[Klaus]

[Guest]

Can you explain what is special about the 18-55. I realize that it is aimed at video but is it likely to be much different optically than the current 18-55 ?

[Brightcolours]

Can you explain what is special about the 18-55. I realize that it is aimed at video but is it likely to be much different optically than the current 18-55 ?

The image shows just how big it is, the 18-55mm f2.8-4 is tiny in comparison. And of course a T2.9 lens is very different from an f2.8-4 lens... The T2.9 lens weighs just under 1 kilo.

[Rover]

And it has all the features for pro video work. Which add bulk and cost like there's no tomorrow.

[JJ_SO]

It's comparatively cheap affordable against other cine lenses with parfocal design.

 

And it was, at least not at first, not available with Fuji X mount but wit cine mounts.

[JJ_SO]

Don't know if I should start a new topic: Along with the new lenses Fujifilm has announced a new type of RAW-converter, using the camera's processor instead of the PC's. Details from DPREVIEW: https://www.dpreview.com/news/1600919737...raw-studio

 

At first I thought "no camera processor can be faster than a multicore processor of a state of the art PC or Mac." Might be true, but with that X-RAW-Studio waiting for updates of "mx RAW-converters" would be over without the fuss of dealing with RAW and JPGs the frist time before the update is out. AND: one could use a netbook for batch conversion. I just wonder if USB-3 and SD-cards will be fast enough?

[Brightcolours]

My cameras save JPEG in an instant, so fast that it can happen several times per second. So that is a pretty fast RAW conversion. My computers are not the fastest around in any sense... but I can't imagine "normal" multicore PCs getting anywhere near that speed of the specialized imaging processors in cameras?

[JJ_SO]

In Fuji's cameras it's possible to get 14 JPGs/second until the buffer is full. That's much faster than my Mac could deliver. I also think, if the camera is set to JPG only, a lot of buffers would never get full. I imagine more times is needed to write the data than to compute it.

 

But I'm a bit concerned about the thermal load, if one converts a couple of hundred pictures. As well as the connection between body and PC/Mac: The new X-E3 ony  has USB 2.0 - no 3.0 or 3.1, I doubt if these slow communications at the ened of the day will convert 500 RAWs faster than my Mac could? Most of the other Fujis only support UHS-I SD cards which means to me "no fast data lane available".

 

But anyway, it's still a cool thing for people travelling only with a netbook or use slower PCs. And speaking about Mac: This time the Mac version is the first to come (unlike the tethered shooting via Lightroom softwtae, which is only available for PC)

 

In a sidenote of the next X-T2 firmware features they also mention "Supports backup and restore of camera settings from one camera to another via FUJIFILM X Acquire". Finally, I'd say.  <_< To be fair, Fuji still takes Kaizen serious. I'm curious how much the AF-C will benefit of the next Kaizen firmware.

[Ayoh]

The 200mm F2 sounds impressive.

 

I wish Sigma would make an 200mm F2 art lens. Should cost similar or less than their 120-300mm due to similar max element size. This would make it less than half of the cost of the Canon/Nikon lenses.

[JJ_SO]

Have you ever tried to handhold and manual focus or only change the FL of the 120-300? I'm just guessing the answer will be "no" 

 

And while manual focusing is comparatively easy with an Art-lens (as well as the types of other manufacturers), the Fuji focus by wire system is in my eyes a clear disadvantage for long glass. Without any kind of tripod it's close to impossible to frame and focus.