Fuji are ahead of the game (IMO)

Well, in all fairness, APSC is Fuji's main business and is Nikon and Canon's secondary business when it comes to cameras.

23/1.4 and 23/2.0... but no 23/1.8 - how come you don't know the lenses in your own system :-( ?!

Agreed. It is a matter of knowing their customers and allocating resources accordingly.

Fuji launched the X mount in 2012 and the XF 23/2.0 WR was released as the first Fujinon in 2016, four years later.
Nikon's Z mount was announced in 2018 and the current Z DX 24/1.8 followed five years later - a full frame Z 24/1.8 was available as one of the first lenses for Z mount.

I find the time between the lens mount introduction and the lens release is a bit better at gauging release pace, rather than the calendar year. While Nikon were a bit late to the mirrorless party, I think their pace of releasing lenses has actually been pretty decent. Needing to split their releases across FF and APS-C inevitably resulted in some delay in APS-C specific lenses. Especially because of the good old "just put an FF lens on your APS-C body".

What I find more interesting is the spread of Z mount primes (or lack thereof). Between Z 24/1.8, Z DX 24/1.8, Z 26/2.8 and Z 28/2.8 there are now four lenses in very close proximity to one another, while other FOVs have fewer or no options. There is no APS-C prime wider than 24mm (only the FF Z 20/1.8) and there is neither a fast 33/35mm APS-C nor FF prime. The absence of a 33/1.4 or 35/1.4 is really odd, in my opinion.

On the other hand, where Fuji could learn from Nikon are fresnel lenses. Native PF lenses for X mount would be great.

HAND.

PF means Phase Fresnel. Nikon use such kind of elements in DSLR lenses 300/4, 500/5.6 and the latest 800/6.3 for Z-mount (only 2385g!)
Canon also used similar approach but named it as DO (Diffraction Optics) there are two versions of EF400/4 DO.
www.lenstip.com/509.0-Lens_review-Canon_EF_400_mm_f_4_DO_IS_II_USM_.html
www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61773698

Cheers,
Artur

If I remember correctly, Cano was the first one to introduce this type of lens, with the EF 70-300mm DO for SLRs.

A Fresnel lens is a specialized lens where the glass is ground into concentric circles and the cross section looks like saw teeth. They were first developed for the use in light houses to focus the light source into a narrow beam. This could be accomplished using a Fresnel lens while conventional lenses would be too heavy for the mechanical portions of the light house to use.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_lens

Today they are often used in small flash units to focus the light into a narrow beam. They are also used in some long lenses to reduce weight and size although the used is specialized. They have also been used as focusing screens on view cameras as a Fresnel screen is much lighter than ground glass.

petapixel.com/2021/03/15/how-a-fresnel-lens-works-explained-with-a-simple-blackboard-model/

However, they are specialized and not all that useful in general photography.

www.makeuseof.com/what-is-a-frensel-lens/#:~:text=Despite%20all%20the%20benefits%2C%20there,a%20photo%20with%20high%20contrast.

On the other hand, all Nikon PF lenses are top-notch.

HAND.

The lens was introduced what, more than 15 years ago? At the time it was the second lens to feature DO, first one was another Canon, the 400mm DO. The 70-300 was really compact and great for travel, I liked mine a lot at the time. With a little bit of micro-contrast added in image processing, results were very good.

I said this on Pnet, but I'll repeat it here:

I am a heavy Nikon DSLR user, and in fact have built up my Nikon DSLR kit over the past year as prices have fallen. Most recently that included a 300mm f/2.8 VR1(I've never had a 300mm f/2.8 and truthfully it will only be an occasional use lens for me, but it's also been an "I want it lens" for me even back in 2006 in high school/college when I was using Canon FD mount cameras exclusively and no plans to even move to AF, much less digital). My two main Nikon DSLRs now are the D850 for most of the time, supplemented with a D5 when I want speed, low light, and much to my surprise RAW files SOOC good enough that I could ALMOST shoot JPEG. The D5 effectively replaced a rarely used D3s, mostly because I have other cameras that have equal if not better high ISO performance, and a gripped D850 w/EN-EL18 has better AF performance all around and nearly as good of a frame rate. The D850 effectively replaced my still used somewhat often D810 as a natural upgrade/progression(the D810 had, in 2020, replaced my much loved and still owned and used D800, and even though I see similar IQ between the two I appreciate all the little touches that the D810 has like the nicer feeling grip and much quieter shutter). The only sort of odd one out I have with no replacement is the Df, which is only completely incompatible with 4 or 5 F mount lenses in the entire history of the mount(only one of which I own, and I don't really care about using it) plus offers low light nearly as good as the D5, a little better than the D3s, and in the lightest FX DSLR Nikon has made.

With that rambling introduction, I'll also mention that as my F mount collection has grown in breadth, many of the individual pieces I use regularly have also grown. I have a full set of f/2.8 zooms covering 14-200mm, but my only current one is the 24-70 f/2.8E. It was an ugprade from my older 24-70 f/2.8G in most ways(I love having VR even on an f/2.8 lens, and splitting hairs but these high resolution bodies appreciate the optical improvements) but it's nearly as big and heavy as my 70-200 f/2.8 VR1.

I have a 5 month old son, a first child for my wife and I both. Needless to say I have her blessing to carry a camera almost everywhere, but my usual grab and go D850+24-70 is...well...a lot. A late May vacation had me start seriously researching mirrorless options, and in particular I focused on APS-C offerings since with purpose-built APS-C lenses there's a nearly automatic size advantage, and also often an optical advantage from needing a smaller image circle.

I first looked at the Z50 and ZFc. I liked the feel of the ZFc and how it feels a lot like a Df successor that really does a better job of actually pulling off the whole digital FE2/FM2 concept. Still, though, aside from it being hard to hide that it's based on a low end body(Z50) the real turn off for me is that Nikon seems to be continuing their tradition of not really building a great DX lens selection. Nikon more or less exited film in 2006 when they killed off everything but the Cosina-made FM10 and the wonderful but expensive F6(yes I have one and love it, but the F100 is 90% the camera at a much lower price new and used). For the most part, though, even before the mass purge of film cameras most of the focus and probably sales for a few years prior had been crop sensor DSLRs, and that was the case until the 2008 D3(unless one branched out and bought F mount Kodaks where you could get APS-H and full frame). Still, though, most of the pro grade lenses introduced in the early 2000s were still full frame lenses. Some, like the 70-200 f/2.8 VR1, definitely favored center sharpness which benefits APS-C cameras, but there still were a lot of great new full frame lenses in that period. As full frame moved to a bigger and bigger chunk of Nikon's sales, there were still some new DX lenses like the excellent 35mm f/1.8, but a lot were plasticy consumer(even if optically decent) lenses like the 10-20mm f/3.3-5.6 AF-P.

Unfortunately, I saw the same in Z mount. Yes, I could buy full frame Z mount lenses(which are now plentiful and tend to be very highly regarded) or even adapt my F mount lenses, but that just leaves me with big heavy lenses on the front of a small body, which kind of defeats the purpose.

So, Fuji started getting a serious look from me, not the least of which because I love physical controls and the mount is very mature with a great selection of lenses, all made for APS-C. After a lot of research, shopping, and looking at options I ended up at an X-T5 and 16-80mm f/4 kit. While I was researching, deciding, and debating Nikon did announce the 12-28 PZ lens, but it still wasn't quite enough to change my mind. The new 24mm came after I'd bought my Fuji and already put it to some serious use. Even though the price is attractive, the Fuji 23mm f/2 still strikes me as an all around better lens.

So, instead, even though I will still be using my Nikon DSLRs for the forseeable future, the X-T5 isn't going anywhere for me. My next purchases for it are likely going to be the 23/35/50 f/2 prime set(maybe one at a time, maybe all together) and a Fringer adapter since I just have too much great F mount glass to not use it even though my preference is still for native lenses. We'll see where I go with Fuji in the future. I have to admit that it was a few weeks of initial frustration(despite reading and watching most of what I could find on the camera, plus frequent trips to Google to find specific things) and the camera still catches me in moments of "Why are you doing that?" or "Why does it work this way?" but as I've learned my way around it I have learned to work with it and figured out what control layout works for me that's gotten a lot better.