50-230 II as a landscape lens

A shot from the weekend, processed through SilkyPix 3.0 and then in Photoshop Nik Dfine, Sharpener (I only used SilkyPix as I wanted to change white balance, I am in the process of migrating to C1 Pro).

Cropped to 4:3 as I didn't quite nail DoF and part of the original foreground was not quite sharp.

Very light lens, seems pretty good when stopped down.

X-T2, Gitzo 2 series Traveller, RRS BH-25, RRS L-Bracket, Hoya polariser.

Nice shot.  I have this lens, it is light and when I bought it very inexpensive but a little plastic compared to other Fuji lens I have. This said Fuji, at least to me, offer a very good range of lenses - even the lower price ones can give very nice results.

As others have said, nice image.

You should be able to pull more detail out with C1.  Since you shot this at F16 (presumably to slow the shutter) you do get noticeable diffraction.  In C1, in the Lens Correction toolset, check "Diffraction Correction" on any image that is F9 or smaller, and you should be able to push the standard sharpening further without artifacts.

I've been considering the 50-230 as well.  I have been hiking with the 16-55 & 50-140 (along with the 2x TC) and I know that going with something like the 16-80 & 50-230 would be sooo much lighter and compact.

georgehudetz wrote:

As others have said, nice image.

You should be able to pull more detail out with C1. Since you shot this at F16 (presumably to slow the shutter) you do get noticeable diffraction. In C1, in the Lens Correction toolset, check "Diffraction Correction" on any image that is F9 or smaller, and you should be able to push the standard sharpening further without artifacts.

I've been considering the 50-230 as well. I have been hiking with the 16-55 & 50-140 (along with the 2x TC) and I know that going with something like the 16-80 & 50-230 would be sooo much lighter and compact.

Ah, thanks, yes I was struggling to get shutter speed long enough to blur the water.

Your back would certainly notice taking the 50-230 instead of the 50-140!

Snap Happy wrote:

georgehudetz wrote:

As others have said, nice image.

You should be able to pull more detail out with C1. Since you shot this at F16 (presumably to slow the shutter) you do get noticeable diffraction. In C1, in the Lens Correction toolset, check "Diffraction Correction" on any image that is F9 or smaller, and you should be able to push the standard sharpening further without artifacts.

I've been considering the 50-230 as well. I have been hiking with the 16-55 & 50-140 (along with the 2x TC) and I know that going with something like the 16-80 & 50-230 would be sooo much lighter and compact.

Ah, thanks, yes I was struggling to get shutter speed long enough to blur the water.

Your back would certainly notice taking the 50-230 instead of the 50-140!

Yes indeed.  I'm even thinking of just taking the 10-24 & 50-230 in a waist pack for most hiking.

jonikon wrote:

Nicely done! It appears you have a better copy of the 50-230mm than I do though. Did you have OIS turned off?

Yes, absolutely, especially after I took some test shots at home on the same tripod/head but forgot to turn OIS off - I almost left the lens at home as the shots were not sharp.

BTW, if you could post a 100% JPEG from C1 - or a raw - of a Landscape image @ F8 sometime, I'd appreciate it.  Most of the XC samples I've seen posted here are of reduced resolution.