28
Apr
2014

Fujinon XF 16mm f/1.4: that’s Fuji’s new high speed wide angle lens on the roadmap (trusted source)

 photo ROADMAPDEF_zps1a63dfa0.jpg

Fujinon XF 16mm f/1.4
trusted Japanese source

The rumor comes from the top trusted Japanese source, so do NOT take it with a grain of salt, spread the good news on facebook, google+, twitter and wherever you want (but don’t forget to quote the (original) source ;-))

Fuji’s mysterious high speed wide angle lens will be the Fujinon XF 16mm f/1.4!

XF 120-400mm
new source

As I told you on February 3rd, according to a new source (see here), the super telephoto zoom lens will be the XF 120-400. If correct, we’ve just unveiled all the lenses that are currently shown on the Fuji Roadmap. So I’ve updated the roadmap for you :-)

XF 18-135mm f/3.5 to f/4.8
reminder

XF 18-135mm Reminder: We know it since the CP+ in Japan, but Fujifilm hasn’t still updated the roadmap: the 18-135 is getting faster (from f/3.5-f/5.6 to f/3.5-f/4.8). This lens will be the first weather sealed lens in the Fuji XF lineup. First rumors suggested that it would be released in April / May. But then Fuji changed its plans and delayed the release to probably June. This explains why Fujifilm has delayed the release… they are making it faster!

Stay Tuned because…

… because Fuji can insert new lenses to the roadmap in any moment. So I won’t stop it here and continue to investigate further for you.

Any hint and help would be highly appreciated. You can drop me an email (with a fake email account if you want), or use the rumor box. It will keep you anonymous (in this case you could use a nick-name so that I can recognize you in future).

Thanks in advance to anyone who decides to make my work here on Fujirumors a bit easier :-)

cheers
facebook, google+ and twitter

HOT DEALS

Fujifilm X-E1

The X-E1 price is falling to ridiculous $499 and $699 for the kit at Adorama (including free hand grip and up to 6% reward!!!). But only while supplies last. At BHphoto the silver kit version is already discontinued! Adorama sells it also via AmazonUS, but you won’t get the freebies and the reward.

As Gabe said in the comments to the previous post:  “If anyone was going to buy the 18-55mm, they should spend the extra $5 and get a free camera.”

Adorama: black body ($499 + 4% reward) / silver body ($499 + 4% reward) / black kit ($699 + 6% reward) / silver kit ($699 + 6% reward) /

AmazonUS: black body ($499 via Adorama) / silver body (via Adorama) / black kit ($699 via Adorama) / silver kit ($699 via Adorama) /

Lightoom 5 boxed version

Lightroom is now $35 off at BHphoto here and AmazonUS here. The boxed version will cost you $109!

 photo X-E1_zpsa14a5df0.jpg

 

  • Mariusz Gajdzik

    Ha! That was just what I am waiting for. This will make the Fujinon lineup perfect. The only thing missing is like 85mm f/1.4 and we have full Wedding/Portrait kit. Great news.

    • Blair Fredrick

      The 56mm IS an 85 in a crop sensor, and it’s a 1.2 I think.

      • Ian Norman

        I think what Mariusz is looking for is something fast in the roughly 100-135mm equivalent.

      • Mariusz Gajdzik

        I know, I’ve got it. I want something even longer ;)

  • deng

    16mm f/1.4 for APS-C? That lens will be huge and heavy.
    It rather sounds like industrial or CCTV lens for smaller image circles like C-mount :)

    • john

      maybe a 16mm f2 lens would be a smaller and lighter option.

      • MV

        Sure, but the benefits of a F1.4 lens aside, think about it from Fuji’s perspective. A 16mm F2.0 would sit so close to the 18mm in the range with the same max aperture, it just wouldn’t look sufficiently different in the marketing material and would be underwhelming from the start.

        • john

          u hv a point there.

    • Mike

      It won’t be a pancake, that’s for sure but I’m betting it’s not gonna to be larger than the 56mm F1.2 either.

      Add the 23mm F1.4 and the kit will still in the same weight class as a 24-70mm F2.8 for FF. You loose convenience but you gain 1 F-stop DOF and 2 F-stops shutter speed.

  • Vic

    Well done Fuifilm, just need a fast 85 or 90mm to complete my outfit.

    • MV

      85mm is the last missing link I think. A 16mm / 85mm combo using two bodies could be perfect for weddings.

      • Vic

        Yep, with you there.

    • Martin Ranger

      Yes, absolutely.

  • mcastein

    There seems to be a lot of development at the wide angle but not a great deal in the telephoto end. Would be great to see some long primes as well. 90mm and over. I would get this lens though, it looks great!

  • john

    yes, 16mm f1.4. Fuji, you have done it again. I am glad that Fuji is very committed to the X mount system by providing lenses that I would say connects some of the missing links in the DSLR market, particularly APSC lenses.

    • MV

      Agreed.

  • shadowc

    No… I have a trip in June. I am waiting for the 18-135. It is delayed?

  • jerome

    I’m thinking more like a 135mm f2.8….

    • Blair Fredrick

      You could get a 90mm Zeiss/Contax G2 and an adapter – 135 2.8

      • jerome

        Yeah, I’m thinking the Nikon AIS 135/2.8 (for 200mm equiv), it’s just on the X-T1, the focus assist button is awkward for left eye dominant users and it can’t be reassigned to any of the Fn buttons.

  • Mike

    Do we know if the super tele will be weather resistant? It would make such a great combo with the X-T1 and 18-135mm if it was!

    A second ‘small & light’ kit with the 23mm, 60mm macro and the Samyang 12mm or fisheye and I would be set ;-)

  • Stefan Georgiev

    Do we really need all these:
    12(Z), 14, 16, 18, 23, 27, 32(Z), 35?

    Beyond that – we only have 50(Z), 56 and 60mm

    • dirk

      The strength of mirrorless cameras has and will always be wideangle lenses. Unless you make the sensor too small of course.

      For compact longer lenses you need something like a reversed retro-focus. I don’t know how that would be called but it will probably make lenses more complicated.

      • dirk

        Alright, it is called telephoto. ^^

    • john

      i think Fuji is just trying to cater to different types of photographers/ consumers in the market, based on how fast the lens is, and the consumers’ various budget/ affordability, which I think Fuji is very considerate and sincere to their customers in each level.

    • Clint

      Yes, we do:)
      Maybe I’m alone in my thinking….but I’m only really interested in the 56 and wider lenses on the Fuji….I still own my 5D2 and 70-200 if I need longer (which inevitably means bigger).

  • Fuji fan

    Yay, can’t wait for the super zoom, which will complete its zoom lineup.

    Nay, why do we need yet another WA? 14mm is awesome, 10-24mm is supposedly excellent too. But fuji, please plug the holes first! Give us a true 1:1 macro that is faster to focus and less noisy than the 60mm (even though it’s good it still frustrates me from time to time).

  • MV

    Great news – bravo Fuji.

    24mm is a classic length for photojournalism (it’s also nice for street, though not as much an all-rounder as a 28mm as you have to be damn close to your subject). To date though, it’s been hard to find on APS-C.

    F1.4 is gonna ensure this lens can see in the dark when paired with an X-TRANS sensor. Great for PJ shots at night.

    Anyone that wants to see what a 24mm lens can do should check out Darcy Padilla’s “The Julie Project”, shot entirely with a 24mm lens: http://www.darcypadilla.com/thejulieproject/intro.html

    Let’s hope Fuji can avoid this one being too chunky and heavy.

    • Clint

      MV, thanks for the link to ‘the Julia Project’. Wow…just amazing….really, really incredible work.

  • Ali

    as a 14 mm 2.8 user i feel a little sad and i didnt undertstand what is the meaning of the 14mm 2.8 besides 16mm 1.4 , just 2mm wide angle?

    • dirk

      why sad?
      14mm is for landscape, 16mm for low light.

      • MV

        And wide-angle street/photojournalism with minimal distortion – unlike the 14mm where the lens characteristics dominate the photo on shots with weaker content.

        • Ali

          i think 16 mm is enough wide for landscape too. if i knew , it will come , i would wait for it.16 mm is the limit for the distortion?

          • dirk

            How long would you wait for the prefect lens?

          • Adrian

            Sell the 14mm now, when the 10-24 is still out of stock in many places, and buy the 16mm in about a year or more, when it will be in stock :D

      • romi.foto

        exactly my reason for wanting the 16 for street photography/documentary and still keeping my 14 for landscape/architecture using a tripod.

    • miniTO

      14mm is a 21mm FF Equivalent? The 16mm is 24mm there is BIG difference there… If you need the 14 you need it simple as that…

    • Gabe

      I think it is a little strange to have so many lenses in such a close range. 18mm f/2, 16mm f/1.4, and 14mm f/2.8. Not to mention a zoom covering all, with the 10-24mm. Maybe Fuji should put more effort into telephotos…which they currently have not much. I think an 85mm or 135mm may be of more use to most than another wide angle. My 2 cents.

      • Colin

        The zoom is too bulky and too slow. I’ve been waiting for a 24mm equivalent lens. 14mm (21mm equiv) is too wide, 18mm (27mm equiv) not quite wide enough.
        My 2 cents.

      • Waiting and waiting…

        Totally agree. Bring those 90/1.4 and 135/2.0 already!!!

      • Brent

        The coolest thing about this awesome range of wide angles, is in no other company do you have these options in a crop sensor. It just doesn’t exist anywhere else and everyone has their own preferred wide angle. I do agree they need more telephotos but theyre doing great so far! :D

  • PRL

    I’m guessing that the 16mm will have the same filter size as the 23 and 56, which would make a great pro standard set of primes. Great stuff!

    • Robert

      If Fuji can get excellent performance from the 16/1.4 doing so, they will likely put a 62 mm filter thread on it, and if so that would indeed be nice. Knowing Fuji, if they have to put a 67 mm or larger filter thread on the 16/1.4 to get top performance they will do so. Since the 10-24 has a 72 mm filter thread, there is at least hope that 62 mm or at least 67 mm can work on the 16/1.4.

  • Skydawg

    Any word on what the f stop range will be on the super zoom?

    • Patrick

      As I said above, it’s possible that Fuji still has to decide the aperture range.

  • Ian Norman

    If it’s actually a 16mm f/1.4 it will be the fastest wide angle lens ever offered for an APS-C camera. That’s something to brag about. I imagine that if it’s as good as Fuji’s latest offerings, it will be the essential low light setup for every x-shooter.

    • Ian Norman

      Also, it’s lenses like these that show that an APS-C system can definitely compete with full-frame at a fraction of the size. And with an equivalent field of view and equivalent depth of field to a 24mm f/2.0 lens on full frame, it far surpasses the capability of competing full-frame mirrorless systems like the Sony a7/r/s (whose fastest FE mount 24mm lens is only f/4). As long as the anticipated Fuji 16mm f/1.4 lens can keep the form factor of the other lenses in the Fuji-X lineup it will likely be smaller than any full-frame lens offering by Sony. I imagine a full-frame e-mount Sony 24mm/2.0 would be markedly larger than whatever Fuji brews up. If it doesn’t weigh a ton, it really makes the X-Series system look very mature in terms of overall capability and size.

  • Adrian

    Anyone else looking for a T/S lens? Am I the only one? Really? REALLY? :). Come on, Fuji, a 17mm 3.5 T/S lens and you can have up to 1.5k of my money :)

    • Martin Ranger

      I don’t think a T/S lens is really necessary. You could use the excellent Canon 24 T/S with a speed booster. A Fuji T/S would add very little if anything to that, imo.

      • Fabio Amodeo

        My Gowd, an adapted T/S that can already be pushed to ithe border of its optical covering with a speed booster to add a few problems to the optical path. i wouldn’t go that way. Fuji must decide. It can stay happy with calm people like me, who try to work around any problem with economical solutions (that sometimes do not work) or it can be a competitor in the full professional field. In that case a f/2.8 telezoom, a system of flashes with a solid TTL and some kind of shift, and eventually tilt, lenses, must be on the roadmap.

  • Robert Jensen

    A 120-400 would be equivalent to a 180-600 on a full frame camera! Any word yet on the speed?

    • Patrick

      no, it’s possible that Fuji still has to decide the speed.

      • Robert Jensen

        Thanks. I hope it isn’t any slower than F4.

        • dirk

          You really want a >100mm front element?

          • Robert Jensen

            No but I don’t want the lens if it is too slow. I could possibly live with F5.6 if it is F5.6 throughout the entire range. So it sounds like you want a slow lens in order to keep the size down?

          • dirk

            To somehow keep the size advantage of a mirrorless system I guess Fuji will rather go for 5.6 or even smaller.
            Of course I also like fast lenses but I’d prefer a 5.6 to a 4.0. With a 400/4.0 you can just as well carry a DSLR. Won’t really matter in size and weight. You wouldn’t even See the X-T1 behind such a lens. ;-)

    • DaveCC

      120-400, 200-400, 140-400, I don’t care as long as it is f/4 at 400mm and that it actual is 400mm, so with the Fuji 1.5 crop it is 600mm field of view, and if Fuji really has the guts, add a built in 1.4 extender to get to 840mm.

  • DanS

    Patiently waiting for the XF16-55F2.8 R OIS WR.

  • Zach Wagner

    I’m into the 16 and all, but being a macro shooter I sure wish Fuji would bring a 1:1 macro into the fold. 100mm f2.8 (or better) preferably. And no, I don’t care about the Zeiss 50.

    • http://trentontalbot.com/ Trenton Talbot

      I’d love them to make a bold move and create the first ever manual focus stabilized macro lens.

      • Zach Wagner

        Sounds good to me

    • Kinu Grove

      I agree they need a better Macro lens

  • d

    The 120-400mm would be fantastic. I wish they were focusing on bringing that out for the summer rather than more wide-angle lenses. With that and a 100mm 1:1 macro lens, the system would be near complete for me.

    • Robert Jensen

      I agree. As a macro photographer I find the current macro is not good enough for many of my subjects.

      • d

        Definitely. The 60mm is an optically superb lens. However, it is not a 1:1 macro lens, so it is limited for those purposes. I can use my Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS macro lens via an adapter on my X-Pro 1, but I would rather have an option from Fuji. While the Zeiss is 1:1, it is not sufficiently long enough, particularly for shooting insects.

    • Waiting an waiting

      What is the downside of using extension tubes to get to that magnification? They are easily available, I suppose you have a reason to avoid them?

  • Northbound

    The 16mm just parked my plan to buy the 12mm f/2 Rokinon for night sky and northern lights work.

    This past winter (which seems to never end this year up here) has finally pushed me to accept that the Canon 24mm f/1.4L II that I’ve used the past couple of seasons is just not my best friend because of the extensive coma, and both the Rokinon 24 1.4 samples for Canon that I’ve tried as alternatives have had issues with what looks like tilting, so I don’t trust that lens too much either.

    With a bit of luck the 16 1.4 will have none of those issues, AND with a bit more luck it’ll be available in October, just in time for the season. :)

    • Ian Norman

      I’m with you on this Northbound. The 14mm/2.8 has been pretty good for me so far but I really want something faster!

    • Waiting and waiting…

      I say with some luck it will be in store by february, and you will get yours by april ;)

  • zhxu63

    Why not 16-70or 80mm f4 instead of 18-135mm f/3.5 to f/4.8? This is the best lens for travel with 23mm f1.4 or 35mm f1.4.

    • dirk

      Maybe because there is already a 18-55, a 16-50 and a 16-55 planned. And by the way, the absolutely very best lens of and for all time and everybody in the whole wide world and the rest of the universe for travel is the 27mm.

      • nwcs

        LOL, depends on what you take pictures of during travel. For me, 27 is utterly boring. If I had my way, I’d have a 90mm f2 1:1 macro lens as my travel lens for Fuji.

    • ryan

      I would prefer a 16-80 3.5-4.5 over a 18-135 personally. It would be far more useful as a walk around for me personally.

      • zhxu63

        Can not agree more. 16-80 lens is a suitable compromise for wide and tele end. For most enthusiasts, they chose fujifile for its compact and excellent colour. If lose convenient, I prefer full frame DSLR over fujifilm.

  • MrGecko

    Ok, I’m sold. Let the pre-orders begin :) Only wish would come out in time for my NY trip. I also predict that in July we see another sale that includes the 10-24 56 and others not included in the last sale.

  • Robert

    Lovely. :-) This is my favorite angle of view for a wide angle (FF 24/1.4). An APS-C 16/1.4 will give a little longer DOF, and likely render the image somewhat differently because of its shorter focal length, but given how nice high end XF primes Fuji has designed so far I think it is a safe bet that this one also is going to be top class.

    • romi.foto

      the FF equivalent to that 16mm f1,4 would be more like 24mm f2.

      • Robert

        You are right. I guess I wanted to say that I like the FF 24/1.4 even more but can live with a 16/1.4 on APS-C to get my favorite angle of view for a wideangle.

      • David

        In terms of DOF yes, but in terms of light gathering power it will have twice the light gathering power of a 24mm f2 on a full frame small format sensor — at least, that is what 24x36mm was called in the film days :).

        • Sebastian

          So is “light gathering power” only dependent on f-number? In other words does my iPhone camera with its f/2.4-lens have the same “light gathering power” as a full-frame sensor with an f/2.4-lens in front of it?

          • David

            Yes, light gathering power is determined by f-number. An f/1.4 lens of 16mm focal length has the same light gathering power as a 24mm f/1.4 lens, it is independent of focal length, which is the whole point of f-numbers.

          • David

            Per area as dirk said.

          • Sebastian

            So if it’s a per-area measure, then to get the total light collection (over the entire image) we’d multiply by the sensor area when comparing across different systems. Makes sense, then, that the iPhone with its tiny sensor will collect less light and be noisier.
            So in the end it’s true that APS-C f/1.6 is equivalent to FF f/2.0. Do I get that right?

          • Riswandi Koedrat

            I don’t care what it is, but Fuji needs to come out with a 16-55mm f1.4 and the 50-140mm f1.4 zoom lenses . THAT will be killer lenses. But it would make the lenses bulky and heavy, and thus defeating the purpose of using APS sensor.

        • Ian Norman

          Light gathering power is dependent on aperture size, so the 16mm/1.4 will have the same light gathering power as a 24mm/2.0 because the aperture diameter is approximately 12mm between both lenses. F/ratio is a measurement of lens speed and is not the same as aperture size.

          • dirk

            Not exactly! “Light gathering power” and lens speed are the same and both depend on the F-number. This is exactly why these numbers where introduced. A 200mm/2.0 is as bright as a 20mm/2.0. Why? Sure, the aperture is much larger physically, but light is also comming only from a fraction of the field of view.

            And to sebastian: Your iPhone lens gathers as much light as a Full frame f/2.4 lens per area. In other words: you can put your i-phone sensor behind a full frame f/2.4 lens and basically get the same brightness. But if you put a full frame sensor behin your i-phone lens your will have some pretty bad vignetting. ;)

    • Waiting and waiting…

      “and likely render the image somewhat differently because of its shorter focal length”
      I don’t think so. What makes you think so?

      • Robert

        The 16 mm has a physical 16 mm focal length even if it covers a view angle on APS-C corresponding to 24 mm on FF. This means that it will behave somewhat differently because of its physical design.

        Compare it to a compact camera, say the Sony RX100 where 10 mm is equal to 28 mm on FF in terms of view angle. In the latter case the differences will be much bigger and so serves just as more evident example of why the physical focal length makes a difference to more than DOF.

        Since I am not an optical expert I cannot explain the details, but it is evident when you look at the images that a different optical design is needed for a different focal length even when the view angle is the same.

        So I think that the 16/1.4 may render images quite similar to an FF 24/1.4, but there will likely be differences that you can see.

        • Waiting an waiting

          I did not see any credible argument in your reply. A 16mm at 1.4 covering APS-C size can behave exactly like a 24mm at 2.1 covering full frame for blurring or rendering purposes (whatever you mean by rendering) because its optical path has the same pupil entry size. The fact that the same amount of light will be concentrated on a smaller (sensor) surface makes it faster (1.4) allowing a faster shutter speed to get the same image.
          Design decisions like “how much correction do we apply? (fish eye vs rectilinear) or, What kind of correction? (coma, chromatic, etc) are what will create the different rendering of the lenses.

          • Robert

            To give a really credible reply I would have to upload images taken with for example an FF 24 and an APS-C 16, which I do not have at hand.

            What I am saying is based on looking at thousands of images over the years, taken with different lenses on different systems.

            “Design decisions like “how much correction do we apply? (fish eye vs
            rectilinear) or, What kind of correction? (coma, chromatic, etc) are
            what will create the different rendering of the lenses.”

            You are right, and to my understanding the corrections need to be different in a 16 mm than in a 24 mm because of the different focal lengths. The fact that an APS-C lens can be made smaller may give another reason to why the design is different. To me this becomes clear if you look at images taken with the same focal length but different size of the lenses (even when the sensor size is the same).

          • Waiting and waiting…

            There sure are a lot of variable in the equation! In any case, I eagerly await the delivery of this lens, but much more so the 90 f1.4!

      • Riswandi Koedrat

        Basically, you are shooting with a 16mm lens on the APS, so it will have greater DoF than a 24mm lens on FF. Yes the APS size sensor will crop the image and give it an angle similar to 24mm, BUT, the actual focal length is 16mm.
        If you have the opportunity to have both an FF body and an APS body, try it and see. Use 24mm f1.4 on the FF and 16mm f1.4 on the APS, use a tripod and shoot both cameras from the same position at the same subject from the same distance.
        You will notice that both the 24mm on the FF and 16mm on the APS will have similar angle of view, but the APS image will have sharper background than the FF image.
        If you want to get the same bokeh on the 16mm as you get on the FF, you will need to open up the lens to f0.93, which as of this date, only the Voightlander has a lens with f0.95 aperture.
        Summary:
        A 16mm lens on an APS camera will have the equivalent focal length of a 24mm on an FF body due to the CROP factor. Notice the word CROP.
        Because of this CROP factor, your DoF will in reality be based on a 16mm lens, not a 24mm lens. Thus it will have greater DoF, because 16mm is 1.5X wider than 24mm.
        Hope this sheds some light.

  • leo

    What about a teleconverter?

    • nwcs

      Wouldn’t really be useful until we have longer telephoto primes (or zooms) that are fast enough. If they do a 300 f4 prime then a TC would make perfect sense. Or even a 200 f2.8 prime.

      • Robert

        IMHO it would make sense with a 2xTC on the upcoming 50-140/2.8.

        • nwcs

          You’d lose 2 stops and a fair amount of sharpness, though. You’d be better off with the 55-200.

          • Robert

            Depends on the quality of the 50-140 and the TC. You get a bit more focal length (400 vs 300 FF equiv) and lose only half a stop of light vs the 55-200 (plus once you take the TC off you have a significantly brighter lens than the 55-200). Personally, to give a reference, I would take the Nikon 70-200/4 + TC20E3 over the Nikon 70-300/4-5.6 any day. The TC20E has an aspherical element which I think is part of why it gives so good IQ. Having used an off brand 2xTC with a Minolta AF 100-300/4.5-5.6, I know that TCs can destroy IQ. Used it with manual focus a few times, but it gave quite soft images.

          • nwcs

            I don’t know. I had both the 70-200 f2.8 and f4 with 1.4 and 2.0e3 tc and I kinda liked the 70-300 better.

          • Robert

            Ok. I guess it is a matter of differences in optical quality in different systems as well as in personal taste. At least for now I am not thinking of adding anything larger and heavier than the 16-55/2.8 (need to try it on to see how it balances on the X-T1), if I am going to carry larger lenses I might as well use a D800, since it gives a lot of pros and the weight con does not matter as much with heavier glass, rather the opposite for balancing IMO.

          • czechphotoguy

            One other aspect we have to take into consideration is the fact of camera body capabilities. The lenses that Fuji is making are wonderful. The clarity produced by the majority of lenses on the lens map is proving to make their line one of the best options to choose across the board. I love, love, love my X-T1. Before it I had an X-E1, and X-Pro1 and they worked pretty well for me until I sold them to get it. But right now until the X-Pro2 (rumored and verified) comes out and it has more than 9 cross type sensors and AF similar to the DSLR’s that the big boys have. This is going to be the weak link for Fuji. I’m mainly a sports shooter and I have been using the X-T1 with the 56mm f/1.2 and 18-55 lens and it’s still just outside of the keeper rate that I would like for it to be.

            I have a Nikon D4, and D3 and I’m using a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR I and 200-400mm f/4 VR I to capture what I need for sports.

            But until Fuji can possibly have something in the range of 51 cross type phase sensors to pick up moving targets I might be asking too much of the X-T1 camera/lens combo.

            I think Fuji see’s that also and there is something around the corner to compliment a stellar lens lineup.

            They aren’t there yet with the camera bodies (the X-T1 was a great start into moving into the next level).

            Ross

    • czechphotoguy

      A teleconverter isn’t going to work unless the lenses are made specifically to be able to use with it. You would have to redesign the teleconverter to have the optics away from the back of the lens. If you notice on Canon and Nikon lenses that can take teleconverters, the back element is recessed in further beyond the lens mount than other lenses that can’t take teleconverters and that is why. So unless fuji is planning on making say a 300 or 400mm f/2.8 equivelant speed lenses a teleconverter is something that will be a down the road addition to their lens roadmap.

  • http://IslandNature.ca Dave Ingram

    @Fujirumor:disqus Any suggestions that the 16mm will be a WR lens? Not a deal breaker but that would be great on the XT1. BTW, the 10-24mm is excellent for those who are looking for a zoom to tide them over : )

    • Patrick

      the Jap source did not say it, but if I should place a bet: ALL IN, YES, WR! :-)

      • romi.foto

        would be nice if all R lenses moving forward were WR.

  • serafin

    So basiclly a big headache in near future for me. First i thought i,d buy the 18/2 but after reasearch it came to me that its onky pro is the size as the 18-55 is even superior to it. So i focused on 14 but then again its a very specufic wide angle and not so universal. So 10-24 hit the shelves and the 16 (my favoirite focal lenght) follows… So again time to wait…

  • Dan Nolan

    May 14/2.8 drop price?

  • Waiting and waiting…

    I just wish they came out with a 90/1.4 and a 135/2, both with OIS. They multiply the offering in the wide angle range but completely neglect the telephoto crowd. Manual telephoto lenses are ok while we wait, but focusing with the 135 in low light, and even with a 85mm is quite a challenge! (The motion blurred magnified image bouces all over the place and not in real time, for those who havent tried so far…)
    Please Fuji, bring a 90/1.4 to market already!

  • Rhondar

    Nope… It is gonna be 18mm f/1.4 not 16mm…

    • Kinu Grove

      They have an 18mm 2.0 what would be the point of another 18mm at this time.

  • jonnie

    Another wide angle lens for the x mount, I would very much prefer a 90mm f2 or 135mm f2.8 lens.

    • Lefred

      I second the need for 90mm and 135 mm primes, but respectively f1.8 and f3.5 (see Jupiter 37A) for me.
      Fast Tele lenses are big and if I have to use big lenses I’d rather use my SLR.
      Maybe on 2015 roadmap… :)

      • bokeh gourmet

        How does a 135 3.5 makes sense in a line up of brilliant 1.4 lenses? You can use one of the zooms at that setting and they won’t be much bigger. (well, maybe a tad ;)

    • bokeh gourmet

      A 135 2.8 would be very disapointing (and the 135 2.8 setting is already available in the zoom).
      I expect exceptionnal optics from Fuji and I am not buying any lens slower than 2.0 (although for 200mm or longer, 2.8 would be a reasonnable tradeoff)

  • Kinu Grove

    Anyone have a guess on what the price for this will end up being?

    • czechphotoguy

      If things look as they have with the last two lenses (56mm f/1.2, 10-24mm f/4) then probably $999. I would love it if it was the case. I’m more interested in seeing the pricing for the 16-55 and 50-140mm f/2.8 R OIS WR lenses.

  • czechphotoguy

    This new rumored focal length lens is now making me feel that Fuji is going to hit all the essential Primes at some point, 16mm f/1.4 (24mm equivalent), 90mm f/2 (135mm equivalent), 135mm f/2 (204mm equivalent). Right now their lens lineup (and soon to hopefully be their camera body lineup) is really making the big boys stand up and take attention. I love my X-T1 but it’s not a DSLR replacement just yet, it’s close. But there needs to be some more features that it’s missing that my DSLR camera has.

    • David Goll

      Dobrý den, bohužel neumím anglicky tak dobře, abych se mohl přesně vyjádřit… Koukám, že jste zřejmě z Čech, tak se na Vás obracím s dotazem… Jakou kombinaci objektivů byste mě doporučil na focení při cestování a lezení po horách a skalách? Jsem asi malinko “ujetej” na kvalitu obrazu… Pořídil jsem si zoom objektiv, který byl v ceně X-E2… a mám 35mm /1,4… Pokukuji po 56mm, možná po nečem širokém… dost mě zajímá nový zoom 2,8 v celém rozsahu… Samozřejmě při cestování a lezení atd, čím bude vše skladnější a nebude potřeba tolik objektivů, tím lépe… Ovšem pro kvalitu jsem ochoten ustoupit… Poraďte prosím co byste volil vy… Moc děkuji David Goll

      • stan

        Na preklad do anglictiny pouzite translate.google.com.
        (please use translate.google.com to translate from czech to english.)

        I translated the previous contribution by google as:
        Hello, unfortunately I can not English well enough to accurately express … I see that you are probably from the Czech Republic, so we turn to you asking … What combination of lenses you recommended me to take photos while traveling and climbing and rocks? I’m probably a bit “shitty” for the image quality … I bought zoom lens that was included X-E2 … I have a 35mm / 1.4 … peeps at 56mm, maybe something wide enough … I’m interested in the new zoom 2.8 in its entirety … Of course when traveling and climbing etc, will all the more compact and does not need so many lenses, the better quality … But I’m willing to retreat … Ask what you please vote for you thank you very much … David Goll

      • stan

        lens for travel:
        Wideangle: 10-24 is arguably very good, if weight is OK, otherwise maybe primes Fuji 14/2.8 is super or the comming samyang 12mm/2.0 seems be very promising. Samyang is manual focus but for such wideangle it should not be a problem.

        It was also very good oportunity to buy 27/2.8 from USA for 199$ (e.g from Amazon ) the delivery to EU is cheap now. This lens is small and very sharp in the whole range.
        Then also tele 55-200/3.5-4.8 is very sharp in whole range.
        The new zooms f2.8 seems be considerably larger than existing slower zooms, for traveling I would prefer current lighter zooms, because their quality is high.

  • Mic

    Please don’t take the official Fuji roadmap and put guesses on it. Make your own clearly different version if you want to do that.