Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi guys

 

Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 lens seems a great lens and is good for action sports but which would forum members suggest would be the best Fuji body to use with it ? I have a feeling my XE1 would be too slow ?

 

Appreciate any advice , thanks

 
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hi guys

 

Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 lens seems a great lens and is good for action sports but which would forum members suggest would be the best Fuji body to use with it ? I have a feeling my XE1 would be too slow ?

 

Appreciate any advice , thanks

 

 

X-E1 would be challenging for the 50-140.

 

I'd recommend X-E2, X-T10, X-T1 or X-Pro2. The 50-140 would be playing nice on these bodies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well obviously a camera with better autofocus will perform better. It all depends on your budget.

 

Thanks for reply but it doesnt really help me in a sense.

Which fuji camera would have the best autufocus ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

 

Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 lens seems a great lens and is good for action sports but which would forum members suggest would be the best Fuji body to use with it ? I have a feeling my XE1 would be too slow ?

 

Appreciate any advice , thanks

Also, what kind of action sports are you thinking of? Because a manual focus fisheye is pretty damn good for action sports too, if you're able to get close enough to the action...

 

You don't need a fast-focussing body, either!

 

542f6cb8c054c2bedb365e1b050fb4be.jpg

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited by Warwick
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, what kind of action sports are you thinking of? Because a manual focus fisheye is pretty damn good for action sports too, if you're able to get close enough to the action...

 

You don't need a fast-focussing body, either!

 

542f6cb8c054c2bedb365e1b050fb4be.jpg

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I will mainly be snapping Football and Rugby league and can get close to the action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're taking photos of football and rugby, a zoom lens will be better than a fisheye. You need to be almost close enough to physically touch your subject for fisheye action shots to look good.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment the X-T1 or X-Pro 2, but soon it will be the X-T2!

 

 

What Mike G said. 

 

If I were in the market for a 50-140 and was interested in shooting team action sports, I'd definitely be looking at the XT-2. You'll have to wait a month or so, but it'll be worth it. 

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
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
    • First post here but long time fuji shorter. I use the XT2 with the 23mm f2 / 35mm 1.4 / 16-80mm f4 I'm considering the 23mm f1.4 r (Non-WR) About me: - I shoot black and white only. - I like macro details to wide open landscapes and everything in-between. - I shoot mostly for art, intrigue and creativity of the image. My question - is the 23mm f1.4 going to offer me any meaningful difference over the f2 for the above scenarios Thanks and sorry for bringing it up again...
    • I discovered this unmarked government installation today.  

      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!

×
×
  • Create New...