zapatista
Veteran
- Location
- Denver, Colorado
- Name
- Mike
I'd love to have a long telephoto (600mm+ eq.) zoom or prime. That would make it impossible to leave Fuji.Absolutey, 100% agree. You want expensive? Go price a Canon 800mm telephoto.
I'd love to have a long telephoto (600mm+ eq.) zoom or prime. That would make it impossible to leave Fuji.Absolutey, 100% agree. You want expensive? Go price a Canon 800mm telephoto.
I don't think the OP is suggesting that the only difference between the current fine lens offerings from Fuji and an entry level lens should be price alone. I think the OP may be suggesting that Fuji release one or two lenses at a lower price point and the lenses should have corresponding levels of build and optical quality. The idea being to allow for easier access to the Fuji system and hope for future purchases by the entrant. It's a strategy that has worked well for Nikon and Canon. I don't think Fuji is ready to compete in that market. It's quite crowded.
I'm considering moving to the Fuji system from Leica and as far as I can tell, Fuji is offering the best performance to cost value (and that's before considering the current rebates).
As an aside, unlike most Leica users I am not well off. Until recently (i.e. Fuji) Leica were the only game in town for the control layout I prefer and good implementation of manual focusing.
In a way they do ofer an entry level price lens I got the 35 for just a couple hundred bucks in a kit.
Can you please post your links to where you have read that the 18-55 f2.8-4 kit lens isn't "any better than other brand kit lenses?" Every review I have read which commented on the 18-55 f2.8-4 has marveled at how much better it is than other brand kit lenses.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.
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.