Detailed specs of the Fujinon XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 OIS and XF 14mm f/2.8R lenses for X-Pro1

The Fuji Guys posted on Twitter the detailed specs of the upcoming two lenses for the X-Pro 1 mirrorless camera (click on image for larger view):

This entry was posted in Fuji and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Donji Hogfan

    Am I the only one who would appreciate a manual focus version of these lenses?

    • Seb

      Uhm, they are all manual focus ?

      • fjfjjj

        They’re manual-focus-by-wire, and it doesn’t work very well. DPReview said the XPro1 wasn’t worthy of the name “Pro” for how bad its MF is.

        • Seb

          Still, you can focus them manually. You don’t have to tell me how it works, i got an XP1 myself.
          I guess the first poster meant that he would love a mechanically focusing version of the lenses without electric transmission, but chose the words a bit unluckily so its easy to misunderstand what he wants.

      • Seb

        Why, because I’m right ? You can focus them manually, if its in a good or bad way wasn’t the topic. So either you are painfully stupid for not knowing what you are talking about or i have no clue what your comment was about ..

        • fjfjjj

          Someone slightly changed the topic. If you don’t like it, get off the Internet.

  • It very interesting, what price of this lens.

    • Seb

      They will be around the same price current lenses are priced as far i can guess.

  • Greg

    Personally, while I like the 14mm lens, I wish it were at least f/1.8. Also, the 18-55 looks sweet. With the OIS and focal lengths, I’ll be able to have a lens similar to my old Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 which is a great lens. Having a mid-zoom like this, you end up using it a lot.

    • Seb

      The 14mm is already huge .. Considering not to buy even if it was the lens i was most looking forward too. The 35mm is already ways too big, and the 14 should’ve been my everyday carry around lens, but it turned out to be too big for that. A faster version of that lens would be even bigger and more expensive. I rather have /2.8 combined with great ISO performance at a good price than a huge, heavy and expensive chunk of glass.

      • Michael Switzer

        What lenses are you talking about? “The 35 mm is already ways too big”? The 35 is tiny and couldn’t weigh anymore than 6 ozs. And how do you know that the 14 is huge? No one has seen it yet. I think you are commenting about something of which you know nothing .

        • Mistral75

          > “And how do you know that the 14 is huge? No one has seen it yet.

          see from

          > “I think you are commenting about something of which you know nothing.

          What about you? 🙂

          • Michael Switzer

            I don’t think one can declare that they have “seen” the lens in that one low-res picture and decide that it is “huge”. Obviously, I meant ‘seen’ as in handled it . Do you think anyone else would declare the 35 “ways too big”? Too big for what? Taking pictures?

          • Pablo Ricasso

            Six ounces for a 35 f1.4? Have you seen my (nikon)?

          • Looking at image in detail as best one can, it appears lens in that image is a zoom and not the 14mm. Typically ultra-wides tends to have a lot more surface glass area than is apparently in image. I suspect upon release it will be around the same physical size as 35mm.

        • Seb

          Well, just look at the picture. Filter thread size of 58mm suggests that the barrel is thicker than the 35mm, also if i put my XP1 with the 35 on it next to me and look at the pictures i can clearly say that judging from the picture it looks simply bigger. The 35mm is far from tiny. I got 35/1.4 lenses that are 1/4th the size of Fujis 35mm. Just because you compare it to bigger stuff, it doesn’t mean it gets smaller. Sure, my 21/2.8 i got is only half the size of the Fuji 35mm, but its still vastly smaller.

      • fants

        Methinks someone has an odd definition of “huge.” It’s not small, certainly, but it doesn’t seem particularly big either. Go look at any other 14/2.8 on the market if you want to see huge! (And yes I know they’re all FF glass.) Also check into the Sony and Samsung 16mm pancakes to see what sacrifices have to be made for the sake of compactness in such a wide angle lens.

        • Seb

          Well if you come from Leica M you probably have an odd definition of lens size, yes. My 35/1.4 M lens is about 1/4th of the size of the Fuji. Sure, its MF and doesn’t have fancy electronics, but still. Im kind of messed up in that matter i guess.
          Take Fuji’s 19mm as example, that is a good sized lens. If the 14 would’ve been the same size as that it would be a great travel lens, but judging from the picture posted and the fact that it has a 58mm filter size i can conclude that its even bigger than the (for me) already too big 35mm.

          • Fuji’s X-Pro1 lenses are very light for their size – I have all three of their current lenses.

        • Pentax has a DA 14/2.8 designed for APS-C, and it is considerably smaller and cheaper than, say a Nikkor 14/2.8 (FX). But it’s not small, much larger than this Fujinon XF.

          Also, 35/1.4 M isn’t “about 1/4 the size of the Fuji.”

          Fuji 187g, 55mm x 65mm
          Leica 306g, 46mm x 53mm

      • CHD

        Seb…in what world is the 35mm 1.4 huge???? The lens is the perfect size…nicely balances with the size of the body. I’m sure the 14mm will be just fine too. If you want something smaller use your iphone…seriously.

    • pooh

      The only in production 20/21mm equivalent for SLR cameras that has an aperture larger than f/2 is the Sigma 20/1.8. Go fetch one, and experience the size.

      Or spend a grand on an Oly 21/2. Or venture into the Leica land for the 21/1.4.

      • Pablo Ricasso

        mmm. 21 1.4! Mmmm.

      • Seb

        Me thinks its the wrong way to compare fuji lenses to SLR lenses. They fuji is no SLR so there is no reason to compare it to them. SLR lenses are generally bigger because of different lens designs, so that says nothing. Compare the lens to Leica, Zeiss, or CV. Then you will see that those lenses are majorly smaller than the Fuji lenses. Thats where you should aim for. I got myself the Fuji because i hate big chunky SLR’s, and i really spent enough money on Leica M already. But i don’t like the way that Fuji is getting bigger and chunkier and not smaller and lighter.

        • hexx

          well that’s all nice and sweet, don’t forget that Leica, Zeiss will become on APS-C camera normal lenses rather than wide angle. Also they’re all MF not AF lenses. Also why would anyone need f/1.4 aperture on wide angle lens – definitely not for shallow DoF since it’s wide lens.

  • Chris

    Hey everyone,
    I’m interested in buying the X-Pro1 but there has been so much bad press and commentaries about the focusing capabilities of the camera and the inadequacies of the lenses for manual focusing that I am kind of hesitant. So my question is: Are there any news about improving this with the new lenses? Will they have improved by-wire gearing to make manual focusing better or a real manual override like the newer olympus lens with the lock ring thing? Will there be an upgrade in the firmware to address any of the issues? Will they have faster focusing motors?


    • I think Fuji will improve their AF speed in the future – remember that the X-Pro1 is still their first gen mirrorless camera.

    • It’s not that bad. Granted I zone and hyper focus both my XP1 and X100. I think press that reviews X-series focus compares it too much to using SLR. Contrast vs. phase detect very different.

  • Ozbaz

    It is good news that Fuji are bringing out more x mount lenses. Esp a OIS zoom. It is a shame it is not a constant f2.8 but any zoom is welcome . I am very interested in this system but I want to see a greater range of glass before buying in. Sales ffigures in my local camera shop are not great. The shop is a well known local chain of shops in Australia. The sales assistant said the Olympus OM-D was flying out the door but they had sold few x pro 1 s yet. That said another chain of stores got the xpro 1 earlier (before the US eg b&h) and sell it for less so their sales might be better.

  • Pablo Ricasso

    Let’s hope the zoom lens is not much more than the various other kit zooms offering the same focal range. That could cause an improvement in the market.

  • Markdphotoguy

    The key point that’s most interesting about this particular preview release on the Fujifilm XF 14mm f/2.8 R is that Fuji has put a depth of field scale on the lens barrel. For this to work the lens has to have a relatively narrow focus throw. The focus ring should stop turning at infinity and minimum focus distance positions, which will make the lens more easily usable for manual focus even if it is still “by wire”. My only concern if the lens is still “by wire” (who knows maybe it’ll be a mechanical coupling to the focusing elements) is lag between turning the ring and the lens focusing to that position, still this would be better than the current means of manual focusing.

  • Harold Ellis

    only crazy one would invest him self into new APS format nowadays… but yea, everyone have right for the hobby.

    • CHD

      Harold….the image quality from the XPro is WORLD CLASS. I’m all for full frame, but for people like me who already shoot a 5D2/5D3/D700 whatever….the Fuji is an AWESOME complimentary camera.

      I guarantee you that if you can’t get great printable shots from an Xpro the lack of a full frame sensor isn’t the problem…you are.

      • Robert Falconer


        Image quality from the XP1 is superlative. Just have a look around on the web to see the results and comments from actual photographers using one.

        I use one myself, and love it. Does autofocus annoy sometimes? Sure. But an easy adaptation for anyone who learned photography back in the manual focus days. Besides, future firmware updates are likely to improve things.

  • Back to top