Complete Overview over the available and upcoming Fuji X-Mount lenses

[milandro]

it really is just an inverted lens  of limited use because it only shoots macro

 

similar to this one

 

http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/4511-zhongyi-mitakon-20mm-f2-45x-super-macro-lens…-also-for-fujifilm-x-mount/

[meneer]

The new Chinese 7artisans range looks interesting: https://petapixel.com/2017/07/11/7artisans-unveils-four-new-affordable-lenses-mirrorless-cameras/

• 7.5mm f/2
• 25mm f/1.8 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/7artisans-25mm-f1-8-Fixed-Manual-Lens-for-Fuji-Cameras-XF-X-A3-X-A10-X-E2-X-T2-/192225749670?hash=item2cc18c2aa6:g:af8AAOSw6YtZTJF6)
• 35mm f/2

(the fourth one is a 50mm 1.1, Leica only, here's a review: https://www.35mmc.com/29/07/2017/dj-optical-7artisans-50mm-f1-1-review/)

 

 

And how about another 50mm 1.1 ?

Kamlan 50mm f/1.1for X-mount: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kamlan-50mm-F1-1-Aps-c-Manual-Focus-Lens-for-Fuji-X-Mount-XT2-X100F-XP2-XE2-/192267858744?hash=item2cc40eb338:g:kicAAOSwighZhB~h

Edited August 11, 2017 by meneer

[meneer]

Meike's range can also be bought as Voking by Bilora in Germany: https://www.foto-erhardt.de/objektive/voking-objektive.html

Edited August 11, 2017 by meneer

[rrrrrichard]

Meike MK-6.5mm-F/2.0 (fisheye) recently reviewed quite positively by Christopher Frost.

[ozytripper]

I need longer lenses. Already have the 100-400mm with 1.4X. Still not getting emough range, a New 600mm F4 will be nice. especially if can be coupled with the 1.4x

Anyone know of an existing 600 or 800mm 3rd party lenses for fuji?

[milandro]

you can use any lens you wish with an adapter. Of course, as it is well known, there are no other lenses than Zeiss (and few of them only) with autofocus, so it will have to be manual focus.

 

If you specifically need something for quick focus something with internal focusing and focusing limiter would be called for or perhaps resurrecting an old lens like the Novoflex system.

 

It took a very long time for fuji to produce the 100-400 and there is very little call for these camera’s to go with huge lenses. In other words don’t hold your breath waiting for one.

 

The Novoflex 600 5.6 or the 800 8 could be such lens for you. Otherwise the Nikon 800mm 8 ed if.

[KateB]

Thanks Quincy, the answer to my question is here and it's 77mm or is it.

 

I have been trying to determine the best filter size to use and use stepdown rings, so that I don't have to have a plethora of filters.

 

I already have an XF 18-55mm zoom and a 27mm pancake. For the pancake, I'll probably just get some 39mm filters as I bought it to be discrete, but for the other lenses I'll probably just have one set. I'm going to sick with native lenses for now.

 

So, is my logic sound or flawed? I don't mind if someone disagrees, I'd rather start off on the right foot and not waste lots of money.

[quincy]

Filters vs. adapter rings is a difficult topic. And I'll show you why. You may agree or disagree.

 

 

If you ask me personally, I'd buy the filters I need for each lens in the right size. But then again, I don't use many filters. The only filters you really need for general photography are polarizers.
 
- UV-filters are not needed anymore, since every relevant digital sensor today has an UV-filter in the glass-stack containing the color filter array etc.
- Protection filters are simply stupid. You add a layer of unnecessary glass in front of your lens, probably negatively affecting your image quality, while they won't protect your lens when you drop it and might even induce more damage. And front elements themselves are pretty scratch resistant on their own. (lots of youtube videos and blog posts about this)
- Instead of using ND filters, you can take multiple images, summing up to the total exposure time you want to have and stack them in post.
- graduated filters can also be replaced by post processing. Just take several different exposures and blend them together. Tutorial on this: Photographing Horseshoe Bend with Elia Locardi and the GFX 50S
- every color filter can be easily simulated in post

 

 

On the other side, there are exceptions for almost everything I said above:
 
- If you are on the beach, protection filters might save you the hassle of carefully removing every sticky grain of sand before washing off the salt layer that coats your front element, because when at home, you can screw them off and simply rinse them in the sink. (I have one 67 mm filter (for XF16 & Samyang 12) for exactly this purpose). But having those in a different size than the lens prevents you from using the lens hood.
- When you want to create long exposures during the day, maybe wide open to utilize the better resolution of the fuji lenses at those apertures, you'd need to shoot several thousand images in order to stack them in post. I've tried this just yesterday. At f/11 and with just a circular polarizer attached, I got a shutter speed of 1/50th. To get a cummulated exposure time of 1 second, you'd need 50 images. If you want to go to 10 seconds, you already need 500 images. (at f/4, it would be 4000 images). I took about 450 and tried stacking them in post. And here comes the problem: even with 8 or 11 frames per second, with a shutter speed of 1/50th you have more time NOT recording an image than recording one, therefore the stacking isn't smooth. If you stack enough images (more than 100 in my example), you get a good result, but with less images you can see separate images lying on top of each other.

- UV-filters can be useful for converted cameras, but that's a speciality topic

- grads and colorfilters are still useless to me.

 

 

And then there are closeup lenses. I do have achromatic closeup lenses made by Marumi, and I use them with all of my tele lenses. I bought them in 55 mm filter size, but since you need to stop down anyway for macro photography, they are fine even on my 100-400. (from f/8, there is no vignetting anymore, which is logical considering 400 mm divided by 8 is 50 mm) Therefore, I just adapt them.

 

 

 

If your question is just about the maximum filter size for fuji lenses: So far it's 77 mm. The rumored upcoming 8-16 f/2.8 might need bigger filters, but it also might not be compatible with screw in filters at all.

 

Also consider that instead of different filters, you'll then have different adapter rings, taking up the same amount of space in your bag (they'll all be 77 mm in diameter, while separate filters might be smaller). They might be cheaper, but they are also prone to introducing vignetting with wider lenses.

 

You see, it's not easy, and there is no universal solution.

Edited August 15, 2017 by quincy

[KateB]

Filters vs. adapter rings is a difficult topic. And I'll show you why. You may agree or disagree...

 

You see, it's not easy, and there is no universal solution.

Thank you for that concise reply. It's definitely food for thought, so I think I will wait until I start using my camera; because I'm not sure if I will be shooting in the way that needs a filter.

 

I totally agree about post production effects. Although having said that I have only used photoshop to crop and remove red eye. But I'm going to get a copy of of Lightroom and try to learn that.

 

However, what about circular polarising filters? I have one of these and have used it for limiting reflections from glass and water. What's your view on those.

 

Also do others here agree with Quincy?

[Tikcus]

Thank you for that concise reply. It's definitely food for thought, so I think I will wait until I start using my camera; because I'm not sure if I will be shooting in the way that needs a filter.

 

I totally agree about post production effects. Although having said that I have only used photoshop to crop and remove red eye. But I'm going to get a copy of of Lightroom and try to learn that.

 

However, what about circular polarising filters? I have one of these and have used it for limiting reflections from glass and water. What's your view on those.

 

Also do others here agree with Quincy?

 

I use High quality protection filters and after testing I had no noticeable difference in image quality, but they only reason i use them is it is easier to clean them than the lens itself.

[quincy]

As I wrote above, I think polarizers are the only filters that are useful for general photography because their effect can't be replaced by post processing.

 

But as with every other filter, if you don't need the effect, you don't need the filter. I have one for my wide lenses, but I would not use it on my teles, where shutter speed and high ISO is always a topic.

 

What i forgot to write: you also need to consider which filter you need for which lens. For example, do you need to share an nd filter from your wide angle with your 400 mm lens? (I don't say that would be stupid, but do you need it in your case?)

 

By the way: I expect the others not to agree with me, that's what i wanted to express in my posting.

[KateB]

By the way: I expect the others not to agree with me, that's what i wanted to express in my posting.

Hi Quincy,

 

I must apologise; my comment was rather clumsy. I was trying to spark some debate. So, I'm really sorry if I offended or upset you.

 

Best regards

Kate

[KateB]

As I wrote above, I think polarizers are the only filters that are useful for general photography because their effect can't be replaced by post processing.

Somehow I missed your comment on polarisers. I do already have a 58mm CPL; so, for the time being, I'll not buy any more filters.

 

But I have been thinking about what you wrote and I think I'll wait until I get my camera and start working with it.

 

I'm not actually new to photography, but I've been using a bridge camera for quite some time and I'm out of touch and out of practice with SLRs and the like.

[KateB]

I use High quality protection filters and after testing I had no noticeable difference in image quality, but they only reason i use them is it is easier to clean them than the lens itself.

Hi Tikcus,

 

That's good to know. What brand/model of filter are you using?

 

How often do you find yourself cleaning your filters?

[KateB]

I think the concern I have with the filters I have is that some of them were quite cheap no I'm wondering if their transmission values will be poor. I may well store them away to avoid temptation!

[quincy]

No need to apologize, I just wanted to express that there are probably as many opinions as there are photographers (which is good).

I'd also recommend you to just start photographing, and when you realize that there is something you can't do, get the right filter for it. You can still decide if you want one filter size and adapter rings (for when you want to have a lot of filters), or just get the filters you want for the lens you need them (if you don't need many filters).

 

My advice is:

- UV filter: don't buy at all, except for when you want to do IR or UV photography

- Polarizers: right size for the lens, so you can use the lens hood (or if you are really getting into landscape photography and want to work with ND-filters and grads, see below)

- protection filters: right size for the lens, as above

- ND-Filters: you could share those via adapter rings. (or if you want grads too, see below)

- graduated filters: you should buy those with a filter holder system to be able to place the transition where you want it (or not buy them and do exposure blending)

- closeup lenses: those are expensive, so just get one, doesn't even have to be a big one, and adapt it to your tele lenses (won't work well with wide-angles)

- color filters: I've actually come up with a use for them: If you want to do photography just in a narrow band of wavelengths, they can be useful. If you don't, don't buy them. You already have a color filter array in front of your sensor, so you can do everything in post.

 

 

/edit: filter test at lensrentals

Edited August 16, 2017 by quincy

[KateB]

No need to apologize, I just wanted to express that there are probably as many opinions as there are photographers (which is good).

I'd also recommend you to just start photographing, and when you realize that there is something you can't do, get the right filter for it. You can still decide if you want one filter size and adapter rings (for when you want to have a lot of filters), or just get the filters you want for the lens you need them (if you don't need many filters).

 

My advice is:

- UV filter: don't buy at all, except for when you want to do IR or UV photography

- Polarizers: right size for the lens, so you can use the lens hood (or if you are really getting into landscape photography and want to work with ND-filters and grads, see below)

- protection filters: right size for the lens, as above

- ND-Filters: you could share those via adapter rings. (or if you want grads too, see below)

- graduated filters: you should buy those with a filter holder system to be able to place the transition where you want it (or not buy them and do exposure blending)

- closeup lenses: those are expensive, so just get one, doesn't even have to be a big one, and adapt it to your tele lenses (won't work well with wide-angles)

- color filters: I've actually come up with a use for them: If you want to do photography just in a narrow band of wavelengths, they can be useful. If you don't, don't buy them. You already have a color filter array in front of your sensor, so you can do everything in post.

 

 

/edit: filter test at lensrentals

Dear Quincy,

 

Thank you for your advice; that all makes total sense to me.

 

Your point about the lens hood is good too.

 

The more I think about it, the less keen I am on the idea of step adaptors.

[Guest Him]

I would like to see an fixed F2 200mm.

 

Very happy with 23mm/50mm F2.

[quincy]

Hi quincy!

Congratulations for your great work, I'm using your data in these days to plan a new lens purchase

 

If you didn't notice it yet, Lensbaby just released the Velvet 85mm f/1.8, maybe you can add it to the chart: http://www.fujirumors.com/lensbaby-launches-velvet-85mm-f1-8-fujifilm-x-mount/

 

Cheers

Thanks! I didn't notice. Have added it now.

 

 

Today, I saw this:

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/60mm-f-2-8-2-1-Super-Macro-lens-for-Fujifilm-FX-Mount-Camera-HS50EXR-SL1000-DSLR/152101804083?_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851&_trkparms=aid%3D555018%26algo%3DPL.SIM%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D43781%26meid%3D94174230a5af46f2aa3ef4559a64a55d%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D6%26sd%3D162491264993&autorefresh=true

Looks exactly like the Laowa Venus 60mm macro. I've added it to the list.

 

 

The new Chinese 7artisans range looks interesting: https://petapixel.com/2017/07/11/7artisans-unveils-four-new-affordable-lenses-mirrorless-cameras/

• 7.5mm f/2
• 25mm f/1.8 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/7artisans-25mm-f1-8-Fixed-Manual-Lens-for-Fuji-Cameras-XF-X-A3-X-A10-X-E2-X-T2-/192225749670?hash=item2cc18c2aa6:g:af8AAOSw6YtZTJF6)
• 35mm f/2

(the fourth one is a 50mm 1.1, Leica only, here's a review: https://www.35mmc.com/29/07/2017/dj-optical-7artisans-50mm-f1-1-review/)

 

 

And how about another 50mm 1.1 ?

Kamlan 50mm f/1.1for X-mount:

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kamlan-50mm-F1-1-Aps-c-Manual-Focus-Lens-for-Fuji-X-Mount-XT2-X100F-XP2-XE2-/192267858744?hash=item2cc40eb338:g:kicAAOSwighZhB~h

 

Those are new to me. Have added them to the list. The Sain Sonic Kamlan is Sony E-Mount only so far.

 

 

Meike's range can also be bought as Voking by Bilora in Germany: https://www.foto-erhardt.de/objektive/voking-objektive.html

Thanks, didn't know that. Have added it to the list.

 

 

Meike MK-6.5mm-F/2.0 (fisheye) recently reviewed quite positively by Christopher Frost.

Thank You for your response. Have added the review to the list.

 

 

I need longer lenses. Already have the 100-400mm with 1.4X. Still not getting emough range, a New 600mm F4 will be nice. especially if can be coupled with the 1.4x

Anyone know of an existing 600 or 800mm 3rd party lenses for fuji?

Existing third party lenses for Fuji with Fuji-Mount? Just the mirror lenses Samyang made. Adapting (manual) old lenses might be a possibility.

If you need a long tele with autofocus, just get the one you want from Canon, Nikon or Sigma. They are all well above $5000, so you can simply throw in a suitable canon/nikon body, like the 7DII or the D500.

 

 

I would like to see an fixed F2 200mm.

 

Very happy with 23mm/50mm F2.

Just don't expect it to be anything like the 23/50. A 200/2 is a monster of a lens. (http://www.fuji-x-forum.com/topic/2180-xf200mmf2-lens-rumors/page-4?do=findComment&comment=31004)

[rrrrrichard]

The wonderful Samyang 12mm f/2.0, in its Sony E configuration, has finally been reviewed by Christopher Frost. ("Highly recommended.") https://youtu.be/KEfj08_kY9o

[Patrick FR]

Ibelux MK II is coming: http://www.fujirumors.com/ibelux-40mm-f-0-85-mk-ii-version-coming-worlds-fastest-lens-fujifilm-x/

[Patrick FR]

The list is growing... and growing... and growing!

 

Here is another one: http://www.fujirumors.com/kenko-announces-new-400mm-f8-0-mirror-lens-also-fuji-x-mount/

[J202.0]

As someone begining to take their photography seriously, this post has been extremely useful. thank you.

 

Although, nearly very use of the word 'length' has been spelt wrong.

[quincy]

Thanks, now I remember what I wanted to do.

 

/edit: done. 124 of them.

Edited September 30, 2017 by quincy

[pringles]

How many AF lenses you had in the 70s? How many rolls of film that was capable of producing 300+ frames you had in the late 90s?

 

We're shooting too much.

no internet 

no internet back then