Without it, I can’t call out “Abdominal Nanbowan”!

I finally made up my mind and chose the one I like.

But you still need him, and I was lost in thought again.

Don't think too much, I'm just describing the process of choosing your camera and lens.

The body is easy to choose, but the lens is difficult to match, so it's a consensus in the industry. Especially the lens group is relatively old, and there are few sub-factory lens systems. Yes, I am referring to Fuji's X system.

Fuji body: true flagship

Fujifilm is a unique existence among image manufacturers. First, Fujifilm started to deploy micro-single products very early, and also established the lens group brand, Fujinon, at the same time. The second is to focus on the field of APS-C frame, and until now, it does not plan to enter the full frame.

Like Sony, when Fuji first used the "micro-single", the sensor performance was relatively average, and the overall performance was also very average. In addition, the "micro-single" did not sound so "powerful and majestic" and suffered a lot. "White eyes." Fortunately, Fuji has established a "retro art" design style, and it can be regarded as a group of "face value parties". It is a niche brand.

In order to expand, Fujifilm has adopted a dual flagship approach. The rangefinder-like retro X-Pro series and retro SLR XT series are parallel, and the second-generation product (X-T2) has caught up with the mainstream level, and reached the third-generation (X-T2). -T3) The performance has completely exploded.

When it comes to X-T4, Fuji continues to tap the 26-megapixel sensor on X-T3, and its video performance has improved again, reaching DCI 4K in-camera direct recording, not to mention the addition of X-T3 users coveting The classic negative film (Classic Neg.) and bleaching effect (ETERNA Bleach Bypass) two filters.

Coupled with the improvements and optimizations in the fuselage design of Fuji X-T4, whether it is the internal specifications or the fuselage design, it can almost be said that it is the true flagship of the current APS-C field. (Sony’s A6600 is only rationed to carry shoes.)

However, the fuselage is strong and strong, Fuji's lens group is another situation.

Fuji lens group: really old

Frankly speaking, Fuji has a large number of X-mount lenses, but many of them (especially fixed focus) lenses were released immediately after the X-Pro 1 was launched, and the age is actually not young.

Take our commonly used 50mm header (35mm for APS-C) as an example. There are 4 original (or authorized) Fuji X mounts, but no matter which one will make you "love and hate".

• Fujinon XF 35mm F1.4 R: Slow and noisy focus motor.
• Fujinon XF 35mm F2 R WR: Can you bear the "large" aperture equivalent to full-frame F3?
• Fujinon XC 35mm F2: Same as above.
• Zeiss Touit 32mm F1.8: Focusing sound, speed and XF 35mm F1.4 R are not much different, and the price is slightly higher.

Except for 50mm, many of Fuji's fixed focus lenses are in a similar dilemma. The focus motor of large-aperture fixed-focus lenses is "slow and noisy", and the aperture of subsequent new lenses is slightly smaller.

Early Fuji fixed-focus lenses used traditional focus motors. Unlike the fuselage, Fuji lenses have rarely been updated. Those lenses equipped with traditional focus motors have been in use today. When these lenses are paired with the latest "flagship", they tend to slow down the "response" time of the entire system, especially in the state of continuous focus.

At the same time, Fuji has been reluctant to open the lens mount agreement, and there is no suitable sub-factory autofocus lens to supplement. Naturally, we can only choose the "old and slow" old lenses.

APS-C frame with a slightly awkward position

Once upon a time, APS-C format was the mainstream of the market. However, in recent years, the "full-frame" popularization revolution has been rapid, and APS-C format products are no longer in the limelight.

Although the APS-C frame product lines of the three major manufacturers of Sony, Canon and Nikon are still emerging, the product positioning, performance specifications, and construction of the lens group are not as sincere as the "full-frame" main products.

• Nikon: The APS-C format product Z 50 has just started, and it shares the Z mount with the full frame. In view of Nikon's own operating conditions, the prospects are not optimistic.
• Sony: Unintentionally operating the A6x00 product line. The flagship A6600 recently launched is not sincere.
• Canon: The APS-C frame uses a separate EF-M system, and high-end RF lenses cannot be used. It is positioned at the mid-end and entry level.
• Fuji: Focusing on the APS-C camera market, the body is very competitive, but the lens group is slightly "old".

Sony and Nikon have roughly the same strategy on APS-C products. They can use the same full-frame lens group by sharing the same mount, which saves the resources (manpower, capital, time) for developing lens groups for manufacturers; Yu Shuang For the machine party, the cost of use is reduced, and one lens is used for two purposes; for ordinary users, the selection of lens groups is somewhat difficult, such as price and volume.

The situation of Canon and Fuji is similar, both of which are unique systems. The lens group needs to be planned and constructed separately. The body can also be designed according to requirements. Therefore, the market positioning of Canon and Fuji's APS-C products is more accurate.

However, Canon’s own main resources are in the RF system. The EF-M system lens can only be considered as a choice, and it cannot be considered as a scale. The entire system only has a 32mm F1.4 large aperture lens. The entire system is still Was constrained by the full-frame RF system.

Under the trend of "people follow the crowd in full frame", the market share of APS-C products is gradually decreasing. Manufacturers are unwilling to spend more energy and money in this "segmented" category, and consumers are more willing Spending on full-frame products that conform to the general trend, naturally APS-C cameras and corresponding lens groups are gradually declining.

The assistant factory lens becomes the rescuer

The sub-factory lens can make up for the blank of the original lens group, such as filling the focal length and filling the large aperture, it can also bring higher cost performance, and even "overtake" the original lens against the trend.

When the sub-factory lens works well with the original camera, it is easy to achieve a win-win situation. A more "famous" example is the "Three Musketeers" of Sigma.

• 16mm F1.4 DC DN (equivalent to 24mm)
• 30mm F1.4 DC DN (equivalent to 45mm)
• 56mm F1.4 DC DN (equivalent to 84mm)

At present, the three lenses of Sigma support a total of three mounts: E, EF-M and M4/3. Among them, the original lenses of the E and EF-M mounts can hardly compete with the first, neither of the same specifications nor There are few apertures of the same specification, even if you look at all the lens groups of the E mount, there is no such cheap lens.

Sigma’s three fixed-focus card positions are very accurate, and each of the focal length, aperture, and price has been cut to the point. With its own efforts, it has improved the happiness of users of the A6x00 and EOS M series cameras, and made the next-door lens available without a second factory. Fuji users left envious saliva.

Not only drooling, foreign Fuji users are still petitioning Fuji high-level communities in the community, hoping that they will open the X-mount protocol. Initially, in order to safeguard their own interests, the Fujinon executives stated that "we have launched a lot of Fujinon lenses and have not yet opened the agreement to third-party manufacturers."

However, the voice of the masses was too loud, and finally Nianjiu Iida, the director of Fuji Imaging Department, made it clear in a recent DPReview interview:

• Fuji plans to open the X-mount protocol;
• The old lens Mark II will definitely be updated but there is no specific timetable;
• The old lens Mark II version may redesign the optical structure and mechanical structure.

On the other side, Sigma stated that as long as Fujiken opens the X agreement, it will promote the production of the X-mount "Three Musketeers" (it is nothing more than changing the "butt").

It seems that Fujinon's use of the sub-factory lens has become "invisible"?

Fuji finally compromises with the market

Friends who have been following the image circle all year round may say that this year the domestic manufacturer Viltrox has launched three X-mount lenses with similar specifications to the Sigma "Three Musketeers" and the price is less than two thousand yuan.

Vitrox’s three lenses can indeed meet the demand, but these three lenses are developed based on "reverse engineering", that is, "cracked". They have not been authorized by Fuji. There is a high degree of uncertainty in the future. Through the fuselage upgrade, there will be some problems with lens adaptability, and how long the lens firmware can be maintained.

Nowadays, the camera market has been shrinking year after year, but there are still new forces such as the L-Mount Alliance (Sigma, Leica, Panasonic) joining, the plate becomes smaller and the cake becomes smaller. If you want to continue to eat the cake, you need to find more growth points and more detailed Sub-market.

Recently, Fuji has launched a new mid-range series X-S10, which is a product aimed at video demand. The appearance has abandoned "retro design elements" and turned to traditional PASM turntables. Fuji X-S10 can be said to be the least Fuji-flavored camera on the one hand, and on the other hand, it can also be said to be the product that best meets the current market needs. The return to the traditional PASM turntable is also for more consumers (such as the previous SLR user).

Relatively speaking, Fujifilm does not have the "stubbornness" and "rigidity" of traditional Japanese camera manufacturers, and is willing to listen to the voice of users, otherwise Iida will not disclose the "open bayonet agreement" for a long time.

As I said before, Fuji Camera is considered a niche brand, and Fujifilm is not a large enterprise. Their business coverage is far less than Canon, Nikon, and Sony. The initial non-opening of the bayonet agreement was mainly for the purpose of maximizing benefits, and the performance of the lens at that time did not lag far behind and would not affect the experience of the entire system. Now the opening of the agreement is obviously for market and influence considerations.

The agreement to close and reopen the bayonet mount has been done by Sony on the full-frame E mount. For the benefit of the early days, the FE mount has a period of exclusivity. It was not until 2018 that it was gradually opened to third-party manufacturers. At that time, it coincided with the release of the "full-frame new benchmark" α7M3. With the sub-factory's cost-effective lens, a wave of "full-frame popularization" was completed.

Today, Fujifilm's APS-C products can already compete with some quasi-professional machines in terms of video performance. While expanding the product line, opening up the bayonet agreement can also be regarded as some positive market measures during this "special" period.

To authorize the sub-factory to produce X lenses, for Fuji, it actually loses a certain amount of profit (affecting the sales of its own lenses), but in the long run, it actually helps Fuji expand some potential people; for the sub-factory, it is equivalent to New selling points have been added and market influence has been expanded. For our consumers, more sub-factory lenses are definitely good news, giving us more high-quality and low-cost options.

"Fujisan, why not take this three-win situation?"

#Welcome to follow Aifaner's official WeChat account: Aifaner (WeChat ID: ifanr), more exciting content will be provided to you as soon as possible.

Ai Faner | Original link · View comments · Sina Weibo