Jump to content

XF33mmF1.0 rumors


Patrick FR

Recommended Posts

Seems that someone has finally reached the conclusion that to produce anything one needs a market large enough to justify it. Of course there wil be many who will cry their outrage ( but not all who will do so would have put their wallet where their keyboard is) at this act of disrespect. But they are not running the Fuji company and have to justify their act to several share holders who already wonder if and when they were going to see their money back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure Fujifilm always knows what they are doing.

 

They launched almost simoltaneously two entry level cameras (X-M1 / X-A1). What was the sense of launching 2 entry level cameras at the same time with basically the same specs (except X-Trans). Of course X-M1 failed (which was more expensive than the X-A1). And the X30 failed too. And the X-E2s is a mistery too. And the X70 failed too. Just a few examples

 

They might have made many right decisions, but also quite some wrong ones. And I believe, not making the 33/1 is a wrong decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they have tried and failed in the beginning of their run this has costed much money, now they have learned from their previous costly faults. The X-A-1-2 ( and their new X-A3) was disappointing in the whole world except from Thailand and South East Asia where they sold in great numbers ( That’s why they are doing this again).

 

I am not going to miss the 33.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My gut says the lens development group has these priorities.

Lenses for the medium format GFX - New market potential

Finishing development of the 80 mm macro - Smaller market, roadmap completion, semi-replacement for 60 mm

Development of the fisheye constant aperture zoom - Small market, roadmap completion

Video lenses for APS-C family - New market potential but market will be small-ish

Refresh of early zoom lenses like the 18-55 - Large upgrade/replacement opportunity

 

After all of that, I would be surprised if Fujifilm has much bandwidth left. Also, a 33 mm f/1.0 is a small market in a crowded area of the roadmap, which has had recent updates. Fujifilm may leave the ultra-fast lens development to other lens makers. A very fast lens will also be bigger, heavier, and more difficult (expensive) to meet Fujifilm's IQ goals. I can see how they may put off development indefinitely, though it may be back on the table as other tasks are completed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be bummed if this rumour is true. One of the main reasons I don't use my 35mm as much is the less predictable focusing (the 56mm may be slow, but at least it's consistent) and the fact that it focuses externally. I like how most of the other primes focus internally and come with plastic hoods; I feel more confident when they get subjected to bumps and the like.

 

Even if they replace the 35mm 1.4 with another 1.4 lens, internal focusing would be enough to get me to switch. f/1.0 would have been a much-welcomed bonus, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apples and oranges.

 

The GFX covers a completely different market where Fuji has little competition and high possible revenues because of the fact that most buyers will be professionals or amateurs with deep pockets.

 

AS for the 100-400, Fuji has never had a credible long lens for those whom intend to use this camera for wildlife photography, sports or plane spotting. The 100-400 is such a lens.

 

The number of photographers (especially amateurs) who use a camera for wildlife photography is certainly way higher than those in the “ need” of a 33mm f 1.

 

Fuji, who is no stranger to providing people with cameras and lenses, knows that.

 

But of course, people at home wish, beg and pray for Fuji to make any focal lengths with increments of 1mm, between 1 and 1000 and all with f 0,01, lightweight, ultrasonic, lenses. Naturally IBIS in a much smaller camera that at present and with FF 48Mp ( 6K of course!).

 

Of course at no more than the price that they are buying their camera currently!

 

As one does... with other people’s companies and money.

Edited by milandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly wouldn't want one because of size and cost. 35 f/2 is fine is a terrific lens, enough DOF for me at that focal lenght (and if it isn't there's always the 1.4).
If I really want thin DOF I grab my 90 f/2, yes sure 90mm is too long a lof of times, but for outdoor portrait it's terrific.

Edited by Hermelin
Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 pence worth

 

Would I buy a 33 F/1, almost certainly not; Do I think Fuji should make one, maybe.

 

Companies (not just camera companies) make products to satisfy the 1% not the 99% , not always to make money directly.

 

Having a flagship product that is out of the reach of the majority drives sales of other products.

Look at every market, from computer CPU's to cars to watches to pens.

 

Every manufacturer releases a flagship product which sales will be a fraction of their entry level and mainstream products

 

In the UK you can buy a Parker Pen for £10 or a Parker Pen for £500. Not many £500 pens will be sold, probably not enough to justify the production costs in the short term. But without the flagship pens less people would be drawn to the brand.

Look at intel processors how many people buy the intel i7x processors for £1000 each not many but having the high performance flagship and the fastest performance helps drive sales of the mainstream devices.

 

Not every product in a range needs to make a profit if it adds value to the range.

If Fuji had not released the XF100-400 a portrait/lifestyle/wedding/whatever photographer who in their free time enjoys wildlife photography that was thinking about moving to the Fuji system, may decide not to because they could not replace their current setup

Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 pence worth

 

Would I buy a 33 F/1, almost certainly not; Do I think Fuji should make one, maybe.

 

Companies (not just camera companies) make products to satisfy the 1% not the 99% , not always to make money directly.

 

Having a flagship product that is out of the reach of the majority drives sales of other products.

Look at every market, from computer CPU's to cars to watches to pens.

 

Every manufacturer releases a flagship product which sales will be a fraction of their entry level and mainstream products

 

In the UK you can buy a Parker Pen for £10 or a Parker Pen for £500. Not many £500 pens will be sold, probably not enough to justify the production costs in the short term. But without the flagship pens less people would be drawn to the brand.

Look at intel processors how many people buy the intel i7x processors for £1000 each not many but having the high performance flagship and the fastest performance helps drive sales of the mainstream devices.

 

Not every product in a range needs to make a profit if it adds value to the range.

If Fuji had not released the XF100-400 a portrait/lifestyle/wedding/whatever photographer who in their free time enjoys wildlife photography that was thinking about moving to the Fuji system, may decide not to because they could not replace their current setup

I agree with you very much on this. A product that gets people excited about the brand can be worth a lot from a marketing standpoint. And the 100-400mm is the lens that made me switch, but is far from my most used lens.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Prestige lenses are just one factor in Fujifilm's decision process.

 

These are a few of the other factors.

  • IQ brand reputation (Fujifilm will not wish to release an ultra-fast lens that cannot take great pictures without being stopped down.)
  • Opportunity cost (What lens would the customers want to drop from the X and GFX roadmaps to devote staff to a 33 mm f/1? You have to expect the same staff is working all of the lenses from X to GFX, maybe even FinePix and Instax. The lens design group cannot just increase staff, temporarily, then lay them off afterward. Training staff for lens design is an expensive investment that takes years to pay off.)
  • Return on investment (If Fujifilm decides to spend 500M yen on a new lens development, how long will it take to recoup the cost and how much potential profit is there in its sales afterward? Investment cost should be lower for refreshing the XF-18-55 versus designing a brand new, ultra-fast lens. Also, the GFX customers should be less price sensitive so a f/1 for medium format lens might represent a larger profit opportunity.)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...