Fuji Why did Fuji decide not to equip us with IS in 56mm f/1.2 lens?

mesmerized

Regular
Howdy,

I'm absolutely new to the Fuji world and one of the things that makes me wonder is why Fuji didn't implement the IS in the 56mm f/1.2 lens?

How do you deal with handheld pictures taken in low-light conditions?

Thanks,

Cheers
 
as far as fuji.. because they're just that - fast, which is great for low-light. and if you absolutely need to, you can up the iso which fuji can do quite well, up to 3200-6400 (depending). also, i think that would make the primes pretty large for their already small bodies.

are you still getting shaky pictures wide open with that lens? that thing is a joy to use at night.


(Sent from another Galaxy via Tapatalk.)
 
It might have more to do with cost/size and the fact that they're already fast enough rather than technical feasibility.
In low-light I slightly prefer something optically stabilised plus shorter focal lengths so it'd be the 1855 @ 18 or 23mm wide open over the 35mm/f1.4 or the 56mm any night of the week; I just get more keepers that way.
 
there are the 18 f2 and the 23 f1,4 primes.

Thanks Romi, but even though 23(35) mm is my alltime favorite FL I'm still hesitating to get the 23mm/f1.4. I'm not much of a lowlight shooter anyway and would prefer a compact pancake over f1.4. I might as well pick up a X100 or 100s but then I'm already stuffed to the brim, more than happy with my all-purpose 1855 quatro-Fujinon and finally need to have an eye on those hand luggage weight limits (and the long suffering back of that ex-Nikon sherpa).
 
the 27 pancake is a good lens to have or at least check out. it's quite sharp over the 18. it is tighter, but i find i'm able to get most of the scene in, for street shooting.

i travel like 98% of the time for work. my two fuji bodies and even with all my primes is a godsend for weight over my dslr gear. and it's usually my personal item next to my carry-on (which are my laptops and storage, etc.).

(Sent from another Galaxy via Tapatalk.)
 
It's not a standard lens. It's a short telephoto. 35mm is a standard lens on APS-C.

I never say it is a standard lens. I means mirrorless standard.

Definition of standard in English:

A level of quality or attainment

A required or agreed level of quality or attainment:
 
Jman is correct - "standard lens" has a specific meaning, and if you don't actually mean "a lense where the focal length is equal to the diagonal of the sensor" or whatever, then it's a bad choice of words. You will confuse everyone who knows what a "standard lens" actually is.
 
They did not because, the lens does not really need it at that speed, more money, more complicated, larger, all not needed on an amazing lens
 
Back
Top