Fuji XF 55-200mm: [shopcountry 12892]
It’s online, the full photographyblog XF55-200 review. They assigned 4 out of five stars and recommend this lens. Check out the whole text and the samples here. Some extracts:
“[…] very quiet linear motor. In practice, we found the auto-focus to be fairly fast, pleasingly quiet and without too much hunting in low-light. Thanks to the IF mechanism the front of the lens does not rotate on focus, which is very good news for anyone looking to use the lens in conjunction with a polariser or graduated neutral density filter. […] pleasing bokeh […] offering an appealing combination of good image quality, excellent construction and handling, and fair value for money. Both centre and edge sharpness drop off as you progress through the zoom range, though, requiring the user to stop down the lens to get the best results. […] very good images, especially at the wider end of the focal range.”
11 Responses
By using a lot of templates (or maybe TextExpander?), these folks are trying really hard to achieve a good SEO – at the same time rendering the text almost unreadable by humans. That’s some keyword abuse!
Yes, they are part of internet’s evil. As such, their words are empty to me.
The review shows that this Fuji lens delivers best in the wrong (short) end. I am also worried about the lens protruding to become very long at 200mm – vulnerable design?
The X-E1 is new to me and I like it very much, great for street photo. Use it with the 18-55mm and Nikon MF lenses, notably 105/2,5 and 200/4. The teles are great in IQ but manual focusing slow.
Need to see more tests of the 55-200…..
Well most tele’s do that i guess, unless it’s a prime. But a difference in performance doesn’t mean it’s bad at any focal length, maybe it’s just crazy good at 55mm, but superb at 200mm anyway. Rico seemed to like it: http://www.fujirumors.com/first-look-xf55-200mmf3-5-4-8-r-lm-ois/
As for the extending lens, i guess they all do that too, unless they are huge to begin with. Right? Personally i’m still hoping for a 90mm (135 eq.) prime some day that is more compact, and indeed doesn’t extend like crazy.
I have a 90mm Leica mount lens, its about 5,5 cm in diameter and 8cm long including adapter (IIRC). Really great performance, I can manual focus it fast enough and often faster than an Fuji AF lens – yes, really!
Best bit, don’t have to wait for Fuji to maybe do something.
No, most tele zooms do not protrude that much based on my 50 years experience. With the prime Nikon’s I can get stellar IQ – provided the MF is done correct and no camera shake. As old as I am, the OIS would be a great help 🙂
More reviews on this lens will be very interesting. It is very usual that new products are hailed heavily on the net – later analysis shows if right or not. Quite often the later.
From my experience (less than 50 years, so maybe I’ve missed something), at least on the planet Earth, a compact non-extending telephoto zoom lens is quite a recent development. Just a few decades back, a non-rotating filter thread was quite an achievement by itself. Then, internal focusing (faked by most manufacturers by deeply recessing the front element). “Trumpet” type zooms and all that jazz…
And an internal zooms are very new in the world of autofocus lenses. In my world, Minolta 80-200/2.8 was one of the first specimen. The rest of the bunch, especially “dark” prosumer zooms from N/C like 75-300 (70-300 etc) were all the same by physical design: you zoom in, it extends.
Remember “zoom creep”? This phenomenon happened because the lens desperately wanted to do what? That’s right, extend!…
So Per, if you don’t mind me asking… which galaxy are you from? 😎
Have to admit that when it comes to zooms I am in the Nikon universe. And more specifically in the high end galaxy! 🙂
Not many zooms that extend there – or extends a little. I had a Nikon zoom that i dropped on a street. The skylight filter crashed, but the lens was still perfectly OK. Imaging just bouncing into something with an extruded Fuji 55-200…… You need to be very careful and also very lucky.Also the famous Olympus 4/3 12-50/4 extrudes a lot at the long end and I knows at least one who had it damaged by just touching something. It happened to me. It all happened on planet Earth, more specific in Paris and in Göteborg.
= my fears are based on positive as well as negative experiences. I’ve owned Minolta, Helios, Nikon, Contax, Leica, Canon, Olympus, Sony, Samsung and Fuji cameras
I’ve been on Canon & Nikon hi-end camp for the last 15 or 20 years, so I know what you’re talking about. It’s not even apples and oranges, it’s more lie bricks and cucumbers.
For example, Nikon 70-200/2.8G VRII (used to be my weapon of choice up until last year) weights 1532 grams. Nikon 70-300/4.5-5.6G VR weights 745 grams, or more than 2x less (nevermind the cost difference). Fuji 55-200 weights even less at 580 grams.
So basically you’re comparing lenses that differ 3x in weight and at least 2x in size… Now, let’s have a look at the cost difference, shall we? It’s $2400 vs $800, exactly 3x again.
In the last 20 years of my professional career, I’ve accidentally dropped my stabilized 70-200/2.8 twice (once Canon, once Nikon). They survived with flying colors. However, considering the cost, weight and size (and don’t forget to add transportation costs to the figure, multiplied bu 20 years)… Was it worth it? Not sure.
What I’m trying to say, I guess, is – if you’re so concerned about dropping that lens, just buy a spare one and keep it in your bag. Your bag still will be lighter and you’ll still save some money compared to the “big gun” like 70-200.
PS: By the way, I have a suggestion for Patrick: if there’s any way to compare repair costs of X-cameras and Fujinons to CPS/NPS as well as the “regular” Canon/Nikon repair pricing… That will make for one hell of a useful post!
…Sorry about typos 😎
What a coincidence, I have dropped, damn it!, my Nikon 70~200 VRII just today and the filter went into thousand pieces while the lens not even a scratch. Great lens in all senses and I suppose the best of its kind. Yet cannot be compared to the Fuji 55~200 as they are indeed two different world. I have ordered my Fuji today and i will be happy to carry a high performance lens of that weight. Sometimes the big Nikon guns really…..well I am tired of carrying so much weight guys. I have of course shot with a Fuji 55~200 before i decided to buy one….by the way.
So, no arguments here. Both are great lenses with different characteristics and cannot be compared. Fuji lenses X mount are incredibly good, affordable, paid my Fuji 55~200 just over 600US$. Bottom line, Fuji 55~200 is indeed a unique lens albeit not as strong as Nikon 70~200VRII. My advice…try not to drop any lens…no matter who makes them. However, shit happens.