This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

6K for 200 f2.

Discussion in 'Fujifilm X News & Rumors' started by David Anderson, Feb 8, 2018.

  1. Tara Elizabeth

    Tara Elizabeth Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,711
    Likes Received:
    1,896
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA

    -Return to Top-

    I have a Konica 200/3.5 that I was gifted. That thing is a beast of a lens, I really need to figure out a tripod foot for it because it is so heavy. I don't see myself replacing it with a Fuji native version unless they put one out around that speed with AF at a price that doesn't make me weep.
     
    Fujiphotog likes this.
  2. gyoung

    gyoung Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2013
    Messages:
    496
    Likes Received:
    183
    Location:
    Nottingham

    -Return to Top-

    200 f/4 is only half a stop or so faster than the excellent 55-200 , so a 2.8 would be more likely. But I still think a 300/4 which could use the 1.4 TC would be good. Nikon have always had good lenses at that spec. which do better than the long zooms at the longer end. Not too heavy either.

    Gerry
     
    Tara Elizabeth and Mike Gorman like this.
  3. Frank Weiser

    Frank Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    578
    Likes Received:
    521

    -Return to Top-

    Hmmmm......My Pentax DA 200* 2.8mm lens cost me $600 used. Beautiful lens and sharp as all get out. $6,000 for a 2.0? Golly Gee Heck No. Not even if I could afford it. I use my 90mm F2.0 for indoor shots requiring more speed. I paid $830 for it brand new. So far my budget for lenses is anything under $1,000. But I would be willing to shell out $1,500 for a used Fuji 100-400 because I think it's worth it.

    My DA*200 lens shot at F4 at an outdoor night ballet concert

    Please login or register to view links by Please login or register to view links, on Flickr
     
  4. Jonimages

    Jonimages Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2014
    Messages:
    930
    Likes Received:
    588
    Location:
    Silverhill-AL

    -Return to Top-

    There are more benefits to a 200 f2. With a 1.4 Tc it would be like a 300 f2.8, and a 2.0 TC it would be a 400 f4. Granted the IQ isn't as good, but it will be a highly versatile lens for sports and wildlife photographers on a budget. I know it doesn't sound like a 6k lens is a budget lens, but look at the cost of buying a 300 2.8, 400 2.8 and a 500 f4 for a full frame camera.

    I'm hoping Fuji comes out with a 140 f2, 70-200 2.8, and your idea of a 140-300 f4 sounds cool too.

    I was interested in the 200 f2 until I saw the price. If I made my money with sports or wildlife I would get it, or if I were retired and wildlife was all I was going to be doing it would be the lens I would get. I can't justify it for business.
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2018
    Marty M likes this.
  5. Marty M

    Marty M Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    372
    Location:
    42301

    -Return to Top-

    A 70-200 2.8 would be the ideal for me. Using my Nikon system, full frame or crop, I shoot probably 80% of all my images between 155-200mm.
     
  6. Frank Weiser

    Frank Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    578
    Likes Received:
    521

    -Return to Top-

    I would love that lens too. However most people point out that this lens would be monstrous in size compared to our XT-1's and 2's so that's why it isn't made.
     
  7. Jonimages

    Jonimages Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2014
    Messages:
    930
    Likes Received:
    588
    Location:
    Silverhill-AL

    -Return to Top-

    Hopefully the 200 f2 is a success so Fuji will see some incentives to make this. Also, there are afs canon converters coming out. I’m really intrigued by this, having the possibility of using sigma,tamron, and canon lenses on the fuji’s.
     
  8. Frank Weiser

    Frank Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    578
    Likes Received:
    521

    -Return to Top-

    I would love to try a canon F4 70-200 version on my Fuji X-T1.
     
    Jonimages likes this.
  9. gyoung

    gyoung Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2013
    Messages:
    496
    Likes Received:
    183
    Location:
    Nottingham

    -Return to Top-

    My 80-200 2.8 for Nikon is about the same size and weight as the Fuji 50-140 + 1.4 tc and is a stop faster.
    Granted newer designs are a bit bigger and heavier (mine is a 1990s Tokina) but they cover FF , not 'Monstrous'.
    Alright having these 'pro' grade lenses at high prices, but how about the bigger number of people who could do with something lighter, slower and cheaper. Especially since third partys are not interested in (or allowed to?) provide alternatives. We've had the lovely f/2 series of 'normal' focal lengths, and a couple of XCs, lets continue the 'theme'.

    Gerry
     
  10. Greg_E

    Greg_E Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    2,413
    Likes Received:
    295
    Location:
    USA

    -Return to Top-

    Under $1000 is where I'm at too, not making money off this gear, so it's hard to part with very much for a lens like this.
     
    Tara Elizabeth likes this.
  11. Jonimages

    Jonimages Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2014
    Messages:
    930
    Likes Received:
    588
    Location:
    Silverhill-AL

    -Return to Top-

    Yet this is what Fuji is already doing. The 200 f2 is the first serious "pro grade" exotic lens. Fuji just came out with a pancake wide angle zoom. Its not like affordable glass has been neglected. Just look at the lineup. If anything it needs more "pro grade" lenses to round out the lineup.
     
  12. ojporqpojrewpo

    ojporqpojrewpo Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2015
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    658
    Location:
    Los Angeles

    -Return to Top-

    This lens definitely seems to indicate that they have big plans for their camera bodies. I like my X-T2 but if I was a pro I would not rely on it for my professional sports work. Something like D500 or D750 seems a safer bet . Let's see how the X-T3 or X-H1 will do in terms if speed.
     
  13. Jonimages

    Jonimages Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2014
    Messages:
    930
    Likes Received:
    588
    Location:
    Silverhill-AL

    -Return to Top-

    I agree. I came from a D3s, and the xt2 with grip is almost like a D3 mini. However, the buffer and battery life suffer in comparison. On occasion I shoot sports and wildlife with my xt2 and I have no complaints about AFS, but the buffer and battery life are my major complaints in this department. I shoot one soccer game and it's almost time to change batteries. If I made my living with sports it would be Nikon or Canon. However, if the x-t3 has a better battery life, or a larger battery that fits into the grip, and a larger buffer I would be all over it for sports.
     
  14. Narsuitus

    Narsuitus Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,971
    Likes Received:
    916
    Location:
    USA

    -Return to Top-

    My Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 is not that much larger than my Fuji 50-140mm f/2.8.

    Please login or register to view links by Please login or register to view links, on Flickr
     
  15. Frank Weiser

    Frank Weiser Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    578
    Likes Received:
    521

    -Return to Top-

    So you use the Nikon in manual focus with your fuji? Is the Nikon a better lens than the Canon equivalent?

    You're right. It's not that much bigger. I would buy it.
     
    Narsuitus likes this.
  16. Marty M

    Marty M Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    372
    Location:
    42301

    -Return to Top-

    I have the 50-140 and Nikon too, and with both original lens hoods, they are the same length. The Nikon is heavier though. I always understood lenses built for DX sensors only, to be smaller than the ones made for full frame. So why can't Fuji build a 70 or 80-200 and it be smaller than my Nikon?
     
  17. Marty M

    Marty M Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    372
    Location:
    42301

    -Return to Top-

    I do use my Nikon on my Fuji X-T2 occasionally. It's brilliantly sharp, but I bought the 50-140 to free myself from 30+ years on a tripod. If the X-H1 turns out to be great, then it greatly increases my arsenal for my Fuji cameras, while still being free of the tripod. I do find that as sharp as the Fuji is, and as great as the image stabilization works, there is no substitute for a tripod when it comes to absolute sharpness.
     
  18. Marty M

    Marty M Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    372
    Location:
    42301

    -Return to Top-

    Your 80-200 looks immaculate like mine!
     
    Narsuitus likes this.
  19. bacil

    bacil Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2014
    Messages:
    1,468
    Likes Received:
    451
    Location:
    USA

    -Return to Top-

    I really want to try the sigma 50-100mm 1.8 in canon mount with the new adapter.
     
  20. Narsuitus

    Narsuitus Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,971
    Likes Received:
    916
    Location:
    USA

    -Return to Top-

    I have never used the Canon equivalent so I cannot compare.

    I have, however, compared my older Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D AF-S to the newer Nikon 70-200 AF-S and it was equal in image quality.

    My 16-55mm f/2.8 and my 50-140mm f/2.8 Fuji zooms are so good that I have never needed to use my Nikon zooms on my Fuji mirrorless.
     

Share This Page

  1. fujix-forum.com uses cookies to help personalize 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.
    Dismiss Notice