Teleconverter for the X100/X100s. 50mm Equiv.

[jsrockit]

I know some have been waiting for this:

http://www.fujirumors.com/image-of-a-new-tele-conversion-lens-for-your-x100s-50mm-equivalent/

 

[NicoM]

YES. If this is true, I'm picking one up as soon as it comes out!

 

[Richard G]

I think it's fake. And if true, too big to bother with. But this is from a guy who is using a 50 f3.5, collapsible, on a Leica II.

 

[jsrockit]

Isn't the pic from CP+? Why would it be fake?

 

[daveleo]

Depending on its size (I am guessing price at $400 and hopefully not a speed decrease), this would be more attractive to me than trading "upward" in the X-??? line.

 

[GaryLH]

Check the pic at bottom of the blog for today.. It looks like maybe somewhere between 58 and 67mm front filter size to me. It is bigger then I had imagined. It should be pretty easy to mount. Doesn't the CL bayonet mount?

Would love to c Ricoh go in this direction w/ a tele converter for a 40 like they had in the old days.

Gary

Correction. I just saw the shot taken from front of lens. It is a 67.

 

[N.delaRua]

Scroll down this page and there is another picture of it.

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20140213_635061.html

https://www.facebook.com/fujifilm.u...6867.385689698125069/805522572808444/?type=1p

Pretty big, but when you think you could have a 28/35/50 f/2.0 in a small bag, the versatility of this system is really nice.

 

[PatrickT]

I would LOVE the X100 to be a 50mm equivalent, but if the teleconverter is as big as it looks in the photos, it'll be a non-starter for me 🙁

 

[N.delaRua]

I think it has to be that big in order to keep the constant aperture since its a 1.4X converter.... usually with something like a 1.4X tele converter you lose 1.4X stops of light right?

 

[f16sunshine]

sorta pretty much a .... meh...

Never could get used to these things. This one looks like it has a ton of glass. Will likely make the x100/s unwieldy.
Get effort though. I'm sure some will make good use of it.

 

[Alberti]

this spoils the small footprint - the IQ - of the camera. It is always possible to crop or stand closer, imho.

 

[burancap]

It sure is big.

I think for the costs (based on the WCL) of the WCL and the new TCL, not to mention carrying all of it as a kit -I'd rather be halfway to an X-E1 and the 18-55 -and leave my X100 alone.

 

[N.delaRua]

I don't know.... its always been a dream to own a summicron lineup 28/35/50/75 from Leica... I like the idea of a constant f/2 range.

This is 3/4 there, still smaller (at least the body), and much less than 3/4 the price.

 

[cidereye]

You might not need a case for your X100s but you'll sure need one for lugging that TC lens around! 😛

I'd love a 50mm equiv but I'll pass on that beast.

 

[______]

I looks like it blocks the viewfinder severely. If this is only usable with EVF then I'd say: no thank you.

Does the 28mm teleconverter block the OVF?

 

[dcsang]

this spoils the small footprint - the IQ - of the camera. It is always possible to crop or stand closer, imho.

True (re cropping and standing closer) but it's not the same thing. You do lose more than just resolution by not using a teleconverter - effective/actual f-stop for example - at least that's how I understand it.

That said, I think Fuji's really done a smart thing here. You can, if you don't mind losing the "discreet nature" of the camera (which I think is a load of BS anyway - as I've said before, nowadays, the moment you raise a camera viewfinder to your eye you become indiscreet) have a 28mm and a 50mm that can be attached to the X100s which is a basic kit all for the price of less than a third of what it costs to own an M240 alone.

Granted the X100s is NOT a true rangefinder but in a pinch and for the difference in money (and probably some better high ISO quality) it'll do just fine. 🙂

Cheers,
Dave

 

[OurManInTangier]

True (re cropping and standing closer) but it's not the same thing. You do lose more than just resolution by not using a teleconverter - effective/actual f-stop for example - at least that's how I understand it.

That said, I think Fuji's really done a smart thing here. You can, if you don't mind losing the "discreet nature" of the camera (which I think is a load of BS anyway - as I've said before, nowadays, the moment you raise a camera viewfinder to your eye you become indiscreet) have a 28mm and a 50mm that can be attached to the X100s which is a basic kit all for the price of less than a third of what it costs to own an M240 alone.

Granted the X100s is NOT a true rangefinder but in a pinch and for the difference in money (and probably some better high ISO quality) it'll do just fine. 🙂

Cheers,
Dave

Apologies for going OT a little but I couldn't help but agree 100% with that thought. You almost stand out nowadays if you aren't photographing something, but raise it to your eye and you're suddenly a curiosity.

As for the X100s tele converter, I think they're a great idea - a superb travel kit of 28, 35 and now 50 in a relatively tiny package. I am surprised at quite how 'large' the 50 looks but even so, I'm sure it will appeal to many.

 

[MiniMoke]

The converters are quite large, true, I had the 28!

But tremendous quality, or rather no loss of quality.

And the X100 handles quite well even with the converter attached. Feels very good and stable in hand.

 

[jsrockit]

I agree...these are high quality converters.

 

[drewbarb]

Am I the only one here who is truly excited by this? I shoot with 35 and 50mm f2 lenses for about 90% of my 35mm work anyway, so the idea of getting my two most used lenses with an x100s is pretty interesting, even with the minor drawbacks of it's size and the VF issue.