Man oh man. I came here to see if anyone had mentioned the clunking sound I experienced with this lens at the store today. Surely in 6 whole pages someone would mention that! I just read through 6 pages of.... I don't even know.
If it was mentioned, I must have forgotten about it by the end of the thread lol.
Nice photos Jman! Does your copy clunk when it is powered off and rotated around? If so, how do you feel about that personally?
I've had the 90mm f/2 for a week or so and do find it to be excellent as to resulting IQ when coupled with the X-T1. It's a "Fuji" and the renderings are "IMO" virtually unequalled.
However, I do find the lens to create an imbalance when HH (even with the X-T1 "gripped") and, surprisingly (from my vantage point) less comfortable and more burdensome than using my D750 and 300/4E (a rather extreme comparison). The balance is off, to say the least. At best, most of the other Fuji lenses I have (10 in number) are borderline acceptable from a balance and convenience standpoint....certainly not consistent with one of the main purported "advantages" of a mirrorless system. I will be most interested in testing the A7RII next month, as a transition may be in order for me.
Once you hop up to APS-C mirrorless I don't think there's that much of a size benefit except in bridge cameras like the X100 or GR. The main benefit over APS-C DSLRs for me is simply that Fuji has a respectable APS-C lens lineup, while Nikon and Canon do not.
I found the A7 to be unbalanced as well. A small body with even larger lenses, such as the 35/1.4FE.
Also, for what it's worth, I don't find this 90mm any more unbalanced on my X-T1 than I used to find the 12-35 or 75mm unbalanced on my E-M5. Lots of mirrorless cameras run into this issue with faster or longer lenses.
TyHutch wrote:
Man oh man. I came here to see if anyone had mentioned the clunking sound I experienced with this lens at the store today. Surely in 6 whole pages someone would mention that! I just read through 6 pages of.... I don't even know.
If it was mentioned, I must have forgotten about it by the end of the thread lol.
Nice photos Jman! Does your copy clunk when it is powered off and rotated around? If so, how do you feel about that personally?
edit: right there in the first post.... hah.
I haven't read all this thread but, about the clunking sound...I read somewhere recently that the floating lens element is held in place by electromagnets. When the camera is switched off the magnets let the floating element rest inside the lens, if tilted or shaken there is a rattle. This is the floating element hitting the inside of the lens barrel. It doesn't sound very good does it!?
Yeah I've heard the exact same. Even from our local Fuji rep here in Canada who quoted me an email from the Japan offices.
I understand it's by design, and the lens really performs wonderfully, but it's sure to be a concern for people who take their gear certain places.
esanchez wrote:
I'm crossing my fingers Fuji puts IBIS on their next bodies...
If I'm going to need shutter speeds 1/160 and above for the XF 90, I'm with you. Or I'll just have to stick to longer XF glass that has OIS. Minimum shutter speeds that high make it less useful to me as a low light lens, despite the IQ and reach.
The bokeh is very good IMHO. The one below is a bokeh torture test with the foliage distance against the sky. I don't think any lens would do better unless it were faster and could create more blur.
Here is a link to a few images that I posted over at DPreview. I would have posted the here but I haven't renewed my membership here as I didn't seem to get any value out of it.
rattymouse wrote:
Canon's 135mm f/2.8 lens (which is what the Fuji is equivalent to optically) weighs 390 grams. Fuji's 90mm lens weighs 540 grams.
But the Canon is a 2.8 lens, the Fuji is an F2 lens. Many of us don't care about the slight DOF difference, it is about speed and optical quality, both of which shine with Fuji.
jeffryscott wrote:
But the Canon is a 2.8 lens, the Fuji is an F2 lens. Many of us don't care about the slight DOF difference, it is about speed and optical quality, both of which shine with Fuji.
Canon's 135 f/2 L lens is 528 grams. Which is a better comparison in terms of quality. Although the 135 would give different bokeh being full-frame.
marko1953 wrote:
Canon's 135 f/2 L lens is 528 grams. Which is a better comparison in terms of quality. Although the 135 would give different bokeh being full-frame.
The Canon 135/2L is 750 grams.
I agree the Canon 135/2 and the Fuji 90/2 are better comparable quality wise.
Calling that shot "ugly, nervous bokeh" is a bit crazy. The shot below would qualify as "ugly, nervous bokeh". The shot from the Fuji is actually quite excellent and I doubt anything short of a lens with an APD filter would improve upon it.
The bokeh is very good IMHO. The one below is a bokeh torture test with the foliage distance against the sky. I don't think any lens would do better unless it were faster and could create more blur.
Apart from that I am impressed that it didnt make the foliage look swirly at all, it really does my head in when lenses do that.
The lens output looks excellent to me, but it's not my preferred focal length. Even if it was I still wouldn't bother buying it because of the size, to me there is no excuse in making lenses so big for this sensor size and at this price point. They can do better for the money.
Spyro P. wrote:
Apart from that I am impressed that it didnt make the foliage look swirly at all, it really does my head in when lenses do that.
The lens output looks excellent to me, but it's not my preferred focal length. Even if it was I still wouldn't bother buying it because of the size, to me there is no excuse in making lenses so big for this sensor size and at this price point. They can do better for the money.
Remember, a 90mm f/2.0 is equal only to a 135mm f/2.8 FF lens. That's as slow as most people want to go in the DOF department. A 135mm f/4 equivalent starts to give away too much to FF cameras so Fuji is up against this limit.
Are there smaller 90mm f/2 APS-C lenses out there?
