BEST lens, its stunning, next would be their 35mm F2 for being awesome, cheap, and very useful.

 

etc.