Rearranging my gear lineup

Hi all,

To resume I need two cameras, because when on holiday trips, my girlfriend likes to carry one with a kit zoom on it.

I had a sony a6000 with a 16-50 specifically for that purpose. But I always kept a x100 style camera in my bucket list.

So I sold the Sony and bought a x100s. Enjoying it so far, it's my everyday camera, goes in my work messenger bag always.

I have an x-t20. Because of the x100s I sold the 23mm f2. Didn't need two 23mm. Bought the 18-55 as the kit zoom.

Also have the 50-230 II, and a 50mm f2 on the way, needed that one for my kids indoor soccer (long enough).

I like to shoot some horse competitions, cross country, jumps, also some rally stuff. And in 1 year my son will be playing outdoor soccer, as he will be 5 and will join the local club.

So my plan was to replace the 50-230 with something that focus faster. It serves my needs for now, don't use it that much, but will use more a telezoom from next year on.

No budget for 50-140 or 100-400, so I'm left with the 55-200.

I read loads of stuff about it, watched YouTube videos, but 95% of the reviews are with older cameras. Image quality wise, I know it's good.

My question is if focus in AF-C will improve much over the 50-230.

Thanks

Rui

The AF of the 55-200mm nowadays is rather on the slow side even after upgrade of camera and lens FW I doubt it is any better than the small brother

The buit is superb same the IQ given size weight and price

All mirrorless systems fail on this setup, cheap fast focusing telezoom.

Sony only has the 55-210, slow from what i understood.

Panasonic/ Olympus have 45-150/40-150, 45-175 and 45-200, only good at AF-S.

Fuji has 50-230 and 55-200, both slow to focus.

In SLRs, at least in canon you have 75-300 USM or event the old 100-300 USM, €150 max for used ones....

Nikon surely has one or two of those as well.

Used D3400 or Canon 750d cost arround €350/400 plus €150 for the lens, and its less than the 55-200 price. Not the same image quality though.

But a Canon L 70-200 f4 used is €450, which would make the setup at €800.

It has mainly to do with the old design of the AF engine, eventhough linear in the 55-200m and the 18-55mm

That said for still use they are great

AFC works well also, but the 55-200mm will be not be very well suited in AFC CL (and of course CH)

The 18-135mm is very fast same for my 100-400mm (with XT2)

I have no problem for BIF phography with both

There is also the 90mm but adding to the cost, it's a short focal distance.

Come on Fuji, update the 55-200 with a decent focus system. Parents have to shoot their kids also, otherwise mothers won't allow them to buy cameras....

I guess I will make it happen with the 50-230 anyway.  Worked for horse jump, Catherdam series and womens soccer. Will not be worst in the future.

I was just lucky enough to have a 70-200 f2.8 L in the past...so I'm spoiled.

Also thinking of adding something wide for landscape and creative shoots. Had a Samyang 12mm for couple of weeks, ended selling it. But since I now only have the 50mm f2 and the 23mm on the x100s, it makes sense to add a wide at some point.

You are correct.  If you are shooting all those sports you need the 100-400 and / or the 50-140 with 1.4 TC.  But that is very expensive and outside your budget.  So yes, the 55-200 is the obvious choice and is far superior to the non XF lens choices and super-zooms.  Yes it focuses faster and is just a better lens.  The 55-200 is a great way to get 300 equivalent.  You will be happy with it at that price point.  It is a very fine little lens.  It is also great for travel.

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Greg7579 wrote:

You are correct. If you are shooting all those sports you need the 100-400 and / or the 50-140 with 1.4 TC. But that is very expensive and outside your budget. So yes, the 55-200 is the obvious choice and is far superior to the non XF lens choices and super-zooms. Yes it focuses faster and is just a better lens. The 55-200 is a great way to get 300 equivalent. You will be happy with it at that price point. It is a very fine little lens. It is also great for travel.

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Thanks mate!

I have the 55-200, never tried the 50-230. It is a good lens though the zoom is a little stiff.

That said I prefer the 18-135 and tend to grab it more as it is more versatile.

I like the weather proofing, whereas the 55-200 does not have it, and I like that it has better magnification .27x compared to .18x on the 55-200 for a close up pseudo macro shot.

I like that it has image stabilization and works as a better standard zoom than the 18-55, they are fairly equal in IQ until the 18-55 reaches 55mm.

If you pair it with the 10-24mm and the 23/1.4 (or the X100s in your case), you have the most versatile 3 lens kit for travel.

KwhyChang wrote:

I have the 55-200, never tried the 50-230. It is a good lens though the zoom is a little stiff.

That said I prefer the 18-135 and tend to grab it more as it is more versatile.

I like the weather proofing, whereas the 55-200 does not have it, and I like that it has better magnification .27x compared to .18x on the 55-200 for a close up pseudo macro shot.

I like that it has image stabilization and works as a better standard zoom than the 18-55, they are fairly equal in IQ until the 18-55 reaches 55mm.

If you pair it with the 10-24mm and the 23/1.4 (or the X100s in your case), you have the most versatile 3 lens kit for travel.

Thanks for you comment Dave.

Well, my purpose is really a telephoto i can use for some occasional sports, like outdoor soccer, some horse contests and car racing. For that the 18-135 becomes short.

Also i don't do macro at all, and i have the XF 50mm F2.0 that focuses quite close for that purpose.

What i am more concerned about, is if the 55-200, additionally to being brighter (1 stop), gives me a bit faster focus in tracking or continuos for stills. Not doing video, and if i do, i will be using 1/60 or 1/50 shutter speeds, so in daylight it will give me f8 or f/11, so the DOF is big enough even for manual focus.