gdanmitchell
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Fuji trash talk'n | |
gyoung143 wrote:
An admiration for deficiencies is a dilettante amateur fixation, putting things in showcases instead of using them sort of thing. Archeology not art.
Yup.
- - -
Not regarding the above:
Also, the notion that Fujiflm will sell _more_ of an existing model but radically reducing its features and capabilities in the next "upgrade" is... a fantasy.
- - -
As to the quality of Fujifilm lenses, a number of those on the above "dud" list are actually fine and useful lenses. I've never met a perfect lens — though the 90mm f/2 is pretty close — and all of them have features that fall short of Perfect Godlike Perfection.
To given one example, take that 60mm f/2.4 "macro" prime. I've had one since it was released.
It certainly has its "flaws." It is more of a "close focusing" lens than a true macro. It came with an inexplicably gigantic metal lens hood whose mount was easily bent. While many Fujifilm lenses of the early vintage may focus more slowly, this thing can be very slow, especially if it is in full range.
Yet...
It is optically excellent — really among Fujifilm's best lenses in that regard. Without that giant lens hood it is a pretty good 60mm ens for non-macro purposes. For not-too-challenging macro needs (e.g. more close up than macro) it is a pretty small package and especially attractive since you can use it effectively for non-macro subjects.
So, I'd say it is more of a unusually positioned lens than an actual "dud," if dud means a lens that isnt' good.
Let's also not forget that there is NO manufacturer whose lens line meets with universal 100% approval from all potential users.
|
