Fujinon 18-55 T2.9 & 50-135 T2.9

This is interesting news indeed.

Many things to like about these new Fujinons. The macro is a big deal for me. It facilitates a rack-focus "cheat" in that you can rack out of focus using the macro and perform a rack back into focus that always hits the mark perfectly since you just rack until the macro clicks back into position. My only quibble with these new Fujinons is that they focus past infinity. And of course it would have been nice were it a single lens, 18-135mm.

"Why are the focus marks on the same side of the lens both ends of the ring?
I hope this is a proto mistake and they will move the fronts to the other side..."

I'm not following what the complaint is here. "move the fronts to the other side"??

Are you talking about the meters markings being closer to the front than the feet markings?

What I want to know is whether a servo motor will be available for this lens. Likely not since the new 18-55mm is absent the mounting holes on the Cabrio 19-90 as seen in the images below:

SL9C0318.jpg

MKLens_Rightside2_50-135-FDTimes-850x567.jpg


What is meant by "a GC lens"?

_____________

So, as an informal poll...

You have $4000 to spend on a zoom. Out of the Sony 18-110mm servo and the Zeiss 18-55mm, which would you rather have?

I'll hold off on my answer so as not to poison the jury pool.
 
Regarding your poll...
If I didn't already have any lenses
And I had a Sony FS (700,5,7,7mk2) videocamera
And I did the variety of work I do...
Then I would get the Sony 18-110.

But that choice is going to vary depending on what a person does and what gear they already have
 
I'd get the sony but only after physically testing it as the varied descriptions - and my desire to throw most sony lenses into the sea.
 
JPNola said:
This is interesting news indeed.

Many things to like about these new Fujinons. The macro is a big deal for me. It facilitates a rack-focus "cheat" in that you can rack out of focus using the macro and perform a rack back into focus that always hits the mark perfectly since you just rack until the macro clicks back into position. My only quibble with these new Fujinons is that they focus past infinity. And of course it would have been nice were it a single lens, 18-135mm.

"Why are the focus marks on the same side of the lens both ends of the ring?
I hope this is a proto mistake and they will move the fronts to the other side..."

I'm not following what the complaint is here. "move the fronts to the other side"??

Are you talking about the meters markings being closer to the front than the feet markings?

What I want to know is whether a servo motor will be available for this lens. Likely not since the new 18-55mm is absent the mounting holes on the Cabrio 19-90 as seen in the images below:

View attachment 121338

View attachment 121339


What is meant by "a GC lens"?

_____________

So, as an informal poll...

You have $4000 to spend on a zoom. Out of the Sony 18-110mm servo and the Zeiss 18-55mm, which would you rather have?

I'll hold off on my answer so as not to poison the jury pool.
Click to expand...
Yes my bad. I did not notice that one set was meters and the other one feet. That is odd. Usually one set is on the operator side (closer to the back ) and the front set is on the dumb side. Either feet or meters not both. That may be confusing. I know they want to make "one lens fits all". Not cool IMO...
 
bill totolo said:
I'm not. Don't mean to be cryptic. PM me and I'll discuss.
LA is a small town and can be a closed circuit at times. No reason to offend those who worked hard to bring a product to market.
Click to expand...

Well, I can't say that I've ever heard of LA described
this way before.....I mean I know I'm at the opposite
end of the spectrum and all but still.....'small town?' 
(I'm actually down here for 10 days and I'm gonna
say, it seems fairly decent sized to me. Oh yeah, one
more thing. That little rainstorm everyone was freaking
out about? My kids play softball in worse weather than
that!) ��
Jokes aside, I understand the sentiment of what you
are trying to say here.
 
Last edited:
Lensrentals already posted their first impressions, including some nice MTF tests, here. For comparison, a bunch of stills 24-70 f/2.8 lenses, all of them seemingly softer than this new cine lens, here.
 
This new lens seems to be a really cool development. I've always liked Fuji lenses, I had several B4 mount Fujis back in the days of Betacam and DigiBeta. The price is appealing, the images looks great. But do this many of you really shoot narrative or episodic with an AC or two? The few times I rent cinema lenses, I always have an AC with FF or motors, trying to pull focus with cinema lenses for doc/EPK handheld/BTS work makes them less practical for me unless it is sit down interviews. That was what I liked about the Canon CNe 18-80, the DPAF still worked, which made it practical for how I usually shoot. Cinema lenses are generally little compromise, mechanical works of art, but not practical for how many of us shoot because of the focus barrel rotation. Out of curiosity, how many of you have shot handheld, without an AC, with a cinema lens and enjoyed it?
 
JPNola said:
... What is meant by "a GC lens"?
Click to expand...

"Game Changer" (we don't say it out loud because we're above cliches).

PS. And, yes, IMO, this lens will be a go-to lens for a lot of the low-mid-budget narratives. For run&gun, as puredrifting said above, the DPAF Canon cameras and the various EF lenses would probably still be the preferred choice.

Until the new models come out. In two month time.
 
puredrifting said:
Cinema lenses are generally little compromise, mechanical works of art, but not practical for how many of us shoot because of the focus barrel rotation.
Click to expand...

Agree. But apparently Fujinon kinda compromised with a barrel rotation around 200 degrees, significantly less than many cinema lenses but more than most still glass. Maybe doable on your own?
 
Thank you Fujinon for stepping up to the plate and making these Cine Zooms! Are they perfect? Nope but nothing is however we haven't had this option before and it's about time we do!. These are going to sell very well and hopefully others will follow. So dang cool!!! I expect to see a lot of these on a ton of rigs at NAB this year. FS7/FS5 and all the a7 cams.
 
T2.9 is OK for the price. But I wonder - what about adapters for other formats + speedboosters? There's no electronics, so nothing lost there.
 
OldCorpse said:
T2.9 is OK for the price. But I wonder - what about adapters for other formats + speedboosters? There's no electronics, so nothing lost there.
Click to expand...

Even though it does have a back focus adjustment, I'm thinking 'no' to adapters to other formats since E mount has such a super shallow flange depth, which makes cameras with it able to accept almost any other formats lens.
 
The new locking e-mount on the Fs7 MkII may well be more of more significance than any of us realize. It possibly has taken the e-mount to another level and made the e-mount more viably a professional mount. It isn't unfathomable to think that before long we could see Red cameras and ARRI cameras with an e-mount. PL-mount, for all its provenance and "serious" camera status, is starting to seem a bit "old school". e-mount just opens up so many options for both lens makers and lens users. It was savvy of Fujinon to engineer lenses that take advantage of the e-mounts unique characteristics. Neither PL or EF facilitate any advantages in lens design. Both are passive players. Whereas e-mount is inspiring lens design and making what was once impossible ( or at least outrageously expensive ) now possible ( or at least far more affordable ).

Needless to say, I am a convert to e-mount. And I never thought I would say that.
 
At this point in time the DPAF technology of Canon is better than my focus pulling skills in many situations. By 2020 the DPAF (Dual Pixel AF of Canon) as well as autofocus of other manufacturers will be much more advanced. Focus puller jobs will be redundant due to this technology and cost combination, except for the extreme top end which is beyond 99.9% of the members of this site. Interestingly in this forum if you check the cinema EOS section, there is a discussion about 1DC and some users are complaining that it doesn't AF in the c-log mode. And same or similar users talk about fully manual focus cinema lens. :)

I have faced certain situations while shooting documentaries, where the people just get overawed by the big lenses. A large cinema zoom and focus puller would simply result in an uncomfortable subject and ruin the show. If you are shooting narratives with focus pullers day in and day out, then that is a different story.

With so many companies launching "cinema" badged lenses, I am sure many of these lenses will not get popular. If I tell a client that I am shooting with so and so cinema lens and that doesn't get a favourable response then what is the point? Since lenses will remain with you for a long time, it is very important to choose and buy a cinema lens. It may not be prudent to buy a lens which is fully manual and costs an amount which can't be recovered in a few months.
 
indiawilds said:
At this point in time the DPAF technology of Canon is better than my focus pulling skills in many situations. By 2020 the DPAF (Dual Pixel AF of Canon) as well as autofocus of other manufacturers will be much more advanced. Focus puller jobs will be redundant due to this technology and cost combination, except for the extreme top end which is beyond 99.9% of the members of this site. Interestingly in this forum if you check the cinema EOS section, there is a discussion about 1DC and some users are complaining that it doesn't AF in the c-log mode. And same or similar users talk about fully manual focus cinema lens. :)

I have faced certain situations while shooting documentaries, where the people just get overawed by the big lenses. A large cinema zoom and focus puller would simply result in an uncomfortable subject and ruin the show. If you are shooting narratives with focus pullers day in and day out, then that is a different story.

With so many companies launching "cinema" badged lenses, I am sure many of these lenses will not get popular. If I tell a client that I am shooting with so and so cinema lens and that doesn't get a favourable response then what is the point? Since lenses will remain with you for a long time, it is very important to choose and buy a cinema lens. It may not be prudent to buy a lens which is fully manual and costs an amount which can't be recovered in a few months.
Click to expand...


DPAF addresses a problem I don't have. Or at least one that I rarely encounter. Whereas electronic ND addresses an issue I frequently encounter.

The thing about DPAF that I find to be an issue not easily solved is the speed of focusing. In the examples of the technology that I have seen, the focusing is often abrupt. And it is linear in speed. It doesn't ease into focus. It more slams into focus. There is no art to it. That's the thing about manual focusing that is often overlooked- it isn't just the focus-finding but the variable speeds in focus finding. And the intentional soft focus moments / racks out of focus that are an artistic tool.

How is DPAF of use when you want the focus to shift from a farther away point such as the door of a room to a closer focus point such as car keys on a table AND you want that focus shift to take place when a person entering the room says the word "keys"? Or a situation where you have a frame that is composed of several individuals who are talking among each other and you want to selectively focus on different individuals in the group, some near...some further away, and have the focus shift from individual to individual at the camera operator's discretion, in a manner that is an artistic statement or storytelling device? ( Jim is in focus as he is speaking and when Jim mention's Mary's ex-husband the focus shifts to Mary who is listening in the background. Her displeased expression on her face is revealed and then the focus shifts back to Jim again who is oblivious to Mary's displeasure with him. )

Is it possible with DPAF to cue the AF to shift at the operator's command and do so in a non-linear speed that is also under the operator's control?


"I have faced certain situations while shooting documentaries, where the people just get overawed by the big lenses. A large cinema zoom and focus puller would simply result in an uncomfortable subject and ruin the show. "

Well, these new Fuji MK zooms aren't much bigger than a Canon 70-200mm, a zoom lens frequently used by documentarians.

"If I tell a client that I am shooting with so and so cinema lens and that doesn't get a favourable response then what is the point? Since lenses will remain with you for a long time, it is very important to choose and buy a cinema lens. It may not be prudent to buy a lens which is fully manual and costs an amount which can't be recovered in a few months."

I'm going to let someone else have at that one. Gentleman? Any takers? Anyone want to explain why precision manual focus / manual iris glass is of use even if no client is impressed knowing you possess it and will be using it?
 
Most modern AF systems allow for the speed adjustment - you can slam or crawl as your wont.

Overall, the non-DPAF designs like Panasonic's DFD and Sony's 4D will be getting closer and closer to DPAF in performance. Simultaneously, the variable electronic ND filters - either OEM or aftermarket - will also be more and more present.

And various focus pulling tools are going to be available for the fully manual lenses like this, Samyang/Rokinon/Xeen, Zeiss, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top