Geoff D F wrote:
I don't object to anyone buying this lens and using it however they want. I do think it is a strange choice for Fuji though, seemingly trying to pitch the GFX system into an area where it will mostly be outcompeted by the big three.
In the Fuji rumours poll, three times as many people wanted an FX 23mm pancake. I'd love 27mm f2 pancake that could AF. A 50-200 f4 would also be nice.
I think it makes a lot of sense when you look at the overall system. You have a great 250mm plus the TC and you've got a great 350mm. Add the 500mm and then the TC on top of that and then you've got four fairly evenly spaced focal lengths from 250mm to 700mm. I think if they didn't have the 250 already, then you maybe make the case for something else, but what would that be? Five hundred seems just about right, and right for a lot of applications. Can't wait for mine.
Likewise. Many people forget the Pentax P645 tele primes, the Mamiya RZ apo tele lenses were great too.
I think for Fujifilm there aren't a lot of holes in the GF lineup especially in the most commonly used focal lengths, so we're going to start getting the 'oddball' lenses. Which suits us oddballs quite well.
Peter Figen wrote:
I think it makes a lot of sense when you look at the overall system. You have a great 250mm plus the TC and you've got a great 350mm. Add the 500mm and then the TC on top of that and then you've got four fairly evenly spaced focal lengths from 250mm to 700mm. I think if they didn't have the 250 already, then you maybe make the case for something else, but what would that be? Five hundred seems just about right, and right for a lot of applications. Can't wait for mine.
Yes I can see it helps flesh out the GFX system. It does remind me a bit of Pentax trying to compete with Canon and Nikon in the film era by producing telephotos for their medium format cameras, where Pentax had a significant presence and Canikon didn't.
On the other hand, we have no fast and long glass for FX, even though I would have thought the X-H bodies were intended to drive such sales. I guess Fuji must have really burned some cash with the FX 200mm f2.
Perhaps the Fujifilm's reasoning is the 200 is a 350mm equiv. Add the teleconverter and it's 490mm equiv, quite long for f/2.8.
Would you want something shorter or longer for XF?
Geoff D F wrote:
Yes I can see it helps flesh out the GFX system. It does remind me a bit of Pentax trying to compete with Canon and Nikon in the film era by producing telephotos for their medium format cameras, where Pentax had a significant presence and Canikon didn't.
On the other hand, we have no fast and long glass for FX, even though I would have thought the X-H bodies were intended to drive such sales. I guess Fuji must have really burned some cash with the FX 200mm f2.
It would be nice if Fuji would let us know what their strategy and thought process was, but in the meantime we'll just keep buying what we think might work for us and try to make compelling images.
thrice wrote:
Perhaps the Fujifilm's reasoning is the 200 is a 350mm equiv. Add the teleconverter and it's 490mm equiv, quite long for f/2.8.
Would you want something shorter or longer for XF?
Unless my maths is wrong the 200 f2 is a 300mm ff equivalent and with a 1.4 tele becomes a 420 f2.8.
I'm not in the market for long fast teles, but I would be interest in something like an FX 50-200 f4. I guess that can be achieved with the 50-140 f2.8 plus 1.4 tele, but I and I suspect most other photographers would prefer not to have to mess with teleconverters. And the later combination while more flexible would likely be more expensive than an f4 zoom.
A 300mm or 350mm f4 might also be nice and should be cheaper than the 200 f2 plus 1.4 combo.
A refresh of the old 55-200 f3.5-4.8 would be nice. It's the Fuji zoom I have been least impressed with.
That said, don't interpret my comments as a complaint about Fuji. I like their offerings.
Oh dear your math is right indeed! I confused 200 and 300 before adding the 50%
Apologies.
Geoff D F wrote:
Unless my maths is wrong the 200 f2 is a 300mm ff equivalent and with a 1.4 tele becomes a 420 f2.8.
I'm not in the market for long fast teles, but I would be interest in something like an FX 50-200 f4. I guess that can be achieved with the 50-140 f2.8 plus 1.4 tele, but I and I suspect most other photographers would prefer not to have to mess with teleconverters. And the later combination while more flexible would likely be more expensive than an f4 zoom.
A 300mm or 350mm f4 might also be nice and should be cheaper than the 200 f2 plus 1.4 combo.
A refresh of the old 55-200 f3.5-4.8 would be nice. It's the Fuji zoom I have been least impressed with.
That said, don't interpret my comments as a complaint about Fuji. I like their offerings.
bobby350z wrote:
^^ A youtuber who doesnt know how to shoot birds IMHO. Edited:- who doesn't know how to use a camera. Everything is bad. Not sure why you posting that here.
thrice wrote:
Don't suppose you have any insight into how it focuses on the GFX100S?
Whenever mine shows up, I'll be able to compare the GF500 on the 100s with the 100II. It's almost June, so I expect one maybe by the end of the month. I only hope they made more of these than they did of the 30mm t/s.
Peter Figen wrote:
Whenever mine shows up, I'll be able to compare the GF500 on the 100s with the 100II. It's almost June, so I expect one maybe by the end of the month. I only hope they made more of these than they did of the 30mm t/s.
I see the 30mm TS is in stock at mapcamera, I'm not there until Feb though.
Apparently I'm first in line at the biggest dealer in Aus for the 500mm, so I'm probably only a month or two behind you
One of the retail dealers I buy from told me today the GF 500mm is going to be released in very limited numbers. They are a majot retailer and are only getting one. I'm in first position with deposits paid at two retailers for the 500mm, should I buy both?
JonathanHunt wrote:
One of the retail dealers I buy from told me today the GF 500mm is going to be released in very limited numbers. They are a majot retailer and are only getting one. I'm in first position with deposits paid at two retailers for the 500mm, should I buy both?
I suspect the actual market will be very small. That said the initial offering will probably not fill the initial demand, so you’re very likely to be able to make maybe a 10% spiff pretty quickly reselling an unopened one.
?