bailosky

If you're in erk1024's (enviable) position and have three systems, I'd agree - save your big pro tele zoom for the DSLR system. Undoubtedly, the Fuji X cameras, like all other mirrorless cameras, are best used with a small lens. They'll handle better and will be easier to carry around. However, if you're like me and only use one system that you want to be as versatile as possible, the size of a tele zoom isn't a problem. At the end of the day, both the 55-200 and the 50-140 dwarf any of the fuji bodies. I decided that if I was going to put the 55-200 on my x-e1, the extra size of the 50-140 was irrelevant. The 55-200 is pretty long when extended anyway. A comment on the variable aperture of the 55-200 when using flash: when I take photo's with off-camera flash, I'm always in the mid apertures to control the flash exposure. Perhaps people do use flash with the lens wide open - it's certainly a skill I haven't mastered. I imagine it's very difficult (ND filter?). So for me, this wouldn't be an issue.

I own the 50-140 now, and I've borrowed the 55-200 and 56 (me and a friend have a pool of lenses between us that we lend to each other). It goes without saying that all the lenses perform very well. Before I bought the 50-140, I borrowed the 55-200 for a few events. It was very good, but I needed to use flash indoors sooner than I would have liked. I'm not averse to using on-camera flash at events, but in some situations I'd prefer to go without. So I rented the 50-140 from 'hire-a-camera' (great company btw). My experience renting the 50-140 was profound, and was the first moment I thought "Ah, so this is why pro lenses are so expensive". I'd never used or purchased a lens anywhere near this expensive before. I returned the hire lens, borrowed some money and bought one. In the past I've agonised over purchasing lenses half this price, but for this one I didn't bat an eyelid. The lens is a pleasure to use, and just works in every way. The AF is quiet and fast. It doesn't feel like elements are being moved around inside like on some of the earlier primes I have. In this way it feels the same as the 18-55. The OIS does make some noise, but it's just a quiet hum that doesn't bother me. On the subject of OIS, for static subjects in low light, I often use this lens at 1/60s throughout its range. The feel of the lens is very solid. The zoom range is covered with a short twist which I like, and the broad rubber grip of the zoom is comfortable. I haven't noticed any issue with the image quality, but I don't pixel peep. I've read some people saying they don't like the bokeh, but it looks great to me. Needless to say, subjects look very sharp and I don't see any obvious aberrations. But the real pleasure for me is how this lens is in use. When I was buying the lens, I also read about the olympus 40-150/2.8, which seems to be a very similar lens, but with a better finish. This lens has the manual focus clutch on the focus ring and a retracting lens hood. Both look like great features that fuji should take note of. For me, the 56 is a different breed. It's a lovely compact lens which can produce much shallower depth of field. I'd love to have one for closer portraits. For events, it's not versatile enough for me. I find myself shooting a lot around the 90mm mark with the 50-140, so I think the 56 would lack reach in a lot of situations. Just my two pennies worth, I hope it's helpful (if a bit long winded!)