Ideal zoom lens for you

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by lights and shadows, Mar 15, 2013.

  1. lights and shadows

    lights and shadows FujiXspot Rookie

    15
    Feb 18, 2013
    Guangzhou (China)
    Maybe is only a dream, but I´d sell my soul :daz: in exchange for a compact design, 20-60 mm equivalent lens with a constant fast aperture of f/3.5. Opinions here?
     
  2. EBC Wilson

    EBC Wilson FujiXspot Regular

    100
    Feb 20, 2013
    My two daydreams: The x10/20 would reach to 135mm with the same apertures, and even though it would be an impractically large camera, the exact smae thing on an X100 frame.
     
  3. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle FujiXspot Regular

    I too wish the X20 went to 135mm. My favorite trinity back in the day was a 28mm, 50mm and 135mm. A larger sensor version such as the X100 would be super sweet! Not sure why all the brands who have put out similar cameras have all chosen to use a fixed focal length. They should make a fixed version and a zoom, satisfy everybody that way. I can't justify spending the money for just one focal length.

    As for my dream zoom - a 28-135mm F2.8-4. My second best is already made by Sigma, well at least for APS DSLRs. The 17-70mm f2.8-4 is a great lens{25.5-105mm equivalent}. Be nice if they could make it for APS mirrorless and a version for m4/3{13-53mm}. On top of being a decently fast zoom with a good range it has macro, well close focus ability at least{less than 9 inches}. It is also very affordable.
     
  4. AlbertInFrance

    AlbertInFrance FujiXspot Regular

    89
    Feb 11, 2013
    Morbihan, France
    But f:3.5 ain't fast. Now a 20-60 f:2.0 in a package no bigger than my Nikkor 105mm f:2.5 would be worth having and may be within the bounds of possibility.
     
  5. Gary

    Gary FujiXspot Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 15, 2013
    SoCal
    Gary
    I would immediately purchase the first 70-200 equivalent w/ a constant f2.8 (or better).

    Gary
     
  6. ddb

    ddb New to FujiXspot

    4
    Feb 12, 2013
    Amen to the 70-200 f2.8. I believe that Fuji will have a difficult time without offering any fast telephoto zooms like the m43 users have.
     
  7. Mitch

    Mitch FujiXspot Regular

    59
    Feb 9, 2013
    Piscataway, NJ
    I'd like a 28-600 2.8 that recesses into the camera.

    (Fantasy lens for sneaking into concerts)

    Reality, I find that my 70-200 IS 2.8 is my favorite lens while using full frame D-SLRs.
     
  8. OdzBodkinz

    OdzBodkinz FujiXspot Veteran

    202
    Feb 17, 2013
    Honestly, a 55-135 with superb optics...doesnt even have to be 2.8. I'm okay with my zoom being as slow as f/4. I am looking forward to the new 55-200mm, but I question why they would have needed to make it zoom that much farther. I wonder if it could have been made f/4 and lighter if they had stopped at 135-150mm. I am not sure we'll see a 70-200 2.8 equivalent, because I imagine it will be too large...Even the Tokina and Sigma DX equivalents were pretty big.
     
  9. Peter Chin

    Peter Chin FujiXspot Regular

    124
    Feb 2, 2013
    the price on that would be in the $2-3K range
     
  10. Gary

    Gary FujiXspot Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 15, 2013
    SoCal
    Gary
    Probably, it is my favorite FF lens.

    G
     
  11. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
    The XF tele-zoom will be out, soon. I'm already looking forward to testing it. F3.5-4.8 should be okay, you'll often need that kind of DOF when shooting moving subjects, anyway.

    Here's an example of shots that were taken at f/2.85 with a focal length of 128mm (Zeiss Sonnar & Metabones Speed Booster):

    View attachment 11345
    S0017350 by ricopress, on Flickr

    View attachment 11346
    S0027354 by ricopress, on Flickr
     
  12. Gary

    Gary FujiXspot Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 15, 2013
    SoCal
    Gary
    The shallower the better for me ... I'd much prefer picking my DOF than having it dictated by the lens maker. If it costs a few more bucks for that option, then once again it's my choice. All things being equal, I will generally prefer subject isolation than distractions due to detail in the foreground and background.

    Some Samples:
    IMG_1021-L.
    200mm, 1/750, f/2.8

    2CBL5560aB-L.
    200mm, 1/40, f/2.8

    2CBL2743-XL.
    200mm, 1/125, f/2.8

    2CBL3079-M.
    200mm, 1/125, f/2.8
     
  13. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
    No problem: Used (probably 20 years old) Zeiss 2.0/200mm APO tele primes are occasionally available on eBay (here's are bargain Japanese build for 4,400 USD, German builds often sell for for 10,000 USD and more). Add a C/Y->XF Metabones Speed Booster (399 USD) and a generic lens adapter (40 USD), and you'll get two lenses for (almost) the price of one. ;) You can shoot the lens with an effective f/1.4, and a FF DOF equivalent of 2/200. So ISO 200 should be available in most situations, even when shooting fast action. Don't forget to add a Monostat carbon monopod to the mix. This lens promises terrific optical quality, plenty of subject isolation and great endurance. In a year or two, you may even be able to sell it for the same price you initially bought it.

    Of course, the vast majority of X-E1 customers will be happy with a lightweight and affordable XF tele zoom, but that's how the game is played. You know it from Leica – that little extra always costs much more.
     
  14. Gary

    Gary FujiXspot Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 15, 2013
    SoCal
    Gary
    I didn't know we were discussing German lenses, I thought we were chatting about Fuji and potential XF lenses. While there are many fast zooms available, I prefer mine to AF. I think most of us were addressing an ideal lens from Fuji, not an existing lens from Leica. But I see how this thread's title and OP could be misinterpreted. I also suspect that many X-E1 customers will be happy with a lightweight and affordable XF zoom. But the thread was not a poll of existing X-E1 customers, it asked about an individual's desires in a zoom. And I gave my opinion, I prefer a fast zoom which will AF and I am willing to pay extra for a fast zoom that will AF as opposed to a slow zoom which will AF, or a fast zoom which does not AF. I am sorry if my desire's for a fast zoom and/or my willingness to pay for a fast zoom and/or that my desired shooting style is to choose a DOF which I feel best matches what I seek in a final image, has seemingly upset you.

    Gary

    PS- Actually, I do know how the game is played as I've been playing it for a while. I do thank you for explaining it to me anyway. :)
    G
     
  15. pniev

    pniev Guest

    Beautiful shots! Playing with DOF delivers great results indeed...when done by a skilled person. What a great shots!
     
  16. Gary

    Gary FujiXspot Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 15, 2013
    SoCal
    Gary
    Thanks pniev. Fast telephotos can offer a cornucopia of options and possibilities. But unfortunately, Rico is correct, the faster the lens the more it costs. And when you get into the f/2.8 and faster, the costs just skyrockets.

    Gary
     
  17. pniev

    pniev Guest

    :D As I indeed experienced with some Nikon lenses. But I always thought the 105mm vr nikon was worth it. It was a reason for buying the sigma 70-200 2.8 instead of the nikon though. That lens performs beautiful as well. Anyway, as you said: this site is about Fuji. ;)
     
  18. Gary

    Gary FujiXspot Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 15, 2013
    SoCal
    Gary
    I shoot Canon, those images were with the Canon 70-200 @ 200mm or the Canon 200mm prime. Back in the film-only days I shot Nikon. My workhorse lens was the Nikkor 180mm f/2.8. Loved that lens. As for the lens being "worth it", for us hobbyists, I think the value sorta depends on your level of photographic passion and how much you shoot at any particular focal length/aperture combo. The more you shoot, in this case @ 200mm-f/2.8, the less the cost-per-frame for the lens, lol. I guess a piece of hardware has value if it delivers the image you seek ... even on just one occasion. Lots of different spins can be made on value-to-cost.

    Not long ago I ordered a Canon 1D-X, as my FF's were getting a little long in the tooth. I ended up sending it back because my FF were just gathering dust as I was shooting most everything with my µ4/3 cameras. So instead of investing in a 401(k) with those monies I expanded my µ4/3 system and dived into the Fuji pool. I really enjoy the Fuji ... it requires me to be much more anticipatory in order to get the shot I desire. The Fuji is different from my dSLR's and µ4/3's, not necessarily different good or different bad ... just different.

    Gary

    Gary
     
  19. flysurfer

    flysurfer X-Pert

    Feb 1, 2013
    Nuremberg
    Rico Pfirstinger
    The Canon F1.8/200mm is a great lens with plenty of potential for X-Mount users. But you'd have to find the FD version, which is difficult, because they were rare in the first place (they were built to appease angry FD system pros shooting the Olympics back in the day) and because most were converted to EF later. However, I recently found the type on eBay Germany, and I almost spent the little fortune to get it. In the 90s, the 1.8/200mm, 2.8/300mm and 2.8/400mm were my Canon EF workhorses, so I'm well aware of the good handling and the optical quality.

    As for XF zooms: Since Fuji (and the vast majority of their customers) consider the X-Mount system a compact system, I doubt that there will be any effort to develop, market and sell large and heavy XF lenses, especially zoom lenses. Zooms are targeted to the amateurs who want affordable, lightweight lenses. So I expect more zooms that are actually slower (but also smaller and cheaper) than the current 18-55mm lens most of us love. After all, Fuji has to compete with Sony here. So if your ideal zoom lens is the fast, large & heavy kind, you'll probably only find it elsewhere, and you'd have to use an adapter. Everything will be MF, of course, but I don't consider this a problem for me personally, as I was trained to shoot sports and action with huge, large, long superprimes in MF mode. Back then, I used to put the EOS 1n and the lenses in MF mode, even though Canon's AF was considered the best during the 90s (plenty of professional Nikon F4 sports shooters changed to Canon because of that).

    I also think and hope that Fuji will continue to develop fast high-quality prime lenses like the 35mm and the upcoming 23mm and 56mm primes. I'd definitely like to see tele primes, like a 1.8/85mm or 2/135mm. Reasonably fast, high IQ, but still small and easy to carry.
     
  20. Gary

    Gary FujiXspot Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 15, 2013
    SoCal
    Gary
    I had the 300mm 2.8, as my sports work diminished I dumped it in favor of the f/4, a much more manageable/practical lens, a decision I often regretted. I have a friend who had the EF 200mm f/1.8 ... that was a monster of a lens. If I was a professional, then manageability be hanged, the only thing that mattered would be the final image. But as a hobbyest, I appreciate the portability of µ4/3 and the unique design of the Fuji. I completely understand the Fuji marketplace does not make the design and manufacturing of large lenses profitable. But this thread didn't state to include a perimeter of economically common sense for the Fuji marketplace. In that vein, while this thread called for "zoom", and as this thread has unfortunately been a bit waylaid if not hijacked, I'll re-state my ideal zoom to primes ... on the long end I'd like see a 135mm f/2.8 or f/2 (approximately 200mm in FF). A 135mm would not be an exceptionally large lens.

    µ4/3 is also considered a "compact system" and I have recently acquired a Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 lens (70-200 in FF) ... so I don't think "compact system" carries much weight in this discussion as a criterium not to produce a certain lens. i believe Fuji's design concept of retro, rangefinder-esque more defines it's marketplace and customer base than "compact" and why long, fast, heavy and significantly expensive lenses would be economically unfeasible to design, produce and sell.

    As to manual focus:

    1) I've spent decades manual focusing, if I had a choice, (as this is my ideal lens per the title of this thread, I feel I do have a choice), I much prefer AF to manual focusing; and
    2) I spent a lot of money to own cameras which auto-focus, I strongly desire a return on my money for said feature. (Similarly, I don't understand people who buy an interchangeable lens camera yet shoot solely with the kit lens.)

    Gary