LEAKED: First Official Images & Specs of the XF100-400mm F4.5-5.6 OIS WR


full zoom

Here are the first official images of the XF100-400, leaked by a trusted Fujirumors source :-)

The XF100-400mm F4.5-5.6 OIS WR will have a minumum focus distance from 1.75 m. Zoomed out, it will be 270mm long, while on the wide end it will be about 6cm shorter.

Filter size 77.

It will weight 1375g and have 21 elements / 14 groups.

As rumored earlier, it should cost around €1,800 and it will be announced on January 15.

stay tuned,
Fuji X Forum, Facebook and Twitter

P.S.: I’m really sorry for the big watermark, but I want to make life to photoshopper a bit more difficult



  • Isn’t that the same weight as the Canon 100-400L? Not that I expect a high quality 100-400 to be light, but shouldn’t a crop lens be lighter/smaller than a FF lens? Or am I not understanding physics?

    • Alex

      Hmm, yes, the size is almost identical. But hey, it’s 150-600mm FF equivalent!

    • Marc Grimm

      The Canon 100-400 II weighs 1.6kg and is shorter. But that’s to be expected because such a telephoto lens requires a certain length and the Fujinon has to be longer by the difference between the flange distances of Canon EF to Fuji X. Besides, the Fuji has the same number of lens elements and that makes a large portion of the weight, yet it still is lighter than the Canon.

      • The Winding Way

        It has to be much the same size as it has the same focal length and aperture. The physics determine the proportions – especially the length and the front element size. The Fuji may be slightly slimmer as the Canon lenses tend to have more bulk, presumably for their own mechanical reasons.

        • Marc Grimm

          The focal length dictates the length, measured from sensor plane. As the flange distance of Canon EF and Fuji X is different, the lens length still varies.

    • umad?!

      “Or am I not understanding physics?”

      Nope. The sensor format is irrelevant with tele lenses since they work with much largers sensors by design. Thing is: this one is designed for crop which means it should resolve higher.

      The length is determined by focal length (and the flange distance) and weight comes from the lens elements.

      This is exactly what was expected: a 100-400 with the size of an 100-400 and the weight of an 100-400.

      Only thing: it’s actually pretty cheap for an new 100-400 lens.

      • Wouldn’t the fact that the image circle needs are smaller mean potentially smaller elements? Or is the image circle theoretically pretty large on this?

        • umad?!

          the image circle size is important when designing primes with shorter focal lengths. (there the size of the entrance pupile is one of the important things)

          but take a wide angle zoom for crop and put it on full frame camera. zoom all the way out and you will see, that it covers the whole frame.

          As said: with telephoto zooms the image sensor size is more or less irrelevant.

          • Cool, thanks for the info :)

    • EnPassant

      The Canon 100-400 II is 1570g, 195g heavier than this Fujinon lens. Just as expected as both lenses have 21 elements and the main difference is some of the elements must be wider to cover the 35mm sensor format on Canon cameras.

      • Ah, I guess B&H’s data was incorrect, it said it was 1.38kg I think. Or maybe that was the first version of the lens.. whatever. Thanks for the corrections, though.

        • EnPassant

          That is for the first version with only 17 elements. Glass is heavy! Newer lenses are often more heavy as they use more glass for better correction.

    • Ciro

      good remark…

    • wincros

      Not really. Nikon says that the reason they do not do crop sensor telephotos is that there is almost no gain in lightness or compactness by doing so. The gains are all in wide and mid range.

  • Hugo

    That’s gonna look awesome on my XA-2!

    • Tolga Tuncer

      perfect for street photography :-D

      • Bremer

        you are giving me ideas :-)

        • Tolga Tuncer

          inception started … haha :D

  • MuMinded

    Want… At an effective focal length of 600mm (maybe more if the Tele-converter works with this) I can accomplish some seriously good astrophotography shots! Sign me up and put me on the waiting list..

    • Ray

      The teleconverter will definitely work with this.

  • Littlelio

    I love fuji but what is the main purpose of this huge and expensive lense…? Is this for hobby use or professional sports photography?

    • Marc Grimm

      Wild life/birding. It’s not fast enough (aperture-wise) for sports photography, although it may be sufficient for daylight sports. It might also work for long focal length landscape. Generally speaking, you can use any lens for anything…

      • Fly Moon

        Who would buy Fuji for Wild life/birding?

        • Scooter


          • Especially now that the X-T1 has an electronic shutter.

          • Fly Moon

            I thought the electronic shutter does’t work very well with the moving subjects!

          • umad?!

            many animals decide (from time to time) to rest (and stay still). This is what many wildlife photographers wait for. And every little shock (from mirror or shutter) can ruin a photo with such long focal lengths, so I guess the electronic shutter actually could make some nice choice

          • Fly Moon

            Hmm. You actually have a point. However, what about tracking and AF-C?

          • umad?!

            not with electronic shutter (yet). That’s on the minus side. For tracking you still have to count on the mechanical shutter. Other negative thing is, that – if something moves – you get rolling shutter
            (this could change in the near future with fast reading stacked sensors [or global shutter])

            But changing Shutter mode is really fast (but it on an FN button or the Q menu) – ofc no changing at all and no shutter/mirror shock would be ideal

          • No complaints from my birds.

          • Fly Moon

            How is that working for you?

        • Marc Grimm

          That’s not the right question to ask, as no bird professional would choose anything else but Nikon or Canon, due to the offerings in the super telephoto prime area. People who already own Fuji now have the opportunity to go up to 560mm focal length (equivalent to 840mm).

        • Carl

          Well no one as Fuji hasn’t offered the option but now they have so we may see people convert from CanNikon to it. The closest to a mirrorless telephoto is Olympus and Panasonic’s offerings but they haven’t been fantastic.

          • Fly Moon

            So, you think what preventing Wild life/birding photographers was the focal length and not the speed?

          • Yes, definitely the focal length.

          • Carl

            Yes the more focal length the lenses can offer the better. Canon 100-400, Nikon 200-500 and the 150-600 are very popular lenses and if Fuji offers one then great.

        • Sebastien

          I like taking wild life shots. But when I will replace my DSLR with the X-t2 (hopefully), I would love to have a single system to support all the photography types I practice. This is the lens it was missing to me. But $$$

        • Dave

          I am very interested in this lens. Long lenses are not just for wildlife photography.

          For example, long lenses allow you to “compress” a scene, think cityscapes with lots of people “compressed” into the scene.

          I do panorama landscapes by stitching images, it is very common for me to stitch 30 images for a panorama, some I have printed 8 feet wide, and you can stand 6″ away and look at the fine detail.

      • Littlelio

        Exactly. It is not fast enough, but it is huge and heavy. The point of mirrorless is the size and weight advantage, but now everything is coming back to DSLR style. Even with my Nikon, I only bring huge lens for very specific use, for work.

        I have the 50-140. It is a great lens, but I have admit that I don’t want to take it with me if I bring X-T1 out.

        1800 EUR is really expensive for a F4.5-5.6 lens… even it is 100-400mm.

        • umad?!

          thing is: you don’t have to buy it.
          It’s as big, heavy and expensive as a 100-400 has to be. The Canon 100-400II is 2200€ btw

        • Scooter

          It’s great I don’t see it as to big or priced to high for what it is. Faster won’t be cheeper or smaller. Yes it is the lens you won’t take out for every shoot as one won’t need 150-600 everyday.

        • Marc Grimm

          The point of mirrorless to gain the advantages of a camera without a mirror. If the size and weight advantage is the keypoint for you, that’s fine but don’t generalize this. Other than that, this aperture combination is rather usual for this field of view area. So no need to cry about that. Look at Sigma/Tamron 150-600’s, Nikon 200-500 or Canon’s 100-400.

        • Jano

          ONE point of mirrorless is the POSSIBILTY to go small and light (= not the only one). I can do that with my X-E2 and the 27. And even when I use my X-E2 with the 56 I have a much faster lens (better build too) and still I’m 100g lighter than using my former D7000 with 50 1.8G. So yes, I can go light and small.

          Most people like to go small when it suits the situation. Using mirrorless cameras we have that option but we can also add battery grip and huge lenses when we need that power. DSLRs are large but they don’t really have the option to go small. Yes, using huge lenses makes the mirrorless systems just as large and heavy as a DSLR kit but since most of us want (or: can afford) only one system I’ll always choose the one which can do both.

          These complaints come up with every large lens Fuji releases and they have always been pretty ridiculous. Would I welcome more compact lens options? You bet! I’ve been writing for long time that a 23 f2 and 56 f2 are sorely missing from the lineup. Does that mean there shouldn’t be any large lenses? No way!

          • Plus the tripod mount (for this lens) is on the lens, so the size and weight of the camera is irrelevant.

        • umad?!

          physics doesn’t seem to be your strong suit…

          • Littlelio

            Well physics actually is my best, so obviously there is other issue with me. For example, in the end I will buy this lense. lol

      • SteveHood

        I do heavy cropping with my birding lens and I would not like the results of pixel level detail from the x-trans sensor. That alone pushes me to another mount for birding.

        • Or the obvious request that FUJIFILM produce an 800mm lens.

        • umad?!

          according to your postings you spend most of your time with µFT. Panasonic is coming with a slow 100-400 and Oly with an expensive 300mm, maybe they are better for your pixel levels

        • herp photos

          Have you even tried cropping a bird shot with an x-t1 and the 55-200 or are you just basing this off of assumptions. I can do some incredible cropping and retain great details with that combo. I can only imagine this lens with the double the focal length will be even better. Especially once there is a 24mp Fuji sensor to pair it with. If anything I consider the cost of this Fuji lens vs. the cost of a used Nikon D7100 and a Tamron 150-600. The latter combo would be cheaper, provide more megapixels and I have seen amazing bird shots with the Tamron. That is what I consider and not crop-ability. I have total confidence that I would prefer the output and cropability of an x-t1 with this new lens to the output of the Nikon with the 150-600 but I wouldn’t have near the reach and would be out more money.

    • Obviously FUJIFILM wants to compete with the “big boys” in all fields of photography. By producing this lens as the first option in the birding/wildlife/sports field they will actually be offering something, whilst then developing the more dedicated lenses. It’s a good choice at this stage.

    • Carl

      It’s for people who want to do birding and light sports photography with a Fujifilm X series camera. Previously there has never been an option like this for mirrorless but now there is one so everyone is happy. It’s actually a good thing as this could be a big chance to convert people from Canon/Nikon who pair the longer telephotos with the fast bodies. If they can get an option that’s just as good in a Fuji but smaller and cheaper then more people will convert.

      You have big lenses but you also have smaller lenses for people who want to do street photography and the such. If this lens is not for you then don’t get it, simple. The thing is, lenses like this are always going to be big and heavy no matter what size sensor or wether there is a mirror or not in the camera.

  • Andrey Simakov

    Nearest Sale price is $1200 ;)

  • Jimmy

    Specs of this lens soundgreat compared to Canikon’s superzoom lenses but come on Fuji! Some x-t1 owners like me will never pay 2K$ in this too heavy lens. I mean, I want to reach at least 300mm on APSC for birding and other stuffs and I will be happy with a 70-300 (why not on a redesigned xf 55-200 base?) or even a lighter, easy to carry, 300mm.
    I can obtain decent results with a nikkor 300mm f/4.5 ED-IF on my x-t1 (handheld), so I would be happy with AF lens.

  • John Dillworth

    yikes! $2,000 U.S. for an f5.6 lens? a bit rich for my blood. I do shoot a big air show each year so I look forward to renting this bad boy!

    • yikes! $2,000 U.S. for an f5.6 lens? a bit rich for my blood.

      You need to qualify that statement a bit more, as many of us won’t mind paying that price for an 800mm f/5.6 lens.

      • umad?!

        funny thing is:
        Canon 100-400 II: 2200€
        Panasonic 100-400 (f/x-6.3) expected at 1900€
        Olympus 300mm f/4 (450mm f/5.6 with TC) expected at 2500€

        the Fuji ist the cheapest of all those

        • Bremer

          i just found the canon 100-400 for 899€ used by asgoodasnew.

          • Dave

            Is that the Canon 100-400 first version or the Mark II version.

            The Canon 100-400 (Mark I) is nowhere as good as the Mark II version.

        • mr.four

          Yup, and Fuji optics are nothing to scoff at.

  • Andrew Hensley

    I like your site and read it often, but brother . . . . you have GOT to improve on either your english or written word or both needs to improve. Lately it’s a chore to read through your posts. Just some feedback from an avid reader.

    • Patrick

      luckily the posts are short ;)

      I have absolutely no time to take evening English lessons. I can’t do better than that, sorry

      • Don’t worry, for as Prof. Higgins said, in America they haven’t spoken it for years.

        • Ryan

          Because we speak American. 👍

      • Andrew Hensley

        I’ll continue to be annoyed as I continue to read. You’re the only site I follow for Fuji stuff. I can’t control my ethnocentrism.

        • Patrick

          It’s ok, At least you understand what I write, somehow.

          • Fly Moon

            You can use Google Translate!

          • Andrew Hensley

            I appreciate that the site even exists. Just a voice from the crowd offering some feedback. Thanks again. Keep up the good work.

      • Seeing as the the Oxford Dictionary Word of the Year for 2015 is an emoticon, the British have now also lost all comprehension of their own language.

        • Tankerman

          As a native UK resident I can tell you that the British started losing that in the 1970’s when the graduates coming out of the universities and going into the teaching profession, who couldn’t be bothered to learn it while at school themselves declared that the teaching of the comprehension of English was no longer necessary.

          The other thing that has helped destroy British English is that successive governments have not insisted that the major US software companies produce software in British English. If they have no difficulty in writing software in any other language they are certainly capable of writing it in British English instead of forcing the use of bastardised US English on us.

    • Bremer

      you mean it is a chore to read something you can choose to read or not to read. …..that is really hard. I feel your pain. BTW it is all free and nobody is forced to read anything Patrick writes ( as far as i know)

      • Loco por el Barça!

        Yes, the pain must be unbearable…

      • Andrew Hensley

        If you want to be taken seriously, you must communicate effectively. So the hell what if it’s free? What does that have to do with anything? I’m still gonna read his posts. Just giving feedback that it would be a more pleasant experience if the entries were a bit smoother and easier on the brain to decipher what’s being said sometimes. Not all the time, but enough lately to make me want to bring it to his attention. Overall, the site is great. Seriously. Lots of good info. People are so easily bent out of shape when someone puts their hand up and makes a comment. What’s the big deal? I’d want to know if my readers liked what I was putting out.

    • t_linn

      I’m one of the majority of Americans that are not multilingual. I’ve tried learning other languages and I suck at it so I have the greatest respect for all the non-native English speakers who participate in these forums and are able to communicate at all, much less with the effectiveness of Patrick (and others). It opens up the world to me. If any other language was dominant on the internet I would be screwed.


      If it’s a “chore” to read, then perhaps it is you that needs to improve your English. My gosh, seriously?

      • Andrew Hensley

        Yes. Seriously. Go read entries at Canon rumors. It flows. Adequate wording that makes sense is used. Some entries here appear to have been written by Frankenstein; whose English was also limited at times. Chill out fan boy.

  • Gilboa

    That’s one chunky heavy lens! Looks good though.

  • Well, the lens is not of interest to me, but this launching may indicate that next Fuji cameras (X-Pro2, X-T2) will perform better enough in AF speed and AF tracking…

  • Ciro

    This lens is the negation of the mirrorless philosophy… what good is having a lightweight body then you connect a beast like that?

    • Chris

      There are people shooting wildlife and you don’t want to bear heavy gears in the wild for days.

      • Ciro

        A professional who wants to shot wildlife certainly will not buy a mirrorless: D do not joking

        • Chris

          You don’t allow hobbyists to shoot wildlife? I know people enjoy shooting aircraft and such. I also never recall fuji calling their products “aim at professional”. It’s mostly from certain users who use it professionally. You really have to think what it does for you.

        • A professional who wants to shot wildlife certainly will not buy a mirrorless.

          No, he’ll by a Musgrave or a Sako, in the calibre corresponding to the intended wildlife to be shot.

    • nlphoto

      You don’t have to buy it. But what about the sports or wildlife shooters who want to utilize their FujiX body? I’m personally excited for this lens and will of course pack light when I need to (most days) but this will come in handy at times.

      • Ciro

        the reflex are much better for wildlife :D another planet at all.
        It is totally useless to save a few hundred grams in the mirrorless body and have so heavy and bulky optical absolutely comparable to the SLR systems. A professional who wants to shot wildlife certainly will not buy a mirrorless: D no joking

        • Lumen

          Not a lens for you obviously. so move on.

          • Ciro

            good reply, for shure :)

        • Sebastien

          You really don’t want to understand that not everyone wants to maintain two systems. I’m not talking about PROs

          • Ciro

            O yes… and you spend 2000$ for this gun :-D

          • Sebastien

            2000$US converted to CAD + tax is about 3K for me so….nope will not buy this lens at full price. I think its price is too high but it will be lower later…

            Anyway, we have to wait for official specs and price..

    • junyo

      You realize the lenses are detachable, right? So if this lens doesn’t meet your needs it’s not welded to the body, in fact you don’t even have to buy it.

      The entire point of an interchangeable lens system is to be able to make it suit various needs at various times.

      • Ciro

        for you:

        Mirrorless cameras are designed to have the advantage of smaller size,
        lighter weight, lower end models with lower cost than SLRs


        • Didiergm

          So mirrorless owners are banned from ever wanting a longer focal length ? On what grounds ?

          • Ciro

            Each one can buy what he want… For me the ML make sense just if it remains Small.

          • The camera in cellphones are small. Does that count?

          • Ciro

            Why not? DAH uses an iphone!

          • Didiergm

            Which more or less bans anything longer that the XF35mm, or better the 27mm : 10-24 – too big, 56mm pffff, 18-135 hahaha, 16-55 don’t mention it, 16mm silly etc, etc, etc

          • Ciro

            A lot of fan boy here ;-)

          • Blekwhole

            Yess, all THERE …

          • Ciro

            If I need a long focal I buy a reflex. Well balanced, with best af, more professional, with serious battery… simply, no?

          • Eric Duminil

            “Best AF” It depends. Mirrorless autofocus can be more accurate than DSLR AF.

          • Didiergm

            That’s your choice and I respect that, but I disagree on one major point: I don’t have the unlimited funding you seem to enjoy so having two (more?) incompatible systems is a no no, I find it good to have the choice in the ML world;

          • Because we enjoy our cameras just simply too much.

          • Didiergm


        • junyo

          So what’s your point?

          The cameras are smaller. The XT1 is half a pound lighter than my SLR, so even with the same lens mounted it’s still a net smaller/lighter package. When I put a pancake or small prime on it, even more so. You’re saying that they’re never allowed to make large lenses, for an APS-C interchangeable lens system? Buy a fixed lens compact zoom then. They’ll never make large lenses for that.

        • Mirrorless cameras are designed to have the advantage of smaller size, lighter weight, lower end models with lower cost than SLRs …

          This statement shows a complete lack of understanding and knowledge of the reason for the reflex mirror in SLR cameras. It also shows that most people still haven’t cottoned that DSLR cameras are, or rather, were an interim evolutionary stage towards current camera systems.
          DSLR’s are the Neanderthals of photographic equipment.

      • Didiergm

        ” You realize the lenses are detachable, right? ”
        Thank you Sir, for the good laugh; You made me spill my coffee :=)

  • Ronin1958

    Arrgh… Fuji fails again! – LOL – The lens is either: too big, too heavy, needs to be a faster aperture (f4), needs to use smaller filters, needs faster Autofocus (no one can wait until the XT2), needs a “Macro” mode, needs to be cheaper.. or it needs to come equipped with a free underwater housing.

    Or better yet – start over and make it a full frame camera!

    FWIW – When the lens comes out, I will wait for a few reviews from the sites I trust (e.g. DP Review) – After I read the reviews (when was the last time a Fuji lens got a “Bad Review”?) I will buy the lens. Then I will use it and integrate it into my workflow – alongs side my other photographic tools – and at some point I might sell one of my other lenses to balance the bank account.

    It’s the same process I have been using since I started shooting 40 years ago.

    Personally I think the XF100-400 is going to be a great lens and I look forward to using it ( and if anyone from Fuji is reading this – please fix the battery lock on future versions of the VG- XT1 – and put a more secure lock on the XT2 memory card slot cover (add a second card slot please! ), and seriously improve the glue you are using to adhere the rubber to the body chassis.

    Happy New Year everyone.


    • Eric Duminil

      Lol, is that your collection? :)

      • Ronin1958

        about 15% of it… ;-)

  • …beast. Happy I’m not obsessed with wild animal photography. Proof that Fuji is a solid competitor. Ever see DSLR sports photogs with their 12+ lb rigs on tripods?

  • F2.8

    With incredible image quality huh?

    I’d expect f2.8. 1800 euro is hilariously high for a F4.5 – 5.6 lens!!

    Another exhibition-only waste from Fujifilm AGAIN.

    • ClownsAboveJokersBelow

      2.8 would be idiotically huge. Oh wait, you’re someone that has no idea what they’re talking about.

  • I had hoped Fuji was going to roll out a new sensor upgrade.

    • Bremer

      you are looking for trouble :-) see yesterdasy´s XE2s rumor comments. we have decided to put the word new sonsor in the indexed section

    • Ciro

      no no, new sensor will came in 2025

    • Chris

      Xp2’s sample image is 24mp. Anyway, it’s just a few days away.

  • It is amazing how many whiners there are online. No matter what Fuji releases, someone is whining, despite the fact that they are one of the only camera companies, if not the only one, that continuously releases high quality lenses.

    If you don’t want a telephoto lens, don’t buy one. It is not an everyday, carry-around lens. I would rather it be sharp center to corner than be smaller with optical issues. This will be great for those who want such focal lengths.

    People are already complaining about the sensor in the X-Pro 2 and they haven’t even used or seen it yet. Who knows, perhaps they will release it with a great sensor, and then you will look stupid.

    • Ciro

      you’re right looking it better, it could be used for the fireworks year-end … hopefully fuji release it in time.

      • vni

        She is great !

      • Lumen

        As you said before, too long for You……… mirrorless you know :-). Actually I think you don’t understand it at all.

    • To be clear, my post wasn’t meant to be a whining or necessarily a negative, I was genuinely confused as to what I thought was the same weight as a FF lens of the same focal length, but multiple posters pointed out I was in error. I don’t expect to a high quality lens (especially a telephoto) to be small and light.

    • sperdynamite

      Fuji is the only company that releases high quality lenses? What?

      • No, that is not what I said. I said, they are one of the only companies that has been “CONTINUOUSLY” releasing high-quality lenses. You can’t say that for every company, especially Sony ~ inconsistent to say the least. Sony has some nice lenses, but there are several that are borderline crap. Sigma is another company that has been producing great lens after great lens.

        Fuji can improve on its camera bodies and by providing a bare-bones raw converter to support the RAF files. However, you can’t really criticize them for the lenses they have released over the past four years.

        • sperdynamite

          Sigma and Tamron have different lines for different photographers. Fuji does not, they only make the X lenses for their enthusiast market. If Fuji decided to make a line of budget lenses like Sigma has to, you’d see low-end performance. Zeiss, Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Sony, Voigtlander, are all making top notch lenses. Fuji is just better at marketing their lenses than some, to make it seem like they’re special in some way. This is not to say that there is anything wrong with Fuji lenses, they’re fantastic, but they’re not better than the equivalent from other makes. They are often cheaper though, being APS-C. If you compare the Sigma 35/1.4 of FF to the 23/1.4 on APS-C, they’re both great at similar prices. However I think the Sigma is a better value being FF. Comparisons to Canon or Nikon are harder because their FF pro primes are double the price. Better than Fuji? Only if you consider that they’re FF I would say. The format being equal they’re about the same. I’ll add that people we’re not that thrilled about the 16-50, or the focus speed of the 60/2.4.

  • Jeff

    Is it a pro (red XF) lens like the 16-55 and 50-140? The logo looks red to me.
    I don’t think I’ll buy it but I know someone who’s really looking forward to it.

    • Didiergm

      Looks like it has a red logo

    • umad?!

      yes, it’s a red lable

    • Lumen

      Yes, a great label.

  • t_linn

    This looks like a great lens. I will buy it and the 1.4x teleconverter. That said, I wish Fuji would’ve integrated an Arca-Swiss compatible dovetail on the foot of the lens collar instead of forcing everyone to go out and buy one separately. How hard could this be?

    • Philipp Kämpfer

      Not everybody uses Arca Swiss (compatible) gear…so why force it upon people…?

      • t_linn

        Maybe I’m missing something, Philipp, but it seems to me that adding this feature would benefit the majority of folks who use Arca-Swiss compatible heads with long lenses (including Wemberley-style heads) and have *zero* downside for those that don’t. I wasn’t suggesting that the thread be removed from the bottom of the foot.

  • MarcosV

    Looking good. I figure I’ll wait until the next generation X-T2 comes out before considering this lens. Ideally I would want to use this lens for wildlife and would even better AF.

  • F2.8

    With F4.5 – 5.6?

    I’d expect F2.8. 1800 euro is hilariously high for the slow lens!!

    Another “exhibition-only” lens from Fujifilm, AGAIN.

    • Mardock

      Show me ANYONE who makes a 100-400 zoom lens (or a 150-600 equiv) with a fixed maximum aperture of f/2.8

      Your “expectations” only exist in fantasyland.

      • Joe

        Sigma makes a 200-500/2.8. It’s tiny. :)

        • GhettoPimp

          Wow! Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 9.30 x 28.60″ (23.62 x 72.64 cm) Weight 34.54 lb (15.67 kg). Now that’s a lens!

    • Have you seen the size of Canon’s 200-400 f/4? It’s an absolute monster. 8lbs and $11,000. An f/2.8 constant with this focal range would weigh 15 lbs and cost north of $15,000, and both those numbers are probably quite low.

      • GhettoPimp

        Jordan CS13 – I think your estimate is a lot closer than mine! Totally agreed. An f/2.8 lens like the new Fuji would be an impossible monster in size, weight… and oh yes, COST! Imagine the howls then!

    • GhettoPimp

      If Fuji made the same lens a constant f/2.8, it would likely weight around 9 lbs and be 50% more bulky. Can’t escape physics F2.8 – Might pay you to bone up on optical systems and design. Like so many others in these forums, your knowledge of photography optics appears lacking. :-(

    • Peter

      First off, with every stop more, the amount of glass necessary and the complexity grows to the third power, and so more or less does the cost.

      Second, I suspect you have never used a lens of that focal length for any extended amount of time. Your depth of field goes so shallow that it would be close to unusable in practice and you would have to stop it down anyway to get decent results.

      Also, the mindset that only very fast lenses are good/professional will deprive you of some great lens options. Every lens makes different compromises.

    • umad?!

      It seems you can work around physics.
      Why don’t you become a lens designer? (cant’t find a canikon 100-400 f/2.8 either. But there is a Fujinon 75-400 f/2.8-3.8 lens ;))

    • Marc Grimm

      So… talking bullshit is your hobby then?

  • Crusty Old Fart

    Nikon 80-400mm, f/4.5-5.6, 77mm thread, 203mm long, 3.45 lbs, $2300.
    Fuji 100-400mm, , f/4.5-5.6, 77mm thread, 210mm long, 3 lbs, $2000.

    • t_linn

      Looks like you are figuring out that for longer lenses and large zooms there is very little size advantage to the Fuji X System lenses. The same thing is somewhat true of their 70-200mm equivalent. Regrettable but unavoidable. What this lens does offer is a 100-400mm option for those who have committed to the Fuji X System for its size advantage with other lenses (or some other reason).

      IIRC, at least one—perhaps more—lenses in this focal range were announced for the m4/3 system but ultimately shelved for the very reason that there wasn’t a huge size benefit for that system either. The result is that m4/3 users have to look at using adapted full-frame Canon FD lenses (or the like) in manual mode if they want something close to the focal range offered by this new lens.

      • People who still think mirrorless cameras or even choosing Fuji is about size advantage are very confused. The size advantage is minimal, especially compared to Canon’s small DSLRs.

        The true advantages are in the advanced image pipeline that’s possible without a mirror in the way. With never, ever requiring focus calibration, with seeing the exposure you’ll get right as you’re shooting instead of chimping later, with fewer parts to break over time, with Fuji’s excellent image processing and color sense, and other such things.

        Size? just a minor bonus.

    • Nikon TC-14E III, $500, 0.7 lbs, won’t work with 80-400mm.

    • umad?!

      so the difference in flange distance is about 25mm and the Fuji is only 7mm longer and even lighter? I’d say they did great ;)

  • Dave

    If this lens is fantastic, then that will support my move to Fuji, will wait for the X-T2 to see how they both go together. I do a lot of photography from small boats.

  • JohnnyFavorite

    this should be a hell of a lens with a prize that matches a fullframe canon L lens 100-400 4.5-5.6 USM II or an 200-500 nikon fixed 5.6… 1800€ for a crop sensor lens argsss. this should be a widlife lens but that only works with a nice tracking af. continuous af on fuji is so super weak that i never use it ever. now i am very curious about the first x-pro/x-e2s tests with this lens.

    • umad?!

      and how does the full frame part matter? Just read the comments, everything explained there ;)

      btw: many wildlife photographers use crop body. Friend of mine owns the 800L and uses it more often with the 7d2 than his 1dx

      • JohnnyFavorite

        it doenst realy matter. normaly fullframe glass is more expensive then dx glass and you can mount ff nikon/canon on a dx body to get extra reach. the point is, its expensive, very expensive for that focal range/apeture.

        • umad?!

          it doesn’t matter for telephotozooms AT ALL.

          Acutally it’s cheap for it’s focal range/aperture (400€ less than the canon!!!)

          • JohnnyFavorite

            it does matter because you can mount ff glass on a ff camera for indoor sports. if you use ff canon/nikon glass on a dx body you loose light. the only way to avoid that is using a ff lens with a speedbooster on a mirrorless camera. cheap? ok thats your opinion ;)

          • umad?!

            oh boy, you should become a lens designer ….

            and yes, the price is more than fair!

    • GilBarib

      Hi Johnny,
      Sorry to hear that you cant get your AFC to work….but in the meantime in the Fuji-X Sport and Action Group on Flickr…. https://flic.kr/g/quLzW

      • JohnnyFavorite

        ty. i shoot with an x-e2 newest firmware but afc deonst work. it misses and hunts all the time so i only shot afs. any tips to improve the performance?

        • X-E2 lacks phase detect AF. Get a new camera is the answer, either X-T10 or X-T1, or probably the upcoming X-Pro2.

          • JohnnyFavorite

            that is not true. x-e2 has phase detect af. direct copy from fuji x-e2 site: Intelligent Hybrid AF (TTL contrast AF / TTL phase detection AF

          • I must have been thinking of the X-E1. Either way, the X-T1 absolutely follow-focuses better than the X-E2. I had both cameras and compared them head to head and it wasn’t even a contest.

          • JohnnyFavorite

            ok ty 4 the info, maybe we are lucky and get some good af firmware update for the x-e2. normaly it performce well but sometimes when there is action and you miss the shot because af is hunting, thats so frustrating

  • Curator

    I prefer canon 100-400 ii for that price and size.

    • Bart Slaman

      That has no Fuji-X mount

      • Curator

        I use both canon and fuji.

        • umad?!

          poor you :/

  • Andrew Hope

    I really don’t understand the trolling of people, just for being happy. Another fantastic piece of Fuji glass to add to the system, whatever the size, can only be seen as a positive surely? Not everyone wants to run 2 systems, some of us shoot with primes, some of us zooms, it is about having choices and options and making the Fuji X-System more adaptable. No doubt, the XPro-2 and X-T2 will bring improvements as regards to AF performance, especially if expensive glass absolutely demands it. I really don’t see any negatives, it’s a win-win…

  • SonyRnD

    Nice glass. Now you guys just have to wait 2 years to use a 2015 sensor on it

  • lizsalander

    I’m really looking forward to this lens, and will start saving for it now. Hope it does well in the IQ department once released, and truly hoping it is released in time for our May trip to Africa. This lens will fill in a long-reach void in Fuji’s line-up. Can’t wait to see some images shot with it.

  • I guess we have two weeks or so to know if the 1.4x teleconverter works with this. If so, it’s on my list.

    • Ray

      Hmm, comment above was meant for you (regarding TC working with the 100-400).

  • Ray

    Was said before (not sure if from Fuji too) and am 100% positive it will work with this.

  • Michele

    I want nowwwww!!!!!

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The Fujirumors website, Fujirumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.