Fuji Are fuji lenses overpriced?

[faberryman]

(also I hate that the inner lens barrel protrudes far out with macro focusing)

This is normal for all macro lenses. Same reason a normal lens requires extension tubes or a bellows for macro work.

 

[Mikey]

This is normal for all macro lenses. Same reason a normal lens requires extension tubes or a bellows for macro work.

Really? My wife's Canon 100/2.8 didn't and neither did my Olympus 60/2.8 or 45/2.8.

 

[Lightmancer]

You need a long-throw focusing helix to get down to macro. Some manufacturers do it internally but it tends to make the lens bigger at all focal lengths.

 

[faberryman]

Really? My wife's Canon 100/2.8 didn't and neither did my Olympus 60/2.8 or 45/2.8.

They are permanently racked out, i.e. longer than their non-macro counterparts for the same focal length and aperture.

 

[ketsang]

I'm new both to the X system and this forum, and have read this thread with interest. Like most people, I like both high quality and a low price, and can understand why it's hard to get both. In general, Fujifilm lens pricing strike me as reasonable, and having just started to shoot with the 18-55 think it's more than fair value for a kit lens.

However, there's one aspect to this discussion which I don't think has been mentioned, namely the price of the 60mm macro. I'm sure it's great optically, but with a widest aperture of f2.4, no image stabilisation, and most importantly a maximum reproduction ratio of 1:2, it doesn't spec up well for a non-discounted price of $US650. I like shooting macro, and by comparison the Tamron 60mm that I use with my Nikon APS-C camera goes to f2 and reproduces at 1:1. It's a terrific piece of glass, my favourite lens by far, and it cost me about $US400 new a few years ago. The new 90mm Tamron, which is also full-frame compatible and throws in IS and that I don't have but is supposed to be equally good, can be bought at the moment here in Australia with a local guarantee for the equivalent of $US460.

Points in the Fuji macro's defence are that it's more solidly constructed and much lighter. Even so, the optics is the critical thing, and the relative unattractiveness of Fuji's macro offering deterred me from buying into their system for a full year. It was only the availability of the $US400 discount price that persuaded me to jump in (I have the lens on order from Amazon), but even with the discount the price seems no better than OK to me. It's another subject, I know, but I wish Fuji would have a 90 or 100mm stabilised 1:1 macro on their roadmap.

Don't think that is a fair comparison. 3rd party lenses like tamron and sigma are always cheaper anyway. The difference is much less when you compare to native nikon or canon lenses.