Jump to content

Fuji 55-200

Tommyboy

By Tommyboy
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

Tommyboy Enthusiast

Tommyboy

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm a recent Fuji convert. I started with a used EX-2, 18-55, and 23mm f/1.4. I was so impressed with the camera, the zoom, and the wide lens, I kept buying. A 16mm, 56mm, and 90mm later, I finally opted for an X-Pro 2. I had to sell my FF Canon system, consign some tobacco pipes, and work a second job, but I put together a very nice system. I'm really impressed with the image quality, particularly with the prime lenses. The 23mm is the lens that I keep on the body and the 90 is just amazing.

 

When I bought the X-Pro 2, I had hoped to pick up a tele zoom. It was the only hole in my system. I agonized between the 50-140 and its infinitely more affordable cousin—the 55-200—for several weeks. I've always opted for better glass and would love to have a 16-55 and 50-140, but I got into this system for reasons of weight. After having a chance to actually handle both, I took the responsible route (financially speaking) and opted for the 55-200. Samy's Camera was out of stock, though, so I had to come home and order it online. 

 

It arrived Thursday and I took a brief trip out of town to try it out. The fit and feel of the lens is very different than the 50-140. It has a metal barrel, but the protruding inner barrel is plastic. The zoom is not smooth. It's ungainly, not a sophisticated design. The max aperture is variable, and slower, but faster then competitive lenses in the same range by other manufacturers. It does offer OIS, 3 stops or 5 stops, depending on who you ask, something absent from most of my lenses. Once I shot a few hundred exposures and processed them, I can safely say that I'm very pleased with the lens's performance. I also really like the (equivalent) 300 mm reach. The 50-140 (equivalent) 200mm seemed so much shorter in the store. That lens is certainly very sharp, probably sharper, has a fixed max aperture, internal mechanism, and is still very small and light, though much heavier than my chosen lens. Most of my shooting is in close, patient, and not dependent on the speed that a zoom affords. Were my circumstances different, I might have opted for the 50-140. Given my current life circumstances, and shooting style, however, this lens seems to fit the bill and is quite satisfying, given its limitations. 

 

I'll continue to shoot my 90 for what I deem critical images, but in all honesty, it was the one lens I didn't reach for all weekend. I used the 55-200 extensively. There were some less-than-spectacular low-contrast photos, some motion blur, and other issues, but many of the photos are just great. These are a few that I think highlight this inexpensive lens's tremendous sharpness. All are RAW files processed in LR. 

 

Thanks for reading. Feedback, comments, and questions are welcomed.

 

DSCF0809-XL.jpg

 

200mm • f/13 • 1/60 • ISO 200

 

DSCF0892-XL.jpg

 

156mm • f/4.5 • 1/900 • ISO 200

 

DSCF0990-XL.jpg

 

200mm • f/8 • 1/60 • ISO 400

 

DSCF1101-XL.jpg

 

55mm • f/5.0 • 1/420 • ISO 400

 

DSCF1089-XL.jpg

 

181mm • f/4.7 • 1/560 • ISO 400

 

DSCF1110-XL.jpg

 

55mm • f/3.5 • 1/2500 • ISO 200

Edited by Tommyboy
Link to post
Share on other sites
Tommyboy Enthusiast

Tommyboy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for your input. I'm thinking about getting this lens, buy I'm not quite there yet.

 

 

It's a great lens. It's my sixth Fujinon lens and only one was less expensive (used 18-55). 

 

If you need a long zoom for indoor/low light shooting, this is not your lens.

 

If you can't get past fit and finish issues, this is not your lens.

 

If you want 6X reach, shoot outdoors in the daylight, and dig crisp, clear photos, this might be the lens for you.

 

Good luck with your decision. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nero Rising Star

Nero

Posted
Posted

I have the 18-135mm (which is actually my least used lens for a number of reasons I won't go into here) and it was the primary reason for pushing me away from the 50-140mm. The image quality is no comparison between the two, but 135mm was just not long enough whenever I really wanted some reach. I went with the 55-200 to get that extra length and it's quickly become a favorite lens. The image quality is stunning for a lens of that price. It has some tradeoffs, but that extra $1000 that I saved allowed me to buy an X-Pro2. The 55-200 is almost permanently attached to my X-T1 and then I rotate between the 16, 23, and 35 f/1.4 on the X-Pro2. If I had spent the extra $1000 on the 50-140, my gear would not be nearly as flexible right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jlmphotos Experienced

jlmphotos

Posted
Posted

I LOVE my 55-200.  Even though it does not come out to play very often, I do take it with me.  Know it is there is good enough.  This lens, at least my copy is tack sharp across the focal range, and at each aperture.  I have no complaints.  I hate the "are you happy to see  me" extension at long end but that's a price to be paid.  It's lightweight compared to it's big brother the 50-140 2.8 which, after unloading myself of my Nikon gear which included the Nikon 70-200 F2.8, I do not ever want to carry around again.  So, there are a few drawbacks, but the 55-200 is a magnificent lens and one I will not give up.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tommyboy Enthusiast

Tommyboy

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

…I hate the "are you happy to see me" extension at long end but that's a price to be paid.…

 

That.

 

...It's lightweight compared to it's big brother the 50-140 2.8 which, after unloading myself of my Nikon gear which included the Nikon 70-200 F2.8, I do not ever want to carry around again....

Mine was a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 v1. Owned it for a dozen years, used it a dozen times. So heavy it was silly as a carry-in-your-bag-lens. Not unlike Nero above, I traded mine for an XP2.

Edited by Tommyboy
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...
abiser Newbie

abiser

Posted
Posted

It's pics like these that made me want the 55-200 so much in the first place but I haven't had any success capturing sharp photos at 200mm with this lens. I bought this used and noticed that at 200mm all the photos were very blurry no matter what I tried. I'm hoping that I wasn't ripped off buying a defective lens.

 

Here is an example where it is kind of sharp in the center but not like it should be at f8.

 

1/500 sec - f/8 - ISO 640 @ 200mm

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

I noticed today when inspecting the lens that when zoomed out to 200mm the external part of the lens significantly wobbles. I know that with an external lens there is going to be some movement especially when the lens is zoomed at to the max but this one seems excessive.

 

Does anybody else's wobble when zoomed out?

 

I'll try to post a video to dropbox but I'm not sure if I can include the link.

 

Video example

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eagd72b188m1wdp/Fuji%2055-200%20Lens%20Wobble.mp4?dl=0

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nick05 Collaborator

Nick05

Posted
Posted (edited)

It's pics like these that made me want the 55-200 so much in the first place but I haven't had any success capturing sharp photos at 200mm with this lens. I bought this used and noticed that at 200mm all the photos were very blurry no matter what I tried. I'm hoping that I wasn't ripped off buying a defective lens.

 

Here is an example where it is kind of sharp in the center but not like it should be at f8.

 

1/500 sec - f/8 - ISO 640 @ 200mm

attachicon.gifDSCF9519.JPG

 

I noticed today when inspecting the lens that when zoomed out to 200mm the external part of the lens significantly wobbles. I know that with an external lens there is going to be some movement especially when the lens is zoomed at to the max but this one seems excessive.

 

Does anybody else's wobble when zoomed out?

 

I'll try to post a video to dropbox but I'm not sure if I can include the link.

 

Video example

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eagd72b188m1wdp/Fuji%2055-200%20Lens%20Wobble.mp4?dl=0

Yes, mine has the wobble too. I found that I get much sharper photos if I turn the IS mode to shooting only. I recently posted that same suggestion in a topic on the 100-400mm too and was thinking I should really do a comparison between the IS settings. I remember reading it somewhere else and it seemed to help me. Edited by Nick05
Link to post
Share on other sites
quincy Community Regular

quincy

Posted
Posted

It's pics like these that made me want the 55-200 so much in the first place but I haven't had any success capturing sharp photos at 200mm with this lens. I bought this used and noticed that at 200mm all the photos were very blurry no matter what I tried. I'm hoping that I wasn't ripped off buying a defective lens.

 

Here is an example where it is kind of sharp in the center but not like it should be at f8.

 

1/500 sec - f/8 - ISO 640 @ 200mm

attachicon.gifDSCF9519.JPG

 

I noticed today when inspecting the lens that when zoomed out to 200mm the external part of the lens significantly wobbles. I know that with an external lens there is going to be some movement especially when the lens is zoomed at to the max but this one seems excessive.

 

Does anybody else's wobble when zoomed out?

 

I'll try to post a video to dropbox but I'm not sure if I can include the link.

 

Video example

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eagd72b188m1wdp/Fuji%2055-200%20Lens%20Wobble.mp4?dl=0

Try shooting from a tripod, and try taking pictures of things that are closer to the camera. But mine does not wobble at all, and honestly, I think your lens is defective.

You can have a short look at my XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Album to see what you can expect from a working sample.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Heccie Thump
      Image Stabilisation

      By Heccie Thump · Posted

      I want to check with you guys on how image stabilisation is meant to work on the XT4 and whether I might have an issue. I was out with the camera yesterday with the 80mm macro lens, which has OIS, and the 1.4 Teleconverter and did some tests to see how good the stabilisation was performing by pointing at random objects/general landscape.  On the lens I had the OIS switch turned on and I selected the stabilisation to be always on in the menu option and was suitably impressed with how much camera shake was reduced.  However, when I went in the menu and selected Shooting Only for stabilisation I noticed something odd.  My understanding with this mode is that when you half press the shutter release the OIS is meant to turn on and stabilise the image just before completing the shot.  With the focus switch set to Continuous AF this is exactly what happened - shaky image, half press, stable image.  But, if the focus selector switch is set to Single AF I half press the release and I get no stabilisation.  The focus locks and the exposure locks but the image is still shaky in the viewfinder. I swapped out the lens for my 16-80mm kit lens and this performs exactly the same - no image stabilisation with Single AF selected, so it appears to be something to do with the body and not the lens. Is this normal?  I would be surprised if stabilisation only kick in when you fully press the shutter release because some shots are taken with tiny fractions of a second of exposure and the mechanism will still need a finite time to engage.
    • Greybeard
      Fuji 100s & the new xApp

      By Greybeard · Posted

      Thats an interesting question - there appear to be two different remote access interfaces to the camera : Bluetooth/Wi-Fi and USB - the USB interface does have a way of accessing a shutter count - I haven't seen any report that its available via Bluetooth/WiFi.
    • garfinkle
      Fuji Apps hijack exposure reading

      By garfinkle · Posted

      Jerry. We're really travelling in circles here (please refer to my original post). I know what tethering is and how to use it. I use the TL Plus View to trigger a Zeapon system for Time Lapse and the two together work perfectly fine. However, it would be nice to work occasionally without this rig and simply use the Fuji app. The workaround you're describing is unworkable for any serious Day to Night timelapse as, apart from anything else (such as camera touching and therefore unwanted movement) you are constantly looking in the rear view mirror as to what it is you're metering, not to mention that the space between intervals would have to be unusably long. (sigh) All Im asking is that the app displays the exposure when using ANY intervalometer. There may be no serious workaround, but I thank you for your thoughts.
    • jerryy
      Fuji Apps hijack exposure reading

      By jerryy · Posted

      Nope the exposure indicator meter only shows when using an external intervalometer, it does not show when using the internal one or when using the app. The work around is time limited, a variation of what I have described above, tethering the camera or grab an image using the app. Open the image in Raw Studio or an editor and look at the histogram, etc, You will see if it is over/under exposed. Tethering or connecting via usb to grab the image is fastest, the remote app is okay. If clouds are rolling in, it can be tricky at first. studio shooters use tethering a lot.
    • garfinkle
      Fuji Apps hijack exposure reading

      By garfinkle · Posted

      Even Fuji Australia seem to see this as an oversight.   The reason Im posting here is in the unlikely event that someone has a functional workaround...hopefully one that doesn't involve physically touching the camera...which is the entire point of the app so far as Im concerned.
×
×
  • Create New...