Fuji 50mm f1.0 - they're calling it THE ONE

Yokosuka_Mike said:
Just out of curiosity, is this thread going to be an endless back and forth of Fujinon lenses versus Chinese lenses? I don’t think that’s what this thread was intended to be about but if so, well, whatever.

All the best,
Mike
Click to expand...

its not a point being fuji vs china... my point was that this lens brings nothing much - and in extremely large package.. same as with CV 35/1.2 - it was nonsense until last version which is finally at least in some decent size (still huge but smallest it can be with that good picture quality...) i just think fuji should focus more towards some goal... whether is small lenses or very corrected lenses or anything... they keep on bringing stuff that cant be identified what they are...

i cant wait to see how does 50/1 looks without any correction applied, i want to see optical design and not software. but those days are long gone it seems...
 
nzeeman said:
its not a point being fuji vs china... my point was that this lens brings nothing much - and in extremely large package.. same as with CV 35/1.2 - it was nonsense until last version which is finally at least in some decent size (still huge but smallest it can be with that good picture quality...) i just think fuji should focus more towards some goal... whether is small lenses or very corrected lenses or anything... they keep on bringing stuff that cant be identified what they are...

i cant wait to see how does 50/1 looks without any correction applied, i want to see optical design and not software. but those days are long gone it seems...
Click to expand...

What do you mean it “brings nothing much?” It brings a very fast lens at this focal length that focuses fast and will be capable of superb IQ. It’s huge, but they already offer a small 50mm lens. And can’t be identified? It’s a 50mm F1 lens ... not hard to figure out when to use that.

Lastly, show me the autofocus F1 50mm lens for Fuji X mount made by a Chinese manufacturer... I can’t find it. I don’t want this lens either but I can’t see why you think you are already know it’s bad without ever using it. I think you are offended by the price perhaps.
 
nzeeman said:
..i just think fuji should focus more towards some goal... whether is small lenses or very corrected lenses or anything... they keep on bringing stuff that cant be identified what they are...
i cant wait to see how does 50/1 looks without any correction applied, i want to see optical design and not software. but those days are long gone it seems...
Click to expand...

Fujifilm has two distinct lines of lenses - the faster larger ones, and the smaller cheaper ones unofficially known as 'fujicrons'. All the faster Fujifilm primes are 100% optically corrected - 14 f2.8/16 f1.4/23 f1.4/35 f1.4/56 f1.2/90 f2. The smaller f2 primes are able to be so small because they utilise software correction - there's no such thing as a free lunch.

Judging from the size of the f1.0 I would safely assume it to be 100% optically corrected. And there is the 50mm f2 for those that want optimum compactness (with only a tiny bit of software correction), and the 56mm f1.2 for those that want a fully optical corrected fast lens without being huge. The 50mm f1.0 seems to be for people that prioritise the 'look' of shooting wide open over everything else - wedding and portrait shooters probably.
 
The lens looks very interesting. I don’t like the Fuji’s that much but I have three at work, so I may end up with one of these lenses.

Given that the Fuji lenses are made for the Fuji cameras, and not really much use on anything else, optical vs digital correction doesn’t really bother me. Those who are more concerned about or interested in optical vs digital correction seem to be more interested in the object and the process than the output.

My main concern about the Fujis with X-Trans sensors was, and remains, the weird artefacts in fine detail the sensors create.

All the hype about this lens stating that it is the first autofocus f1 lens has me baffled though - I guess everyone forgot that Canon made an EF 50mm f1 autofocus lens from 1989-2000.

Marty
 
Sorry ill wait till Fuji goes sub f1.0....thats when it can compete with the noctilux. Fuji is behind the game.lol
 
when i say nothing much.. this lens is bigger than full frame canon af 50/1 lens.. bigger! i dont care how well corrected is lens if u make it bigger than camera itself-everyone can make huge corrected lens... whole point of lens design is to make something that is usable image and size wise.. this is bigger even than canon one with af adapter... and i dont care about price as someone mentioned-i just think is it logical that something exist or not-and i don't see logic for existence of this one when they already have 56/1.2
 
It exists because they want it to exist... and it’s not heavier than the Canon, just longer. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this lens even if you think Fuji has no reason to make it.
 
nzeeman said:
when i say nothing much.. this lens is bigger than full frame canon af 50/1 lens.. bigger! i dont care how well corrected is lens if u make it bigger than camera itself-everyone can make huge corrected lens... whole point of lens design is to make something that is usable image and size wise.. this is bigger even than canon one with af adapter... and i dont care about price as someone mentioned-i just think is it logical that something exist or not-and i don't see logic for existence of this one when they already have 56/1.2
Click to expand...

A commercially successful fishing lure doesn't justify its existence by catching fish. It justifies its existence by catching fishermen (i.e., generating sales for the manufacturer).
 
Last edited:
nzeeman said:
when i say nothing much.. this lens is bigger than full frame canon af 50/1 lens.. bigger! i dont care how well corrected is lens if u make it bigger than camera itself-everyone can make huge corrected lens... whole point of lens design is to make something that is usable image and size wise.. this is bigger even than canon one with af adapter... and i dont care about price as someone mentioned-i just think is it logical that something exist or not-and i don't see logic for existence of this one when they already have 56/1.2
Click to expand...

Actually it's the smallest of the 50/85mm superfast AF mirrorless lenses from any manufacturer.

If you'll visit this link - https://j.mp/3haZXgm, you can see it's slightly smaller than the slower canon 50mm f1.2L, and significantly smaller than the manual focus only Nikon 50mm f0.95 noct.
If you compare equivalent focal length lenses (75-85) you'll see the canon is even bigger in comparison again. Hell, even the Sony/zeiss ZA 50mm f1.4 is almost the same size, and not an f1 lens. I actually agree with you that all these lenses are too big - I'm just pointing out that Fuji is on the better side of that argument comparatively.

The canon 50mm f1.0L EF lens was designed 31 years ago and has a reputation of being basically unusable wide open (although I suspect it's probably better than its rep)
 
ah canon is full frame lens.. and lens by itself is 86x74 versus fuji that is 104x87.. ttartisans and noctilux also that are 0.95 are roughly same , and tt is 89x72...
this becomes like talking to leica users... now someone will come and tell me this is way better than noctilux or something like that...
i dont care about brands - i love and use fuji but this is just lazy designing and thats all.. and i wont interfere anymore with this lens worshiping.. if you want delete my infidel posts here...

edit:
check canon 5d with 50/1.2 compared to this and say i am not right... remember its full frame dslr so that 50mm is even wider so you can come much closer and get more bokeh...
https://camerasize.com/compact/#772.926,682.354,ha,t

or even worse 5d with 85/1.2 still smaller and still full frame...
https://camerasize.com/compact/#772.926,682.295,ha,t
 
Last edited:
nzeeman said:
ah canon is full frame lens.. and lens by itself is 86x74 versus fuji that is 104x87.. ttartisans and noctilux also that are 0.95 are roughly same , and tt is 89x72...
this becomes like talking to leica users... now someone will come and tell me this is way better than noctilux or something like that...
i dont care about brands - i love and use fuji but this is just lazy designing and thats all.. and i wont interfere anymore with this lens worshiping.. if you want delete my infidel posts here...
Click to expand...

Again, that's the old canon EF mount lens, not the new RF mount lens, which is larger than the fuji, and slower. If you check the measurements of the new RF mount canon lens, you can see it's larger.

These new mirrorless superfasts prioritise IQ over size. Not lazy designing, just a different design goal. You'll find they have considerably better IQ at their wide open aperture than the older style ones.
 
Doug said:
Indeed it does happen, and almost always. Briefly, if a lens is neither over- nor under-corrected for spherical aberration, the bokeh disk in out of focus detail (such as specular reflections) will have an even illumination across the circle, neither brighter around the periphery nor brighter toward the center. If the spherical aberration is under-corrected, then the disk is brighter toward the center and the periphery is less so and this promotes more attractive (smoother) bokeh... but *only* for the far bokeh, that beyond the focus point. At the same time, the near-bokeh will have the disks brighter around the edge and so produce less-attractive soap-bubble bokeh. This is usually acceptable unless the OOF near-bokeh is very noticeable. The very opposite occurs with a lens over-corrected for SA.

B&H has a good article on bokeh that explains the above with illustrations about half-way through:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/tips-and-solutions/understanding-bokeh
Click to expand...

Here's what the B&H article says:

The rub with SA is that, if you under-correct or over-correct it, you will get the opposite light distribution effect before and after the focus point. Therefore, an over-corrected lens that causes the soap-bubble bokeh in the background will have foreground-out-of-focus areas with a concentration of light in the center of the discs, and vice versa for under-corrected aberrations.
Click to expand...

Which is the same thing that Hubert Nasse and Paul van Walree say:

Page 38: https://lenspire.zeiss.com/photo/app/uploads/2018/02/cln35_en_web_special_bokeh.pdf
The more appealing the blurriness is in the
background, the less appealing it is in the
foreground. There it often seems harsh and
disturbing. It generates swirls of small
highlights and transforms lines into double
lines.
Click to expand...

https://web.archive.org/web/20120126110020/http://toothwalker.org/optics/bokeh.html
A lens with undercorrected spherical aberration is associated with a smooth background blur and a harsh foreground blur; the situation is reversed for a lens with overcorrected spherical aberration.
Click to expand...

All three say that spherical aberration affects bokeh like a seesaw. One side goes up, the other goes down. It's either neutral on both sides (corrected), or harsh in front and smooth behind (under-corrected), or smooth in front and harsh behind (over-corrected). What happens behind the focal plane has an inverse relationship to what happens in front of it.

Rask seems to be saying something different.

Fujifilm chose to control the spherical abberation in the foreground/subject focusplane with the 1 ASPH element, but leave some of the spherical abberation in the background, instead having that portion controlled/handled by the ED elements near the front of the lens. (bold mine)
Click to expand...

He seems to be saying that Fujifilm has bent the seesaw in the middle. They're doing one thing to control it in front of the focal plane, and they're doing another thing to control it behind the focal plane. Rather than being bound in an inverse relationship, Fujifilm is manipulating bokeh on opposite sides of the focal plane independently from each other—that they can make it smooth behind the focal plane AND smooth in front of the focal plane. Isn't that supposed to be impossible?

Maybe something was lost in translation. Fujifilm could have been trying to say that spherical aberration has a different effect on opposite sides of the focal plane, and they decided to create a lens that was slightly under-corrected (a little smooth behind, only a little harsh in front). To achieve that, they used 1 ASPH element and ED elements in the optical formula. *shrug*
 
new fuji 50...interested?

new fuji 50...interested?

who is interested in this new fat and fast 50?

and if so...who are you and why are you planning on or thinking about getting one?
i'm not all that interested for myself...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom