Reading mode: Light Dark

Just took the plunge with 55-200

Go to last post
@third son, how much PP is built into those shots? I'm looking at photos I've taken at 200mm on my lens, and all the sharpness test shots I've done, and either you got the best copy of this lens that Fuji ever produced or I got a dud. I'm thinking of doing a separate thread and posting some test shots to gauge consensus from the group...
 
Honestly, after I bought the 55-200 I sold my 90/2 and lost any interest in the 50-140.

Sure they other two are better, but this zoom is light, small enough and performs very well. At least for a non-pro family guy



460cb4ce8e1948cbb85996ef7829bb10.jpg



ebf68b4047c943b2b6ce1f4574d3c67b.jpg



cf10995fbd7748878a704e275e721af7.jpg



240a290671f141dfa798d77da9069098.jpg



--
https://500px.com/fpessolano
https://www.flickr.com/photos/fpessolano/
PS: No reply from me, I guess you are in my ignore list
 

Attachments

  • 9aa85d8fbb704df78505b9271e79c02a.jpg
    9aa85d8fbb704df78505b9271e79c02a.jpg
    11.8 MB · Views: 0
  • 19e001802fcc45d085def6af2926bf3e.jpg
    19e001802fcc45d085def6af2926bf3e.jpg
    9.3 MB · Views: 0
  • 2e9d82fe7c894fbea6b4070db059ca95.jpg
    2e9d82fe7c894fbea6b4070db059ca95.jpg
    8.9 MB · Views: 0
  • 15f6f26654f94e859e49ba98a0b7d246.jpg
    15f6f26654f94e859e49ba98a0b7d246.jpg
    14.3 MB · Views: 0
Last edited:
afwares said:
Wow, nice shots. I guess that's what we'd call getting a good copy. Nothing at all wrong with that one. Kudos on some seriously good shots, especially the peacock vaping.
Click to expand...
Thanks!
 
Thanks Jerry. I also have the 100-400 when not traveling. The 55-200mm is just so convenient!
 
afwares said:
@third son, how much PP is built into those shots? I'm looking at photos I've taken at 200mm on my lens, and all the sharpness test shots I've done, and either you got the best copy of this lens that Fuji ever produced or I got a dud. I'm thinking of doing a separate thread and posting some test shots to gauge consensus from the group...
Click to expand...
Nothing is 'built in' . I am not even sure what that means:-| I used capture one to develop the raw files. Nothing fancy.
 
By "built in" I was asking if those shots had a lot of post-processing added to them, i.e. sharpening, texture enhancement, etc. or if they were SOOC pix. They're really good, so good that my first gut response to myself was "why don't my pix look that good!?" :-)
 
afwares said:
By "built in" I was asking if those shots had a lot of post-processing added to them, i.e. sharpening, texture enhancement, etc. or if they were SOOC pix. They're really good, so good that my first gut response to myself was "why don't my pix look that good!?" :-)
Click to expand...
I always shoot raw. I process with Capture One 11. I sharpen with NIK free output sharpener. Oh and I purchased my lens used. I don't spend a lot of time on processing.
 
third son said:
afwares said:
By "built in" I was asking if those shots had a lot of post-processing added to them, i.e. sharpening, texture enhancement, etc. or if they were SOOC pix. They're really good, so good that my first gut response to myself was "why don't my pix look that good!?" :-)
Click to expand...
I always shoot raw. I process with Capture One 11. I sharpen with NIK free output sharpener. Oh and I purchased my lens used. I don't spend a lot of time on processing.
Click to expand...
Interesting...I have the whole NIK suite, but haven't made good use of the sharpening module yet. I'll work on that. Glad I ran into your post.
 
Truman Prevatt said:
The 50-140 f2.8 is all anyone could want from in a lens.

It is a fixed aperture zoom

It is fast for a zoom in that range

All the zooming is completely internal - the lens does not extend.

All the things I look for in a zoom. On the other hand it is heavy and not the type of lens I would consider throwing in a bag and walking around with. My 50-140 I use a lot but I often don't take it along because of the size and weight. Lugging that thing around on a hike would require either renting a Sherpa or buying a Yak ;-)

I have looked at the 55-200 a couple of times. The faults I find with this lens are

Variable aperture

It is slower than molasses - outside on a cold day in Maine

The zooming is external - namely the lens grows as you zoom out.

All three of these I detest in a lens.

However, I just got mine and tried it out. The huge benefit of this lens is it is about the size of my 90 f2 - even the same filter size. From what I seen here and in testing of it is sharp enough (maybe not to the standards of the 50-140 but still very good) and has a nice rendering (for a slow lens). This lens I will throw in my bag and take it with me a lot more often.

I took a shot of the light switch indoors at 1/10s using my H1 and the OIS/IBIS combination works quite well. Outdoor shots were sharp with good contrast.

Given the price at B&H I decided to take a risk with it. I'm quite pleased and I don't have to worry about what to feed a Yak :-D
Click to expand...
You have seemed to forget it's on sale for $499.00 and sharp as a tac @ 200mm. Big bang for the buck IMHO.
 
Mikegee said:
Truman Prevatt said:
The 50-140 f2.8 is all anyone could want from in a lens.

It is a fixed aperture zoom

It is fast for a zoom in that range

All the zooming is completely internal - the lens does not extend.

All the things I look for in a zoom. On the other hand it is heavy and not the type of lens I would consider throwing in a bag and walking around with. My 50-140 I use a lot but I often don't take it along because of the size and weight. Lugging that thing around on a hike would require either renting a Sherpa or buying a Yak ;-)

I have looked at the 55-200 a couple of times. The faults I find with this lens are

Variable aperture

It is slower than molasses - outside on a cold day in Maine

The zooming is external - namely the lens grows as you zoom out.

All three of these I detest in a lens.

However, I just got mine and tried it out. The huge benefit of this lens is it is about the size of my 90 f2 - even the same filter size. From what I seen here and in testing of it is sharp enough (maybe not to the standards of the 50-140 but still very good) and has a nice rendering (for a slow lens). This lens I will throw in my bag and take it with me a lot more often.

I took a shot of the light switch indoors at 1/10s using my H1 and the OIS/IBIS combination works quite well. Outdoor shots were sharp with good contrast.

Given the price at B&H I decided to take a risk with it. I'm quite pleased and I don't have to worry about what to feed a Yak :-D
Click to expand...
You have seemed to forget it's on sale for $499.00 and sharp as a tac @ 200mm. Big bang for the buck IMHO.
Click to expand...
In fact when I checked the weight out on B&H, I noticed the sale price of 499 compared to the approximate 3 times that for the 50-140. That was a big reason I decided to give it a try. It is half the weight of the 50-140 (about the same size as the 90) and 1/3 the price.

Couldn't go wrong there. It's not the 50-140 but it is damn good for good light and you don't care that it is slow. From my limited experience so far - it is well worth the investment. I can't remember when I have ever had the need shoot at 200 on an APS-C. The longest lens I had on my Nikon 135 format was 180. Even if soft at 200 - I probably won't ever notice.
 
After seeing some of the photos other posters took with the 55-200mm, I ran some sharpness tests of my own at 200mm, both indoors and outdoors, at both MFD and about 15ft. It's plenty sharp at f4.8 and 5.6, but the sweet spot (at least on mine) at 200mm is at f6.4.
 
afwares said:
third son said:
afwares said:
By "built in" I was asking if those shots had a lot of post-processing added to them, i.e. sharpening, texture enhancement, etc. or if they were SOOC pix. They're really good, so good that my first gut response to myself was "why don't my pix look that good!?" :-)
Click to expand...
I always shoot raw. I process with Capture One 11. I sharpen with NIK free output sharpener. Oh and I purchased my lens used. I don't spend a lot of time on processing.
Click to expand...
Interesting...I have the whole NIK suite, but haven't made good use of the sharpening module yet. I'll work on that. Glad I ran into your post.
Click to expand...
Nik's output sharpening module is awesome! For printing it is my last step. It has defined sharpening based on the paper type (matt vs. glossy vs. semigloss) on print DPI and even viewing distance. All come with sliders to fine tune.

The display sharpening is similar.
 
I will spend more time with it. If I run up against something I don't understand, I may come back and ask for some help. Clearly, I'm missing the boat here. TIA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top