55-200 V. 50-230 - FujiX-Forum

• Home
• What's new Unread posts New media New media comments Latest activity
• Forums Latest posts Forum list Search forums
• Media New media New comments Search media
• Buy/Sell

Log in Register Back What's new Search

Search

Everywhere Threads This forum This thread Search titles only By: Search Advanced search…

• Latest posts
• Forum list
• Search forums

Menu Log in Register Install the app Install

• Forums
• X Camera Gear & Lens discussions
• Native X-Mount Lens Forum

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.You should upgrade or use an alternative browser. 55-200 v. 50-230

• Thread starter stevenz
• Start date Dec 18, 2020

• 1
• 2

Next 1 of 2

Go to page

Go Next Last

stevenz

Well-Known Member

Can anyone give a general idea of the relative qualities of these two lenses? Performance, build quality, durability. There’s a big price difference so I’m sceptical about the 50-230. I would use it as a “long” lens for general purposes, possibly some wildlife (bird) photography. (I’d really like the 50-140 with a Tele-converter, but $$$...) Thanks. steve

Finder

Well-Known Member

Also consider Fuji is releasing a 70-300mm in 2021. 5

59152

Well-Known Member

There’s a YouTube video that CLEARLY shows the 55-200 is sharper and renders images better when shooting at 200mm looking at pine trees and a church in the distance. However the 50-230 that I currently own is no slouch. And for $199 used purchased from Adorama I will not be looking to replace it anytime soon with the 55-200. I’m awaiting for the arrival of the upcoming Fuji 70-300 and only then will dump my 50-230 for it. I have no intentions of ever purchasing the 55-200.

Richard_R

Up to my ankles

Finder said: Also consider Fuji is releasing a 70-300mm in 2021. Click to expand...

Also keep in mind that Fuji are notoriously late in releasing lenses and often when they appear on the road map it can but months or even years after the projected arrival period before they actually hit the shelves.

MarkGVH

Well-Known Member

For the price, the 50-230 is an excellent lens and value. I did a lot of checking reviews of the 55-200 and 55-230, and the quality of results is similar though the 55-200 is slightly better. I'm happy with the 50-230, but the main thing to keep in mind is XF 55-200 F/3.5-4.7 compared to XC 50-230 F/4.5-6.7. It's not a good low light/contrast lens at the long end.

AndresC

Well-Known Member

If you can wait for the 70-300 I would definitely do so, specially if you are wanting to shoot birds. I can´t speak for the 50-230 iq, but the 55-200 is an awesome lens and definitely better built than the 50-230.

Solsdad

Well-Known Member

XC50-230 was my first tele zoom when I was shooting JPEGs only. I found it was very sharp in the center and I didn't really care about the corner sharpness. I didn't use it much and sold it. Recently I made a trip to Yosemite and found myself wanting a telephoto zoom again and bought XF55-200 with the awesome current deal. I am very happy with XF55-200. XF55-200 is better in every single aspect. It has aperture ring and built is much better with metal mount. No side by side test was done but 55-200 has better AF performance but maybe because 50-230 was on my X-T1 then and 55-200 is on X-H1 and X-T3. Now trying to use it in landscape photography, corner sharpness is important to me too. I do not shoot BIF but I learned that it requires very high shutter speed to freeze motion and the wider aperture in 55-200 will be beneficial for it. But I had no complain when I had 50-230 and I believe its AF performance should be much improved with newer body. Last edited: Dec 18, 2020

IMoL

Well-Known Member

I have the 50-230 and for the small amount I use long lenses it works fine, as long as there is enough light. I have used it all the way from x-Pro1 to X-T4 without any issues. It's a steal at the price they go for used. If I were doing a lot of photography in that focal length range, though, I would invest in something more "substantial".

Gethyn Clothier

Well-Known Member

I used to have the 55-200mm then bought a 50-230mmfor a good price so for a while had both lenses. I took quite a few shots with both and also did some (not terribly scientific) comparisons between them, comparing the IQ. I couldn't see any difference between the IQ of both lenses. Other factors, such as weight, maximum aperture, size, cost, etc. you can see the differences by looking at the specs. I ended up selling the 55-200mm as I couldn't see what it offered over the XC lens, other than better build and an overall nicer feel to it (and a slightly faster maximum aperture). S

Spock66

Well-Known Member

I have the 55-200mm and it's a great lens. There have been a few posts about the plastic mount breaking on the 50-230mm, but optically it's considered as a pretty good performer.

johant

Well-Known Member

I have my second 50-230mm (I was one of those few who had issues with the plastic mount on the first one), and with the little use I have for a tele zoom, it is a great lens. Main issues: AF is slooow, and it's mostly a good weather lens.

stevenz

Well-Known Member

Thread starter Thanks for all the comments, folks. It gives me what I need to focus my thinking. Um, so to speak. ? I think it may come down to how much money I am comfortable spending, or maybe a used one will fall out of the sky.

jknights

Moderator

Admin/Moderation Team My 55-200 is a very good lens. Probably as good as my Nikon lenses the only thing it lacks is the f2.8 continuous aperture but that would make the lens much heavier and more costly. I am happy with it and use it when I travel as my main zoom. My only gripe is that the TCx1.4 does NOT fit it.

Terrywoodenpic

From Saddleworth West Yorkshire

The 50-230 is optically excellent. however as an XC lens it is a far lower build specification and is mostly a plastic construction. But it is produces far higher quality images than its price would imply. it is also extremely light for such a lens which means it can be stuck in a pocket or bag with out a noticeable weight penalty when out walking. 100% crop High up over door in church

AndresC

Well-Known Member

jknights said: My 55-200 is a very good lens. Probably as good as my Nikon lenses the only thing it lacks is the f2.8 continuous aperture but that would make the lens much heavier and more costly. I am happy with it and use it when I travel as my main zoom. My only gripe is that the TCx1.4 does NOT fit it. Click to expand...

I agree, that’s what makes the upcoming 70-300 so interesting. It’s a bit bigger than the 55-200 but compatible with the tc’s. That being said at the current price of 499 in the US, the 55-200 is hard to beat. Last edited: Dec 19, 2020

crashton

Well-Known Member

For my use the 50-230 is a great lens. Things I like, good image quality, light weight & low price. Things I don't like, mostly the fact it is slow. I just bump up the ISO so I can live with that. If you look around you can find a used one under $200. I have shot with the 55-200 & yes it may be a better lens. What I didn't like was the weight & cost. Being an older gent (old Fart) both cost & weight are huge factors for me. Pretty sure whichever one you choose you'll be happy. L

lig

New Member

For travel and if you only need tele once in a while I think the 50-230 is pretty good. As @Terrywoodenpic mentioned the plastic mount is a little off-putting but it's very light, compact and sharp enough. If top shelf performance is needed then the 50-140 is your lens. . A simple jpeg at 230mm https://ibb.co/Y7S1nww] [/url]

jknights

Moderator

Admin/Moderation Team

AndresC said: I agree, that’s what makes the upcoming 70-300 so interesting. It’s a bit bigger than the 70-300 but compatible with the tc’s. That being said at the current price of 499 in the US, the 55-200 is hard to beat. Click to expand...

I hadnt picked up that the 70-300 will be compatible with the TC x1.4 That is good news. Oh dear I thought that my Fuji lens arsenal was complete.

AndresC

Well-Known Member

jknights said: I hadnt picked up that the 70-300 will be compatible with the TC x1.4 That is good news. Oh dear I thought that my Fuji lens arsenal was complete. Click to expand...

Oops, meant to write that the 70-300 will be a bit bigger than the 55-200. And yes, tc compatibility will surely come handy. Happy to help gas

Richard_R

Up to my ankles

jknights said: I hadnt picked up that the 70-300 will be compatible with the TC x1.4 That is good news. Oh dear I thought that my Fuji lens arsenal was complete. Click to expand...

Seeing as it is f5.6 at 300mm it is going to have to have extremely good OIS to be able to use handheld with a 1.4x TC at 300mm and the worlds best ever OIS to make the 2x TC even something worth thinking about. I can’t see the TCs being practical for handheld use at the longer end of the focal range,

jknights

Moderator

Admin/Moderation Team

Richard_R said: Seeing as it is f5.6 at 300mm it is going to have to have extremely good OIS to be able to use handheld with a 1.4x TC at 300mm and the worlds best ever OIS to make the 2x TC even something worth thinking about. I can’t see the TCs being practical for handheld use at the longer end of the focal range, Click to expand...

I use the TC x1.4 on my 100-400 and it works OK-ish in UK but I usually end up boosting ISO to 6400. Miss the bright light from Oz.

stevenz

Well-Known Member

Thread starter Thanks again for all the comments. Any idea when the 70-300 is due out, and the price range/comparable quality? I.e., a 55-200 price range or 50-230 price range? I’ve got a sore back today so weight is rearing its ugly head as a factor. The lens’s, not mine. ? N

Neil Jefferies

Well-Known Member

You should be able to handhold 300 at around 1/500 without much problem using the 1/f rule-of-thumb from the manual days and allowing for a 1.5x crop factor. Even with 3.5 stops of stabilization (which is about the minimum you get from Fuji with the XC lenses) that comes down to under a 60th. Frankly, at the longer focal lengths, the things I shoot move around a fair bit so I prefer faster shutter speeds. However, at the moment I shoot with an old fully manual Tamron Adaptall 60-300 F3.8/5.4 and it's serviceable, if rather front heavy. Remembering the old Sunny 16 rule and allowing for the fact that ISO 1600 is now quite usable means that f8 and f11 aren't troublesome any more (hence Canon has released f11 relephoto lenses for those of us who hate lugging big lumps of glass around). Based on the fact that the Tamron is smaller and lighter than the 100-400, I have no interest in that lens but the 70-300 looks just about right - even if it is about the same weight, being optimised for mirrorless means it won't have the extra length that the Tamron has with the mount adapter. I have a 50-230mm as well which is very nearly the same optical formula as the 55-200 bar a single additional element in the 55-200 which probably mainly corrects edge aberrations to allow a wider aperture. As others have said, the difference with the 55-200 wasn't compelling - the 70-300 definitely is. Even if it ends up around the same ballpark as the 16-80 or 50-140. I am, of course, assuming its optical quality will be up to scratch and it features comparable levels of OIS to the 16-80 but WR plus TC compatibilty plus the size as demonstrated are nice. One other thing - the Tamron works very well with the 1.4x TC (arguably better than Tamron's own 140F converter) since the X-mount adapter is long enough to accomodate the bit that sticks out. I am tempted to get the Tokina 400mm reflex to try out with it. N

Neil Jefferies

Well-Known Member

...I would expect a fair number of secondhand 55-200 lenses available cheapish when the 70-300 comes out though so you may want to wait...since the rumor is that it will appear in Q1.

AndresC

Well-Known Member

stevenz said: Thanks again for all the comments. Any idea when the 70-300 is due out, and the price range/comparable quality? I.e., a 55-200 price range or 50-230 price range? I’ve got a sore back today so weight is rearing its ugly head as a factor. The lens’s, not mine. ? Click to expand...

Some size comparisons here and more info SIZE COMPARISON: Fujinon XF70-300mmF4-5.6 vs XF55-200mmF3.5-4.8 vs XF100-400mmF4.5-5.6 vs XC50-230mmF4.5-6.7 - Fuji Rumors No idea on pricing but it´s an xf lens with great range and features, there´s no way that it will be in the 50-230 ballpark. 5

59152

Well-Known Member

AndresC said: Some size comparisons here and more info SIZE COMPARISON: Fujinon XF70-300mmF4-5.6 vs XF55-200mmF3.5-4.8 vs XF100-400mmF4.5-5.6 vs XC50-230mmF4.5-6.7 - Fuji Rumors No idea on pricing but it´s an xf lens with great range and features, there´s no way that it will be in the 50-230 ballpark. Click to expand...

Hopefully they will keep it under $1,000 for the masses. If anything it should increase sales of their teleconverters.

stevenz

Well-Known Member

Thread starter I like the way the reviewer uses the word “lovely”. I had visions of $$$$ dancing in my head. I hope there is a ?? (Inserted Santa Claus emoji, in case the site rejects it. It apparently doesn’t like some emojis.)

Solsdad

Well-Known Member

Neil Jefferies said: You should be able to handhold 300 at around 1/500 without much problem using the 1/f rule-of-thumb from the manual days and allowing for a 1.5x crop factor. Even with 3.5 stops of stabilization (which is about the minimum you get from Fuji with the XC lenses) that comes down to under a 60th. Frankly, at the longer focal lengths, the things I shoot move around a fair bit so I prefer faster shutter speeds. However, at the moment I shoot with an old fully manual Tamron Adaptall 60-300 F3.8/5.4 and it's serviceable, if rather front heavy. Remembering the old Sunny 16 rule and allowing for the fact that ISO 1600 is now quite usable means that f8 and f11 aren't troublesome any more (hence Canon has released f11 relephoto lenses for those of us who hate lugging big lumps of glass around). Based on the fact that the Tamron is smaller and lighter than the 100-400, I have no interest in that lens but the 70-300 looks just about right - even if it is about the same weight, being optimised for mirrorless means it won't have the extra length that the Tamron has with the mount adapter. I have a 50-230mm as well which is very nearly the same optical formula as the 55-200 bar a single additional element in the 55-200 which probably mainly corrects edge aberrations to allow a wider aperture. As others have said, the difference with the 55-200 wasn't compelling - the 70-300 definitely is. Even if it ends up around the same ballpark as the 16-80 or 50-140. I am, of course, assuming its optical quality will be up to scratch and it features comparable levels of OIS to the 16-80 but WR plus TC compatibilty plus the size as demonstrated are nice. One other thing - the Tamron works very well with the 1.4x TC (arguably better than Tamron's own 140F converter) since the X-mount adapter is long enough to accomodate the bit that sticks out. I am tempted to get the Tokina 400mm reflex to try out with it. Click to expand...

So Tamron with adopter works with Fuji's XF 1.4X TC? Learning something new so many from this Forum. Thank you Neil. N

Neil Jefferies

Well-Known Member

@Solsdad Yes, if a manual lens is attached the TC seems to just turn off and act like a regular dumb one. Most manual SLR lenses adapted for use with mirrorless should have enough space in the adapters for the front of the TC with the caveat that it is designed for longer lenses with apertures f2.8 or smaller. R

robfilms

Member

Fuji 55-200/3.5-4.8 $499 @B&H seems like a decent zoom with good reviews. i have read that it can be a tad softer at 200mm but most folks seem to be okay with the results. is this a good value lens or are there better values (yes-the 50-140/2.8 is "better" but it should be at $1k more!) any idea of what the cost of the yet to be released 70-300 might be? i look forward to any and all thoughts. stay well. rob

• 1
• 2

Next 1 of 2

Go to page

Go Next Last Post reply Insert quotes… Share: Facebook Twitter Email Share Link

• Forums
• X Camera Gear & Lens discussions
• Native X-Mount Lens Forum

Top Bottom