First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics

Started Dec 6, 2014 | Photos
Daniel from Bavaria Contributing Member • Posts: 904
First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics
9

Hi,

yesterday I was in a very innocent mood when I visited my local photo dealer, and as destiny had it's fun, there was a single 50-140 in his window.

Mhh, I've not planned to buy that lens yet, for sure later, when I really need it for some job to do, what is not the case at the moment - and for the time being the 55-200 should be good enough.

Two weeks ago I've sold my Canon 5dmkIII and the 24-70 II, so some petty cash is available ..., and what the heck, I just give it a look .... and ten minutes later I went with the lens out of the shop

Poorly, so far I had not much time to really test the lens as I have some work to do that weekend, however here are my first impressions, and one thing upfront: Yes, the lens is so damn good as you may have read in other places...

First of all, it is not THAT big, but it's not small either. Compared to the Canon it is a good share smaller and lighter. In fact has the X-T1 with the 50-140 roughly the same weight as the Canon alone. Just from my memory, the Camera-Lens package of the Fuji is a total different world. Therefore I cannot understand the moaners who are whining that the difference is not that big. Forget it, the difference of the package I had with my 5dmkIII is huge. Of course it's not a pocket lens, and also not my first joice when it comes to travelling, but it's a good piece smaller and for small there are still the primes. Horses for courses.

without lenshood - the lens cap of the Fuji is roughly double as thick as the Canon.

With lens hood

Size when packed for transportation

The build quality seems to be top notch. Again, compared to the Canon, the Canon feels a bit more sturdy, what might be due to the weight. The black color is of course much less obstrusive.

The tripod collar is really nice design, engineering wise much nicer than the Canon one. But for normaly usage I leave it at home.

The Zoomring and the Focusring are nicely damped. So everything fine.

On the X-T1 the lens handles very nice, either with the MHG-XT or the battery grip.

Once you turn on the camera you hear a slight "clong"-sound when the Image-Stabelizer places the lensgroup into position. The OIS itself works extremely well, I would say a bit better than the already insanely good 18-135 OIS.

Here is the very first picture it took with the 5-140: My 1.4 23mm in low light: 140mm 1/12s and sharp. I think that's a bit crazy

The very first picture, from the boy on the camera ... and snap. Very efficient OIS. 140mm at 1/12

The AF seems to me also very, very snappy, and of course quiet. When I am talking about noise, yes, due to the OIS the lens makes a subtle humming noise once the camera is on.

But to the most important point: The Image quality. And when until yet the lens aready made a very, very good impression, the this is the area where it realy shines. The image quality is just near to perfect from f2.8 onwards. In fact I was not able to the a different in sharpness or contrast between f2.8 and f5.6 in real life photos of my dog.

The bokeh is surprinsingly soft, don't know what trick they used, but beside the lens is sharp and contrasty the bokeh is kind of soft and buttery -for such a lens on APS-C.

Not a tat nervous, just every bit pleasent.

Bokeh example, just defocused on the Christmas tree in daylight.

Overall I am very happy with the lens and I am looking forward to bring it through it's paces soon.

As I have a EF-Fuji adapter and still the 70-200, I plan to do a small comparision between the Canon 2.8 70-200L IS II and the 50-140 on the X-T1.

Please find attached some more first shots from today, nothing special, just to tryout a bit.

Daniel

Last but not least, the always needed Cat photo, no test without

 Daniel from Bavaria's gear list:Daniel from Bavaria's gear list
Leica M10 Leica Elmarit-M 28mm f/2.8 ASPH Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH Leica Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH Leica Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH +1 more
Comment & critique:
Please provide me constructive critique and criticism.
Canon EOS 5D Fujifilm XF 50-140mm F2.8 Fujifilm X-T1
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
wblink
wblink Regular Member • Posts: 229
Re: First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics

Not worried with the sound of gyroscoop in your lens

-- hide signature --

Willem.
Fuji XT-1

 wblink's gear list:wblink's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 +1 more
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 3,441
Re: First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics

How many Screws has the Fuji Lens on the Mount ?
Please share a Photo.

57LowRider Veteran Member • Posts: 4,064
Re: First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics

I do like those shots (heh, your standard is always high). The OIS really does the business, apart from the super optics. If I was a pro X system user, the lens might well be a must-have.

 57LowRider's gear list:57LowRider's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R +11 more
The Davinator
The Davinator Forum Pro • Posts: 21,885
Re: First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics

Wow...bokeh actually looks more pleasing than some Canon primes.  Looks like an awesome lens.

 The Davinator's gear list:The Davinator's gear list
Canon EOS D30 Canon EOS 10D Nikon D2X Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 +17 more
bartolyni Contributing Member • Posts: 513
Re: First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics

IQ looks very promising indeed...Another outstanding lens from Fuji. Thanks for sharing. Are in fashion industry by any chance?

forpetessake
forpetessake Veteran Member • Posts: 4,960
faulty comparison
8

The Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 lens is equivalent to a FF 75-210mm f/4.2 lens. So the closest Canon lens would be 70-200mm f/4, not the f/2.8. And if you compare Fuji to the equivalent Canon you'll find out that it's neither small, nor light, nor cheap. Maybe it will test better than Canon, we don't know yet, but let's not kid ourselves, it's a heavy and expensive lens by modern standards.

bartolyni Contributing Member • Posts: 513
plain silly!
8

forpetessake wrote:

The Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 lens is equivalent to a FF 75-210mm f/4.2 lens. So the closest Canon lens would be 70-200mm f/4, not the f/2.8. And if you compare Fuji to the equivalent Canon you'll find out that it's neither small, nor light, nor cheap. Maybe it will test better than Canon, we don't know yet, but let's not kid ourselves, it's a heavy and expensive lens by modern standards.

Light gathering ability of Fuji is still f2.8.....Your comparison has no grounds but polemic

The Davinator
The Davinator Forum Pro • Posts: 21,885
Re: plain silly!
3

bartolyni wrote:

forpetessake wrote:

The Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 lens is equivalent to a FF 75-210mm f/4.2 lens. So the closest Canon lens would be 70-200mm f/4, not the f/2.8. And if you compare Fuji to the equivalent Canon you'll find out that it's neither small, nor light, nor cheap. Maybe it will test better than Canon, we don't know yet, but let's not kid ourselves, it's a heavy and expensive lens by modern standards.

Light gathering ability of Fuji is still f2.8.....Your comparison has no grounds but polemic

Agreed.

 The Davinator's gear list:The Davinator's gear list
Canon EOS D30 Canon EOS 10D Nikon D2X Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 +17 more
Jason Haven Regular Member • Posts: 312
Re: faulty comparison

forpetessake wrote:

The Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 lens is equivalent to a FF 75-210mm f/4.2 lens. So the closest Canon lens would be 70-200mm f/4, not the f/2.8. And if you compare Fuji to the equivalent Canon you'll find out that it's neither small, nor light, nor cheap. Maybe it will test better than Canon, we don't know yet, but let's not kid ourselves, it's a heavy and expensive lens by modern standards.

Equivalent aperture refers to depth of field. It's still a f2.8 lens in terms of light gathering, and hence why the size balloons, especially if you want said lens to be sharp wide open and most/all focal lengths.

Making such a lens light weight, and cheap, would probably mean soft edges, heavy vignetting, only sharp at a few key focal lengths, and not that sharp wide open.

Physics is a limitation in these things. You can't really make a small, all around high quality, fast zoom.

That all being said, it's probably too big of a lens for me, just because I'm trying to keep my kit fairly compact. But damn is it tempting.

 Jason Haven's gear list:Jason Haven's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R +4 more
cesjr Forum Member • Posts: 60
Re: faulty comparison
1

Equivalence police out already. But I guess we knew that would happen.

forpetessake
forpetessake Veteran Member • Posts: 4,960
Re: faulty comparison
3

Jason Haven wrote:

forpetessake wrote:

The Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8 lens is equivalent to a FF 75-210mm f/4.2 lens. So the closest Canon lens would be 70-200mm f/4, not the f/2.8. And if you compare Fuji to the equivalent Canon you'll find out that it's neither small, nor light, nor cheap. Maybe it will test better than Canon, we don't know yet, but let's not kid ourselves, it's a heavy and expensive lens by modern standards.

Equivalent aperture refers to depth of field. It's still a f2.8 lens in terms of light gathering,

You are repeating an old myth, which used to be wide spread, but for the last two years there were so many posts, articles, and even DPR editorial which dispelled it, I'm surprised to see somebody who still believes it.

The equivalence applies to everything: the FOV, the DOF, the light gathering -- it's just simple physics. See, for example the DPR take on it: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care

-- hide signature --

The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so.

OP Daniel from Bavaria Contributing Member • Posts: 904
Re: First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics

Carsten Pauer 2 wrote:

How many Screws has the Fuji Lens on the Mount ?
Please share a Photo.

Hi,

here you are (a quick an shaky one .. ;):

 Daniel from Bavaria's gear list:Daniel from Bavaria's gear list
Leica M10 Leica Elmarit-M 28mm f/2.8 ASPH Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH Leica Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH Leica Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH +1 more
OP Daniel from Bavaria Contributing Member • Posts: 904
Re: First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics

bartolyni wrote:

IQ looks very promising indeed...Another outstanding lens from Fuji. Thanks for sharing. Are in fashion industry by any chance?

Thanks, and nope I am not in the fashion industry. I am just a amateur, the lady is my wife.

 Daniel from Bavaria's gear list:Daniel from Bavaria's gear list
Leica M10 Leica Elmarit-M 28mm f/2.8 ASPH Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH Leica Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH Leica Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH +1 more
Beat Traveller Contributing Member • Posts: 744
Re: faulty comparison
1

One two three four I declare an equivalence war.

Seriously who cares. It's a good lens, end of.

 Beat Traveller's gear list:Beat Traveller's gear list
Nikon D60 Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS
Joachim Gerstl
Joachim Gerstl Veteran Member • Posts: 8,065
Re: First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics

Hi Daniel,

Nice shots and you are right: No review is complete without a picture of a cat.

You already sold most of your Canon gear. Why is that?

-- hide signature --
 Joachim Gerstl's gear list:Joachim Gerstl's gear list
Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +6 more
OP Daniel from Bavaria Contributing Member • Posts: 904
Re: First impressions 2.8 50-140 with some pics

Joachim Gerstl wrote:

Hi Daniel,

Nice shots and you are right: No review is complete without a picture of a cat.

You already sold most of your Canon gear. Why is that?

Hi Joachim,

thanks.

To your question: I used it far too less for its price. Took me 2,5 years to make the decision but I am really not the 2 system guy. I've prefered to work with the Fuji in most of the cases and when I looked at my pictures there was practically no justification for me to hold on the Canon system.

Daniel

 Daniel from Bavaria's gear list:Daniel from Bavaria's gear list
Leica M10 Leica Elmarit-M 28mm f/2.8 ASPH Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH Leica Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH Leica Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH +1 more
pluton Veteran Member • Posts: 3,221
Re: faulty comparison
3

Jason Haven wrote:

Equivalent aperture refers to depth of field.

Not to me.

-- hide signature --

-KB-

ot73 Forum Member • Posts: 70
Re: faulty comparison

well i really dont know what the fight is all about...

DOF wis, the 50-140 = 70-200 f4

Light wise, 50-140 = 70-200 f2.8

no?

i dont know why people are so obsessed with this.

if you have fuji x, and you need this lens - you will get it, and not the canon...

if you want something lighter, there is the 55-250.

dennis tennis Veteran Member • Posts: 3,783
Re: faulty comparison
2

ot73 wrote:

well i really dont know what the fight is all about...

DOF wis, the 50-140 = 70-200 f4

Light wise, 50-140 = 70-200 f2.8

no?

i dont know why people are so obsessed with this.

if you have fuji x, and you need this lens - you will get it, and not the canon...

if you want something lighter, there is the 55-250.

No, light instensity wise it is f2.8 but it isn't the same LIGHT total as the 70-200 f2.8 on FF.  That's the part people don't get.  the 50-140 project a samller image circle.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads