Jump to content

55-200mm or 50-140mm

Cynthia

By Cynthia
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

gordonrussell76 Collaborator

gordonrussell76

Posted
Posted (edited)

The 90mm continually blows my mind. 

 

Just for shizzles and giggles this weekend I took it out along with my 55-200mm and I shot some wildlife and birds at the same physical distances at 90mm and 200mm respectively. When I cropped the 90mm to match the 200mm field of view tabout 70% of the shots were sharper from the cropped 90mm even when zoomed in further. I find that mind blowing.

 

If it were not for the issue of initial target acquisition there is part of me that is tempted to ditch the 55-200 and take the 90mm instead for my canada trip.

 

erk1024 thank you for your kind words 

 

It funny i bought the 90mm because of an oh wow moment in the shop where I pointed it out the window and got an amazing first shot (featured on Fuji Love few months back). Then my brain kicked in and I started wandering if were a practical lens for me. Those street shots were part of me trying to convince myself I could live without it and sell it and the 55-200 to justify the 50-140mm, the irony is that the more I have used it the more I am realizing how versatile it is.

 

I did a few shots this weekend that show that its very good at architecture if you have the distance to get far enough away and that leads me to suspect that it will do well at landscape. In addition its close focus is fabulous and it makes a great Macro lens.

 

I will put up another gallery later this week with a few shots to illustrate this point.

G

Edited by gordonrussell76
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
lleo Community Regular

lleo

Posted
Posted (edited)

Nice shots and beautiful kids, Cynthia. You know, when you get a "stock" lens, one of those offered in kit with the camera, and a "pro" one you'll understand the difference istantly as well as why the pro lenses cost a fortune.

Many years ago I've tried a Nikon 28-80 f/3,5-4,5 or 5,6, then I've bought a 35-70 F2,8 and it was like day and night.

Just looking at the pics, the ones taken with the kit lens looked like toys.

It's not the case of Fuji, obviously, due the high quality of the kit lenses. The only questions you have to ask yourself are:

  • how much the differences between the two lenses might affect my work? And are they so big to justify the extra money?
  • do I need a weather sealing lens?
  • how much I can or I wish to pay a lens?

Once you have answered this questions, you'll have the clue.

Actually I own the 18-55 and the 55-200 and they're really great, great lenses. I shoot mainly with a old Leica so I didn't want to get several prime lenses and I opted for these two zooms.

In the early I also thought about the 16-55, the 50-140, but in the end the two I have are perfect for my needings. Also, the other two are... well I don't know why Fuji made lenses that overlay each other. Fortunately they didn't do it with the two zooms I have.

Edited by lleo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • thelostkiwi
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By thelostkiwi · Posted

      I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...