mdm

I'd insist on 55-200.

...and because they want I suppose. "The want" is a powerfull making decisions driver.

Ok than, It's still smaller, lighter, cheaper, WR, has shared hood (35), probably got 9 blades, has newer motor,... So for those (me) who haven't got 23f1.4 it could be the choice. One stop of light gathering? Well, habituated to sleep at night, so don't shoot most of the really-low-light time.

If you are not going to shoot "action" with 60mm, this lens rewards you with outstanding images. 50f2 looks too short but until we will see how it performs all speculations are premature.

It sounds easy to do but turned out to be hard to follow. I'm not an impatient person but I failed to use one FL for a single day (18-55) and ended up zooming soon or later. So I've already added 27 and 35f2 to original 18-55 and 'm looking forward to see 23f2.

As your attorney I advise you to use 18-55 with OIS switched off.

Yep, you are the lazy one! It takes me around 15 sec. to change lenses on my single body. I guess you simply have no idea where to put your bar of gold (16-55) when detach it from the camera.

- if you pull focus ring on the lens toward the camera, you set the camera in pure Manual mode. That means it doesn't matter in what position set the switch at the front of your camera (S, C or M), you can adjust focus only manualy. - if you push focus ring on the lens from the camera (AF mode) and set the switch at the front of your camera in M-position you are in the Manual mode with AF-L functionality. That means you can use AF by pressing AF-L button instead of shutter release. When camera aquires the focus you are able fine tune it manualy.

Fuji's hiding under the snag.

Have managed to catch that red flare. 27mm at f16

I am an artist... Well, let it be...

Well, they should build some plants in more tectonic stable areas for the sake of future proof.

What about price Increase on X-Series Gear in September? Looks like desperation is just around the corner.

Having both 27 and 35f2 can say that 35mm without doubt has overall better quality and handling, it's one stop faster, quick and silent... but 27 has "unic" angle of view that let you be nearer and capture more context (18mm might be too wide). So i'll definitly keep these two in my bag. 27at2.8 This is where Pokemons are coming from...

We have time to visit Mars and come back...

It's so easy to check, just connect your lens to any other x-body, or any other x-lens to your body and you will know for sure what is faulty.

I did the same but had to get 55-200 later on. As it turned out 4.5/6.7 was not enough (without engaging high ISO) for the half of the shooting conditions. I've won some eBay auction and got 55-200 just for $250 so it didn't kill me. The problem with it is the weight of 55-200. It's toooo havy for me so I use it only when I have to. If there is planty of light I take XC if the sun is low or I'm in a deep shadow (trees, narow streets... anything) I have XF on.

This thrush was about just 10 - 15 meters away and I used 50-230mm on it's long end to capture it. You need a luck to get to an interesting bird this close and 50-140mm + 2x tele-converter gives you only 210mm and it's absolutely not enough (providing you are not in a Zoo). So you should have 100-400mm for sure.

Why not? Mostly it's a question of price for the customer. In the future MF cameras might be affordable for everyone. I'd like it will.

Yep, the silhouettes of 23f2 on that swedish website looks much more promising for me...

I thought it might be bigger in diameter not in length, so have ordered 27mm already... anyway I lose nothing if 23f2 will be fine I can added it later.

eBay - http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2050601.m570.l2632.R2.TR3.TRC2.A0.H0.Xlens+cap+43.TRS0&_nkw=43mm+lens+cap&_sacat=78997

and his camera hadn't got a grip....

Yeah... You should repost it in every thread of XT2-whatsoever branch.