Which zoom (55-200 or 50-230)

georgehere wrote:

StefanUllmann wrote:

In my opinion the 50-230 is excelent value for money.

I don't know how to quantify value-for-money, I haven't seen anybody suggesting a formula for that. But I would say that any product in an efficient market has the same value-for-money. Otherwise there wouldn't be a balance between the demand and the offer.

True, there is no mathematical formula. In my opinon it is relative go customer needs. I'm (as a non professional customer) are so happy and satisfied with this lens that i write about it and post pictures in public forums - I'm confident that I bought great value for my money. In your words, the offers satisfied my demand, more than that.

I have the X-M1 and both XC lenses both as kit as a step up from point and shoot. Wish Fuji makes an XC variant of the 18-135 lens as alround and always on lens for people like me.

I believe Fuji will have to offer cheaper lenses if they want to expand their market share. It wasn't a priority in their market strategy, but it eventually will. The release of the inexpensive 35/2 and hopefully other similar lenses is the move in that direction

Absolutely, and may be there is an X-M2 in future. Even if they stay with 16 MP but apply the noise reduction from the new sensor and make high ISO applicable for everyday use. I have printed some shots in 40x60cm - tack sharp. Good enogh for me. But this was not the topic of this thread.

If you can live with the non-metal material and without the XF-mark then the 50-230 is a mo-brainer.