55-200 Vs 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 vs 50-230

• Thread starter stefanocps
• Start date Oct 4, 2019

• 1
• 2

Next 1 of 2

Go to page

Go Next Last S

stefanocps

Member

Hello i am a new xt3 user and my use is mainly for video I already have the 18-55 lens which is really fine. I want to have also a tele, so i was looking at the 55-200 until i discover the 55-230 which is a longer and cheaper lens(also slower..) that many say being a really god lens, comparable to the 55-200 I would like to have some opinion of the 2 thanks a lot

jknights

Moderator

Admin/Moderation Team I have the 55-200 and it is a very good lens. It is especially useful when travelling as it is relatively light.

Arjay

Well-Known Member

stefanocps said: ... my use is mainly for video Click to expand...

I don't have either, so I can't provide additional info. But since you intend to use it for video, you may look at one specific lens feature which is relevant for video shooting: Focus breathing. This refers to changes in focus distance as you zoom the lens. If a lens has focus breathing, images could become progressively defocussed while you zoom the lens during a take. S

stefanocps

Member

Thread starter

Arjay said: I don't have either, so I can't provide additional info. But since you intend to use it for video, you may look at one specific lens feature which is relevant for video shooting: Focus breathing. This refers to changes in focus distance as you zoom the lens. If a lens has focus breathing, images could become progressively defocussed while you zoom the lens during a take. Click to expand...

are you talking about parfocal lens? generally they have a big price, isnt'it. Also most probably zoomung while shooting is not a so common practice But a part of this, do you have any suggestions? thanks S

stefanocps

Member

Thread starter ok i have read about focus breathing. It seems something that most lenses have., more or less; should use cinema lenses to avoid this, but in this casewe are talking about a budget which is not mine! S

Spock66

Well-Known Member

I have the 55-200mm which is a great lens, the 55-230mm is also a very capable lens although I have seen a number of reports that the plastic bayonet mount can get broken off.

Tilphot

Well-Known Member

I have the XC 50-230, it's a very capable lens, very sharp, but obviously not the fastest. I also have the 50-140 with the 1,4 teleconverter, which is obviously my preferred lens for fast action/tracking/inddor etc. (it's not only faster in terms of aperture but also has superb AF performance), but the XC 50-230 is still very usable, especially for its price. Here's a few sample images: S

stefanocps

Member

Thread starter

Tilphot said: I have the XC 50-230, it's a very capable lens, very sharp, but obviously not the fastest. I also have the 50-140 with the 1,4 teleconverter, which is obviously my preferred lens for fast action/tracking/inddor etc. (it's not only faster in terms of aperture but also has superb AF performance), but the XC 50-230 is still very usable, especially for its price. Here's a few sample images: Click to expand...

55 230 look nice So there is the option of 50 140 too, which is the fastes, though i would miss all the focal distance to 200 at least...unless to add another lens for that facls...

rokphish

Well-Known Member

I only have the 50-230 so couldn't give you the comparison between it and the 55-200. I posted here showing some examples at the longest reach of the lens, showing its performance at its "worse". 50-230mm - Sample photos @230mm only Feel free to browse through the flickr account with more photo samples (link inside the thread).

Tilphot

Well-Known Member

stefanocps said: 55 230 look nice So there is the option of 50 140 too, which is the fastes, though i would miss all the focal distance to 200 at least...unless to add another lens for that facls... Click to expand...

There is a 1.4 and 2.0 teleconverter available for the 50-140. Sometimes there are bundles available. I have the 1.4 teleconverter which gives you a reach of almost 200. Widest aperture changes to 4.0 though. Also, it’s a huge lens and a bit pricey of course. 6

64616

Guest

I had both at one time. Still have the 50-230 II as it is more than capable for 95% of my photo endeavors. Much less $$$ and lighter to carry. S

stefanocps

Member

Thread starter

Tilphot said: There is a 1.4 and 2.0 teleconverter available for the 50-140. Sometimes there are bundles available. I have the 1.4 teleconverter which gives you a reach of almost 200. Widest aperture changes to 4.0 though. Also, it’s a huge lens and a bit pricey of course. Click to expand...

teleconverter?what are th downside of using a teleconverter?

Tilphot

Well-Known Member

stefanocps said: teleconverter?what are th downside of using a teleconverter? Click to expand...

The 1.4 and 2.0 teleconverters by Fuji are specifically made for the high-end XF lenses like the 50-140 and the 100-400 (and are only compatible with these!) – look them up on the Fuji website. The downside of using them is the already mentioned slower aperture and supposedly a somewhat slower AF performance and a little decrease in IQ. I can only comment on the 1.4 and would say that both are negligible. Look for posts by forum member "Matthew Perry" (like the actor from friends) who posted a lot of images taken with the XF 50-140 and the 2.0 converter.

ScottyMac

Well-Known Member

I have a 55-200 in my herd, and frankly, its been sort of an 'enigma' of a lens. I could not warm up to it. But recently, I used it for an informal portrait at around 135mm, and was blown away by the sharpness and character of the image. So maybe understanding the stronger portions of its zoom range is key. For sure, it is a valuable tool for travel. 5

59152

Well-Known Member

My 2 cents. I've got the 50-230 and paid $199 for it used from Adorama. For 200 bucks its a hell of a lot better than any other el cheapo lens I've used from other brands. I do not have any personal experience with the 55-200 lens but this youtube video from Matt Storer pretty much tells it all. For an extra $300 used you get a much sharper lens. But for the best rendering and sharpness I'm quite sure the 50-140 with teleconverter simply can't be beat but you're going to pay $1,800 or more used for both lens and teleconverter. So it's all about money. How much do you want to spend? All used prices by the way: $200 for a 50-230 $500 for a 55-200 $1,800 for a 50-140 + teleconverter. Here's a photo taken with my 50-230 DSCF9872 by frankweiser, on Flickr I'd like a 200mm F4 from Fuji but doubt I'll ever see one so someday I'll probably sell my 50-230 and ante' up for the 55-200 just because I'm a photo snob

AndresC

Well-Known Member

Pretty much what Frank said above! If you can afford it go with the 55-200 unless you need the extra reach of the xc. Or if size and funds are no issue then 50-140 with a 1.4tc.

DFW

Well-Known Member

I had both and got rid of the 55-200 . For my limited telephoto needs the 50-230 is great , a little more reach and pic quality is stellar . And for the price difference if something happened to it because of the cheaper mount well I could buy 3 used 50-230’s to one 55-200! 5

59152

Well-Known Member

DFW said: I had both and got rid of the 55-200 . For my limited telephoto needs the 50-230 is great , a little more reach and pic quality is stellar . And for the price difference if something happened to it because of the cheaper mount well I could buy 3 used 50-230’s to one 55-200! Click to expand...

The plastic mount doesn't bother me one bit. Matter of fact it makes the lens lighter. Here's another pic from the 50-230. DSCF7475 by frankweiser, on Flickr

jamie allan

Well-Known Member

stefanocps said: 55 230 look nice Click to expand...

I'd totally agree with @************ and @DFW the 50-230 is a great lens for the price. I saw one locally on sale 2nd hand for £100 last week. You can still buy one new on eBay UK for £202 or £229 with a 5 year warranty. I've had mine since I first bought an X-E1 in 2014 and I'm continually impressed with the images from it. This is about 50% of the original image shot with the X-T1 and 50-230 S

stefanocps

Member

Thread starter 50 140 + teleconverter at that price is not an option remain 55-200 or 50-230, where the price difference of the 2 is reasonable 5

59152

Well-Known Member

Sometimes you can get so caught up in what lens to purchase and second guessing yourself even after the purchase it can drive you crazy I know because constantly I'm second guessing myself should I have purchased the 50-140 over Fuji's stellar 90mm and then add a teleconverter to get to 200mm. Then I think again, no the 90 is perfect. It just never ends LOL. If you look at my signature I've got a really nice selection of Fuji and Zeiss primes that anyone would be proud to own. Sometimes you just need to get out there and shoot with what you have.

Irene McC

Bohemian Media

Admin/Moderation Team

************ said: Sometimes you just need to get out there and shoot with what you have. Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth! Yes = 100% S

stefanocps

Member

Thread starter

************ said: Sometimes you can get so caught up in what lens to purchase and second guessing yourself even after the purchase it can drive you crazy I know because constantly I'm second guessing myself should I have purchased the 50-140 over Fuji's stellar 90mm and then add a teleconverter to get to 200mm. Then I think again, no the 90 is perfect. It just never ends LOL. If you look at my signature I've got a really nice selection of Fuji and Zeiss primes that anyone would be proud to own. Sometimes you just need to get out there and shoot with what you have. Click to expand...

i agree but right now i don t own any!

Jeff Fa-Fa

Well-Known Member

I have the 50-230. Brought it new for $150. For the money The images look good to me. But I'm no expert. I just take photographs to please myself and maybe tell a story or two. The only downside is that the 50-230 seems to be relatively fragile at the mount. I have already broken one mount. If you can afford either of them I would go with the 55-200. If for nothing else than durability. O

opxe1234

New Member

I have the 50-230 and had it before I rented the 55-200 for a week. During the short time I had it I think the 55-200 was a tiny bit sharper than the 50-230, but if I recall it was heavier, and after the rental, I just kept the 50-230 and never bought the 55-200.

SquarePeg

Hear me roar

The 50-230 is the best bang for the buck of the Fuji options. Bought mine used for about $200. Cheap, sharp, small and light. I love that it fits in my jacket pocket and weighs no more than a can of soda. As long as you’re shooting in decent light it’s terrific. If you’re going to be indoors or trying to use it during the blue hour, you better have a still subject and a tripod.

SquarePeg

Hear me roar

Untitled by SharonCat..., on Flickr At 230mm S

stefanocps

Member

Thread starter really nice, the aperture makes me doubt..50 200 is definitely faster..also i d like to understand how is the difference in video, that is what i am more concerned S

soeren'

Guest

55-200 with 16mm extension tube Species unknown -af- Søren N Tap on pic to get a larger version.

AndresC

Well-Known Member

Reviving this thread as I now find myself having this conundrum. I have a 55-200 which has been my favorite lens by a mile, but fungus has gotten to it and I´m having to replace it. I started to think that what I really want is a 50-140 but simply can´t afford it at the moment. So I can bite the bullet and replace my 55-200 with another copy and hope it´s as good as my fungus infested one and forget about the 50-140 (the 55-200 was good for pretty much everything except challenging light action). Or get one of those ridiculously cheap grey market versions of the 50-230 and have it as a placeholder for when I can jump to the 50-140 whenever that may be. This fungus thing really threw my end of year gear plans off track, as I was actually looking to upgrade to the 16-55 and pair it with my beloved 55-200

• 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