90mm's MTF indicates really exceptional performance, but the size could have been a lot smaller; length 105mm for 90mm focal length, with the telephoto form a 70mm length would be more reasonable.
...and i wish the 90mm weighed less.
The X-T10 looks fine, I'm glad they're dropping prices some.
05-18-2015, 11:23 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-18-2015, 11:25 PM by Klaus.)
I am slightly wondering about Fuji's strategy here.
An obvious lens for a comparison is the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM.
Now even when ignoring the slight difference in speed (which favors the Canon anyway), the Canon lens is much smaller and that's DESPITE APS-C format (Fuji) vs full format (Canon). And the Canon is half the price.
Now if we look at what we got, Fuji lenses aren't really any better than Canon lenses either.
It almost feels as if Fuji is releasing/developing lenses at such an extreme speed that they don't invest too much time into optimization really.
For portraits etc I will stick to my 56mm f/1.2 APD. ;-)
At a high level comparison, the Fuji should be a much better lens optically and physically, thus could justify its price on that. The Canon as far as I can tell doesn't use any exotic glass compared to 3 ED elements in the Fuji. At a practical level the Canon has severe LoCA, so if the Fuji can approach APO like performance that would be a big plus. With the usual cautions of comparing MTF charts across systems, the Canon at 30 lines/mm is lower than the Fuji at 45 lines/mm! Ok, the Canon is a notch faster but that is also slightly offset from the focal length difference. Plus Fuji got the S and M lines to track each other closely, and has weather/dust sealing. If the Canon were an "L" lens, maybe the comparison would be closer.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
05-19-2015, 09:46 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-19-2015, 09:48 AM by Brightcolours.)
The Canon being an L lens (better build, probably weather sealed) would not make it a heavyweight... Nor would UD elements.
Of course, it may be that the Fuji just is a "modern" design approach, where the quest for easy sharpness makes for heavy big lenses (think Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art, Otus nr 1 and 2 for instance).
Still odd to be though, because "mirrorless" should mean "compact and portable". Think Leica lenses. Leica 90mm f2 for the M is 64mm wide and 77mm long. It contains 5 elements. That is a lot smaller than the Fuji at 75 x 105mm, even when you take the bigger flange distance into account. And that Leica is 135 format coverable.
The Canon EF 85mm f1.8 USM is actually not much smaller than the Fuji, though. It measures 75mm x 71.5mm, and the Fuji flange distance being 17.7mm and the EOS one 44mm, the length difference is just 78.7 - 71.5 = 7.2mm. Small difference. But yeah, the Fuji is only APS-C (at least, I can't speculate on Fuji starting an FF X-body and is designing lenses with FF coverage already), and that makes it a pretty heavy lens.
The current Nikkor AF-S 85mm f1.8 measures 80 x 73mm, by the way.