Fuji Are fuji lenses overpriced?

Is it just me or does it seem like most of the Fuji X lenses are overly expensive? In most systems there are a few entry level lenses for $200 or less but in the X-lens lineup the cheapest lenses are $400. I know there are some current rebates going on but I am talking MSRP. A few of the higher spec lenses seem to be on par price-wise with other brands. But there are no bargains anywhere in the line{special rebates not included}. It seems to me that Fuji would be better off if they had at least a couple of bargains to entice more people in. This is especially important since this is a new system with few lenses to choose from{although growing at a good pace}.
 
I actually think they are an incredible value. The optical quality is on par (or even exceeds in some cases) the pro grade lenses from Canon and Nikon that generally cost about 50% more.
 
The current USA lens specials are actually underpriced (but of course very attractive from a user standpoint).
Fuji USA is pretty much losing money here, who knows what's riding them.
 
I'd rather they kept standards up. They already do a cheap zoom with the X-A1 and X-M1. Otherwise, I agree - in terms of performance they are indeed incredible value.

Sent from another Galaxy
 
I guess it is just me then. I do agree that skimping isn't good but the two kit lenses are twice as expensive{or more} than other brands. From all I have read on these lenses they are not much better if any than other brand kit lenses. Those two plus the 27mm f2.8 should be around $200 IMHO.

Several other lenses are just a little higher than I think they should be and the rest are on par with other brands. The one lens that does appear to be a good bargain is the new 56mm f1.2. I didn't notice the max aperture at first but since it is an f1.2 it would be comparable to the Canon 85mm f1.2 on FF or the Panasonic 42.5mm f1.2 on m4/3. Both of these lenses are more expensive{$600 more for the Panasonic and $1000 more for the Canon}. That makes that lens a bargain for portrait shooters.
 
Last time I checked the 27mm cost 199 dollars. The 18-55mm kit lens is available for about 400 dollars more than the body alone, which sounds perfectly okay for a lens of this quality. If you don't see or want or need that level of quality, it's of course sensible to save your money and look elsewhere. Sony (for example) has cheaper zooms with lower resolution and higher distortion, but the specs are very similar on paper.
 
The 18-55mm kit lens is widely regarded as better than nearly all other kit lenses. If you were to buy an x-e1 with a kit lens the lens only costs ~$200 which is a phenomenal deal.
 
Do you want cheap(er) lenses? The current line does not include many entry level lenses. That's not to say what is available is overpriced. I think Fuji is doing a great job with its lens line. The price, is fine with me. I don't want to see a Sony approach where very few of their lenses can support the resolution their bodies are capable of.
 
Money is made on lenses I will pay more for the lens as long as they keep firmware on older camera coming. When my camera is obsolete the lens isn't attractive anymore.
 
Money is made on lenses I will pay more for the lens as long as they keep firmware on older camera coming. When my camera is obsolete the lens isn't attractive anymore.

Some really nice glass was made by Olympus for their 4/3 cameras.. SHG (Super High Grade).. and it's a shame that the camera bodies didn't keep up.
 
Fuji glass is definitely underpriced. It's also important to consider the scale of things here. None of the mirrorless systems "really" have super affordable glass like Canon or Nikon's nifty 50s, but Fuji's optics are all standout. Every single one of them. Canikon also produce wayyyyy more lenses than Fuji does and are able to scale prices appropriately, whereas Fuji took an important high-end first approach.

To me it boils down to this: every one of Fuji's optics is worth its price tag. Fuji's stuff may be relatively expensive and have relatively few affordable options, but that doesn't make it overpriced, in the same way a quality burger isn't overpriced compared to a bigmac.
 
OK so maybe "overpriced" is the wrong word or the wrong way to look at it. However I still think Fuji needs at least one or two budget, entry level lenses. If they make the sale price of $199 for the 27mm the new MSRP then they would have one. I would suggest that the two kit lenses also be cheaper even if it was only by $100 each.

I can't be the only enthusiast who is on a tight budget. I really like what Fuji is doing, they are very innovative right now. They have great sensors and well designed bodies. But the system is out of the reach of many. They are doing better with entry level bodies - X-M1, X-A1 and to a lesser extent the X-M1. Why not do similar with the lenses?
 
It's all a matter of perspective. From a consumer lens point of view, they appear to be expensive. Given their superb optical quality, coming from the view of someone who has bought a lot of big Canon pro L glass, I think they are an incredible value. My Canon 500/4 L IS was $5400, and a 20 year old Canon 300/2.8 L non-IS was $2200! $899 for the fab Fuji Fourteen seems like a bargain to me.
 
I guess it is just me then. I do agree that skimping isn't good but the two kit lenses are twice as expensive{or more} than other brands. From all I have read on these lenses they are not much better if any than other brand kit lenses. Those two plus the 27mm f2.8 should be around $200 IMHO.

Several other lenses are just a little higher than I think they should be and the rest are on par with other brands. The one lens that does appear to be a good bargain is the new 56mm f1.2. I didn't notice the max aperture at first but since it is an f1.2 it would be comparable to the Canon 85mm f1.2 on FF or the Panasonic 42.5mm f1.2 on m4/3. Both of these lenses are more expensive{$600 more for the Panasonic and $1000 more for the Canon}. That makes that lens a bargain for portrait shooters.

The 18-55 "kit lens" is, IMHO, very affordable, and is superior to many standard zooms I've shot with, including the Canon 20-70 or 17-40. That makes it seem like a bargain to me.

Also, having shot with a lot of superior optics in my time, I can assure you there is no way to make a superior optic "inexpensively". Making superior optics is expensive; IMO, the optical quality you get from Fujis compared to Nikon or Canon optics makes them an incredible value for money.
 
Fuji glass is definitely underpriced. It's also important to consider the scale of things here. None of the mirrorless systems "really" have super affordable glass like Canon or Nikon's nifty 50s, but Fuji's optics are all standout. Every single one of them. Canikon also produce wayyyyy more lenses than Fuji does and are able to scale prices appropriately, whereas Fuji took an important high-end first approach.

To me it boils down to this: every one of Fuji's optics is worth its price tag. Fuji's stuff may be relatively expensive and have relatively few affordable options, but that doesn't make it overpriced, in the same way a quality burger isn't overpriced compared to a bigmac.

Absolutey, 100% agree. You want expensive? Go price a Canon 800mm telephoto.
 
OK so maybe "overpriced" is the wrong word or the wrong way to look at it. However I still think Fuji needs at least one or two budget, entry level lenses. If they make the sale price of $199 for the 27mm the new MSRP then they would have one. I would suggest that the two kit lenses also be cheaper even if it was only by $100 each.

I can't be the only enthusiast who is on a tight budget. I really like what Fuji is doing, they are very innovative right now. They have great sensors and well designed bodies. But the system is out of the reach of many. They are doing better with entry level bodies - X-M1, X-A1 and to a lesser extent the X-M1. Why not do similar with the lenses?

No Im on a budget too so I feel your frustration. I compare fuji to leica and I feel better. Is it on par with leica maybe not but neither is price. By the way I can look at thousand of pictures on the computer can't tell difference between leica and fuji lens. As far as build quality time will tell. But price wish fuji is doing it right. Bodies and kits are inexpensive so I can get in cheap just have to save for more glass. And its not costing me a paycheck to buy a lens. Do I wish they costs less hell yes! but are they out of reach no. even a used leica is out of reach for me.
 
Back
Top