Jump to content

Leaked: XF23mmF2

Patrick FR

By Patrick FR
in Fuji X Rumors & News

 Share

Recommended Posts

milandro Grand Master

milandro

Posted
Posted

Predictably this ( and the 50 will probably follow suit) fits in the range of lenses especially created to fit the X-Pro-2 and not mess around with the optical viewfinder, blocking its image.

 

If anyone believed that it was possible to have an aperture dial, being f2, have a fast autofocus and being weather resistant AND being smaller than what it is then one entertains thoughts against the requirements of physics, or perhaps it could be achieved only if a part of the lens would disappear in dimension X ( to stay faithful to the X cameras).

Link to post
Share on other sites
mdm Experienced

mdm

Posted
Posted (edited)

Ok than, It's still smaller, lighter, cheaper, WR, has shared hood (35), probably got 9 blades, has newer motor,... So for those (me) who haven't got 23f1.4 it could be the choice. One stop of light gathering? Well, habituated to sleep at night, so don't shoot most of the really-low-light time. ;)  

Edited by mdm
Link to post
Share on other sites
Alan Sircom Apprentice

Alan Sircom

Posted
Posted

Looks like it fits the same hood as the 35, which is good

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

 

Well, the hood on the photograph is the one for the 35mm. Presumably Fuji will either dual use this hood, or release a similar one for the 23/2 nearer the time of the launch of the 23/2.

Link to post
Share on other sites
johant Mentor

johant

Posted
Posted

So here's how much the existing 23m f/1.4 obscures the x-pro1 viewfinder.

 

bMtf52m.jpg

 

But that is without the lens hood, right?

 

The 18mm and 13mm primes do not obscure the frame at all without a lens hood, and only a small corner with the hood attached.

Link to post
Share on other sites
frod Community Regular

frod

Posted
Posted

But that is without the lens hood, right?

 

The 18mm and 13mm primes do not obscure the frame at all without a lens hood, and only a small corner with the hood attached.

Indeed, although I haven't investigated vented hoods as it doesn't bother me at all. The 23mm f/1.4 doesn't handle glare particularly well; but on the other hand the 35mm f/2 doesn't handle straight lines particularly well and needs to be digitally corrected. It just seems like such a minor reason to pick a lens to me given how simple it is to switch to EVF. If you're concerned about the bottom right corner detail, wouldn't it make sense to go with the lens that actually has better corner sharpness? It's not like the actual OVF frame lines are that accurate anyway..

 

Here's the 35mm f/1.4 btw, again without the hood.

 

YoDRNC1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
johant Mentor

johant

Posted
Posted

Yes, I have the 35mm F/1.4 indeed. And I hope that the 23mm F/2 does not cover more viewfinder area.

 

If I had wanted to use the EVF, with its limitations, I could just as well have used a X-E1. I think the OVF is brilliant, because it gives a view of the real world, and because it allows you to see beyond the frame. That it's not 100% accurate is a price I'm happy to pay for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Puma Cat Enthusiast

Puma Cat

Posted
Posted (edited)

As I already said on the German "sister forum"; I had hoped that it would not be (much) larger than the 18mm F2, but it looks like I'm going to be disappointed ... I'll have a look when it's really available in the shops.

 

Fuji made it as small, compact and short as they possibly could given all the requirements they had for the lens. Some of the requirements functional responses conflicted with one another and it's a matter of  how to make the optical, size and engineering tradeoffs to get the best of all possible outcomes/designs GIVEN THE REQUIREMENTS. As they had Voice of Customer and competitive benchmarking data for prioritizing the requirements, it's as small and compact as they could have made it. If it was shorter or smaller than it is now, whatever, it would have compromised functionality or quality attributes they or customers were not willing to give up on. As always, each customer has to decide for themselves if it represents a value proposition. I'm confident it will be as successful at the 35/2. 

Edited by Puma Cat
Link to post
Share on other sites
Hermelin Proficient

Hermelin

Posted
Posted (edited)

Kinda expensive. Only about 130 bucks less than the 1.4.

 

But I guess this is for people how wants a more portable and WR and probably faster AF. Maybe those benefits are enough for fuji to have a price not far from the original 23.

Edited by Hermelin
Link to post
Share on other sites
eilex Contributor

eilex

Posted
Posted

Kinda expensive. Only about 130 bucks less than the 1.4.

 

But I guess this is for people how wants a more portable and WR and probably faster AF. Maybe those benefits are enough for fuji to have a price not far from the original 23.

If you compare the original price of the 1.4, the difference is way bigger than 130$.
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • jerryy
      Fall pictures

      By jerryy · Posted

      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!

       
    • Giampaolo Masserano
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By Giampaolo Masserano · Posted

      I use a TECHART ring to mount Canon EF lenses on the GFX 50S-II and 100S-II, maintaining image stabilization and autofocus. The only limitation are lenses with a small rear element diameter that make it impossible to cover medium format. Fast lenses like the EF 85/1.2L or the 100-400L, however, work great.
    • thelostkiwi
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By thelostkiwi · Posted

      I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
×
×
  • Create New...