the FUJI XC 50-230 ticks a more than a few boxes.

Terrywoodenpic

Terrywoodenpic

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,172
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
Tried out the cheapo Fuji XC 50-230 Sunday On my XE2, does not seem to be any fringing at all. Even with my extremely shaky hand it was reasonably sharp, so the anti-shake works well enough. ISO 1250 F7.1 @ 1/250 at 230mm (which is about 360mm FF)
For a new lens that can be bought sometimes for under £140 it has perhaps a limited spec. but not bad at all.
If what you need it for can cope with maximum apertures of F4.5-6.7 . and a non water proof all plastic construction and no, on lens, manual aperture or anti shake controls.
then it is pretty much a winner.


_TXE4153web by Terry Andrews, on Flickr

The 100% crop shows the head to be slightly OF but it may be a slight head movement as they are constantly nodding. But for ISO 1250 the detail is good.

_TXE4153-web-100% by Terry Andrews, on Flickr

I bought it on line from Ireland (a Hong Kong company) as a grey import, but at that price it is almost disposable. It seems that the lowest price now is about £170 so I got a real bargain.
 
Last edited:
MK1 or 2? The MK2 is apparently about a stop better OIS, and if you can get it used or cheap abroad without customs charges, it is a right bargain indeed .

Much like the Olympus 40-150 4-5.6 R lens, cheap plastic build, but plenty sharp enough for general use
 
Cagey75 said:
MK1 or 2? The MK2 is apparently about a stop better OIS, and if you can get it used or cheap abroad without customs charges, it is a right bargain indeed .

Much like the Olympus 40-150 4-5.6 R lens, cheap plastic build, but plenty sharp enough for general use
Click to expand...

It is a mk 2 with latest firmware.
 
macvisual said:
Great quality captures there -- wow!

Does the XC50-230mm lens come standard with 'OIS' ? Is so that's a real bargain.


Regards;
Peter
Click to expand...

Yes indeed this has the mk2 upgraded ois. so make sure if buying you get a mk2 lens. it also has more accurate manual focus when you want it.
 
Last edited:
jj_glos said:
Does the mkII have improved AF? I assume I have a mkI as I've had it a while, but it's light and had okay IQ. AF is a bit pedestrian though, I keep mine for travel. Well at least in theory as it hasn't made it yet (50-140 is worth the weight penalty).




VSCC @ Prescsott Speed Hill Climb 2014 by jj_glos, on Flickr
Click to expand...

As your shot shows the focus speed is fast enough though not up to the XF standard. Tests have shown that closed one stop, there is nothing in it sharpness wise compared with the 50 140. Your pan is a credit to the 50 230 even if it is the earlier version. Where the 50 140 wins hands down is in poor light.
The version is marked OIS mk2 on the lens.
 
This was the lens I was going to get but I sold all my Fuji gear because I have too much gear.
I think it was £130 and I seen a test showing how it compared very well optically to the super expensive Fuji zooms
 
GTG said:
This was the lens I was going to get but I sold all my Fuji gear because I have too much gear.
I think it was £130 and I seen a test showing how it compared very well optically to the super expensive Fuji zooms
Click to expand...


This Comparison makes a lot of sense and gives an excellent comparison with the other Fuji Zooms
The 50 230 make a lot of sense if you need excellent quality but not all the bells and whistles.
http://www.robzeiglerphoto.com/blog-posts/2016-1-11/sibling-rivalry-the-underestimated-xc-50-230mm
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
As your shot shows the focus speed is fast enough though not up to the XF standard. Tests have shown that closed one stop, there is nothing in it sharpness wise compared with the 50 140. Your pan is a credit to the 50 230 even if it is the earlier version. Where the 50 140 wins hands down is in poor light.
The version is marked OIS mk2 on the lens.
Click to expand...

This type of panning shot with plenty of room to work is easy for AF and doesn't particularly cause lenses a problem. Where the lens really struggled is in the initial focus acquisition. So if I was waiting near a corner and had only seconds to acquire focus, pan and take the shot it struggled. The 50-140 does f2.8 and renders nicer for me, it's a more expensive lens so it should be better!
 
jj_glos said:
This type of panning shot with plenty of room to work is easy for AF and doesn't particularly cause lenses a problem. Where the lens really struggled is in the initial focus acquisition. So if I was waiting near a corner and had only seconds to acquire focus, pan and take the shot it struggled. The 50-140 does f2.8 and renders nicer for me, it's a more expensive lens so it should be better!
Click to expand...

The 50 140 has a liner focus motor and it is a lot faster. it is also clearly more useful as it has a so much wider aperture, which take a more complex lens structure to cover well.
However just like there is nothing between a Zeiss Novar and Tessar for sharpness at F8 or beyond, neither is there a noticeable difference between the Fuji lenses. at those apertures.

I think a good deal of the focus acquisition speed is down to the camera body and firmware level, as my XE2 seems to lock focus with it very quickly.
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
The 50 140 has a liner focus motor and it is a lot faster. it is also clearly more useful as it has a so much wider aperture, which take a more complex lens structure to cover well.
However just like there is nothing between a Zeiss Novar and Tessar for sharpness at F8 or beyond, neither is there a noticeable difference between the Fuji lenses. at those apertures.

I think a good deal of the focus acquisition speed is down to the camera body and firmware level, as my XE2 seems to lock focus with it very quickly.
Click to expand...

It's a bit quicker on my X-T2 than the old X-E1, but it's still not fast to AF initially.

I have to stop down when panning to get the shutter speed down, but in normal use all my lenses are used wide open :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top