p.3 #2 · Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 IOS rolling impressions
I posted a quick grab of a performance photo earlier in this thread. This morning I had an opportunity to really test this lens out in the kind of performance environment I hoped it would excel. Bottom line, it did not disappoint. Of the nearly 170 images I made, only four missed focus. I'm still new and learning on the XT-1, and during continuing half-pressure of the shutter button, it seemed to me that the camera/lens was trying hard to achieve focus. But a simple half-press of the shutter to get focus, then releasing, and then waiting for and firing on the expression I wanted resulted in nearly 100% effective focus. The lens is significantly heavier than the other Fuji lenses I have, and I experienced more camera shake than I expected (hand-held at around 1/400 with no monopod). But the onboard image stabilization was incredibly effective; not one of my shots exhibited camera shake. The sharpness is quite simply amazing, and the files are incredibly malleable. I shot between 800-1250 ISO, and no noise reduction has been applied, only a touch of clarity in Lightroom. This is Ray Parker Jr., who composed the "Ghostbusters" song, and who began his professional recording career with Motown at the age of 13. With results like this, I have no doubt that I can travel without my heavy Canon gear and get the performance photos I need to get.
p.3 #4 · Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 IOS rolling impressions
Hi Steve,
what about the autofocus in hard situation ? I'm interested in low lights and subjects in movements.
Have you ever tried 55-200 ? just to do a sort of comparison. I'd like to know if the triple linear engine of the 50-140 AF is able to improve the performance of the xt-1 af in difficult situation.
p.3 #5 · Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 IOS rolling impressions
I don't have the 55-200 because I need the fastest glass I can get for what I do. My very first experience with the 50-140 was in terrible light. What I was shooting (a choir) wasn't moving much, so the autofocus seemed reasonably fast. As I reported above, my technique, learned through years on Canon gear, is not the same as with the Fuji, so I can't say that I've really tested it in absolutely crappy light, using the technique I mentioned above. I do know, however, that the combination of autofocus speed and shutter lag prevented me from getting many good shots of dancers, which is really my specialty. With my Canon gear, I can nail the exact instant I mean to just about every time. So far (one effort) with the Fuji, no. I'm going to keep evaluating it, though, until I prove to myself that it just doesn't measure up for this particular use. Otherwise, I'm very happy with it.
p.3 #6 · Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 IOS rolling impressions
IMO, the 50-140 is decent in lower light, but it definitely slows down quite a bit. If the subject is not illuminated (in shadow in dim light), or if there's not a lot of contrast, it can hunt. I'd say it's slightly worse in dim light than the 56/1.2 is, and a little better than the 55-200. It's not a revelation in focusing, but it can do a decent job if you know what you're doing. Moving subjects in lower light I think would be an issue though. Stage work would probably be OK, though because of the higher contrast and brighter subject lighting due to the spots.
The more I shoot with this lens, the more I'm impressed with it. It's really an outstanding optic. Sharp to the corners (they are a little softer than the brilliantly sharp center, but still have plenty of resolution), very nice bokeh in most situations, excellent control of lens aberrations, well built, etc. The only real knock on it is the fact that it's the size of a FF 70-200 f/4, and I needed to switch to one of my SLR bags because it won't fit in any of my mirrorless bags with the lens mounted to the camera.
p.3 #7 · Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 IOS rolling impressions
Steve Wylie wrote:
I don't have the 55-200 because I need the fastest glass I can get for what I do. My very first experience with the 50-140 was in terrible light. What I was shooting (a choir) wasn't moving much, so the autofocus seemed reasonably fast. As I reported above, my technique, learned through years on Canon gear, is not the same as with the Fuji, so I can't say that I've really tested it in absolutely crappy light, using the technique I mentioned above. I do know, however, that the combination of autofocus speed and shutter lag prevented me from getting many good shots of dancers, which is really my specialty. With my Canon gear, I can nail the exact instant I mean to just about every time. So far (one effort) with the Fuji, no. I'm going to keep evaluating it, though, until I prove to myself that it just doesn't measure up for this particular use. Otherwise, I'm very happy with it....Show more →
Before I moved to Fuji I had a Canon DSLR along with the 300mm f/4 L lens. That lens focused so fast as to be almost instantaneous. I've never seen any mirrorless lens or lens/camera combo even remotely approach that level of auto focus performance. Granted, I havent tried all the brands, having mostly kept my experiments with Fujifilm X cameras and they simply can't play the auto focus game that Canon can. And that doesnt even take into account the serious shutter lag problem that Fujifilm X cameras have. See DPR for a VERY interesting thread complete with metrics on how extreme the lag levels can rise to with X cameras. Up to 0.5 seconds!
p.3 #8 · Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 IOS rolling impressions
You have set a pretty high bar for them to climb.
Probably so. It's for that reason that I just don't see selling my Canon gear in favor of my Fuji gear. There's a time and place for everything, and with the exception of travel-related photography (which I hope to do a lot more of), I see no reason to get rid of my trusty Canon cameras and glass. I do, however, really like what I'm getting with my new gear; as they say, "Horses for courses." As of today, I imagine that I'll be doing studio, sports, and dance work with my Canon gear, and just about everything else with the Fuji.
p.3 #9 · Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 IOS rolling impressions
I just want to comment real quick after using the lens this past week regarding the OIS.
This is, hands down, the best OIS system I've ever used. Consistently sharp shots at 1/10s at 140mm, and if I'm steady, I get a good hit rate at 1/6 second.
p.3 #10 · Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 IOS rolling impressions
Steve Wylie wrote:
Probably so. It's for that reason that I just don't see selling my Canon gear in favor of my Fuji gear. There's a time and place for everything, and with the exception of travel-related photography (which I hope to do a lot more of), I see no reason to get rid of my trusty Canon cameras and glass. I do, however, really like what I'm getting with my new gear; as they say, "Horses for courses." As of today, I imagine that I'll be doing studio, sports, and dance work with my Canon gear, and just about everything else with the Fuji....Show more →
Travel photography is the best. I just got back from a seven day trip to Japan. I was thinking about buying a new camera before that, but then decided why add yet more gear? So I took that money and spent it on a trip. I got round trip airfare and hotel for the cost of a camera. Of course, once I was in Japan, I was REALLY tempted to buy a new camera there! The yen is really low now and prices there are extremely tempting. I *almost* picked up a Sigma DP1M for about $400, but held off because that was not the reason why I made the trip. I did play with a lot of Fuji cameras in Japan too, but I dont find them as tempting since I'm primarily a film shooter now. I like Foveon sensor cameras because in my eyes they offer the only truly real difference from Bayer cameras. The new Fuji zoom lens that this thread is about feels nice in hand, but is far too large for the XT-1 that it was attached to. It seems enormously over sized and front heavy. I really don't see the point with such large lenses on mirrorless.
p.3 #11 · Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 IOS rolling impressions
rattymouse wrote:
I really don't see the point with such large lenses on mirrorless.
That's easy. While large lenses like this certainly aren't going to save you significant weight vs. a DSLR lens of similar capabilities, these lenses exist because a lot of people shoot with these systems as their only system. If I end up buying the 50-140/2.8 for myself (which I very well might...it's very impressive), it wouldn't be for daily carry. I enjoy the weight reduction the switch to mirrorless provides, and so I generally carry 4 lenses or so and that's it, and it's a nice compact and light kit with great quality.
However, if I want to shoot an event, or a portrait shoot where I will need quick focal length changes and I want the ability for shallower depth of field than I can get with the 55-200, then that's where this lens comes in. I grab this, I don't need to have a DSLR system in reserve, and I'm able use the same camera I use every day.
It makes a lot more sense to have a high quality lens available for your main system when you need the speed, even if it's something that is too large for daily use if you want to stay small and light.
I will say that with the vertical grip and the tripod foot removed, the lens handles very well.
p.3 #12 · Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 IOS rolling impressions
Jman13 wrote:
That's easy. While large lenses like this certainly aren't going to save you significant weight vs. a DSLR lens of similar capabilities, these lenses exist because a lot of people shoot with these systems as their only system. If I end up buying the 50-140/2.8 for myself (which I very well might...it's very impressive), it wouldn't be for daily carry. I enjoy the weight reduction the switch to mirrorless provides, and so I generally carry 4 lenses or so and that's it, and it's a nice compact and light kit with great quality.
However, if I want to shoot an event, or a portrait shoot where I will need quick focal length changes and I want the ability for shallower depth of field than I can get with the 55-200, then that's where this lens comes in. I grab this, I don't need to have a DSLR system in reserve, and I'm able use the same camera I use every day.
It makes a lot more sense to have a high quality lens available for your main system when you need the speed, even if it's something that is too large for daily use if you want to stay small and light.
I will say that with the vertical grip and the tripod foot removed, the lens handles very well.
OK, that makes sense. The X-T1 I was shooting with didnt have the grip on and the tripod foot was still on the lens so the whole set up seemed grossly mismatched. I would never buy a lens like that so I'm not the target audience anyway. I removed that lens and slapped on the 56mm f/1.2 and was much more happy with the feeling.
In the Japanese store Yodobashi, it really seems like Sony has taken the predominate place in the mirrorless department (much more floor space, sales force, and crowds in the store). Panasonic seems much more reduced from my last visit one year ago. I found that surprising. Virtually all the mirrorless activity I saw out and about in Kyoto during my 7 days there was either Sony or Olympus. I used to see a lot more Panasonic. I wonder what's going on with Panny to lose so much visibility. Fuji was as invisible as ever. 1 X-T1 and 1 X100 variant were all that I could spot out in the wild. Of course, I didnt see a single person carrying Fuji rangefinders like I was.
