Fuji 16mm f/1.4 lens image and specs leaked!

Within the next 48 hours Fuji will announce the new 16mmf /1.4 lens. It has those specs:

– Nano-GI coating
– Works at Low-temperature till minus 10 degrees
– Over-the-counter price is $ 1,150

via Digicameinfo and Fujirumors.

  • iudex

    1150 USD? Wow, this is hell of a lot. I know, wideangle with f1,4 is unique, however I doubt whether the speed is that important for a WA lens. I think it could have been f1,8 or even f2, making it much smaller and cheaper. Anyone having a X-mount camera with a standard zoom will think twice whether he needs that 16mm (which are on a kit lens) for 1150 USD.

    • Zach Wagner

      I have to agree with this sentiment. f1.4 is great, and hardcore build too. But wow on the price. I would think a few more times than just twice. Lol.

    • Trenton Talbot

      Fuji already have 18/2 lens, which is smaller and way cheaper… I think 16/1.4 is more or less “proof of ability”, novelty lens, just like Canon’s 50/1.0 or 200/2.0 (latter being surprisingly practical for a “hot rod” glass).

      I’m getting that 16/1.4 as soon as my budget allows (probably they’ll have very nice deals and rebates by that time already)).

  • Sil

    If it’s too expensive for you don’t buy it . For me it’s a WR high quality (I’m assuming) 24mm f1.4 Eqiv lens that’s smaller and lighter than the WR zoom…. I’m looking forward to this being the first of several fast, tough and WR primes coming for use with my X-t1 in the wilds…

    • bousozoku

      Getting lower light group shots without loads of extra lighting seems a great application for this lens. A wedding or event photographer could make the money to pay for the lens quickly.

    • Brandon

      the lens is actually 24mm f2.1 not f1.4 equv lens. that being said… you are paying too much for a f2.1 lens if you are thinking of buying one

      • Sil

        Actually …f2.1 Eqiv from a DOF perspective…but F1.4 from a light gathering perspective… This is still a F1.4 lens they built and if it’s sharp, has great contrast and “POP” then it’s well worth the money…especially for the build quality that WR and its cold weather operating parameters imply.

        • Brandon

          that does not even make sense at all… light gathering depends on the diameter of the iris of the lens and the focal length and there is no way that this lens can gather that much light.

          • Sil

            Exactly….and all f1.4 lenses have exactly the same iris opening from a relative light gathering perspective…. As to price Zeiss Distagon T* 15mm f/2.8 ZF.2 Lens for Nikon F Mount cost nearly $3000, is manual only, is slower and has no water resistance…. Price or quality for a lens have little to do with DOF….

          • Brandon

            you sure know what you are talking about LOL… this is the formula for light gathering (f/D) where f is the focal length and D is the diameter of the front iris not the filter thread size. Since i cant find anything about the diameter of the front iris of the fuji 56 f1.2 so lets use the diameter of the filter thread to do the math. (56×1.5)/(62)= f1.33 but obviously there is no way that the iris is as big as the filter thread. therefore the actual light gathered is less than f1.33. Also, the price of fuji 16 f1.4 is only relatively cheaper if you compare it with zeiss lenses. In fact, most lenses seem to be relatively cheaper if you compare with zeiss so your argument is invalid :) Fuji is not even in the same class as Zeiss so dont even bother comparing them.

          • Gabriel Banfalvi

            Uh.. I think you have it backwards. The f number is the focal length and the denominator is the _ratio_ of the focal length to diameter of the lens pupil. A 50mm f/2 lens has a 25mm diameter. Similarly, the 56 f/1.2 should have a 46mm entrance pupil. Let’s check: http://imgur.com/C5aNYev

            Now, I brought it up as close to the lens as i can without scratching it, and the perspective is a bit wonky, but it’s definitely 46. If you don’t believe me, you can test yourself.

            The fact that the sensor is smaller, means that if you were to capture the same picture on full frame (both angle of view and DoF) you could use an 85/1.8 http://i.imgur.com/MfuhBkU.png , and those are definitely cheaper, but the 56/1.2 still has _significantly_ greater light-gathering ability on crop, as will the 16mm.

            It’s certainly less than ideal to get a crop camera if you’re in it for the shallow depth of field – but these lenses _do_ grant you much faster shutter speeds. Equivalent lenses at full frame would be pretty damn expensive, might give too shallow DoF and could be potentially larger.

          • Brandon

            the lens is eqiv to 85 1.8 meaning that they have the same light gathering ability as 56 f1.2… that being said, you don’t get faster shutter speeds or anything since the same amount of lens is entering the lenses.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtDotqLx6nA
            watch this and you’ll get it :)

          • Gabriel Banfalvi

            Right. It has 100% the same light gathering ability of the 85, but it’s a crop sensor, so the surface that same amount of light projects to is smaller, affording the user greater amount of light per square mm (this is what lens speed boosters do), allowing you to use faster shutter speeds. Also, you should stay away from that guy, his stuff is misleading at best and disingenuous at worst.

        • Mike

          Aperture (f-stop) equivalent is always from a DOF perspective. If you want light gathering you need to look at transmission (T-stop); f-stop just gives a rough idea of what the transmission can be.

          And that light gathering is always measured “per unit of sensor area”. A T/1.4 lens on APS-C and a T/1.4 lens on full frame have the same light gathering per unit of sensor area. Thus you can set the same ISO and shutter speed, but you cannot expect the same ISO noise performance from different sized sensors.

          • bousozoku

            You mean that you can’t expect the same ISO noise performance if the pixel density is the same?

            I believe you’re saying that for a given MP number the pixel density is less on the bigger sensor, and therefore, if they use exactly the same engineering techniques, the bigger sensor will be better.

  • Corrado Topi

    I do not understand who among the participant in the discussion is actually using Fuji lenses and cameras, but for me and if the price in EU is reasonable, I will definitively buy one. We have been waiting for a 16 / 1.4 for quite a while. It is coming with WR (yesssss!) and if it is of the same quality as the 14 or the 23, it is going to be an absolute delight. For us user this is the only thing that really matters, I think.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The Mirrorlessrumors website, Mirrorlessrumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.

Close