Hypothetical: Fuji 27mm f1.7 'classic'

[gavinlg]

I was thinking about Fujifilms extraordinary lens lineup for their XF mount the other day - specifically about the coming 23/50mm f2 lenses and their doubling up on focal lengths with differing characteristics. Obviously this is great for photographers (not so great for their wallets if you can justify each version of each focal length - which isn't hard to do!). Then I started thinking about a lens I would like for my XF mount cameras.

I've been using the diminutive 27mm pancake a lot recently and it makes for an excellent travel lens, being tiny, sharp, relatively flare free etc. But that 27mm (40mm equiv) focal length is just crying out for something a bit more special.
Why not do something a little weird Mr Fuji-san and develop a 40mm equivalent fast classic prime as a sort of homage to the great little japanese rangefinder cameras of the 70s and 80s (himatic 7sII/yashica GSN/canonet).



Here's my mock design brief:
- 'Classic' labelling or 'Fujinon-C' distinguishes it as a seperate lens to the usual XF lens range in same vein as the APD 56mm.

- Lens size must be small - somewhere around the 35mm f2, but fatter in the lens barrel to accomodate the faster aperture.

- Inspiration lenses should be the Carl Zeiss 50mm f1.5 sonnar-c, the voigtlander 40mm nokton f1.4 classic and the summicron 35mm f2 pre-asph.

- Optical design should be non-reliant on aspheric elments as to channel the 'classic' look and some barrel type distortion is acceptable. Excess barrel distortion should be corrected via software rather than optically to allow for smaller lens design. Some amount of spherical abberation engineered into the optical design would give the lens a dreamy or 'glowy' bokeh - ala the nikon 58mm f1.4G or the Voigtlander nokton f1.4's. Aperture should be between f1.4 and f1.7 at the slowest.

- RRP should be around $600-$700us.




I would personally be lining up to buy such a lens, especially with the 40mm equivalent focal length. The question is, would you be interested?

 

[Jdi]

I'm not keen on participating in the institutionalizing of software corrected lenses. Why not put the glow in software as well, ala a Toy camera type sim. Especially for $600-$700. I'd rather put my money in non-native glass if I want that kind of look. Adaptable to many systems, less initial expense, virtually no depreciation.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

DEFINITELY! I'd add to your wish list the idea of a
manual focus-only lens with a Leica-style focusing tab. I assume Fuji wouldn't consider such a thing since most of their current camera bodies aren't that much fun to use with MF lenses. However I'd love one for use with my X-Pro2.

In any case, I'd love a Nokton-like 27! Fuji... Put me on the waiting list. 😊

 

[jsrockit]

I'd love to see a 30mm (45mm equiv) for Fuji.

 

[kshapero]

Give me a 14 mm manual focus and I will just hyper focal for instant auto focus. Voila

 

[jsrockit]

Give me a 14 mm manual focus and I will just hyper focal for instant auto focus. Voila

Doesn't Fuji already make that? I mean its an AF lens, but with a pretty good manual focus ring.

 

[Jdi]

30/45 equivalent? The 27.

As above, the 14 is quite nice to focus manually, has the scale. I find all the collared lenses quite nice to MF with. Different than a true MF lens but nice damping and smooth enough. Actually I find them easier to MF than a lot of the MF glass I've had. Unfortunately, those lenses are also rather large.

 

[f16sunshine]

Yes, I would try it.
When I tried the 27mm I liked it but would take a larger faster lens with classic character.
The xf f1.4/35mm is my favorite because it has a bit of chaacter. Fuji lenses can be a bit too "perfect". (My opinion)

 

[SaveKodak]

The 27 as it is now SHOULD have been an f2 at least, even at the expense of some size. But yes, Fuji's lens rendering is generally pretty boring. They would do well to integrate some character in their otherwise decent line up. Then again, as your focal lengths get shorter (which they have to be on this format), you lose character first generally. That's part of why I don't like APS-C cameras. The first thing to go is the rendering.

 

[jsrockit]

30/45 equivalent? The 27.

Nah, that's a 41mm not 45mm. Seems like a little to you, but to me there's a big difference.

 

[jsrockit]

But yes, Fuji's lens rendering is generally pretty boring. They would do well to integrate some character in their otherwise decent line up.

hahaha, funny.

 

[Canyongazer]

OK, Gav, it's a deal

OK, Gav, it's a deal

Wouldn't be my choice but as long as some people like it, I'm in. Always glad to see any lenses added to the Fuji line.

Now, can you help campaign for my longed for Small-But-Not-A Pancake, optically corrected, sharp at all apertures, WR,
16mm f2.8?

Oh, and an X-E3 to stick it on, please.

🙂

 

[Jdi]

Wouldn't be my choice but as long as some people like it, I'm in. Always glad to see any lenses added to the Fuji line.

Now, can you help campaign for my longed for Small-But-Not-A Pancake, optically corrected, sharp at all apertures, WR,
16mm f2.8?

Oh, and an X-E3 to stick it on, please.

🙂

Hopefully you mean a WR X-E3. If they expand the WR primes, they have a head start on their competitors as they're few and far between. I'd love to have a small WR system. Usual primes a shorter/smaller zoom than the 18-135.

 

[emayoh]

I would like something like the original poster requested. In the meantime, I picked up a Zonlai 25mm f/1.8 manual focus lens in Fuji mount. I added a Taab focusing tab, and voila: It's one of my fave walkin' around lenses. Since it is native Fuji mount, there is no adapter, the size is perfect. The only issue is that the aftermarket Taab covers up the distance scale, but after 18 months of manual focusing with an XPro1 and XE2, I have really gotten the hang of MF with the Fuji. I really feel it comes close to what it felt like walking around with my beloved Canonet.


http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_osa...+25mm.TRS0&_nkw=zonlai+fujifilm+25mm&_sacat=0

https://www.lenstab.com/product-category/taab/

 

[nongfuspring]

Sure, I would. I don't care about the classic designation but my favorite lenses are the ones that are less "perfect". Center sharpness is important but I don't really mind light falloff, chromatic abberation, soft corners etc. Appx 40mm is my favorite FL but the 27mm 2.8 is too slow and too uninteresting for me.

 

[gavinlg]

I'm not keen on participating in the institutionalizing of software corrected lenses. Why not put the glow in software as well, ala a Toy camera type sim. Especially for $600-$700. I'd rather put my money in non-native glass if I want that kind of look. Adaptable to many systems, less initial expense, virtually no depreciation.

Well, the glow of spherical abberation can't be added in software. Lenses like the 35mm f2 prove that software correction of optical distortion doesn't really reduce IQ any practical amount - by comparison with the optically corrected 35mm f1.4. It's all a compromise - the software distortion correction just means the lens can be smaller. For what it's worth, fujifilm already has a well corrected 27mm too.

Non-native glass is fun to play around with, but manual focussing sucks with crop sensors and digital bodies.

 

[willie_901]

I'm not keen on participating in the institutionalizing of software corrected lenses. ...

Too late. That ship has sailed. Even Leica implements vignetting corrections via coded lenses. The T and SL lines also support Leica lens software corrections.

 

[jsrockit]

I just don't care... if the lens works for photography, I use it.

 

[gavinlg]

The 27 as it is now SHOULD have been an f2 at least, even at the expense of some size.

I've definitely said this a few times. It is nice to have a lens that's both super cheap and super small, but the f2.8 is just too limiting and the 40mm focal length is just too nice to not have something a bit special.

 

[Jdi]

Too late. That ship has sailed. Even Leica implements vignetting corrections via coded lenses. The T and SL lines also support Leica lens software corrections.

As well as the Q. Which is where I came to my position. If the lens can't be fully corrected, as is the case with the Q, and Leica put's it's name on it, where will we be 5, 10 years from now? My software corrected xc16-50, after correction, is hardly a 16, it crops close to 18.

Maybe I've been pixel peeping too much.