There were a couple of interesting choices made in the configuration of the new XCD lenses. The zoom is an f/3.5-f/4.5. Why have a variable maximum aperture rather than a constant f/4? What is gained?
The new 135 f/2.8 is somewhat surprising, as it is close in focal length to the 120mm. However, it can be mated with a new, dedicated 1.7x converter to turn the lens into a 230mm f/4.8. My first reaction was why not just make a separate 200mm-240mm lens? My experience with tele-converters has not been good. They inevitably entail some degree of compromise in image quality. This XCD tele-converter is a dedicated converter, so perhaps the compromise will be less significant. There would be a substantial savings in size and weight compared to carrying two fairly hefty lenses. This may make the decision to buy the 120mm Macro more difficult for some, as the 120mm is close in focal length to the 135mm, and the 135mm will be more versatile because of the 1.7x converter. Hmmm.