Fujinon ​XF33mm F/1.0
Old 09-27-2018   #1
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,697
Fujinon ​XF33mm F/1.0

Is anybody really interested in the Fujinon XF33 f/1.0 lens? From the looks of the prototype, that thing is huge. And it only has an effective FF DOF of f/1.5, so it is not really anything exceptional.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-27-2018   #2
benlees
Registered User
 
benlees is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB
Age: 47
Posts: 1,553
Zero interest for the 33, but the 16mm 2.8 may intrigue me! One of the reasons I like Fuji is that at least some of their lenses are a reasonable size...
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-27-2018   #3
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,197
unless it's a complete dog (doubtful) i plan on getting the 16/2.8 and i think it might become my almost always lens.
no interest in the 33 at all...but look forward to enjoying viewing some of the images made from it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-27-2018   #4
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,058
Nope, not at all... I just don`t get it. Huge for APSC which is something that does not work for me. It`ll probably cost as much as a used 24mp DSLR and a 50mm 1.4.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-27-2018   #5
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Torrance, CA
Age: 37
Posts: 4,655
put me down in the not really interested column.

i would have preferred a refreshed 35/1.4 with new AF motors.
__________________
Ugly Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2018   #6
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,337
Nope.

It’s too big and heavy.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2018   #7
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,317
Not for me but it's good that they've got something for everyone.

Their next priority should really be improving the overall performance of their lenses, especially the oldest ones. Uneven performance had been holding the system back since day 1.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2018   #8
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archlich View Post
Not for me but it's good that they've got something for everyone.

Their next priority should really be improving the overall performance of their lenses, especially the oldest ones. Uneven performance had been holding the system back since day 1.
Sure, on day 1, but what is the issue now with the latest lenses and bodies?
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2018   #9
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Sure, on day 1, but what is the issue now with the latest lenses and bodies?
We all know that on the same body, the 35/1.4 (and the not-so-common 60/2.4) focuses notoriously slower than newer lenses. Even later lenses like the 23/1.4 focuses a tad slower than say the 23/2. Those with LM are generally faster. Newer cameras close the gap a bit but even the X-T3 cannot completely eliminate it. This even applies to the GFX system: the LM zooms are much faster than the vanilla 63/2.8.

This is what makes people hesitate to say "Fuji has solid autofocus". The first three primes need a version II. The 18/2, a optically weaker link in the lineup, may even need a new formula. Whatever should be done.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2018   #10
Veggies
Registered User
 
Veggies is offline
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 60
An adapted 55mm 1.2 with Speedbooster seems like a better option. Both price wise and functionality.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2018   #11
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archlich View Post
The first three primes need a version II. The 18/2, a optically weaker link in the lineup, may even need a new formula. Whatever should be done.
Ok, I understand now and agree.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2018   #12
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veggies View Post
An adapted 55mm 1.2 with Speedbooster seems like a better option. Both price wise and functionality.
Unless you want AF...
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-28-2018   #13
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by benlees View Post
Zero interest for the 33, but the 16mm 2.8 may intrigue me! One of the reasons I like Fuji is that at least some of their lenses are a reasonable size...
This^^^.

I'm really only interested in the 16/2.8 as long as it's as the image quality is on the same level as the Fujicrons.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 10:39.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.