Fujifilm 50-230mm - both versions

Hi,

Yes, IMO. it's worth it for travel and 'grab & go' uses. I've owned both versions of the 50-230 and still own a Mk1 and the 55-200. I found myself leaving the 55-200 at home because it's a 600g lump in the day pack. I bought a mint used 50-230 for $150 just for hiking and travel, not that I'm doing too much of either at the moment. It weighs 390g with the caps on, so it's lighter and by enough to actually notice that it's lighter.

I believe the two versions are optically identical but there's improved OIS in the MkII. I initially bought a used MkII, but had trouble with its AF on my XT1 running fully upgraded FW. I sold it to someone on whose camera the AF worked and later bought a used Mk1. I haven't owned both at the same time, so I haven't compared their IQ side by side. I've had no troubles with the Mk1 and it works just fine. I don't notice any IQ differences at all.

I've compared it to my 55-200. The XF is better but I've come to think of the benefit as being the build quality, faster aperture and more capable OIS than outright resolution. There is a difference visible at pixel peeping levels in some images. However, in my samples, the differences at each aperture are incremental when viewed at 100%. That's a print of over 24X36", so for more routine smaller print sizes, I doubt it would be visible at all. There's a noticeable step up in the IQ one stop down from maximum aperture so I try not to use it wide open (though that's true of both lenses.) The 50-230 is the better lens in terms of flare resistance if you're shooting into the sun.

To my surprise, I've become a convert...... I think the 50-230 is a capable travel lens. Yes it's plastic and lacks an aperture ring, but you know that when you buy one. If you look past that, it's underrated and offers a useful FL range in an ultralight package. It's excellent value for money and more so if bought used.

Cheers, Rod