Dream High-End X-Mount Lenses

[Sator-Photography]

I have grave fears that Fuji are going to downgrade the entire X-system to become more of a lower end consumer product in order to draw more attention to their medium format system. I hope that Fuji do not give up their aspirations of the X-system being something that can rival or surpass the best high-end full frame models. It does concern me that we are getting news of Fuji cancelling the 120mm f/2.8 macro, the 33mm f/1.0 prime, and the 200mm f/2.0 has likewise vanished off the lens road map. I can only hope that Fuji keep aspiring to much greater things for the X-system, and do not cripple it to make their medium format system look better. With that thought in mind I compiled a list of ambitious dream lenses. 

 

Keep in mind that the X-system is turning into a more capable sports and wildlife system, something that a medium format system could never really manage because the lenses are too big and slow. Even if Fuji now refuse to make high-end X-system lenses that would conflict through rivalry with their medium format siblings, at least they can make fast telephoto lenses of a sort impractical for medium format. 

 

 

 

First: Fuji XF 135mm f/1.8 prime (no OIS to reduce size and maximise sharpness).

A dream portrait lens for portrait and wedding photographers, who would actually be able to carry it around on location to shoot hand-held without a tripod, unlike a full frame 200mm f/2.0 IS prime or a a 250mm f/4.0 medium format prime.

Second: Fuji XF 33mm f/1.0 prime
This was reputedly planned but cancelled to focus on cheaper consumer orientated models that sell well. But Fuji need to build the system with showcase lenses too. It must have MTF plots that match the Sony-Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar T* in the centre but surpasses it at the edges. Let it be as large and expensive as it has to be to achieve this end e.g. 86mm filter size to get that perfect corner sharpness without vignetting at f/1.0. You just can't make medium format lenses this fast so there is no conflict of interest here.

Third: Fuji XF 200mm f/1.8 OIS prime lens
Canon used to make a 200mm f/1.8 prime lens, so it is perfectly feasible. A f/1.8 maximum aperture would make it compete more directly with full frame 300mm f/2.8 lenses (as at f/1.8 the Fuji would have the same depth of field as a 300mm FF lens at f/2.8).

Fourth: Fuji 70-200mm f/2.8 OIS zoom lens
This will make a 105-300mm full frame equivalent zoom like the Sigma Sport lens 120-300mm f/2.8 zoom.

Sixth: XF 50-100mm f/1.8 zoom (no OIS to reduce size and maximise sharpness)
Like the Sigma zoom lens. For a 75-150mm full frame equivalent perspective. An ideal fast portraiture lens really only practical in APS-C format.

Seventh: XF 120-300mm f/2.8 Extender 1.4x
It would have a built in 1.4x extender like the Canon. This will allow it to reach from 182-638mm FF equivalent. The main body would be proportioned more like the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 full frame zoom. Unlike the Canon 200-400mm f/4 Extender 1.4x, it might actually be affordable. Nothing like this is possible without it becoming absurdly expensive on a FF system, let alone a medium format system.

 

[addicted2light]

The only "dream lens" that Fuji doesn't already make, for my kind of shooting, would be a relatively compact (i.e. as small or smaller than the 55-200) and stabilized 200/4 macro (1:2 would be more than enough).

 

EDIT: and a 16mm f/2! I shoot at f/11 or 16 most of the times, I don't want to lug around the 1.4 version...

Edited September 12, 2016 by addicted2light

[mdm]

I have grave fears...

 

Hobby. Photography must be a hobby. When you are a paid pro you are losing such a pleasure... Especially wedding ones, they are so vulnerable...

Edited September 12, 2016 by mdm

[steviewonder]

I only need a replacement for my Nikon 24-120 f/4 travel lens, which would be a 16-85 Fuji f/4. It would hopefully be sharper than the Fuji 18-135 lens.

[Tom H.]

I'd love a small 18-35 f2 wr zoom for travel. Anything else, I don't really need or desire.

[Warwick]

With the 23mm f2 to go with my XPro2 I'll have all the lenses I need and want. The smaller, lighter WR range is wonderful: if I wanted big, heavy lenses I'd buy a Nikon or a Canon. The only missing link for me is a matching wide-angle: a 16mm f2 or an updated 18mm f2

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Larry Bolch]

Don't worry—the target customer is entirely different. Downgrading the current line would have no effect on the market for the medium-format line.

 

The top X-cameras are well under $2,000US where the medium format cameras will be well above $5,000US. The sensor alone is reported to be $5k wholesale. It is supposed to be cheaper than the recent Hasselblad which is currently selling for $9,000. While most of the X system lenses are under $1,000, the 35-90mm f/4-5.6 zoom lens that Fuji makes for Hasselblad sells for $8,560.00. Primes are somewhat less but still aimed at working photographers.

[bhu]

Yes, as Larry has said, do not worry. MF cameras are for an entirely different customer base. If full-frame cameras are losing customers to APS-C, then MF, with its much larger lenses and implied weight gain are not going to cannibalize the smaller sensor market. If you still wish to worry about something, worry about cell-phone cameras gaining multiple lens elements and growing in size to finish eating up the P&S market.

 

The XF series lenses have a pretty full range right now. A super-fast, short-focal prime will have limited application because of its very shallow depth of field. Long focal length fast primes will be heavy, which APS-C users like me kind of hoped to get away from. Rather than niche, or situational, lenses, I suspect Fujifilm will revisit some of their earlier designs to do things like add weatherproofing, update the image stabilization, make them focus quieter and faster, improve manual focus and the aperture controls, take some cost out where they can, address any obsolete components inside, etc.

 

Fujifilm will not make a lot of money developing eclectic specialty lenses and, even if they make a special lens, the people who buy them will keep them for a very long time. Fujifilm makes money on standard primes and zooms that sell in larger volume so their first priority before development is to determine which lens offers the chance at the most revenue. With a maturing lens line, that will mean considering updates and revisions capable of enticing a lot of customers into selling their old lenses. The tapered lenses designed for the X-Pro2 is one opportunity. The X-T2, with its nascent video capability may be another. However, there is the original kit lens and a few others that I suspect Fujifilm is considering how to update in attractive ways.

[Warwick]

Essentially, Fuji want to make cameras that people want to buy. The X Series cameras are very popular right now, because they balance super image quality with lightweight portability and retro design. There is no way in a million years that they would 'disable' the system to try to drive enthusiasts to buy bigger, bulkier Medium Format cameras - which always have been a 'niche' product. As for the growing number of smaller F2 lenses: Fujifilm continue to make the F1.4 alternatives - it's just that the f2 versions are proving wildly popular at present, so they are making more of them.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[addicted2light]

As for the growing number of smaller F2 lenses: Fujifilm continue to make the F1.4 alternatives - it's just that the f2 versions are proving wildly popular at present, so they are making more of them.

 

...and it looks like they are finally sticking to just ONE filter ring size!

Edited September 14, 2016 by addicted2light

[Sator-Photography]

BTW this is a thread for those who shoot professionally. If all you do is take casual snapshots, this thread isn't really meant for you. 

 

The trouble is that even if I did buy into the medium format line, I would still need to keep the APS-C X-series line for many on location shoots outside the studio. Photographers who shoot medium format often (but not always) leave their medium format camera behind in the studio when flying and travelling longer distances for on location work. I often have a HUGE amount of lighting equipment etc that I need to carry. 

 

So that means that there is still place for Fuji to aim at the professional market with the X-series. But Fuji are instead focussing on casual photography orientated products exactly at the same time as they release the medium format system. That is of grave concern. I think it is important to push for there being room to "aim high" with the X series rather than demoting it to a Instax like commercial product. You cannot do sports and wildlife with medium format. You cannot do low light photography opening up aperture speeds to f/1.0-1.4 on a medium format system. Nor is it reasonable for Fuji to ask we buy slow and ginormous medium format long telephoto lenses for stratospheric prices.

 

It seems perfectly reasonable to have something like a L lens vs non-L lens differentiation in the X-series lenses. While I appreciate that the compact, slow, and cheaper lenses sell well...and Fuji being a business they should expand offerings in the street and casual shooting department. BUT...there is room for system building with showcase lens models that turn heads and win publicity for the system as a whole, even if most casual shooters end up buying the cheap stuff in the end. The high-end stuff helps sell the commercial grade stuff. Fuji still needs to demand that the X-system be taken very seriously indeed rather than as a low end system. Fuji cameras also need to seen in the hands of more professional photographers for the sake of publicity. That means that once Fuji finish making these street and casual photography lenses, they need to return to system building with serious high-end offerings.

 

As for filter sizes, keeping that constant for commercial grade lenses is fine, but for anything high-end, the dictates of the optics should dictate the filter size. Doing whatever it takes to ensure optical optical performance is what is important. If anything I think Fuji have been too conservative in their filter and overall lens sizes. By all means keep these down to a minimum for street and casual photography purposes, but there should be also be a L lens type of more high-end optics line in which lens optical performance takes precedence. The early lenses tend to neither fish nor fowl in this regard, but product differentiation between ultra compact and discreet street photography models, and larger high-end optics show-case models would probably be helpful. 

[Tom H.]

I used to own a whole bunch of canon L lenses. My fujinons are way sharper and without aberrations, at half the size and while still being only "consumer grade"... I fail to see the point of that f1 aperture with perfect corners, except for bragging rights...

[mdm]

BTW this is a thread for those who shoot professionally. If all you do is take casual snapshots, this thread isn't really meant for you. 

 

-1

 

Even when I shot film (sorry took casual snapshots) I was light with Olympus mju II, so that's why I'm with Fuji now.

Edited September 15, 2016 by mdm

[Mike G]

I only need a replacement for my Nikon 24-120 f/4 travel lens, which would be a 16-85 Fuji f/4. It would hopefully be sharper than the Fuji 18-135 lens.

Or they could make a revised and better 18-135mm!

[Sator-Photography]

Despite initial scepticism, I think the fact that the development of GF medium format lenses is adversely affecting XF lens development is beginning to dawn on a larger number of people. 

 

It is clearly doing so at two levels:

 

1. Diverting human resources away from XF lens development

2. Causing the XF mount to be treated as a second rate consumer product for those unable to afford medium format

 

There will also be fear of creating anything too good for the X series in case it upstaged the GFX series. This is actually a real and meaningful threat, not a hypothetical one. The reasons:

 

1. It is easier to overbuild the specs of smaller format lenses

An APS-C lens with a 62mm filter diameter is like a full frame lens with a 94mm filter diameter (x 1.52), or a FX lens with a 120mm filter diameter (x1.27). X series lenses perform well because they have exceptional light gathering ability RELATIVE to the sensor size. You can do this with smaller format lenses and overbuilt them. Try to do that with larger formats and the lenses end up blowing out to elephantine proportions. Many smaller format lenses even have more elements to their design, whereas doing this on larger format lenses causes them to blow out unreasonably in price and weight. A good example is the Zeiss Touit 50mm f/2.8 macro with its 14 elements in 11 groups (52mm filter), which is a remarkable number of elements for a prime lens of this focal length. It would have been even better with a 62mm filter size and additional low dispersion elements, which would have made it pricier, but not so much that it would make it unrealistic. The chances of anyone commercially making a 4433 format 100mm f/2.8 prime lens with 14 elements and a 120mm filter size is zero. 

 

2. It is easier to overbuild the specs of smaller format sensors

The X-series has a more sophisticated sensor in that it has an X-trans RGB configuration. This is lacking in the GFX 50S probably because it is too expensive to add the X-trans array to it. Smaller sensors are often more sophisticated than larger ones having for e.g. BSI, stacked sensor designs, X-trans RGB. Larger sensors tend to be unsophisticated brutes by comparison. In 3-4 years time, Fuji might find that they are able to make APS-C size organic X-trans sensors, but that it is uneconomical to produce 4433 size organic sensors. This could result in an organic APS-C sensor outperforming a 4433 medium format Bayer sensor. The fear is that Fuji may cripple the X series to prevent this from happening. 

 

It would be a great tragedy to see the X series being downgraded from overachieving small format dynamo to just a second class consumer product fit only for those who cannot afford medium format. The purpose of this thread is to keep the dream alive...although that isn't going to stop people posting in this thread asking for an upgrade to their kit lens. Sigh....

[Sator-Photography]

I used to own a whole bunch of canon L lenses. My fujinons are way sharper and without aberrations, at half the size and while still being only "consumer grade"... I fail to see the point of that f1 aperture with perfect corners, except for bragging rights...

 

 

The reasons for the performance of the X series lenses vs Canon include:

 

1. You can overbuilt the specs of smaller format lenses e.g. additional ultra low dispersion elements and aspherical elements without causing too much of a price blowout

2. Some of the Canon L lenses are getting old. Many are over 10 years old and some are up to 20 years old. The Fuji lenses are more recent designs benefiting from the dramatic improvements in computer assisted optical engineering during this time.

3. Short flange distance/back focus distance, and elimination of the space needed for the mirror box

 

Canon will need to make their L lenses seriously 250MP ready, given they are showing off a prototype 250MP sensor, and already have announced plans to manufacture a 120MP sensor (probably stacked). It will also mean that Canon FF small format lenses will end up becoming rather large (like Zeiss Otus lenses), but if you look at 135 format lenses since the 1960s they have been growing larger as time goes by anyway.

 

If Fuji really wanted to they could overbuild the specs of XF lenses so that they perform as well as XG lenses. They just have to make sure that XF lenses perform as well at 20 & 60 lp/mm on MTF plots as the equivalent XG lenses do at 10 & 30 lp/mm, which isn't an unreasonable ask. However, the chance that will happen now is probably zero. 

[arty]

I'd prefer a slow, but pancake zoom, the present 16-50 is too big to get a little Fuji-camera in a pocket with me allaround. So I'd like a small, compact zoom, maybe 16-40 mm efr.

Edited September 23, 2016 by arty

[deva]

Despite initial scepticism, I think the fact that the development of GF medium format lenses is adversely affecting XF lens development is beginning to dawn on a larger number of people. 

 

 

That is not at all established... and is only speculation on your part.

 

Fuji focused on the fast glass first, then is filling in the lineup with some smaller lenses. If Fuji were downgrading the X series, you would not have seen all the effort to make the X-T2 better for fast action AF. The X-T2 plus grip is not a camera intended to use the 35 f/2 lens. Before Fuji can release something like a 200/2, they needed to have a camera that can match the fast action use case for the lens. I think what Fuji has done with the X-T2 shows that they are still aiming straight at the pro DSLR market. 

 

Fuji has also upped the video capability, so there is now also a place for some X lenses for the videographer. 

 

And as for dream lenses... I would like a 70/1.4

 

I'd like the 16-85 f4 with OIS as a nice all around lens and would be useful for video 

 

no thanks to the 50-100 1.8 without OIS... my 50-140 2.8 with OIS is superior for my use. Now, a 80-170 f2... that would catch my interest... and please, with OIS. With the 50-140, I am using that lens all the time at 2.8 and in the 100-140 range. I frequently wish it went just a bit higher than 140

 

I would love a 14-40 f2.8 or f4 with OIS for video

[Phil]

Despite initial scepticism, I think the fact that the development of GF medium format lenses is adversely affecting XF lens development is beginning to dawn on a larger number of people. 

 

It is clearly doing so at two levels:

 

1. Diverting human resources away from XF lens development

2. Causing the XF mount to be treated as a second rate consumer product for those unable to afford medium format

 

 

I really don't think that will be an issue. 

 

1. As popular as this medium format camera is right now, how many people are actually going to buy it? GFX production has got to be a tiny, tiny fraction of the XF production. I doubt they'll start short-changing the XF lineup to meet the huge GFX demand, because there probably won't be a huge GFX demand.

 

2. I also seriously doubt they'll start to play the XF lineup off as a second-rate product for poor people who can't afford medium format. The Canon 1DX is ~$6000, and the 5D is ~$3000. Is Canon trying to play the 5D off as a second-rate product for people too poor to buy a "real" DSLR? No; Canon sells way, way more 5D's than 1D's, so it would be stupid to belittle/alienate that customer base. The 5D is considered an excellent workhorse camera for professionals, and the 1DX is an outrageously expensive camera that 99% of photographers don't need.

 

The Fuji XF bodies are around half the price of what the 5D4 will be, and the GFX is even more expensive than the 1DX2 and much more specialized. No one in their right mind would try to make someone feel bad for buying an X-T2 instead of the GFX simply because the GFX is "better".

Edited September 25, 2016 by Phil

[Warwick]

As far as I can see, Fujifilm are making their XF lens range more and more attractive for serious photographers. They now have a full range of fast primes, a range of zooms, and now a growing range of ultra-portable weather-resistant lenses for photojournalists and street photographers. I can't see what else they could be doing.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Naddan28]

I guess "revisiting" some of the earlier lenses to make them weather sealed. It's bizarre that the faster more expensive primes are not WR but the cheaper ones are. I'm surprised Fuji didn't think ahead a little with these lenses at the time of release, or perhaps the lineup has surpassed their wildest expectations!

[deva]

I want a version 2 of the 10-24 f4 that is WR... plus do not mind a bit faster AF... whatever price is necessary 

 

I also want the 23/1.4 WR

Edited September 25, 2016 by deva

[Larry Bolch]

Despite initial scepticism, I think the fact that the development of GF medium format lenses is adversely affecting XF lens development is beginning to dawn on a larger number of people. 

 

It is clearly doing so at two levels:

 

1. Diverting human resources away from XF lens development

2. Causing the XF mount to be treated as a second rate consumer product for those unable to afford medium format

 

There will also be fear of creating anything too good for the X series in case it upstaged the GFX series. This is actually a real and meaningful threat, not a hypothetical one. The reasons:

 

1. It is easier to overbuild the specs of smaller format lenses

 

2. It is easier to overbuild the specs of smaller format sensors

 

It would be a great tragedy to see the X series being downgraded from overachieving small format dynamo to just a second class consumer product fit only for those who cannot afford medium format. The purpose of this thread is to keep the dream alive...although that isn't going to stop people posting in this thread asking for an upgrade to their kit lens. Sigh....

 

1. Give up. Your fears should be overwhelming. You have no idea of how little the GFX50S means in the overall business of Fujifilm. To put things into a bit of perspective without baseless FUD.

 

I have the pro-video Fujinon pages open on the B&H Photovideo site and you would be devastated with the products it is up against in-house. Not just a matter of six new lenses that spell doom to the nice little X-cameras but:

• 81 professional Fujinon video production lenses being maintained to divert people away from X design. The cheapest of the lot is $3,900US and the most expensive is $233,490.00. That for a single lens!!!
• Nine pro-cine PL-mount Fujinon lenses from $18,200.00US to $99,800.00!
• 29 Industrial Fujinons from a mere $109.95US to $11,500.00
• 14 Hasselblad HC lenses from $3,110.00US to $6,310.00. The Fujifilm GX645AF became the Hasselblad H1 and Fujfilm still makes its lenses.
• Unknown lenses built under government contracts around the world for satellites, weapons and other classified projects. Also,
• 30 models of binoculars from $59.99US to $16,559.95. 

Fuji Xerox is a joint venture between Fujifilm and Xerox Corporation of North America. Fujifilm bought Sericol Ltd., a UK-based printing ink company specialising in screen, narrow web, and digital print technologies in March 2005. They also do cosmetics.

 

Clearly, the X and GX cameras were doomed from the beginning with Fuji needing their engineers to work on paying projects. The consumer-camera project obviously is a drop in the bucket. Give up all hope. 

 

On the other hand, realise that Fujifilm is several times larger than Nikon. It is a fully independent corporation, unlike Nikon, which is a member of the Mitsubishi group of companies. Those ignorant of the facts seem to think that Fujifilm is a tiny company only producing consumer-level cameras. Nothing could be further from the truth. Fujifilm has about three times the revenue and three times the employees. Most significant, in 2015, it grossed 7.45 times the income of Nikon!

 

Nikon

• Revenue ¥857.8 billion (FY2015)
• Net income ¥18.4 billion (FY2015)
• Number of employees 25,415 (March 31, 2015)

 

Fujifilm

• Revenue ¥ 2492.6 billion (2015)
• Net income ¥ 137.1 billion (¥118.6 attributable to FUJIFILM Holdings) (2015)
• Number of employees 79,235 (consolidated, as of March 31, 2015)

While Kodak management thought that digital imaging was a brief fad that would go away if ignored, Fuji invested and diversified, fully embracing the disruptive technology. Little or nothing is left of Kodak that is still original and intact.

 

With initial resolutions of 16MP, the X-Trans was a brilliant solution to the removal of the AA-filter without creating moire. Above 24MP it becomes much less needed (Nikon D810) and at 50MP no longer relevant. However, for the time being, it is pure brilliance. Times change—technology advances.

 

Don't weep for Fujifilm—or us for that matter. The company has vast resources for this little camera project of theirs. Medium-format is not aimed at high-end consumers as is the X-Pro2 and X-T2. It is an industrial tool for working photographers—just as Fuji's very pricey medium-format film cameras were. The market is limited compared to retail buyers, and production is balanced to fit the size of the marketplace. It is an absurd purchase for anyone who does not make a reasonably quick return on investment. Just in salaries, a single afternoon advertising shoot can far outdistance the price of the camera. A whole 'nuther world.

Edited September 26, 2016 by Larry Bolch

[arty]

 

1. Give up. Your fears should be overwhelming. You have no idea of how little the GFX50S means in the overall business of Fujifilm. To put things into a bit of perspective without baseless FUD.

 

I have the pro-video Fujinon pages open on the B&H Photovideo site and you would be devastated with the products it is up against in-house. Not just a matter of six new lenses that spell doom to the nice little X-cameras but:

• 81 professional Fujinon video production lenses being maintained to divert people away from X design. The cheapest of the lot is $3,900US and the most expensive is $233,490.00. That for a single lens!!!
• Nine pro-cine PL-mount Fujinon lenses from $18,200.00US to $99,800.00!
• 29 Industrial Fujinons from a mere $109.95US to $11,500.00
• 14 Hasselblad HC lenses from $3,110.00US to $6,310.00. The Fujifilm GX645AF became the Hasselblad H1 and Fujfilm still makes its lenses.
• Unknown lenses built under government contracts around the world for satellites, weapons and other classified projects. Also,
• 30 models of binoculars from $59.99US to $16,559.95. 

Fuji Xerox is a joint venture between Fujifilm and Xerox Corporation of North America. Fujifilm bought Sericol Ltd., a UK-based printing ink company specialising in screen, narrow web, and digital print technologies in March 2005. They also do cosmetics.

 

Clearly, the X and GX cameras were doomed from the beginning with Fuji needing their engineers to work on paying projects. The consumer-camera project obviously is a drop in the bucket. Give up all hope. 

 

On the other hand, realise that Fujifilm is several times larger than Nikon. It is a fully independent corporation, unlike Nikon, which is a member of the Mitsubishi group of companies. Those ignorant of the facts seem to think that Fujifilm is a tiny company only producing consumer-level cameras. Nothing could be further from the truth. Fujifilm has about three times the revenue and three times the employees. Most significant, in 2015, it grossed 7.45 times the income of Nikon!

 

Nikon

• Revenue ¥857.8 billion (FY2015)
• Net income ¥18.4 billion (FY2015)
• Number of employees 25,415 (March 31, 2015)

 

Fujifilm

• Revenue ¥ 2492.6 billion (2015)
• Net income ¥ 137.1 billion (¥118.6 attributable to FUJIFILM Holdings) (2015)
• Number of employees 79,235 (consolidated, as of March 31, 2015)

While Kodak management thought that digital imaging was a brief fad that would go away if ignored, Fuji invested and diversified, fully embracing the disruptive technology. Little or nothing is left of Kodak that is still original and intact.

 

With initial resolutions of 16MP, the X-Trans was a brilliant solution to the removal of the AA-filter without creating moire. Above 24MP it becomes much less needed (Nikon D810) and at 50MP no longer relevant. However, for the time being, it is pure brilliance. Times change—technology advances.

 

Don't weep for Fujifilm—or us for that matter. The company has vast resources for this little camera project of theirs. Medium-format is not aimed at high-end consumers as is the X-Pro2 and X-T2. It is an industrial tool for working photographers—just as Fuji's very pricey medium-format film cameras were. The market is limited compared to retail buyers, and production is balanced to fit the size of the marketplace. It is an absurd purchase for anyone who does not make a reasonably quick return on investment. Just in salaries, a single afternoon advertising shoot can far outdistance the price of the camera. A whole 'nuther world.

 

Thank you, Larry, for this info

[Tom H.]

This will put the whole company thing in perspective:

 

Sony:

http://www.forbes.com/companies/sony/

 

Canon:

http://www.forbes.com/companies/canon/

 

Fujifilm:

http://www.forbes.com/companies/fujifilm-holdings/

 

Nikon:

http://www.forbes.com/companies/nikon/

 

Let's not forget these are not small companies. They can pretty much do whatever they want, depending if they think there is money to be made by doing so...