Now that the Fuji GF 50 f/3.5 is announced and will be arriving soon, the only lens still coming on Fuji's GF lens roadmap is the GF 45-100 f/4. What other lenses would you like to see for the Fuji GFX cameras. Here is my list in order of what I would like to see most:
30 f/4
75 f/1.4
40 f/1.8
200-400 f/5.6
180 f/2.8
My thinking is that the gap between 23 and 45 for primes is a pretty big gap and it would be nice to have a prime between those two. I also think that Fuji could do well with a couple more fast primes. Adding a very fast 75mm and a fast 40mm would make a nice fast prime trio with the 110 f/2. Adding the 180 f/2.8 would provide a nice reasonably fast longer lens as well. Finally, the 200-400 f/5.6 zoom would provide the longer coverage that many landscape shooters would like. From my perspective these five lenses could pretty much complete the system.
I honestly can not think of anything else. I am quite happy with their current lineup and would be overjoyed with the above 2 lenses. Albeit, more options is always better so... all of them is my final request.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Now that the Fuji GF 50 f/3.5 is announced and will be arriving soon, the only lens still coming on Fuji's GF lens roadmap is the GF 45-100 f/4. What other lenses would you like to see for the Fuji GFX cameras. Here is my list in order of what I would like to see most:
I honestly can not think of anything else. I am quite happy with their current lineup and would be overjoyed with the above 2 lenses. Albeit, more options is always better so... all of them is my final request.
Interesting, a 12-24 f/4, now that would be a very wide lens. FF 35mm equivalent of 9-18 in a 4 X 3 aspect ration and a 10-20 in an 3 X 2 aspect ratio. I would think in a lens that wide an f/5.6 might be a plenty fast enough aperture.
After seeing your post I realized that I did suggest a wide zoom and I think such a lens is fairly likely. I think an 18-32 or 20-36 f/5.6 is a lens that is quite likely to be developed.
Interesting ideas Jim. I do think they might develop some T/S lenses and a wide one would be especially useful as at longer focal lengths you can use the Cambo Actus for very nice T/S.
I also think it would have been better had the 63 been internal focussing and had a linear motor, but if they make another lens close to this focal length with those feature I would expect it to be a bit longer and to be faster than the current 63.
A 135 or 150 f/2.5 prime would be a lens I would really like to see developed, but I am guessing with the 110 f/2 that such a lens might be judged to be too close to that lens. I do think a 150 f/2.5 and a 180 f/4 would be an interesting pair with one lens being more a portrait lens and the other being more of a landscape lens.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I do think they might develop some T/S lenses and a wide one would be especially useful as at longer focal lengths you can use the Cambo Actus for very nice T/S.
The "front porch" on the GFX 100 makes me sorry I bought the Actus.
JimKasson wrote:
The "front porch" on the GFX 100 makes me sorry I bought the Actus.
It looks like Cambo made a nice kit with riser blocks so that you can use the GFX 100 with the Actus. I think Cambo is likely to keep making kits to let us use the Actus with new GFX models.
Steve Spencer wrote:
It looks like Cambo made a nice kit with riser blocks so that you can use the GFX 100 with the Actus. I think Cambo is likely to keep making kits to let us use the Actus with new GFX models.
The problem with the kit is that the iffy short-lens situation gets even worse, unless you shoot in portrait orientation. Or do I misunderstand that?
JimKasson wrote:
The problem with the kit is that the iffy short-lens situation gets even worse, unless you shoot in portrait orientation. Or do I misunderstand that?
Jim
I think the situation is much the same. There are still some decent 40mm and 50mm options that ought to work with this kit even in landscape orientation. Anything wider than that and not much is available. I don't have the GFX100, however, (at least not yet) so I haven't tried it. Perhaps you can't even go that wide.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I think the situation is much the same. There are still some decent 40mm and 50mm options that ought to work with this kit even in landscape orientation. Anything wider than that and not much is available. I don't have the GFX100, however, (at least not yet) so I haven't tried it. Perhaps you can't even go that wide.
"Cambo’s new AC-795, designed as an interchangeable bayonet holder kit, will be compatible with the current Actus-G series. It is placed in line with the existing mounts for the Fujifilm GFX50, Hasselblad X1D, Nikon-Z and AC-78E. However, due to the design changes of the Fujifilm GFX100 body, this needs to be positioned on a higher distance to allow enough clearance. This results in a 30mm riser block for the front standard. Also the Actar-60 will not reach infinity setting with this kit."
The most pressing thing for me would be a 12-24 f/4, but a 16-24 would be just as good.
The 75 f/1.4 sounds like a reason to sell my 110.
If they did a 20-26mm t/s, I'm afraid the shift mechanism wouldn't be as good as Canon. Unpopular opinion: tilt is no longer useful enough to justify its development costs. A built-in variable ND would be more appealing to the market, although I don't know if that's feasible.
JimKasson wrote:
"Cambo’s new AC-795, designed as an interchangeable bayonet holder kit, will be compatible with the current Actus-G series. It is placed in line with the existing mounts for the Fujifilm GFX50, Hasselblad X1D, Nikon-Z and AC-78E. However, due to the design changes of the Fujifilm GFX100 body, this needs to be positioned on a higher distance to allow enough clearance. This results in a 30mm riser block for the front standard. Also the Actar-60 will not reach infinity setting with this kit."
Sounds like a bad situation has gotten worse with the GFX 100.
Jim
Perhaps, but I was never impressed by that Actar-60 anyways. I think some of the best options for wider on the GFX and Cambo Actus include the Hasselblad CFE IF 40 f/4; the Hasselblad CFi 50 f/4; the Mamiya 645 55 f/2.8N; and the Mamiya RZ 65 /4, and maybe a few other of medium format options (I always wanted to try the Pentax 67 45 f/4 and 55 f/4) and for these I don't think the extra extension for the new kit is going to be an issue at all.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Perhaps, but I was never impressed by that Actar-60 anyways. I think some of the best options for wider on the GFX and Cambo Actus include the Hasselblad CFE IF 40 f/4; the Hasselblad CFi 50 f/4; the Mamiya 645 55 f/2.8N; and the Mamiya RZ 65 /4, and maybe a few other of medium format options (I always wanted to try the Pentax 67 45 f/4 and 55 f/4) and for these I don't think the extra extension for the new kit is going to be an issue at all.
Darn. I sold my 40 CFE a couple of years ago. It struggled a bit on the GFX 50S, though, so I'm not sure it's a good match for the GFX 100.
The Rodenstock 40mm f/4 HR Digaron-W could keep up, but I don't think it will work on the Actus with the GFX 100.
JimKasson wrote:
Darn. I sold my 40 CFE a couple of years ago. It struggled a bit on the GFX 50S, though, so I'm not sure it's a good match for the GFX 100.
The Rodenstock 40mm f/4 HR Digaron-W could keep up, but I don't think it will work on the Actus with the GFX 100.
Jim
There are two different Hasselblad 6 X 6 40mm CFE lenses. The 40 CFE IF f/4 is quite a bit better than the 40 CFE (non-IF) f/4 and since Zeiss publishes the MTFs of these lenses you can see the quite large difference in performance as they have measured it there. If you had the non-IF 40 CFE I would expect it to struggle a bit on the 50s. Yes, the Rodenstock LF lens would be great if you could use it, but that didn't allow much in the way of movements on even the 50s, so I am pretty sure it wouldn't work with the GFX100 at all.
I'd love a 55/2, the "true" normal focal length. :-) Faster would be unnecessarily heavy and expensive.
55/2 would give the same (diagonal) AOV and DOF as 80/2.8 on 6x6 and 70/2.5 on 645, or 90/3.3 on 6x7. Plenty enough for "MF look".
Steve Spencer wrote:
Now that the Fuji GF 50 f/3.5 is announced and will be arriving soon, the only lens still coming on Fuji's GF lens roadmap is the GF 45-100 f/4. What other lenses would you like to see for the Fuji GFX cameras. Here is my list in order of what I would like to see most:
30 f/4
75 f/1.4
40 f/1.8
200-400 f/5.6
180 f/2.8
My thinking is that the gap between 23 and 45 for primes is a pretty big gap and it would be nice to have a prime between those two. I also think that Fuji could do well with a couple more fast primes. Adding a very fast 75mm and a fast 40mm would make a nice fast prime trio with the 110 f/2. Adding the 180 f/2.8 would provide a nice reasonably fast longer lens as well. Finally, the 200-400 f/5.6 zoom would provide the longer coverage that many landscape shooters would like. From my perspective these five lenses could pretty much complete the system....Show more →
I think f/2 is all we're going to squeeze out of Fujifilm regardless of focal length, but I'd love to be wrong.
180 f/3.5 OIS might be a good compromise of size and usefulness as both a portrait and landscape lens; but f/3.5 is odd from a marketing perspective – makes people make weird faces when they hear it. Personally would rather see the f/2.8 but only if they disregard size and weight and still make it an OIS. The GF 110 is really pushing it without OIS or IBIS for us handheld shooters.
Anything in the longer focal range has my vote. But after being spoiled by the GF 250, I'm going to have to say I'd rather have a 400 or 500mm prime. I fear if they make a 200-400 they will follow the 100-200 blueprint and sacrifice too much IQ.
30mm prime should be the next, first lens. I don't care if it's a larger T/S or a regular-sized f/4.
