Fujifilm XF 2X Teleconverter Announced

/

Well isn’t this fortunate. Fuji has officially announced their XF 2X Teleconverter.

From Fuji:

The “FUJINON TELECONVERTER XF2X TC WR” is a high-performance teleconverter capable of multiplying the focal length of mounted lenses by two.

This gives the XF 50-140mm f/2.8 and effective focal length of 100-280mm f/5.6, or 152 to 427mm in 35mm equivalence, and the XF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 reaches all the way out to 200-800mm f/9-11, which is 305 to 1,219mm in 35mm.

That quite a bit of a slow down in aperture, but over 1,200mm of reach is going to be tough to resist.

No Phase Detection

Also worth noting, we lose Phase Detection on the XF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 altogether with the XF 2X TC attached thanks to the reduction in aperture. That could pose a bit of a problem for things like early morning game park drives or bird photography outings when higher ISOs are already common. It will be interesting to see how this lens performs with the TCs attached.

Size and Weight

That extra reach also means extra size and weight with the new 2x weighing in at 170g, or 40g more than the 1.4x and measures twice as long at 30.2mm. I’ll be getting close to maxing out the height of my bag already, so be mindful of your max carry size before you place any preorders.

Edit: Jonas Rask already has one of his typically epic reviews up for the XF2X TC. Man, that guy is on fire these days.

Disassembling a Fuji XF Lens

/

Fascinating post at Lensrentals.com:

The overall construction is excellent. There was no place during this disassembly that either of us thought we saw a weak point that would be likely to cause problems. It’s not massively over engineered, but it’s very solidly constructed. [...] This looks like a lens that was designed by people who know how to make reliable lenses.

Lens Got Flare

/

When I write about flare, it’s typically not with a negative connotation, unless the lens in question comes with coatings intended to reduce it. Flare is part of what gives a lens its character, and can play a huge role in its desirability.

Charlene Winfred has a great piece on how much she likes the flare from Fuji’s new XF 35mm f/2 WR:

... I’ve never had a lens that flares as downright cinematically as this one. Those distinct diagonals and ghosting that appear when it is pointed at strong, directional light sources are simply gorgeous.

It’s helps to possess the photographic talent Charlene does, but I’ve enjoyed shooting my XF 35mm f/2 WR directly into light myself. She’s got plenty more great sample images on her site.

Flare example from the XF 35mm f/2 WR, courtesy of Charlene Winfred

Flare example from the XF 35mm f/2 WR, courtesy of Charlene Winfred

35mm Reviews

/

Lots has been written about the new XF 35mm f/2 WR, but a few reviews have risen to the top for me.

  1. First is Jonas Rask’s. His reviews are always chalk full of excellent sample images, and drool-worthy gear shots. If you’re on the fence with the XF 35mm f/2 WR, his review will likely shove you violently over to the purchase side.
  2. Second is Kevin Mullins, the guy I attempted to emulate at a family wedding I shot last June. If you’re looking for insight from someone in a professional space, look no further.
  3. As it happens, Mullins suggests my latest inspiration candidate, Patrick La Roque, for further reading on the XF 35mm f/2 WR.

35mm (and where I’ve been)

/

XF 35mm f/1.4 vs. XF 35mm f/2 WR

After weeks of testing, my extensive comparison of Fuji’s 35mm primes is now online. See how well the new normal compares against the old normal.

Where I’ve Been

As a bit of an aside, regular visitors have likely noticed a serious lull in content and updates. Looking at my last post that happened in August, I can hardly believe it’s been that long myself. What happened? A combination of things.

First of all, I found new employment approximately 5 months ago. It’s been a big transition from my previous freelance gig, and the ups and downs of a new job on top a huge multi-month project, had all but squelched my capacity for creative photography, let alone photographic analysis. Fortunately, things have settled down considerably.

Secondly, I decided early last year to take control of my physical wellbeing. This started out with the standard physical fitness, but quickly morphed into an obsession with restoring mobility and range of motion I’d lost from 15+ years of sitting for 8-15 hours a day. It’s been hard work, and took up almost all my free time, but it was well worth it.1

Anyhow, it was always an internal struggle for me. I felt bad neglecting the site outside of replying to those who emailed or tweeted, but it was the right thing to focus on.

TL;DR

I’ve been busy with work and life, but plan to get content on the site more regularly now. It’s good to be back.

  1. Physical health is hardly a topic for this website, but if you’re at all interested in restoring your own capacity for movement and how good movement can apply to photography, I recommend Kelly Starrett’s CreativeLive Class. Simply being able to squat properly behind my camera (ass to ankles, heels on the ground, toes pointed forward) has increased my enjoyment of photography, and saved me from putting more bad loads on my knees. If you can relate to that last part, you owe it to your lower extremities to restore full range of motion in your hips and ankles.↩

The Wide Angle Primes

/

Work on my comparison between Fuji’s 3 widest angle primes, the XF 14mm f/2.8, the XF 16mm f/1.4, and the XF 18mm f/2 is almost complete. If you’re interested to see how Fuji’s newest weather sealed wide angle compares to their other wide fixed focal length offerings in sharpness, bokeh, handling, and more, this page is for you.

XF 14mm f/2.8 vs. XF 16mm f/1.4 WR vs. XF 18mm f/2

XF 90mm f/2 Review by Jonas Rask

/

Reviews of the forthcoming XF 90mm f/2 → are few and far between right now. Fuji clearly hasn’t made as many pre-production units of this pro-focused lens as they did the consumer-focused X-T10. Jonas Rask has the best write-up I’ve seen to date.

... and it has a 62mm filter size just like the XF56mm f/1.2 (and the XF23mm f/1.4). By placing the 56mm and 90mm side by side it’s quite apparent that they are the same width, and and what differs is only the length of the lens.

This is a really smart move by Fujifilm. Three extraordinary, fast lenses covering a wide range of focal lengths, one set of filters. If only they were able to keep the XF 16mm f/1.4 at the same filter thread.

Compare it to an equally spec’ed full frame or even APS-C lens, the XF 90mm will still be one of the smaller options to carry around.

Jonas is right, it is one of the smaller options, but as Jonas alluded, it will depend a great deal on how you arrive at 135mm, and which of the other big guys you compare against. Here’s how things stack up against full frame Canon and Nikon lenses.

Fuji 90mm vs. DSLR 135mm, lens only

Canon actually has a really small and lightweight option at this focal length. I can’t speak to its quality, however. When it comes to Nikon, the DC-Nikkor 135mm is conspicuously absent from the US site, but is still available on nikon.ca. At f/2 on full frame, it will deliver a stop’s worth of shallower depth of field, but it will cost you in weight. Those figures do not account for body weight.

Things change when APS-C is included for either Canon or Nikon, depending on how exact we’re being with our focal lengths. 90mm is really closer to a 137mm equivalent, whereas a full frame 85mm will get to pretty close at around 129mm on Nikon’s version of APS-C (1.52x multiplier) and real close with Canon’s (1.6x mulitplier). That means you can get a lens that’s close to 135mm with an f/1.8 lens from either company for less weight than Fuji’s 90mm f/2, but what it doesn’t account for is body weight.

Fuji @ 137mm vs. APS-C DSLR kit

So going mirrorless gets you a reduction in weight, albeit a smaller one.

Finally, in an effort to be a completionist, let’s compare a Fuji X-T1 kit, with the closest we can get from Olympus, the OM-D E-M1 and M.Zuiko 75mm f/1.8 lens.

Fuji @ 137mm vs. Olympus @ 150mm

Sadly there doesn’t seem to be a 135mm equivalent in the M/43 world, Still, if you want the lightest way to 135mm and beyond, Olympus is the way to go, if you ignore the whole f/1.8 on a Micro Four Thirds thing.

I had intended this to be a quick piece pointing you to a great review, so I’ll leave you with a final word from Jonas before you checkout the rest of his review:

OH MY DEAR LORD! THE IMAGE QUALITY OF THIS LENS!

I get the feeling he likes it.