Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Non Rangefinder Cameras > Digital Fixed Lens Advanced Compacts > Fuji X Fixed Lens

Fuji X Fixed Lens This forum is for fans of the rangefinder retrostyled Fuji X Series of digital cameras.

View Poll Results: X100 alternative focal lengths. Will it happen?
50mm equivalent 34 40.48%
85mm equivalent 7 8.33%
other. Tell us what you think below 27 32.14%
I used to be indecisive but I'm not so sure any more 21 25.00%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 84. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 09-25-2010   #26
HoodedOne
Registered User
 
HoodedOne's Avatar
 
HoodedOne is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 239
I don't think fuji is gonna bring out the x100 with different focal lenghts. Like Cam said 35 is perfect, and sneaker-zoom never fails ( unless you're at the edge of a cliff).
But I really hope that (if the x100 proves succesfull), fuji will bring out a camera with intechangeable lenses.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #27
bwcolor
Registered User
 
bwcolor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 2,314
If this camera is a hit then they will certainly bring out a new model.

If they can keep the quality high and cost below $1000, I would like to see all fixed lens cameras optimized for their sensor. Remember, this also means an optimized viewfinder and no sensor cleaning. That said, I would, as I do now, mostly use the 35mm on full frame. For marketing reasons, they would also do well with a 50mm equivalent camera. Most polls on this board show that 50mm is very popular. Longer and shorter lens/camera combination would probably not be as economically viable on the market. There might be room for a very fast 50mm mated to a future high ISO sensor at a premium price. First, they need to get the X100 off the ground.

Last edited by bwcolor : 09-25-2010 at 15:48.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #28
Pablito
coco frío
 
Pablito's Avatar
 
Pablito is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Salsipuedes
Posts: 3,259
wider maybe but certainly not longer.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #29
tlitody
Registered User
 
tlitody is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sceptred Isle
Posts: 1,776
I asked for 50 and 85 as well because that gives full height portrait and head and shoulders portrait as well as wider shots with the 35 equivalent. To me that would make a fantastic system for weddings. You have three bodies with you so you always have two backups and all three for around the price of $3000. That would be incredible value for money compared to any other system. No extra costs on lenses. And the really big plus is that all lenses can be fast. Maybe an 85 would only get to 2.8 as an f2 would be a bit big on such a small camera. Pros would snap them all up at that price point.
I wouldn't expect street people to snap them all up, but fuji say they are targetted at pros.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #30
cam
the need for speed
 
cam's Avatar
 
cam is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: paris no more
Posts: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by tlitody View Post
I wouldn't expect street people to snap them all up, but fuji say they are targetted at pros.
so street aren't pros?
__________________
my flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #31
tlitody
Registered User
 
tlitody is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sceptred Isle
Posts: 1,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam View Post
so street aren't pros?
I think you know what I mean. Street don't usually use mid to short tele lenses. A lot of Pros do portrait work using mid to short tele.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #32
bwcolor
Registered User
 
bwcolor is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 2,314
Since these are not full frame sensors and given the need to keep the size down, a telephoto in the 75mm range just might work.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #33
iwaki
Registered User
 
iwaki is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bellayr View Post
No. Maybe if technology expands then a zoom lens. I am waiting for Leica's reply to this camera.
i'm somehow very skeptical that Leica has what it takes to make such a camera........ Even the successor to the X1 is probably too short of a time for Leica to catch to other company's technology.

As an owner of M9 and a former owner of R-D1, for me, aside from the fullframe sensor, there is nothing in M9 that hasn't already been done by R-D1. Which is essentially only retrofitting digital into a film RF body.

I have no idea but, does leica even develop their own electronics and software? I thought jenoptics is doing it for them?

So as for the poll, i vote for wider focal length, if there are going to be any other focal length. That's how Fuji has been doing things it seems ;-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #34
dazedgonebye
Registered User
 
dazedgonebye's Avatar
 
dazedgonebye is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
Age: 53
Posts: 3,930
They'll go with interchangeable.
__________________
Steve

"And I know now that the cure for my childhood was not to be looked after, as I once believed; it was to look after someone else." ~Philip Norman

Photography Blog
Flickr
Twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #35
DNG
Fuji X-E2 / Nikon FE
 
DNG's Avatar
 
DNG is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Camby, Indiana. USA
Age: 60
Posts: 2,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazedgonebye View Post
They'll go with interchangeable.
If they do,
A body for under $1K, and lenses for $500, maybe a 25/28/35/50/90 fov with f/2,8 for the 25mm. f/2 for 28/35/50, and f/2.5 for the 90 fov.

but, what kind of VF? Frame lines?
Hybrid OVF with a built in magnifier from .5x for 25/28/35. and .72x or 1x for 50/90 lenses? , Plus EVF option if you want it live?
Best of both worlds......

Think Fuji is reading this thread?
I 'd say so
They'd be out of touch not to, IMO
__________________

iPernity

Flickr (Street Photography)

Tumblr


My Feed Back


Fuji X-E2: XF 18mm f/2_ XF 35mm f/1.4_J9-85mm f/2
Nikon FE: 24mm f/2.8 Ais_ 50mm f/1.8 Ais_50mm f/1.4 NAi


Last edited by DNG : 09-25-2010 at 17:26.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #36
M4streetshooter
Tourist Thru Life
 
M4streetshooter's Avatar
 
M4streetshooter is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Philadelphia, Pa 19111
Age: 65
Posts: 625
Cam,
Any word on our 2 previous post....
Just wondering...
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #37
bensyverson
Registered User
 
bensyverson is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 630
I really hope they DON'T go interchangeable. I wouldn't buy it. First of all, there are complications related to the OVF, as DNG mentioned above.

The potentially great thing about the X100 is that the sensor and lens are perfectly mated and optimized for each other. And of course you don't need to worry about sensor dust. An interchangeable system means a more general, compromised sensor.

But if this camera is a big success, I can imagine them doing a 17mm f/2.8 (28mm equivalent) or perhaps 15mm (24mm equivalent). Think of Ricoh's GR series.
__________________
me on flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #38
flip
良かったね!
 
flip's Avatar
 
flip is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kobe, Japan
Posts: 1,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRohlfing View Post
Why not M mount?
Because SM mount sounds edgy, even for Sony.
__________________
Very happy with my Shintaro BP M2. Thanks!
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #39
Nettar
Registered User
 
Nettar is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 44
There are several threads addressing the X100 on Rangefinderforum. In one of them (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...postcount=1176) tom.w.bn, who has apparently seen the mockups, wrote that "there was another aspect the nice Fuji representative told me. The lens bayonet is designed to add converters in front of the lens." Nettar
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-25-2010   #40
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by M4streetshooter View Post
We doin' need no stinkin' other focal lengths...
Man ain't no man can't see 35mm....
Sheeeesh!
That's about right. ...but there's need, and there's want. And the second one I'd want is either 21 or 24mm.

28 and 50 I can do without, thanks. And teles belong on SLRs, anyway.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/

Last edited by semilog : 09-25-2010 at 23:30.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-2010   #41
Tompas
Snarp-shooter
 
Tompas's Avatar
 
Tompas is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ostfriesland - Northwestern Germany
Posts: 405
I believe they'll come up with either a 21 or a 25mm (equivalent) version. Probably 25mm, because that's a little 'safer'.
__________________
-- Thomas
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-2010   #42
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,337
It'll be 28mm before any other focal length... if they ever make another one of these at all.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-2010   #43
Fuchs
Registered User
 
Fuchs is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
Age: 47
Posts: 325
I think that a 21mm equivalent and an 85/90mm equivalent will be mandatory. If not, at least a couple of very high quality focal length converters to the tele and wide sides.
__________________
Ed Albesi
Buenos Aires, Argentina
[Sony A7, Nikon FM2n, Nikon I, Nikon S3 2K, Leica M6ti]
My flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-2010   #44
tlitody
Registered User
 
tlitody is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sceptred Isle
Posts: 1,776
I tkink converters may be possible but can they reduce focal length from standard lens?
Also what about frame lines? Can that be done with firmware on this camera? The reason we don't have longer tele lenses on rangefinders is because of the miniscule frame lines. i.e. you can't see to frame and focus accurately. I think separate models with viewfinder designed for lens focal length would be better.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-2010   #45
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
 
Ronald_H's Avatar
 
Ronald_H is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Helmond, The Netherlands
Age: 43
Posts: 1,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bellayr View Post
No. Maybe if technology expands then a zoom lens. I am waiting for Leica's reply to this camera.
I hope you are a patient guy.

The current 35mm is nice (a 40 would be even better) but to lure me away from (mostly) film, it should have interchangeable lenses. Or maybe, just maybe a 28-90 f-fast, if it is exceptionally good.
__________________
"The only substitute for Tri-X is more Tri-X"

My Flickr

My regular website: www.lookupinwonder.nl
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-2010   #46
Avotius
Monster Rancher
 
Avotius's Avatar
 
Avotius is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chongqing, China
Posts: 3,440
I dont think they will, but then again I hope they do come out with a 50 f1.8 or something like that, my wife would jump on that, she is already really interested in this camera, more so then I have ever seen her for a camera, but she is a 50 fan not a 35.
__________________
Flickr.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-2010   #47
narsuitus
Registered User
 
narsuitus's Avatar
 
narsuitus is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 225
I shot many events with two 35mm bodies and a 35mm f/2 or f/1.4 on one body and an 85mm f/1.8 on the other body.

If I had an X100 with an f/2 35mm equiv lens and an X100 with an f/2 85mm equiv lens, I would not need interchangeable lenses because these are the only two focal lengths I really need. Anything wider, longer, closer (macro), or fishier, I would shot with my SLR.

If, however, Fuji insists on producing a wider wide-angle version of the X100, I hope it will be in the 18 to 21mm equivalent focal length range.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-2010   #48
M4streetshooter
Tourist Thru Life
 
M4streetshooter's Avatar
 
M4streetshooter is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Philadelphia, Pa 19111
Age: 65
Posts: 625
Fuji is good but their not nuts.
I can see a zoomie version coming out.
That would draw the non serious RF shooters.
To make different bodies with different focal lengths is to good to be true.
A zoomie from 28 - 90 gets it done, easier and cheaper.
I don't want that one at all....
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-2010   #49
kbg32
neo-romanticist
 
kbg32's Avatar
 
kbg32 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 4,851
With so many different opinions, do we ever get what we want?
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-26-2010   #50
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
 
Frankie is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald_H View Post
......The current 35mm is nice (a 40 would be even better)......
If one accepts digital zoom to no smaller than 6Mp [like the R-D1], the X100 is equipped with a 35~46mm zoom. If one adopts the couple of steps back/forth method on top of that, the lens is a 25~65 zoom...

That cannot be such a hardship...can it?
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 19:05.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.