images: fuji 50-230

back alley

back alley

IMAGES
Local time
9:52 AM
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
41,289
12091380595_2d9571185c_c.jpg


12092080656_3a775e2a5f_c.jpg



12091852064_894326c406_c.jpg
 
i did (buy one).
this is from a quick walk with the lens earlier this afternoon.

along with the 16-50, this is some of the nicest plastic i have seen, well built, smooth focus…no, incredibly smooth focus, nicely balanced on the x-e1 and light weight.
 
burancap said:
I am struggling to find a reason to continue saving my marbles for the 55-200. What gives?
Click to expand...

$50. off the regular price this month…
plastic mount, plastic everything…

i think nikon & canon forgot to tell fuji that when you build a cheaper lens you're supposed to put cheaper glass in it!

i will use this lens less than any other fuji lens i currently own…why should i buy the more expensive 55-200? i will never wear out any of the plastic on the 50-230!
 
yes, the stops…it's slow…but the fuji features great high iso and image stabilization and i mostly shoot in daylight, outdoors.
works for me!
 
better build, extra stop of light, OIS switch and can change the aperture from the lens instead of through the camera settings
if those don't matter to you then really i would rather go 50-230
 
Hmmm, I will not pretend to be an optical engineer, but yeah -doesn't look like they cheapened the glass here.

More samples tomorrow, please!
 
from fuji website…

XC50-230mmF4.5-6.7 OIS

For all Fujifilm X series cameras with X-mount interchangeable lens system.
The wide zoom range of the FUJINON XC50-230mmF4.5-6.7 OIS starts at 76mm* and goes to 350mm* with consistently outstanding optical performance all the way through. The powerful 50-230mm lens will let you capture your subject at a distance with clarity. The all-glass 10 group / 13 element lens configuration includes 1 aspherical lens and 1 ED lens. Superb optical performance is ensured via optical image stabilization effectively minimizing blur when shooting at longer focal lengths or in low light. A reduced weight focusing lens combined with a high-precision stepping motor guarantees high-speed autofocusing and suppresses any noise from the zoom mechanism.

and did i mention it is a silent and fast focussing lens too?
 
it's surprising the budget lens is wider and longer. although it seems to be a tad slow for my taste, it is significantly lighter than the XF 55-200 (580g vs 375g). i pay very close attention to filter thread sizes as it becomes annoying with different lenses with different filter thread sizes (caps, polarizers, uv ....). the XC zoom uses a 58mm thread which matches the 18-55 as well as the 14mm.
 
Hmm, looks like another nice lens! I may have to pick one up for the occasional surf shoot!
 
i am mostly a wide to normal lens shooter and so i'm thinking that this lens will be more special purpose for me…but…when i was out walking today knowing that at the long end of the zoom i had an equivalent 350mm (230), it forced me to try to see very differently than i normally do when out shooting with a 35mm (23).
i very much enjoyed that process.
 
As far back as only 4 years ago, I would have categorized myself as a super wide to short tele shooter. My favorite two lens combo was 21/40 or 24/50 depending on camera system. I find that these days I actually rarely go beyond 28. In most cases, I am 40 to 200mm fov. I occasionally will go up to 400mm, since that is the longest i can handhold and still get a decent shot.

I tend to use zooms the most when I am out w/ family, since I don't want to hold them up while I change lenses or when I am on vacation. Lately I have been using zooms because I need to shoot longer then 200mm fov and fixed length lenses tend to be too expensive considering the amount of use I think I would end up using them for.

Times change, different aspects of photography become interesting as well.
Gary
 
I totally agree. Although the 55-200 is an amazing lens, I prefer the 50-230 for the X-E1. It's smaller and lighter. The AF is fast enough. OK, it would be nicer as a4-5.6 but then it would be bigger again.
I'm not much of a tele shooter, hence that 50-230 is somewhat perfect for me.
And th surprisingly great IQ serves me well. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom