DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Which zoom (55-200 or 50-230)

Started May 23, 2016 | Discussions thread
georgehudetz Veteran Member • Posts: 6,299
Jeff, good points, but overstated just a bit

I think most people will not consider a 15% increase in reach "huge."  If it is, then surely twice the light gathering is even "huger?"  

Even if one does consider an extra 15% in reach huge, it's worth pointing out that (according to Photozone, anyway) the edge resolution of the 55-200 wide-open is roughly 15% higher than the 50-230, both at full tele.  So a crop from the 55-200 @ 200mm should offer roughly similar resolution to a full shot from the 50-230 @ 230mm.  To be fair, the center of the shot from the 55-200 would suffer a bit.

While one could argue that is splitting hairs, I'm just pointing out that it's not that simple.

Like most Fuji "upgrades" the improvements garnered from the more expensive instrument can't be properly appreciated with just one or two numbers.  Lots of little things add up to the 55-200 being a nicer overall lens.

But the value (either from a cost or weight perspective) of the 50-230 is off the charts, I won't disagree!  If I ever do a multi-day backpacking trip I may get one just for weight reasons.  After all, the best lens is the one you have with you.  

But if it's anything less - even a strenuous day hike - I don't mind the weight.  Heck, I've moved on from the 55-200 to the 50-140 so I guess that says something...

 georgehudetz's gear list:georgehudetz's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DC-S1R Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 Panasonic S 24-105mm F4 Macro OIS Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 DG DN Panasonic Lumix S Pro 16-35mm F4 +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
94
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow