FUJIFILM 50-140mm 1 YEAR REVIEW // Is It Still The Best?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 10

  • @jamescraig3345
    @jamescraig3345 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Stumbled on this and had to add… this is my favorite lens. For hand held, wide open, back of theater stage performance shooting it is phenomenal. I get outside, I sometimes pick up the 55-200.

  • @jaapkamstra9343
    @jaapkamstra9343 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hey man! great review! I'm so excited: mine will arrive this saturday: can't wait to try it out!

  • @benjones8977
    @benjones8977 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I didn’t like the weight and size of the lens, so I opted for the 90 F2. When I’m traveling it’s so much lighter and it gets me the nice bokeh, and quality images I like.
    I can always crop if I need to get closer. I also carry the 56 1.2 when I need something wider. But my mainstay lens is my 16 -55 2.8. I just prefer a lighter load when I’m hiking. The less lenses I carry the better my creativity. I usually only carry two lenses.

    • @benjones8977
      @benjones8977 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@diogocastrofilm
      You’d be surprised how well my system works. I don’t shoot wildlife so I don’t really need the 50-140. I also have a 10 to 24, which still wasn’t big enough in the redwoods! 🙄

    • @benjones8977
      @benjones8977 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@diogocastrofilm
      No problems if you like the lens. I thought about it long and hard but just don’t like the weight/size. The 56 and the 90 are incredible for portraits.
      I am eyeing the new 70-300 by Fuji. But I’m not sure I have a reason to get that either. 🤔

  • @clipdump
    @clipdump 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    That's a major point with the size of f2.8 lenses on aspc cameras. We are blessed with such high quality glass from Fuji but also the form factor is often really good. Yes FF has better low light performance but if you are zooming in anyways you actually benefit from smaller sensors like this

  • @bill3117
    @bill3117 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I love my copy!

  • @caesarblanko1399
    @caesarblanko1399 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Yo, you tried it with a gimbal? Could nowhere find anything.

  • @anorveaa
    @anorveaa 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Huuu??? This Fuji lens is "cheaper" than any other 70-200? The Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 is close to $1K while this Fuji is $1600 plus tax. Where do you get your information that this lens is cheaper?.

    • @anorveaa
      @anorveaa 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@diogocastrofilm And there is the Sigma as well. All fantastic lenses at lower prices. I would love to see more comparisons between these lenses against the Fuji 50-140. The only other "review" I've seen is Tony Nortrhrup saying that the Fuji shows much less detail, but I have no Idea if that's true. What I do know is that the Fuji is older than the Tamron G2 for example so I would love to see true actual differences.