Am I the only one wanting an XF 24-200 WR lens?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Jerry-astro
MOD Jerry-astro Forum Pro • Posts: 17,566
Re: You are thinking too small

Doug MacMillan wrote:

How about something like the Canon 50-1000? It's only $70k and the darling of wildlife cinematographers.

Seriously, to build something with enough IQ and a fast enough aperture to suit me would end up being very large, very heavy and very expensive.

I also agree that any zoom beyond 3x calls for too many compromises. Personally, I don't regard super zooms as being what Fuji is about. If I wanted something like that, I would have gone with a different system.

So, just to be clear, you would therefore also include Fuji’s 100-400 in that class as well, right?  Now, I admit to being a pretty big fan of that lens and it’s arguably the one I use the most, but I honestly haven’t encountered much in the way of compromises in IQ at either end of the FL range… or certainly not enough to discourage its use.  I have encountered issues with other lenses that are consistent with your view here, but I suspect you might be “painting this with a bit too wide a brush” IMHO.  I think there are a number of 4x long zooms out there that are more than worthy with very few compromises.  Their popularity with professional wildlife photographers might also support that view.

-- hide signature --

Jerry-Astro
Fuji Forum co-Mod

 Jerry-astro's gear list:Jerry-astro's gear list
Fujifilm X-H1 Carl Zeiss Touit 2.8/12 Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Fujifilm XF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 OIS WR Fujifilm XF 8-16mm F2.8 +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow