Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS review

@Asylum Photo

Well the opinion of the internet is the opinion of those that have no other opinion, so perhaps you have a point. ;-)

I carry an X100s every day, and no, you're wrong, Fuji is slow.

But if you're patient, the results can be excellent.

Its an expensive simply consumer telephoto. :P

Actually Fuji USA gave me *for free* an F810 because my F710 imported from Japan and never sold in the USA, had the sensor issue where it would die in a couple of years. They offered me to have to wait and pay a lot to get an F710 replacement from Japan or give me an F810 model for free.

They were simply great. Now, this was a long time ago so don't know how they are now, but if that's any indication, they are really good.

Yes, they were excellent. Fixed one of my cameras out of warranty because they agreed a card interface error should not have happened at all.

But I buy my cameras from a reputable dealer and generally let him handle warranty issues. So far 100%. His opinion is that he prefers dealing with Fuji to all the rest.

There is nothing quick about setting the AF point on the Fujis. Even with the update it's still clunky at best. It changes the viewfinder, which eats up some time. Then you move the point and half-press (and hope it focuses right). If the subject moves you go through the whole process again.

One of the main reasons I ditched my XPro-1 was because even with the fix it's still pretty slow.

Fuji should implement an AF priority mode that allows you to change the AF points on the fly like a DSLR. Even if it required using the EVF only it would be a good feature to have to speed up AF with moving subjects.

Well I am talking specifically about what DVT80111 said, not about your needs. What you mention seems to be a common problem on CDAF/mirrorless cameras in general.

JD....there are literally hundreds of online sites showcasing fuji / mirrorless cameras in daily use for street photography. In fact, the most prominent and best of this genre won't use DSLRs due to their scare factor on the general public, so not sure where you draw your conclusion from. These photographers aren't using point-n-shoots.

That doesn't make sense at all. I rather have a more reasonable size and this lens than a constant big heavy F2.8.

Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 is a APS-C good quality lens, but it's quite expensive and huge... would not match very well the size of xpro1. I would rather use some high quality fast primes like the ones Fuji provide!

I suspect that the profits Fuji make on cameras like the XM1 and XA1 are the resource that will enable them to continue to make higher level cameras like the XPro1 and XE1. Plus their lower volume prime lenses that appeal to pros and enthusiasts. Anything they can do to broaden their base is a therefore a good thing. And lets not pretend that the metal shells of the XPro1 and XE1 reflect an entirely metal structure.......there are plastics in their construction too.

Unfortunately in today's world of planned obsolesce with regards to electronics, buying into an "investment" is not as prevalent as it was 20 or 30 years ago.

Relax. So the very cheapest zooms and primes of the lineup use some plastic. Every other lens is Made in Japan and entirely metal-bodied. Even the filter threads are metal. The upcoming 56/1.2 leaked shots say "Made in Japan", fitting for what will surely be a $999+ lens.

@ Jiri Folta
"For me, buying Fuji was not only buying photographic tool, it was also investment in the future!" And there is the problem Jiri. You see Fuji makes PHOTOGRAPHIC TOOLS and not "future investments".
Try real estate or art and precious metals. Seriously man, you need to learn what is important, country of origin of my equipment has nothing to do with my photography.
BTW don't use your lenses to crack nuts and you will see that even plastic ones can deliver in hands of people that actually DO photo instead of moaning about how much metal is in their lens.

" country of origin of my equipment has nothing to do with my photography."

For some people it's not a matter of photography. I prefer not to buy Chinese (if I can help it) from a humanitarian/ecological standpoint. The Chinese do not treat their workers or citizens well and they do not care one iota for the havoc they wreak upon the planet with their chemical waste.

It may not have anything to do with my photography, but I'd like to think that by giving as little as possible of my hard earned money to rich Chinese exploiting the poor I can make a tiny difference.

"Seriously man, you need to learn what is important, "

Yes, this is true. What is important may not be photography at all.

Usually new generations do perform better. What is amazing is that even the first generation is awesome.

@yabookie Fuji's 1st gen is already better than anything Sony has for it's Nex users. it also has good looks, egronomics, soul & an optical viewfinder/hybrid vf.
And maybe in the next decade or 2 Sony will give you guys a f1.4 lens. (but I wouldn't count on an f1.2 lens or optical viewfinder/hybrid vf- I don't think Sony likes it's users that much.)

Maybe DXO software cannot be made to work with Fuji files, there is still a need for formal measurements. What's wrong with shooting standard resolution targets for example?

@chlamchowder
Comparing the price of a several years old used lens for a different mount to that of a brand new lens is pretty irrelevant

Well. I think they look soft too on a pixel level, which also means you lose fine texture. The uncorrected ones don't look as bad, but I'm not impressed. For architectural scenes, the pincushion distortion will be visible in the uncorrected photos, which - again - could be a dealbreaker.

It all depends what you are used to seeing, of course. If you're used to very sharp pro zooms or macro lenses, this does seem soft in comparison. I've also seen photos from cheap lenses quite a bit sharper than this, no matter what some people might think.

Surely the slight haloing affect you see in most of the photos isn't due to the sensor, is it? Reminds me of pictures from the Sony RX100 for some reason.

Will any of this matter? That's another question altogether, and it depends on how big your prints are, and whether you're cropping like crazy because this focal range really is too short for what you want to take pictures of.

Where do you read "very very poor lens" in the review?

Tandua. I wouldn't discount the 70-300 so easily. Its AF performance seems to be miles ahead of this one. But you are right about the IQ. Just.... Ok.

I'll reserve judgement for when I've seen other samples. This seems off. Fuji are great at making lenses. This is just plain weird...

Learning curve? Fuji have been making good lenses for a long time.

Haha, yabokkie - always a fun thing to read you.... I guess you have never touched a recent Fuji lens, have you? ;)
Fuji is building the Hassy lenses for the H System - this system ist not to be confused with the Lunar and the like (just to make sure...;)).

I don't think any Fuji shooter shoots anything that moves.

@yabokkie
Fuji has been making some of THE most expensive and advanced lenses that exist. They have been making lenses as OEM for Hasselblad for many, many years. Google "hasselblad" since you apparently have never heard of them and see what quality lenses are.
Then we have Fuji manufactoring of Pro film/movie/broadcasting lenses. Some of these lenses (if not all) cost or start at the cost of a good mid sized saloon car.
Fuji has been doing that for many years now.
You really need to take a brake from commenting on this site kiddo. I have seen another couple of your comments and everywhere you go you seem to pour out ignorance.

@yabokkie - the know how in making the high end lenses translates. BTW, Olympus had great OM lenses (that's before 2007) so their knowledge did transfer to 4/3rds.

Finally the Fuji primes are superb, so you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Oh, and this lens is good. It's amazing the amount of ignorant inexperienced commentary you can spout.