Fujifilm announced that they’re hosting a “Focus on Glass” online event on March 5th at 5 AM Pacific Time, 8 AM Eastern. They’re going to highlight and discuss various Fujinon lenses. I’m sure it will be interesting. Apparently, one aspect of this event will be engaging with the community. Fujifilm stated that they’re interested in receiving input from their users regarding future lenses, which I think is great. Not wanting to wait until March, I thought I’d share some ideas today. Maybe Fujifilm will take this into consideration.
I have a few ideas for both X and GFX, but I wanted to just discuss the X-series in this article. Since GFX is much newer and niche, it obviously has a lot more holes; however, it has a lot few customers—most X-series photographers don’t own a GFX camera. To keep this most relevant to the majority of you all, we’ll stick strictly to X-mount lenses today.
If you’re a regular reader, most of these suggestions will be familiar, because I’ve said them before. For one or two, this will be my first time mentioning it. My ideas might be much different than yours, so feel free to give your suggestions in the comments, should Fujifilm read this article and take the ideas into consideration. Also, let me know which of these you’d most want Fujifilm to make.
Fujinon 12mm f/2
Fujifilm has a few options for ultra-wide-angle lenses. There’s the 8mm f/3.5, which has surprisingly little distortion for how wide it is; however, it’s definitely questionable for things like astrophotography. Then there’s the 14mm f/2.8, which is not going to be quite ultra-wide enough for some, and also not quite bright enough. There are two zooms: 8-16mm f/2.8 and the 10-24mm f/4. What’s missing is a faster prime in the 10mm-12mm range, such as a 12mm f/2. There are some good third-party options (like the Rokinon 12mm f/2), but a Fujinon lens would be nice to have available.
Fujinon 15mm f/3.5 Pancake
One advantage of APS-C over full-frame is the compact size; however (and shockingly), there aren’t a lot of pancake lenses to pair with the small camera bodies. The Fujinon 27mm f/2.8, which is one of my favorites, has become legendary. The brand-new Fujinon 23mm f/2.8 is great, and a very welcomed addition. The Fujinon 18mm f/2 is one of the original X-series lenses, and is barely a pancake (more like a short stack or Japanese pancake). In my opinion, another pancake lens or two makes a whole lot of sense, and a 15mm f/3.5 would be an excellent option that I think many would appreciate.
Fujinon 18mm f/2 II
The Fujinon 18mm f/2 is one of the oldest lenses in the lineup, and it shows. It has good character, and there’s a reason people love it, but it’s in pretty desperate need of a refresh. I hope this is the next one to receive a Mark 2 version.
Fujinon 40mm f/3.5 Pancake
This is the other pancake lens that I’d love to see added to the lineup. Just a little telephoto, but not far from a “nifty-fifty” focal length. A maximum aperture of f/2.8 would be good if they can keep it no larger than the 18mm f/2, but otherwise I’d want a smaller lens with a smaller maximum aperture. I would buy this on day one if Fujifilm made it.
Fujinon 60mm f/2.4 Macro II
The Fujinon 60mm f/2.4 Macro is often overlooked because it is older, not the best performer among the X-series lineup, and lacks weather-sealing. If Fujifilm modernized it, I think it would do quite well. It’s got a lot of versatility, and can serve as a walk-around lens for those who prefer telephoto focal lengths. This is my second pick for a lens refresh.
Fujinon 70mm f/1.4
In-between the Fujinon 56mm f/1.2 and Fujinon 90mm f/2, there’s not a fast portrait lens. Both the Fujinon 60mm f/2.4 and Fujinon 80mm f/2.8 can serve as portrait lenses, but that’s not their primary purpose. For those who find the 56mm too short and the 90mm too long, a 70mm f/1.4 would be the Goldilocks option.
Fujinon 135mm f/2.8
There aren’t many long telephoto primes for the X-series. In my opinion, something in-between the Fujinon 90mm f/2 and the (very large and expensive) Fujinon 200mm f/2 is desperately missing. This lens should not be all that much larger or heavier than 90mm f/2, and the price needs to stay somewhat reasonable, preferably under $1,500. This would be another day-one buy for me.
I’m all in for a 70mm or 75mm to give Viltrox a run. Back in my film days I was happy with the Nikkor 105mm 2.5 AIS. A focal length that when you stick with it for the day, you soak it in and see like a 105. As said Fujifilm danced around this concept with before and after lengths, but I firmly believe that the 75mm for APS-C is necessary tool in the box.
70mm or 75mm would be good. 70mm obviously fits right in-between 60mm and 80mm, but nothing says that it has to.
I’ve enjoyed the TTArtisan 75/2. The aperture isn’t super fast, but it’s a lot smaller than the Viltrox, wicked cheap, and still has a nice-feeling build.
Same for the Samyang 75mm f/1.8 AF. Very nice, small and well-built. The Viltrox 75mm f/1.2 is better, but man, that’s a heavy beast.
@ Onno – I looked at the Samyang, but the fact that it didn’t have on-lens aperture controls was kind of a dealbreaker for me.
If that works for someone, love that for them. The optics and price on the lens are good.
Exactly what Don just wrote. And I’d be happy for it not to be too fast,. so as to keep it smallish and ‘travelable’. Say f/2.5 like that famous Nikkor or f/2 as you get more depth of field on APS-C. Also I’d love them to find a way to keep the character of the first generation lenses (esp. the original 35/1.4 look) as I worry that ever-increasing megapixel counts and razor-sharp lenses don’t actually give a nicer feel to images than the original couple of generations did.
I’d like it to be a “larger” maximum aperture only because there’s the 60mm f/2.4 and 80mm f/2.8 already in the neighborhood, so going larger than f/2 provides some extra distinction; however, if the primary distinction is size and weight, with a footprint maybe a bit closer to the 50mm f/2, than I could see that as a good philosophy.
Expect to be on a limb here.
Concur we have a big gap from 90 to 200 but do you really need F:2? Pick a filter size and work to it.
Across the board:-
Weatherproofing, absolutely.
Resolving chops and with Zeiss accuracy.
Barring accidents, lenses are an investment, bodies a mere distress purchase. Worth little in a few years.
Would love to see all metal plus full frame coverage throughout.
XT lenses can be adapted to all, probably, other mirrorless regimes. Celebrate this and build accordingly.
Once the computations are up to snuff, only revisions to the motors should need a re-work.
After the F:2.8/135, self levelling sensors would be my priority.
Rgds.
Fujifilm has apparently registered patents on a few lenses that cover full-frame. The new X-series 500mm lens has full-frame coverage (actually, GFX). I know some of their current lenses can cover APS-H, but most don’t; however, this might be something they’re looking at for future glass.
I love the idea of 18mm refresh. Add 35 f1.4 to the list please. No optical changes, just weather sealing and modern af motors.
I think an XC version of 23mm f2 would be amazing addition. Same formula as the Xc 35. Quality glass in a affordable body. I have couple of student friends who are running on a tight budget and rocking the XC 35. That lens paired with an XT30 III would be an amazing kit for people on budget and bring lots of customers to the fujifilm.
Also some fast pancakes would be nice for my taste. There are lots of f2 pancakes in the market, plase don’t say its nor possible.
Another super affordable XC lens is probably a good idea. There are lots of people who don’t have the budget for more expensive options… I’ve certainly been there.
I think f/2 pancakes are certainly possible, but they’re going to be more along the lines of the 18mm lens (as far as size), and less like the 23mm and 27mm. Nothing wrong with that approach, it’s just whatever the designers prioritize.
I appreciate the input!
If the quality won’t go big, why not stick to your phone?
Really any point?
Malcolm.
The XC 35mm f/2 is exactly the same optically as the excellent XF 35mm f/2. The difference is that it’s not weather-sealed and lacks an aperture ring; the XC version is like half the price. If Fujifilm were to do something like that with the other f/2 lenses, such as the 23mm f/2 and 50mm f/2, that would be well received by a large group, I’m sure. No compromises on the IQ, only on the frills and build quality, for those on a tight budget.
Point accepted. Still twitch if compromises of build quality. Never forgave Nikon for deleting the aperture ring. The phrase is Gelded lenses.
Malcolm.
@ Malcom Hayward – Why not just use phones? Because phone ergonomics are terrible as cameras.
A “real” camera is just much nicer to hold in hand, nicer to compose images with. I keep being tempted by something like a CampSnap. That’s not nearly as good a camera as my phone, in a technical sense, but probably much more natural to hold in hand and shoot.
Add 90mm F2 which is full frame equivalent 135mm
The Fujinon 90mm f/2 is such a great lens, been a favorite of mine for many years now.
Everyone makes a great 90mm. An easy lens to make.
Some even make them full frame, F:1.4, with and without the perfect geometry. Zeiss have done many, portrait and otherwise. Seems a shame not to cover full frame.
I use the F:2 / 90 Zeiss built for the Contax G2 Rangefinder. Skipped the AF adapter. 100% manual.
Teriffic images, would prefer the Voigtlander palette. I don’t do people.
Many of us are curtailed by the need to standardise on acessory thread size!
Malcolm.
I mostly agree with those ideas, though not all of the lenses would be in my radar. Buut… more pancakes, the better!
Only one different suggestion from me: 135mm: this focal length I would prefer in slower design – understand lighter and smaller in size (That could be even smaller than your favorite 90/2 🙂 ) . Something like 135/3.5 or f/4 would be sure choice for me.
In order to keep the size, weight, and price in check, I’d definitely be willing to give up a little on the maximum aperture. Thanks for the input!
Fully agree on your first 2 suggestions, Ritchie, a 12mm f/2 and an 18mm f/2 mark II. Would buy those in a heartbeat. Also a 16-35mm f/2.8 zoomlens would be nice; I would imagine that it could be kept quite small.
They just released the 13-33mm f/3.5-6.3, which is pretty small. A 16-35mm f/2.8 would be notably larger; however, it would be smaller and lighter than the 16-55mm f/2.8. What if they did something like a 15-35mm f/2.8-4?
Well, the f/2.8-4 is the only drawback of 18-55mm zoom I own and use. And it’s not the smaller aperture on the long end but because it changes and for this very reason there cannot be markings on the aperture ring. In effect, the only way to check aperture is to look into viewfinder, ev. display and you cannot preset it to desired value before shooting without that. I would likely prefer smaller but constant f/4 throughout the whole range. In my film days I used to use SMC Pentax 28-70/4 and loved it
Anway, it’s rather minor drawback because… not long ago I owned Fujinon 16-80/4 with all the properties I miss elsewhere, but had to let it go due to it’s size and weight.
Haha, that’s me, but let’s be honest who isn’t picky for various other reasons 😀
Manual lenses are good so use them already.
The two greatest beauties of a modern body :-
Focus assist for when you haven’t got time to do it properly.
Auto ISO to just handle the exposure when you have better things to do like playing tunes on the exposure compensation.
Above all, you can keep your hideously precious glass in it’s sweet spot.
Malcolm.
I prefer marked aperture rings myself, too. So I totally get that, and agree.
A pro version of a 13-33/2.8 would actually be pretty sweet.
I know a lot of Fuji shooters prioritize compactness, but the Sigma 18-50 is already a really compact f/2.8 zoom, and a small 16-XX/2.8 zoom doesn’t gain much over that or Fuji’s offerings except compactness. But going wider in that modern way with a 13-XX or 14-XX zoom is going
Looking way back, there used to be 24-50 and 35-70, because more than 2x zoom wasn’t really feasible. Both lenses kind of needed to be on offer from the lens companies, since 24mm and 35mm are a ways apart. Then they expanded the ranges, you started to see 28-70, 28-85 sorts of zooms, because they could get that reach, and 28 was figured wide enough, and the 24-XX dropped off until folks started to make 24-70 fast zooms and 24-100 slower zooms. At which point, the 28mm equivalent wide end became relegated to smaller budget zooms or extra long travel zooms. But more recently, folks have figured out to make decent zoom lenses that start at 20mm equivalent, and go up to 50, 60, 70mm. 20mm really gets you into ultrawide territory, a pretty huge difference from the 24mm standard, and into true normal territory, not like the UWA zooms (the older FF 20-35mm, or more recently 16-35).
Not that the XC 13-33 is a bad lens. It’s probably fine, but it’s still just a kit zoom. An XF 13-33 or even 13-30 ultrawide to standard would be a nice lens. If f/2.8 isn’t feasible, an f/4 option might work, somewhat like what Sony did with the 20-70/4.
Fuji kit zooms, I know nothing.
Nikkon Z kit zooms have phenominal acuity but cheaply made with all that entails.
Without the matching Nikon body and firmware, they would be considerred unuseable.
Modern camera companies build them sharp but image integrity is created within the body’s processor. Don’t clout them. Keep a metal filter steppy uppy downy fitted to give some protection to the plastic.
Not much proper glass so hardly a longterm Leitz or Zeiss like investment.
The latter dates back to the first light grey tele Canons.
Lifed for a couple of years, assuming most pros will have already broken theirs or had it stolen.
Rgds.
Nice idea and propositions Ritchie 👌
Being a tele guy, I’m all in for a 135mm (indeed not too heavy, size / wait / versality of the 90mm). With up to date , if possible superior AF capabilities than the 90mm.
Would an instant buyer for me (Futurama: take my money 🤣).
About the 90mm, perhaps a simple refresh of the AF only after all those years would great.
Going brut force, with 4 magnets is not anymore required with all the things and tweaks learned Fujifilm since then.
Also go for the more than long awaited 18mm Mark II and expending the macro with the long awaited 60mm.
And now getting older, I’m also all in pancake lenses, whatever focal they would be 👌
Also nice to fill in the holes and not havigmng too much reedits like the 35 and 23mm (guys we are all good now!), so 70mm, etc are nice to have.
On the wide range, since we are APS-C, any gaps filled-in is a must: 12mm, 6mm.
Thought liking fisheye, I’m still waiting for the long announcement of a Fujifilm fisheye lens. Instant buyer too.
Also waiting after GFX got one, a real well made proper range Tilt-shift lense a not too wide and short-tele ones.
Third-party offer is there but generally ok the good range only one the 2 possibilities, not both Tilt-shift. Only both ones are terrible IQ wise or the correct usefull focal range for architecture…
Last, the XC line is too much forgotten. Same glass and electronics but no aperture ring and a bit more plastic, would people on budget wishing to stick Fujifilm. I love my XC35mm on my X-E1 IR converted. Need no more.
But now there is a lot of good third party lenses, so might not be the best for Fujifilm…
We can all dream. But let’s hope first for an affordable, ‘light’, ‘compact’ 135mm lens 🙏
Tilt-shift is definitely missing from the X-series lineup, too. I should have included one in my list, but I didn’t even think about it. Thanks for the comment!
Nice idea and propositions Ritchie 👌
Being a tele guy, I’m all in for a 135mm (indeed not too heavy, size / wait / versality of the 90mm). With up to date , if possible superior AF capabilities than the 90mm.
Would an instant buyer for me (Futurama: take my money 🤣).
About the 90mm, perhaps a simple refresh of the AF only after all those years would great.
Going brut force, with 4 magnets is not anymore required with all the things and tweaks learned Fujifilm since then.
Also go for the more than long awaited 18mm Mark II and expending the macro with the long awaited 60mm.
And now getting older, I’m also all in pancake lenses, whatever focal they would be 👌
Also nice to fill in the holes and not havigmng too much reedits like the 35 and 23mm (guys we are all good now!), so 70mm, etc are nice to have.
On the wide range, since we are APS-C, any gaps filled-in is a must: 12mm, 6mm.
Thought liking fisheye, I’m still waiting for the long announcement of a Fujifilm fisheye lens. Instant buyer too.
Also waiting after GFX got one, a real well made proper range Tilt-shift lense a not too wide and short-tele ones.
Third-party offer is there but generally ok the good range only one the 2 possibilities, not both Tilt-shift. Only both ones are terrible IQ wise or the correct usefull focal range for architecture…
Also a couple of nice selected focal range XC so to stay with Fujifilm film (same glass and electronics, but with no WR, aperture ring and plastic body) would be nice. But there is already all of third-party alternatives. So not the best choice for Fujifilm now.
We can all dream. But let’s hope first for an affordable, ‘light’, ‘compact’ 135mm lens 🙏