Fuji 55-200mm Vs 50-230mm | Talk Photography

• Home What's new Latest activity Authors
• Forums New posts
• What's new New posts New media New media comments Latest activity
• Media New media New comments
• Members Current visitors

Log in Register What's new

• New posts

Menu Log in Register Install the app Install How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

• Shooting starts now for Film Photographer of the Year 2025, click for more
• Film 'tog of the year 2024 - voting is now open for December entries, we welcome your votes - click on this notice
• Nifty-Fifty Voting for December is now open. Anyone can vote, click on this notice
• DPOTY24 December - voting is now open, anyone can vote - click on this notice
• Vote for your favourites in the New Old Film Challenge #248 poll - everyone can vote, click here
• We have another attempted account hijack, this time of an old account unused for a long time. Please review your account security asap in line with the this guidance [click on this message]
• Entries are open for January in Digital Photographer of the Year 2025, click for more

• Forums
• Main Discussion Forums
• Talk Equipment

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. Fuji 55-200mm vs 50-230mm

• Thread starter cardiff_gareth
• Start date 1 Jul 2021

cardiff_gareth

Messages 2,686 Name Gareth Edit My Images Yes It's probably been asked already but I've been reading about these lenses and some say optically they're the same formula but it's the aperture speed and build quality where the main differences are but as they have different focal lengths I'm struggling with the lens formula bit. Has anyone had both please and can shed light on them both? My main camera is a full frame Pentax and the Fuji is mainly used as a general walkaround camera with landscapes and the occasional 'grab photo' camera for weddings so this longer focal length would fit into these shooting genres. Thanks. Welsh Photographer Flickr | Facebook | 500px

cambsno

Messages 20,603 Name Simon Edit My Images Yes I have the 55-200 and did try the 50-230. The 55 is better built, has the ring, and is wider. IQ seems to be a bit better but for occasional use the 50 is hard to beat. Simon Cambridge Photographer specialising in Baby & Family Portraits, Cambridge Wedding Photography www.cambridgeportraits.co.uk

Mr Perceptive

Messages 8,594 Name David Edit My Images Yes I've had both,but own neither now. The 55-200 is much better built and has the aperture ring. Its a good lens though the bokeh can be a bit fussy. The 50-230 is much lighter, doesn't feel as solid in the hand, but optically its good. Its AF is slower than the 55-200 but as an occassional lens certainly meets the longer focal length requirement. the 50-230 obviously has a little more reach. It all depends on your requirements, but you could easily buy a 50-230 and Samyang 12mm (giving you a UWA option as well) for the price of a 55-200. www.davidyeomanphotography.co.uk - Flickr Photostream

cambsno

Messages 20,603 Name Simon Edit My Images Yes I do admit to thinking about getting the 50-230 instead and using funds to go towards a 10-24. I only use the 55-200 on 2 occasions - days when I need long length (i.e. at beach) which is not often, or airshows (when I often shoot at f8-f11 anyway) Simon Cambridge Photographer specialising in Baby & Family Portraits, Cambridge Wedding Photography www.cambridgeportraits.co.uk

Fuji Dave

I'm in Clover

Messages 21,611 Name Dave Edit My Images No I loved my 50-230 when I had Fuji, great for my local airshows plus I tried my mates 55-200 but never got one. 50-230mm is lighter a joy to use on most Fuji X cameras, but remember the mount is plastic though even though I never had a problem with mine. Galaxy S22 Ultra / Pixel Pro 8 / My 7th 52 on the trot Flickr Susies Flickr. THE TP 52 CHALLENGE FOR 2023 FLICKR

troutfisher

Messages 2,982 Name Chris Edit My Images Yes Never had the 55-200 but I had the 100-400 and found it far to heavy so I sold it and got the 50-230 great lens for the money 'All the gear and no idea"

Nod

Tootles

Messages 46,977 Name Nod (UK) Edit My Images Yes

Mr Perceptive said: I've had both,but own neither now. The 55-200 is much better built and has the aperture ring. Its a good lens though the bokeh can be a bit fussy. The 50-230 is much lighter, doesn't feel as solid in the hand, but optically its good. Its AF is slower than the 55-200 but as an occassional lens certainly meets the longer focal length requirement. the 50-230 obviously has a little more reach. It all depends on your requirements, but you could easily buy a 50-230 and Samyang 12mm (giving you a UWA option as well) for the price of a 55-200. Click to expand...

This sums it up really. I have both - had the 55-200 for longer then bought the 50-230 as a holiday lens due to its lighter weight and extra reach. Having used the 55-200, I found that the 50-230 felt way too plasticky in comparison so it's been on the shelf ever since. Images were OK but the 55-200's are better - IMO! How visible the differences are in the real world is hard to say. Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum. The above is my opinion - it may differ from yours. Tsikoudia doesn't contain many vitamins, that's why you should drink lots of it! Lived fast; too old to die young and a good looking corpse was never on the cards! Swearwords? Sentence enhancers!

Cagey75

Messages 16,936 Name Keith Edit My Images No owned both and neither really impressed me, but ... I wasn't big on tele lenses at the time. I feel I would make much better use of either one now. Difference in weight wouldn't bother me so much as 200g is hardly holding you down, I like a bit of weight to a tele lens it makes it easier hand holding tbh, feels more steady. I never noticed anything significant between them optically bar the light gathering ability, I'm sure the 55 is sharper but if so only by a hair, and nothing that can't be made up for in post if you shoot RAW OP

cardiff_gareth

Messages 2,686 Name Gareth Edit My Images Yes Thanks for the replies. I put a wanted post up here but nothing and then when searching online I found a 50-230mm at CeX for £185 with free shipping. Thought for that price, even though the 50-200mm would have been better, I couldn't leave it! No idea about condition as stock images and no description so here's hoping its alright when it gets here, if not it'll be going straight back with distance selling laws for a full refund! Welsh Photographer Flickr | Facebook | 500px

Barryboy

Messages 274 Name Rob Edit My Images Yes Hi Gareth. Have been having the same thought myself.. Please let us know how you rate the lens when you get it,. Rob

Terrywoodenpic

Messages 8,097 Name Terry Edit My Images Yes All zooms are subject to a greater variation in quality between examples, than non zooms. This is a fact of life. The difference between individual examples of these two lenses is greater than the differences between them. Most examples of each can meet most people's expectations for image quality. The build quality of the 55 200 is clearly higher, but has little to no impact on sharpness. As the 50 230 has a greater range one should expect it to have greater compromises through the range of focal lengths. In practice this is impossible to identify in actual use. I have noticed that the shop price of the 50 230 has risen considerably since I bought mine. Which is something that only seems to happen on better lenses in high demand. There are very few bargain offers since the MK2 version came out. The Mark2 only increased the effectiveness of the anti shake, the optics are identical Last edited: 13 Jul 2021 80++ years with the photography bug and counting

derekG

Messages 342 Name derek Edit My Images Yes I think that's probably the best comparison of these two lenses that i have seen. OP

cardiff_gareth

Messages 2,686 Name Gareth Edit My Images Yes I've had it here a while now. It's light weight! Shot some images with it and they seem okay. Not sure if I was trying to hard to pixel peep when I was reviewing the images! Will have to post some pics up with it! Welsh Photographer Flickr | Facebook | 500px

fujilover

Messages 804 Edit My Images Yes much better build quality, the 230 is like a toy lens but like all fuji lenses they have decent IQ even the cheap ones.

Terrywoodenpic

Messages 8,097 Name Terry Edit My Images Yes

cardiff_gareth said: It's probably been asked already but I've been reading about these lenses and some say optically they're the same formula but it's the aperture speed and build quality where the main differences are but as they have different focal lengths I'm struggling with the lens formula bit. Has anyone had both please and can shed light on them both? My main camera is a full frame Pentax and the Fuji is mainly used as a general walkaround camera with landscapes and the occasional 'grab photo' camera for weddings so this longer focal length would fit into these shooting genres. Thanks. Click to expand...

They are not the same formulae. The 55 200 has one more element as it needs more correction to cope with the larger aperture. However it is very similar indeed as one of the doublets is replaced by a single element In the 50 230. 80++ years with the photography bug and counting You must log in or register to reply here. Share: Reddit WhatsApp Email Share Link

• Forums
• Main Discussion Forums
• Talk Equipment

• This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register. By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies. Accept Learn more...

Back Top