CplGumby

Nice Work! I brought the same set up to an indoor rodeo and it was a disaster. I think that lens works great when there is enough light! Well done!

Here are a couple more

The 55-200 is my least thought of lens. Sitting in the bottom of my bag of lenses I really only bring it out when I go to the mortocross track. There I basically beat the crap out of it, letting it get dusty, wet, using my sleeve to wipe of the dust... and everytime I walk away amazed at the quality of the images! Mind you, in insufficient light, it's another story but when light isn't a problem this lens is fantastic, especially at the price!
 
Here are some pics of a Red Bull Rocks and Logs event this weekend. Ideally, you want to have the rider coming at you but unfortunately due to the limited access for spectators we were unable to see them coming for the good parts!

Thanks for the comment. I do shoot with it over exposed by 1 stop but you gave me food for thought. Although I take the meter reading off the jersey, maybe it's still under exposed as I find I have to bump the exposure up on all of my images. (Gee Chad, why don't you bump up your esposure in camera then?? D'uh!)

Here are a series of shots that demonstrate the ability of the T2 to stay focused on the player when another passes in front. This was achieved by using an AF-C Custom setting. Tracking sensitivity was set to 4; Speed Tracking was set to 0 and Zone was Center.
 
These were shot through the plexiglas and I was on the goal line with the player on the center. Not great action but I was surprised when I came across it how it stayed with the subject.

Great idea, Adam, I'll give it a go!

Great images! It's good to see that the focus and sharpness is crisp. Are you using single point or Zone focussing? I've found that Zone 3x3 works better than single point for me but I use single on my DSLR so I'm not sure.
 
 
How do you get it so your blacks aren't crushed and over saturated?

Tried the X-T2 with 50-140 at another game but this time I was on the bench instead of shooting though plexi. These are JPG images using Providia (?)
Big difference! A bit of post to reduce the contrast and blacks as the fuji really saturates the image.

Hockey is one of the hardest sports to photograph. Fast, erattic, crappy lighting, Refs and players getting in the way and if you're a common schmoe like me and not shooting in a pro rink, you are shooting through Plexi-glas. Plexi not only adds an extra stop of light but if you aren't shooting perpendicular through the glass, you will get a haze or cloud on your image that you can't remove in post. Oh and did I mention that most often plexi has puck marks and scuffs galore? 
 
Yes, as a common guy shooting at a common rink, this is tough. So while it's sharper to shoot through a hole in the glass, just how does the X-T2 handle. Can you use it.
 
Well, you are going to have to do some post regardless to adjust the WB and possibly to bump up the exposure. I find anything over 5000 starts to incur too much noise.
 
Back Button focus doesn't work too well in fact almost all the images were off, however, by giving up control (gulp!) and switching to AF-C and allowing the AF to work when you press the shutter (AF-on still works in Manual mode) the images turned out much better.
 
I also discovered that JPG is much better than RAW for this. RAW had too much noise whereas JPG has a built in processor which makes the noise not as noticeable. A trade off is the images look a bit soft.
 
The biggest thing I found which was a surprise was how fast the buffer filled up. A quick burst and then it was full. What this means is that it's not a spray and pray tool which isn't a bad thing.
 
Although do-able, I will stick with my Nikon D500. Fuji isn't there yet. Pretty darn close but not as good as the DSLR. If the X-T2 is all you have, then you can still use it for hockey. Or talk nice to the rink rat in the hopes that he will let you cut a hole in his plexi!
 
Interesting story about image 141. The player celebrating had shot the puck and it hit the far post and then bounced ou tto his teammate who scored. The poor guy thought he had scored. Or...maybe he KNEW his teammate would so celebrated early!!
 
The last picture was not shot through plexi.
 
My settings were:
AF-C
AF-C setting of 5 for Eratic and suddenly accelerating/decelerating
1/1000s
F 3.2
ISO 5000/6400
AF Mode -Single point
 
The age group is Novice which is 7-8. Not fast but I also tried it on some older kids with the same result.
 
You may notice that some images are different WB, that's because I didn't have a preset made up.

When you get up to the focal lengths this lens gives, regardless of camera model ... it takes lots of practice.
 
For $75/CAD I picked up a 1980's 200-500/5.6 manual focus Tamron (the thing looks like a bazooka) and use a Nikon/Fuji adapter and I learned right away that even on a tripod, it takes lots of practice to get anything that looks any good due to DOF and camera shake.

with my XT1...
 
​Woods River Jetties-1 by troy_williams, on Flickr
 
pismo 12-30-16-5 by troy_williams, on Flickr
 
grey suit bottom-1 by troy_williams, on Flickr

Don't give it up...
 

 
 

thanks for an honest review. I am starting to get used to the X-T2 with the 100-400 and it can be challenging to set up focus correctly. I would love to try a D500 and see how that works.

Tried the X-T2 with 50-140 at another game but this time I was on the bench instead of shooting though plexi. These are JPG images using Providia (?)
Big difference! A bit of post to reduce the contrast and blacks as the fuji really saturates the image.

Tried the X-T2 with 50-140 at another game but this time I was on the bench instead of shooting though plexi. These are JPG images using Providia (?)
Big difference! A bit of post to reduce the contrast and blacks as the fuji really saturates the image.

I upgraded and still have both. The reason I upgraded and am happy with the T2 is the Autofocus and shorter delay in EVF blackout when shooting burst. I shoot a lot of action photos so this is a great choice for me.
If you don't need faster focus, video, or short blackout times then stay with the T1. Landscape, street, portrait...the T1 is still good enough.
 
I do love my T2 AND T1.

The PBR was in town on the weekend so I thought it would be a good time to test out my new X-T2.
In reviewing my images, however, none were acceptable.
 
Some things that worked against the camera:
- It was an indoor venue so the lighting wasn't best.
- Pyrotechnics were used at the beginning and the haze was prevalent throughout the event
- Apparently most bulls are black. Most cowboys wear black. Most of the signs in the background are black. In other words, there was a lot of black! This would make it very hard to pick up focus points.
 
Settings:
I used the battery grip with boost mode on,
- XF55-200mm lens, and my settings were
- ISO 12,800,
- Aperture f/5.6,
- shutter speed 1/640s,
- AF-C,
- Zone,
- full selection of focal points,
- AF-C custom was both Accelerating/decelerating objects and ignore obstacles.
 
Conclusion:
I believe that the low shutter speed was the culprit as the images of the crowd and other entertainers were fine. I couldn't get the shutter speed up to 1/1000s where it needed to be. In hind sight, I could've tried and then boost exposure in Lightroom. I also could've used my 50-140 but was concerned that the f2.8 would be too narrow a DOF and I wouldn't get  both the bull and rider. Also, with the 50-140, battery grip and 3 batteries...it was getting into Nikon weight!
 
It was a good test to learn the limitations of the camera. I think for outdoor rodeos, sports, action, it would work fine. The blackout period between bursts was virtually non-existent and I feel it was grabbing focus fast it was just that even at 12,800 ISO, shutter speed was too low to capture. 
 
I still have work to do on my settings and I still require more practice of sports photography but I learned that Bull riding and other rodeo events should be around 1/1000s. Who knew?
 
I've posted some jpgs straight out of the camera with no post done to show you the results. I've also included one of the images of the entertainer to show that it was sharp.
 
 

No such thing as a "Final Lens"!!  Are you kidding?  I am always looking forward to my next lens.  I must also go with the 55-200.  I have the 18-55 + 55-200 and they are truly my go-to lenses.  Now if most your photography is landscape then possibly the 10-24, but only if you are very heavy on landscapes.

Now if Fuji would only make a 1.4x or 2x teleconverter that would fit my 55-200, that would be great.

I wanted to contribute to this topic for days, but I was looking for a way to upload high resolution images. I've dediced to upload them to flickr, set to private. I hope you can see them. You should be able to click some them to see the big versions:
 
 
My first image with the lens:
 

 
I think the image quality is nice, but you can see slight CA at the crow's throat. For me it's okay, the black crow on the bright blue sky is a pretty harsh transition and this is the only image that I've seen CA.
 
 
Then there was a cute little woodpecker:
 

 
 
And a nice great tit (dark, high iso):
 

 
 
If you ever asked yourself the question which Fuji-X lens has the nicest "bokeh", the 56 1.2 or the 90 2.0, the answer is: The 100-400. But don't take my word for it, have a look:
 

 

 

 
The nine-bladed aperture does a great job.
 
/edit: I'm slowly migrating the images to the forum, for persistence.

#2- Hand held  1/20sec f5.6 ISO 200 @ 400mm