p.4 #1 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
RustyBug wrote:
+1 @ ^
Lots of glass out there that has an aperture spec in the center that is no where close to that spec in Zones B & C wide open.
I've got plenty of (FF) Oly's that are nice and small ... but the vignetting is the price to be paid, until you stop down sufficiently to even things out across the frame. How much vignetting is worth vs. how much size & weight is worth ... variably subjective, but rarely is there any "free lunch" when it comes to optics.
Vignetting is a 10 second adjustment these days so making lenses that large just to prevent that seems misguided at best.
p.4 #2 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
Jman13 wrote:
The length isn't the issue, it's the girth. This is a BIG lens around. It's a 72mm filter and probably 82-85mm in diameter. The 56 is a 62mm filter and actually has a very slightly larger aperture opening (46.6mm vs 45mm), so why so much bigger in diameter. Like I said, it looks to be roughly the size of the 85mm f/1.2L. The 85L is 91mm long and 84mm wide. THis lens, if 30% is correct, is 95mm long and 84mm wide. Longer I sort of understand, since the focal length needs to make up for the shorter flange distance. But this is an f/2 lens that, in mockup form at least, is as big or bigger than a full frame 85mm f/1.2. Why? ...Show more →
Very good points. Perhaps the mock up was rushed and done very poorly. The real deal might be considerably smaller.
p.4 #4 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
rattymouse wrote:
You have a defective copy. I've seen my own shots as well as *many* wide open shots on the MF lens thread in the Nikon forum. It's tack sharp.
It's the lowest priced MF 85 lens because Nikon made far more of them than the faster aperture versions. Supply vs demand you know??
Performance has nothing to do with price. It's all about supply and demand. A Zeiss 21mm Distagon would cost $5 if there were 5 billion of them lying around. Does that lower price make it a lesser performing lens? Nope.
I don't actually own a copy, every copy I've considered has not performed as well as the old 85/1.8 K I owned for many years (that's about 8 copies of the 85/2, a lens I wanted due to the much smaller size than the older lens). It's a good, solid lens, but overshadowed by the other 85's. Sharp enough is how I'd describe it, but not tack sharp (to be entirely correct, none of Nikon's fast 85's except maybe the G's are truly tack sharp wide open). It's certainly no match for the 105/2.5 wide open, which remains my standard for the 85-105 focal range in 80's Nikon glass.
The 85/2 is only slightly more common than the older 85/1.8 (around 180k total production vs 160k for the 85/1.8). It's dramatically less common than the 85/1.8 AF & AF-D (same lens in two variations) which had a production run of around 330k units.
p.4 #6 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
frankly, even the 23 f/1.4 is pushing the size limit for this system if you ask me.
if you compare the x-t1 with the 35 to a leica with a 50, they're pretty comparable. but you throw on the 23 and you've got a significantly plumper setup. not that heavy, but gettin bulky. I balked at the 56 because of the size, and this 90 is just ridiculous. all these new giant zooms are crazy as well. even the ultra wide... the damned thing is bigger than the camera. nevermind the telephotos. might as well just shoot full frame with the smaller lens options (I.e. non-L) and call it a day.
I love fuji but the size benefit of this system is limited to a few lenses as far as I'm concerned.
it's not only their fault. if they released a small 90 f/4 the enthusiast crowd would laugh them off the stage crying that it's too slow.
p.4 #8 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
carstenw wrote:
I have tried a Nikkor 85/2 AI-S on my old D3 and my D800, and it was very nice, quite sharp, and with a nice look.
it's a nice enough lens, just nothing special. i'd choose a number of other lenses over it, many of them cheaper, and i would certainly hope this monstrosity performs much better.
felixj wrote:
Saying that, it is still a specialist lens. Not every man and his dog has a 35mm equivalent of a 135mm lens or would consider getting one.
true, that focal length is one i never really want. i'd be happy going straight from 75mm to 200mm.
p.4 #9 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
Agreed, there are other portrait length lenses I would rather own, my point was more that there is nothing wrong with this lens. If someone has had a bad experience with it, then probably it was a bad copy.
p.4 #10 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
freaklikeme wrote:
Does it really matter how big a lens is if you like to shoot with it?
It's not the size of the lens that matters, it's how you shoot it...
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
I kind of like the size of the 90 Summicron Pre ASPH on my XT-1. Kind of put off on the new Fuji 90/2 though. We'll see. My tune might change when it's out in the wild.
p.4 #11 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
Total turnoff for me. The beauty of the Fuji system for me has been the small size.
I was dreaming of this lens for a long time. But seeing such a wide diameter lens that is meant for a APC image circle, not full frame and it has no OIS - there is really no excuse for it being that wide for a f2 lens.
Smarten up Fuji and return to your COMPACT roots. If I want large glass, I'd rather use a Canon on Nikon SLR.
p.4 #13 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
Even if it is the final size....is it really that big? Isn't the 5d3 +135/2 size combination about the same as the XT1+90/2 combination....meaning relative and proportional...but STILL smaller? Looks so to me.
Furthermore, which of you complaining about the size carries around your 135/2 all the time? It is a specialized lens. I sure know that I don't. That said, it is ONLY taken out for me when I plan to use, i.e. portraiture. I am not carrying my 135 on vacation or in my bag to show my friends how diverse my kit is.
Looks like a bunch of crying over spilt milk to me...
p.4 #14 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
carstenw wrote:
So let's repeat (again):
Fuji has said that this may not be the final size. Let's calm down and wait until they release it.
They might hear enough of this type of ranting that it causes them to work to reduce the size of the final product. Maybe this prototype was shown for exactly that reason - to gauge photographers response to the potential size of the lens.
p.4 #15 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
misternikko wrote:
Even if it is the final size....is it really that big? Isn't the 5d3 +135/2 size combination about the same as the XT1+90/2 combination....meaning relative and proportional...but STILL smaller? Looks so to me.
Furthermore, which of you complaining about the size carries around your 135/2 all the time? It is a specialized lens. I sure know that I don't. That said, it is ONLY taken out for me when I plan to use, i.e. portraiture. I am not carrying my 135 on vacation or in my bag to show my friends how diverse my kit is.
Looks like a bunch of crying over spilt milk to me......Show more →
Well the length is not unexpected.
The 135L is quite common lens with Canon users and thus not really a specialized lens in my opinion. I used mine a lot both for portraiture and landscape. I could skip having a 70-200 in my bag and have only the 135L and extenders for lower weight. I think that fat 90/2 would look rather strange with an adapter.
p.4 #17 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
hauxon wrote:
The 135L is quite common lens with Canon users and thus not really a specialized lens in my opinion. I used mine a lot both for portraiture and landscape. I could skip having a 70-200 in my bag and have only the 135L and extenders for lower weight. I think that fat 90/2 would look rather strange with an adapter.
do any of mirrorless mounts have native tele extenders?
p.4 #18 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
Olympus just released a 1.4x, but it only works with a handful of lenses due to a protruding element. It's made more more less directly for the 40-150/2.8.
p.4 #19 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
rattymouse wrote:
Vignetting is a 10 second adjustment these days so making lenses that large just to prevent that seems misguided at best.
Optical vignetting is not the greatest of evils, but there are enough people complaining about it.
The gradual drop in brightness is easily corrected, but you can spend the rest of your life trying to undo the corresponding drop in SNR. And you have to like swirly bokeh, in case that matters.
Sep 19, 2014 at 11:09 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.4 #20 · Fuji 90/F2 prototype - why so big and heavy?
How does it compare in size to 680g first v. of Leica Summicron 90/2?
