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

"Protection:"

Nikon, for example, always had a 300/4 for $1000 and a 300/2.8 for $4000 and one, as a buyer, had to sit down and make the choice. Those shooting night sport or rock venues knew that that the extra stop would pay back, other shooters knew thet the low mass F4 was something they could get along with especialy as it was less of a bum to schlep about.

The journey from base 100 ISO to base 1000 ISO made that choice set often fall in the other side of a line. Many Photojournalists use the 70-200 F4 now or the 200-400/4 versus the more traditional 400 2.8

The 300/4 was never not made to protect the 2.8 version. Because if nikon didnt someone else would.
Same with 85/2 v 85 1.5 and many other lenses - not to mention the canon 70-200 in 4 and 2.8 with a huge price/mass hike
 
Last edited:
Hey has anyone that's pre-ordered in Australia received theirs yet or have any more info on arrival dates?
Best I've got is 'mid-march'... *looks anxiously at calendar*
 
I was at the Abel Cine NY C200 demo today. Canon had their 18-80 cinema zoom mounted on the C200 and there was a FS7 with the Fujinon 18-55 mounted on it. I had an opportunity to play with both cameras and lenses. I was very impressed with the Fujinon 18-55. The zoom and focus felt much smoother than the Canon 18-80. Not only is the Fujinon less costly than the Canon, but it feels to be a more refined cinema type lens. If the 50-135 is anything like the 18-55, Fujinon has a dynamite combo. If only Fujinon would offer the lenses in a Canon EF and/or MFT mount they would double or triple the sale of these lenses. I would buy.
 
They could, but then they wouldn't be able to offer it at that price point. I think they really made a great piece of work here, can't wait to pick up the 18-55 later today, and the 50-135 later in august.
The thing is, if it was going on an EF mount, you'd have to make the lens bigger, meaning more materials, hence more expensive and probably a lot heavier.
From what I heard so far, you can run & gun with the 18-55 all day long due to its light weight.

Check out the post in the Sony forum... apparently MFT services are now offering conversions from E to MFT or FZ mounts.
 
Last edited:
legrevedotcom said:
The thing is, if it was going on an EF mount, you'd have to make the lens bigger, meaning more materials, hence more expensive and probably a lot heavier..
Click to expand...

Are you certain about that? Because Duclos has come up with a FZ-mount mod that does not make the MK larger in size, or heavier, or in need of more materials other than the materials constituting the mount adaptation:

https://www.ducloslenses.com/products/sony-fz-mount-kit-for-fujinon-mk-zooms

Maybe adaptation to FZ is one thing while adaptation to EF and PL is much more complicated if not impossible, otherwise someone would surely be doing it why now.
 
They fit the S35 sensor, taking it away from some of the larger sensors like the C-series, Dslr and bigger Red cameras.
 
Last edited:
Having said this though... I wonder if there was a way to do the EF mount anyways, seeing how the 4k on fx. the 5D4 is slightly smaller than S35. Wouldn't that mean one could potentially use the lenses for that mode :D
 
Last edited:
The problem is the EF mount sits farther away from the sensor than the Sony E, MFT or FZ mounts. These lenses would have to sit deep inside the EF mount to be the proper distance to the sensor.
 
Mitch Gross said:
The problem is the EF mount sits farther away from the sensor than the Sony E, MFT or FZ mounts. These lenses would have to sit deep inside the EF mount to be the proper distance to the sensor.
Click to expand...

Could an adapter with a focusing lens make them usable on EF? Seems that an adapter with a lens could re-project the image to a sensor at any distance. Obviously it doesn't work like that, or isn't that simple because someone would have done it by now.

I finally found the solution to the lack of a relatively inexpensive s35 servo zoom with a satisfactory wide-to-telephoto focal length range- go back to 2/3". :happy:

It's a buyer's market for B4 servo zooms right now.
 
JPNola said:
Could an adapter with a focusing lens make them usable on EF? Seems that an adapter with a lens could re-project the image to a sensor at any distance. Obviously it doesn't work like that, or isn't that simple because someone would have done it by now.

I finally found the solution to the lack of a relatively inexpensive s35 servo zoom with a satisfactory wide-to-telephoto focal length range- go back to 2/3". :happy:

It's a buyer's market for B4 servo zooms right now.
Click to expand...

Well, that's basically what the IBE/Abel HDx35 does with our 2/3" lenses to allow them to work on s35 cams. Besides the mechanical mount adapter, it has the optics to blow-up and correct the image for the s35 sensor. BUT there is image degradation, so it's probably been deemed "not worth it" to create a mechanical/optical adapter to use the Fuji's on cameras that would need optical help, so to speak.

And yes, it is a fantastic time to buy 2/3" HD glass. I keep getting tempted... I've had my eye on a SWEET long ENG lens. I know the seller. $30K+ lens for ~1/3 of the new cost. Insane. And they're all like that unless it's someone like Adorama or another retailer selling on eBay. Almost all of the private sellers are almost giving them away.
 
Im not sure that 2/3 adapters actually change flange focal distance, they just spread the image circle. Not being an optics wonk I don't know if refocussing is more complex than spreading..
 
morgan_moore said:
Im not sure that 2/3 adapters actually change flange focal distance, they just spread the image circle. Not being an optics wonk I don't know if refocussing is more complex than spreading..
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to get too technical, just trying to make the point that I'm sure it can be done, it's just whether it's actually worth it to do it or not. And I'm guessing it's probably not.
 
What you're asking for is called ariel projection, like in a borescope, and yeah, it is seriously not worth it here for what would have to be done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top