What lenses are coming - internal roadmap?

[danwells]

The internal roadmap shared on Fujirumors suggests a 33mm (or is it 32mm? X-Pro 2 bodies differ on which frameline is shown) f1.0, a 200 mm f??? and an 8mm lens being among coming attractions for 2016.

 

The 32 or 33mm is the easiest to see for a company building cameras with a rangefinder-like ethos. It's basically our old friend the Noctilux, but in an APS-C appropriate focal length. Complete guess on the price: $2000 (it'll be substantially more expensive than the Ibelux, which is presently selling for $799, but 1/5 the price of the Noctilux). If it's $2000 or less, it will be a substantial seller, probably over 1000 per year, maybe well over - Fuji builds somewhere in the neighborhood of 300,000 bodies per year, and one in several hundred seems somewhat reasonable for a lens like this. It might be worth building even if it were to cost more than that, and sell in the hundreds per year - mainly as a "halo product". Since Fuji does a lot of hand production anyhow, it's not terribly expensive to build a few of something unusual every year.

 

Filmmakers also love fast lenses, and with the good video capability of the X-Pro 2 and the presumed superb video capability the X-T2 might have, this is not to be ignored - this would be a sixth lens at f1.4 or faster from Fuji! Canon only has 5 such lenses in EF mount (6 if you count both old and new versions of the 35 f1.4). Nikon has 5 plus a very old manual focus 50 f1.2 and multiple generations of 35 and 50 f1.4 lenses.

 

 

If the 8mm is a fisheye, it's not that interesting a lens - 8mm fisheyes exist for most APS-C systems and even on full frame, and the X-mount already has a Rokinon/Samyang. Yes, the Rokinon is manual focus, but since the depth of field at most apertures extends roughly from the surface of the front element to the surface of the moon, the manual focus is not a huge disadvantage - fisheyes have occasionally (some versions of the 6mm Nikkor, maybe others)  been built with no focusing mechanism at all... A Fujinon would certainly be much better built than the Rokinon. It might very well also be optically superior, but it would be a lot more expensive (how many people would pay $750 or whatever, instead of $250 for a lens that gets that little use). Certainly there are a small number of photographers for whom the fisheye is a bread and butter lens, but for most of us, it's an effects lens if we have one at all.

 

If, on the other hand, the 8mm is a rectilinear lens, it becomes a rare bird indeed. There are two rectilinear lenses almost exactly as wide among B+H's extensive stock, and one the merest fraction wider. All are zooms, and two require a full-frame body to reach their full width. The "exactly as wide" lens is an older Sigma 12-24 f4.5-5.6, with generally pretty good image quality, but the high sample variation that characterizes older and lower-end Sigmas. I wouldn't be shocked to see Sigma do an ART variant on this lens that was half a stop or even a full stop faster, and sharper with lower variation, but we haven't seen it yet. The wider lens is the new $3000 Canon 11-24mm f4. Sigma also makes an APS-C dedicated version of their 12-24, an 8-16mm f4.5-5.6 zoom that will be exactly as wide as a Fujinon 8mm (if used on a Nikon or Sony body - Canon will be a bit narrower).

 

Fuji's lens would be the widest rectilinear prime around, almost certainly faster than the zooms, and smaller and lighter (perhaps by a wide margin). It would also be significantly wider than any other lens for a mirrorless mount. The image quality would probably be closer to the Canon than to the Sigmas (although a Sigma ART lens could be much closer).

 

Perhaps the most interesting lens of the three, largely because of what it signals about Fuji's future intentions, is the 200mm.. Tere are three reasonable maximum apertures for a 200mm prime, and Fuji could go for any of them. If it's a f2.8 lens, it's a reasonable size, weight and cost, but it's not an especially ambitious lens. It's probably compatible with the converters, but they aren't terribly useful, because it's only marginally faster than the 100-400 if used with the 1.4x, and it's not faster at all with the 2x .200mm f2.8 primes have become rare, only because the focal length and aperture combination is so common as the long end of a zoom.

 

If it's an intermediate speed around f2.4 or f2.5, it's somewhat bigger and heavier, but still not an "exotic"-sized lens. It's a little more ambitious - the fastest long lens in any mirrorless system, and it becomes more interesting with converters, because it maintains a speed advantage over the 100-400 used alone.

 

If, on the other hand, it's an f2.0 (or, if Fuji's really ambitious, even f1.8) lens, it's the first new lens in years to go up against the Canon-Nikon duopoly in long, fast lenses - Sigma makes a few, mainly FOR Canon and Nikon mounts, and Sony (A-mount only) and Pentax both make 300mm f2.8s, but they're older designs - neither one sells enough to update them) -. It's a type of lens we haven't seen for any mirrorless system - a big, heavy monster of a lens that throws down the gauntlet and says "we're going up against DSLRs in every field, even where AF speed matters and size doesn't".  It is really interesting with the converters.

 

200mm f2.0 isolates subjects like 300mm f2.8 on full frame, but it lets in a stop more light, buying the photographer either a shutter speed or an ISO setting.

 

280mm f2.8 (1.4x converter) isolates subjects a bit better than a 400mm f4, but lets in light like a (much bigger and more expensive) 400mm f2.8

 

400mm f4 (2x converter) isolates subjects like a 600mm f5.6 (arguably a stop slower than pro standard, but 600mm f4 lenses are the most exotic of the exotics), but lets in light like a 600mm f4.

 

Decent coverage of the three common exotic tele focal lengths in one lens and a pair of converters...

 

No mirrorless maker has dared go up against the DSLR duopoly in the heart of their dominance with that kind of lens. No matter how good their bodies and lenses are, it might not work - a huge number of big lenses are owned by newspapers and the like who have been with either Canon or Nikon forever. On the other hand, if it did, Fuji would have established themselves as the third true pro alternative.

 

Nobody is being as creative with lenses as Fuji, nor releasing lenses of as consistently high quality. Sony has seemingly adopted a different strategy - very few, and oddly positioned, native lenses, but adapters for everything. If I were Sony, I'd release Sony-branded Canon and Nikon adapters. It would be a lot more reassuring to photographers if their body maker said "we're still filling out our lens line, but here are our native solutions (that work with our weathersealing) for using the two biggest lens lines in the business at full capacity". What they're saying now is pretty much "we're still filling out our lens line, but we hear that you can find solutions on eBay from a company you've never heard of that let you use the big lens lines - oh, and good luck with the weathersealing, we have no responsibility if that $300 adapter ruins a $3200 body or a $8500 lens".

 

If I were Fuji, my next lenses after this roadmap wouldn't be lenses at all - they'd be flashes! Unless they have a real interest in the low end of the market, which Fuji has avoided so far (at least as far as what they promote and make their reputation on, the entry point is an X-e2s/18-55 kit for $1000), their lens lineup will be pretty darned complete. Sure, they could build a tilt-shift lens or two, or release more speed options in the same focal lengths, but they will have well over 20 pro-grade lens choices spanning from a 12mm equivalent to a 600mm equivalent (pushing it, you could even claim 840mm equivalent - slap the 1.4x on the 100-400 - it might even focus on a sunny day).

 

That lens line deserves a full pro flash line to go with it (and I say this as a landscape photographer who keeps a dusty old flash in the bottom of his bag for the times he can't avoid shooting an event as a favor). I'll probably buy the new EF-X500 if it's any good at all, and be satisfied with one of it and a couple of diffusers for my limited flash use. However, I know plenty of Canon and Nikon shooters who say "how do you like your Fuji", and I say "it's great - reasonable size,rugged, nice controls, fantastic lens line, very good image quality (when my X-Pro 2 arrives, I'll be able to say "fantastic image quality").

 

Their next question, unless they shoot only landscape, is inevitably "what's the flash system like"? Currently, my response has to be "a few toy flashes, one overpriced Sunpak adaptation, a lower-midrange Metz nobody can find and one Nissin with OK features but durability issues". Not exactly the response that anyone who uses flash wants to hear. Even adding the EF-X500 to the mix, it will still be one decent midrange flash plus the dreck mentioned above (if the EF-X500 proves to be decent, and not another overpriced Sunpak). Fuji needs to make (or more likely get someone to make) a flagship flash above the EF-X500, a "baby wireless" flash below the EF-X500 that is part of the wireless system the EF-X500 initiates, a commander unit (unless the "baby" wireless flash is also a full-featured commander), and maybe a macro ring or twin light...

[Marc G.]

Rumored new lenses:

 

18/2 update

33 1.0

120/2.8 macro

more lenses like the 35/2 (compact, slower, electronically corrected)

200/2

2x Teleconverter

8 Fisheye

 

Can't sign parts of your flash criticism. The EF-X500 is a weatherproof flash with HSS and enough power. I don't use a trigger system other than a simple yongnuo 603 thingy so I don't care about the flash communication between EF-X500s. The flash brings all the needed features. It's said to come on may.

[EyesUnclouded]

Rumored new lenses:

 

18/2 update

33 1.0

120/2.8 macro

more lenses like the 35/2 (compact, slower, electronically corrected)

200/2

2x Teleconverter

8 Fisheye

 

I think these would round up the lens lineup pretty nicely. The 18mm desperately needs an update and I would add the 60mm macro in this category. Smaller/lighter/cheaper f/2 versions of the 16mm and 23mm are indispensable IMO. 

 

Overall, the only major type of lens I see missing after these additions, is a fast-ish 16-70mm or 16-80mm with constant aperture. Lenses such as Canon's 24-105mm are best sellers in their systems for a reason. I'd be particularly happy if Fuji managed to make it faster than f/4 but I'd be satisfied with f/4 with image quality at the levels of the 18-55mm, perhaps with better distortion control and better IS.

 

Concerning the flash system, my opinion is that Fuji should outsource the whole deal, working with a couple of major flash manufacturers on Fuji TTL versions of existing flashes. For off-camera flash, honestly, there is no huge problem with Fuji. I can use a Cactus V6 plus a bunch of available flashes from several brands, and have full on-camera flash power control. I personally don't care much for off-camera TTL and, to be honest, I know of very few people in need of that. But, if this is an issue, again, just work with third party manufacturers for a TTL radio system; this is exactly what happens with Canon and Nikon.

 

I may be in the minority here, but I don't find flash support to be a major weakness in the system.

[danwells]

If Marc's rumors are correct, that's great - the only disappointment (and it's minor) is the 8 fisheye as opposed to a rectilinear 8... I think the Rokinon serves for a fisheye (they're supposed to distort, aren't they), and a rectilinear 8 would be a more unusual lens that offered a perspective we don't already have. Maybe I'm wrong, and there's a great clamor for a sturdy, AF fisheye with great optical quality.

 

As for the flash, I think outsourcing the whole deal would make a ton of sense - Metz already makes one (available) toy-level flash, and one (hard to find, at least in the US - as in B+H doesn't stock it, and they stock most things) midrange flash. If they just made Fuji versions of a couple higher-end models, we'd be in good shape.

 

As for the EF-X500, if it's of decent quality (e.g. not a Sunpak with a big price premium), it is the best possible SINGLE flash introduction - it'll suit a lot of people (myself included). Pros who use wireless flash will want a "big" flash with a stop more light and extra features,  and a little off-camera one, both compatible with the EF-X500's wireless protocol. If Fuji just gave Metz the protocol, Metz already make wireless flashes for other systems that suit both roles well.

[Marc G.]

While I think 23/2 is perfectly reasonable, I think Fuji would rather opt for a 16 2.8 instead, to keep it more compact. After all, you hardly find a 24 1.4 24 2.0 and 24 2.8 in dslr systems (except when Nikon lately introduced the 24 1.8g)

 

 

I think these would round up the lens lineup pretty nicely. The 18mm desperately needs an update and I would add the 60mm macro in this category. Smaller/lighter/cheaper f/2 versions of the 16mm and 23mm are indispensable IMO.