That camera you were talking about 3 years ago, is finally here. The Fujifilm X-T5, with 7 stops of IBIS, is perfect for this gorgeous lens. In addition, the X-T5 has a 40 megapixel APS-C sensor. It's a combo worth salivating over!
Isn’t the colour down to its use? I read that certain lenses are white because they have almost entirely outdoor use and white doesn’t heat up and cause the lens to expand in the sun.
I love mine and I am so glad I purchased it! Esthetically, the most beautiful lens I have ever seen. On the XT3 with the newest firmware and the XT4, it is flawless and focusses ultra-fast and accurately.
From this incredible glass to the huge leaps in AF they've taken with the X-T3, I can barely contain my excitement for the X-H2. I fully expect it to be a game-changing camera, whenever it comes out. I'm thoroughly enjoying my X-T3, but, I'm nearly impatient for that X-H2. :-)
My excitement for the X-H2 has cooled considerably because of the X-S10 and X-T4. They would have to have 4K120, the bigger battery and dual card slots to make one make sense
You might have a point there, also the 33mm F1.0(pretty large as well) makes more sense with a different camera than what they currently have available. They might launch an XZ-1, a different kind of beast, dedicated to sports photographers 😁
Based on your comments, why the hell are you doing a review on this lens. This is a professional lens and has a professional price on it. If you look at this product and it doesn't make sense to you you, you definitely shouldn't be doing a review on it!!!
Xt3 is perfect for sports and the shutter speed fps is faster than the Sony a9.....also dont forget to try this lens with the new firmware update with the xt3 the auto focus is unmatched.....
You the funny thing is that I’m considering buying the Nikon 200mm f2.0 VRII for the Nikon Z9, and then I saw the Fuji 200mm f2.0 and I immediately realized that they don’t have the right camera for this lens. And I know nothing about Fuji camera’s except I like the look of the Fuji X - T5……BUT it’s not built in proportion to the lens! And then I saw your video here….from 4 years ago….. and realized that Fuji still has not come out with a proper camera for this white 200mm f2.0 lens
It’s a shame that hood cost almost $300. And is plastic and not well made but does falls apart easily ,for a $6,000. Lens Fuji should be ashamed and Fuji refuses to replace the faulty hood with a new hood even though it’s under warranty still…absolutely amazingly cheap company
Hi, congratulations on your channel and pretty down to Earth approach. I'm a recent subscriber and owner of a XT-3 16-55 and 50-140mm F2.8. Hobbyist in sports photography, Kite, surf, Mtb Downhill and moto sports and went in depth for the last couple of (confinement) months to study the camera itself. Current challenge is to focus sharp and move up from 'Ok picture' mode ;) I wonder if you could point me the direction for the focus area? Usually on AF-C \single point [º], kind of uncertain how the size of the 'square' influences the sharpness of the subject. Checked your insta and Hawaii is still, at 56, a dream trip (surf since 11). Cheers and many thanks
I think this lens should be compared to Nikon/Canon 300mm F2.8. The price isn't so far apart from those 2. Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II = $5,496.95 Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM = $6,099
No, your comparison is off. You are factoring in the cropped of 1.5 into the lens but that has to do with the camera's APS-C sized sensor. The Nikon 200mm f2 on a D500/D7500 is the same focal length when compared with the Fuji 200mm f2 on XT bodies. The thing is, both the Nikon and Canon versions can also be used on their full frame bodies. Fuji advertised it as an APS-C lens vs Canon and Nikon which are designed for FF but can also be used for cropped bodies as well. Unless this Fuji 200mm f2 is designed for a FF, it's way overpriced IMHO.
@@wenc8796 Fuji have never really been on value lens side even for a crop lens system (pretty much across the board). I agree I think the crop factor should = more appealing prices. FF seems to be on a roll lately - I like Fuji can't help but think they're maybe missing out longer term without a 35mm body
@@EnterSpacebar Panasonic only just started out on full frame. Doubt they will get a huge following. More about the other makers, and what they do. What happens with Panasonic likely not very important. I can only say I think Fuji can do well, if they are at a level which is more appealing on cost. If it's too close to 35mm, clearly that will impact them. I wouldn't be too interested in a crop only system at this stage - perhaps others might
dont quite agree, you forgett that fuji showcased a new firmware for the xt3 which improves afc tracking. will be released soon. a lot of this + more will go into the XH2 though
The colour does make sense. Image quality degrades with heat. White helps keep the lens cooler when shooting outside the whole day under the piercing sun.
You make a very good point. $6000 seems really crazy for APS-C line up Fuji has at the moment. It seems unlikely they will enter full frame market, but if there is some kind of premium sports shooter in APS-C size sensor that they are working on.... this might make a bit more sense. The price though, is still a stretch.
I use a Canon 200mm f2.0 for indoor sports. Even when attached to an FF (36x24mm) camera, 200mm are often too long when shooting indoor sports. On a crop camera (APS-C) this lens is pretty much useless for indoor sports, unless you shoot in really large arenas (NBA). The same applies for portrait photography. On an FF body you can fill the frame with a 23cm tall subject like a small face at the minimum focus distance (1.8m on the Canon, 1.9m on the Nikkor). Regardless of you desired composition, the focus distance is 50 % longer with an APS-C body. The bokeh difference between a subject distance of 2 and 3m is quite strong. If your subject distance is more than 8m, you lose the magic look such a lens creates. It then looks like a 200mm f2.8 or 4.0. A 200mm f2.0 would be the ultimate lens for a medium format camera, but is wasted for APS-C.
This lens on a X-T3 or X-H1 makes more sense than the 28-70 or 50 1.2 RF lenses on the RP. Sorry, just a Canon shooter that is beyond fed up with Canon. It will interesting to see if Fuji has another high end camera in the works.
I think this lens was a "halo" model for Fujifilm, a way to show what they can do, an exotic item. But you add an interesting new perspective. A new camera around 2500-3000, with higher mech rate and bigger batteries, a more beefy XH-2 kind of thing?
Fast glass cost big bucks, and when I shoot sports I want the fast stuff. It definitely sets your photos apart, yes it is a speciality lens. I guess I'm addicted to fast big glass.
Interesting review I hope you’re right I was thinking of pulling the trigger on this lens for wildlife photography but I’m waiting to see what Fuji’s roadmap is for going to be for next year if they sit on their hands then Nikon is going to get my money with the d850 and the 500mm pf
Agree, I'm aware Fuji users say the AF performance on the xt3 is excellent, (as they did for the xt1 & 2), but I've found in reality it's not up there with certain other cameras. Not saying it's a bad camera, it's brilliant, but I just don't see it as a pro sports camera and the cost of this lense puts it squarely in that area.
Hmmmm....I guess I didn't shoot all those tens of thousands of frames of professionally accredited racing with my Fujifilm X-T2/X-H1/X-T3 then! 😉 Nor did I win a Nominee Award for my motorsports photojournalism entry for the 2018 Spider Black and White photography competition in Sports with a photograph I took with my X-T2...
@@stephenscharf6293 Stephen no one is challenging you about your own skills. What we are saying the XT3 does feel like it matches up in build quality & performance compared to something like say the Canon 1 DXii or Nikon D5.I was very clear to say the XT3 was a fine camera, just that the lens is something special & different. The target market customer who can afford the XT3 wouldn't be the type of customer who has the $$ for the 200mm. But, a pro sports shooter would....this is what my hunch is. Feels like something is coming that will out compete those flagships from the big boys. Thanks!
@@MMaven Hi Michael, understood that my skills were not being challenged, no worries! 😀 Its just that I didn't agree with Tony's assessment, based on my extensive experience with both systems. I wouldn't have sold all my pro Canon gear I used for many years if the Fujifilm X and Fujinon XF system could not do the job; the fact of the matter is they can, at least for what I do (motorsports). As for build quality and performance matching the 1DX and Nikon D-series, I agree with you, the X-T3 does not match up with the Canon 1D-series/Nikon D-series. It was never designed to; the X-T series is the equivalent to the Canon 5D series. The Fujifilm body that *does* match up with the Canon 1D and Nikon D-series is the X-H line, with exception that the X-H1 will not AF at -5 EV which the Nikon D5 will (the D850 won't either, for that matter). As for the camera body in the Fujifilm X-system that customers would buy to use the XF200? In my professional view, that is the X-H line of camera bodies. And Fujifilm Corporate agrees, as they specifically stated in their white papers published for the release of the X-H1. And I agree, that the something will come out, like the X-H2, and future X-H models, that will be quite impressive, indeed. Here's some reading for you from my blog regarding the X-H1's "Design Brief": bit.ly/2HYC8f6 Cheers, Michael! Best, Stephen
Dude, there are tons of lens that are 4-5 times more than the cameras you use them on. I paid $2899 for my D850 and $12,500 for my 600 f/4 lens, for example. For me, this 200 f/2 is a sports AND more importantly for myself, a kick ass portrait lens. Most photographers use a 70-200 f/2.8 for portraits and a 200 f/2 just destroys it. And what do you mean a high end sports camera from Fuji? They won't make a FF, so that's out. What more could you ask from the X-T3? It's metal, weather sealed, the best focusing system, up THIRTY fps, 11 fps mechanical, 20 fps electronic shutter, and 30 fps in the cropped sports mode. Yeah, it even has special sports modes. The X-T3 has a grip, dual card slots, the best video recording capabilties out of any camera as of right now. I don't know what you think they need to add. I'm sure I'm forgetting a lot too, lol.
Michael The Maven Zack Arias, Kevin Mullins and Michael Damböck all mentioned being invited to Japan last January for something on development. However none has spoke a word about that meeting afterward! 🤔
Is this perhaps Fuji making an early engineering statement. To my mind, it doesn't fit with their current apsc bodies. Rather like the recent mega fast ( and expensive) 50 mm lens, is this a little similar to Leica releasing various iterations of the kidney costing 50 mm Summilux 1.1, 0.59 super fast lens. Of little practical use ,even for Pros, the design and manufacturing of these Leica lens were about Leica making a statement abour it's design and manufacturing abilities than the production production of a lens to be made in significant numbers. It will be very interesting to see if Fuji will blind side the camera market and introduce a camera that would be a good "fit" for this lens. No doubt, if so, the price point would too high to move me from my XT2 & XT3. Doubtless, time will tell.
Excellent review! This 200mm prime is really a great piece of work from Fujifilm! I really love this lens. I compared its IQ with my Sony 400GM and, I have to say, it is at least on par with Sony 400Gm, if not better(actually I felt that Fuji 200 may be even very very slightly sharper than Sony 400 when really zoomed in). I fully share your views on the camera body. Non of the current Fuji X bodies can match this lens! What a shame! I had exactly the same focus issue when using this lens with X-t3 to panning shoot cars. I think that it is the X-t3 body to blame. I have this lens and tested it along with my other Fuji lens (i.e. 18-55) and found the exact problem. When I was panning with X-t3 to shoot a moving car, the first few shots were sharp and in focus but then the camera would lost focus after the initial grab! Quite disappointing! But this happens to all my fuji lens. Therefore, I do not think that it is the lens to blame. To be honest, focus tracking on X-t3 appears to be a quite bit behind Sony. My A7R3 has similar tracking character when doing panning for moving cars. It seems that the camera's CPU or whatever just cannot keep focusing with the constant moving target! But my A9 does not have this issue at all and it keeps tracking insanely well! Really hope that Fuji can bring a body to match this mega lens!
Love these shorter videos that you've been doing lately... Interesting hunch, and it makes perfect sense. Perhaps in time for the 2020 Olympics we'll see a body with build similar to the X-H1 but optimized for sports and nature??
Sacha Martin - I am not a sports shooter, but have shot sports. The X-H1 probably could work for certain sports applications, but it comes down to keeper rate. The X-T3 has better FPS and AF tracking plus superior target acquisition, hence would have a better keeper rate. The X-H1 has better handling with larger lenses, plus superior build quality. A body that combines the best of both X-T3 and X-H1 attributes ‘might’ be in the works?
Does it makes sense to purchase any $12 000 supertele which costs 5-6 times the camera body people are using them with? My problem with this lens is that it's too short for birds and wildlife.
ATG & I agreed that this should be branded as 300/2.0. Because it is only corrected in the center. Meaning, the lens light opening will not cover 24mm X 36mm. And since all camera (based on 35mm format) bodies are reduction cameras with 1.5 decreased of 24X36. Unless, this lenses has an open of their APS medium format (GFX 50s or GFX50r) with adapter, then some will buy. But it is best just to rent and use on with those reduction cameras. Most people don't know that Fuji has been making lenses for China's world best cameras. So Fuji is the only company that make three lens mounts.
Abbbbbssssooooooluttteeeeellllyyyyyy with you...not sure about the new APSC camera....especially with the xt3, but who knows maybe you're right, especially witht he home run they pulled getting camera of the year if not side by side by the a7iii. Tbh...I've been more upset at how they havent redone the 35mm 1.4...i really want that lens. or a full frame equivalent zoom w/OIS
That is one serious 'hunk' of glass Michael! To me this lens makes no sense at all. As you pointed out, which current Fuji user would actually purchase this lens? It is very specialist is some ways; obviously it would be great for some outdoor sports events and maybe indoor sports where lighting is tricky. It is the type of lens that a pro sports shooter would use but let's be honest; Fuji has not really released a specific camera body to pair with this lens (yet?) to attract sports and wildlife photographers. I would be more interested as a wildlife photographer to have a 200-600mm F5.6 lens for Fuji to tempt me away from my Nikon gear.
I think you are right it doesn't make sense. If it was a 300mm f2.8 and a couple of grand cheaper yes would be useful but anyone using it would likely use it with the 1.4 all the time and the fact that IS is not consistent with isn't good. But it looks nice.
I would have liked you to compare the 200f2 with a 500mm lens f5.6 because the the Fuji 200f2 is the Equivalent of a 500mm lens at 35 mm... Fuji 200mm x 1.4 tele, the sensor crop 1.5 plus the 1.25 Corp when you shoot in 30 fps brings it to over 500mm
i think Sony has some new sensor tech but is doing the waiting game to announce it and maybe because of contractual restrictions fuji hasn't launched or leaked the new camera yet. hehehe
Regarding the missed shots and tweaks to correct it, you might want to look into changing your camera's I.S. mode. I vaguely remember a video by Ken Wheeler (aka The Angry Photographer) about changing the image stabilization mode on his X-T2 or X-T3 when shooting with the 100-400mm and 50-140mm. But for the life of me, I can no longer find it... nor do I recall what his reasoning was.
I got the same experience.The lens seems great but the Xt-3 is not match to the lens. It hunted for me few times when tested and also initial focus acquire was slower then expected (comparing to A7III with 400/2.8 GM). I don't think it's due to lens really.
0:38 like yours on explaining FF sensors vs croped? (sorry if i sound like a d*ck,) I've never been a fan of TheoriaApophasis guy but when it comes to physics and light he is the guy to ask and you were unfortunately wrong.. I think you should make a video that explains this like it should be explained, without hate, bias or anything else, just come clean i beg you bc i you were my main channel i recomended to anybody I know as far it goes to technical aproach to cameras.. Keep up with the good work and make this fricking photo comunity HEALTHY, love from Croatia ^^
Hate to break it to you, but that video is correct. That’s a tough pill for him and others to swallow, but facts are facts. Had you carefully read any of the references provided, with an open mind and heart, you would learn something. Best wishes.
"Something big is coming from Fuji" - X-T3 with firmware update in April will be a very fast camera. The problem is - and this is from a Fuji- only user - that 90% of all pros automatically reach out for full frame. For sensors, bigger is just better, at least up to FF, beyond that the drawbacks (in terms of size, price, weight) outweigh the extra IQ... As far as I am concerned, I will not shell out that kind of money for an APSc money? The logic of the video is strange: He would not spend 6k for APSc lens, and the lens is so much more expensive. So maybe he would if the camera would not cost 1,5k but 3k?
Actually it will give the same depth of field as those, if you shoot from the same distance. What I don't understand is why a portrait photographer is comparing a 300mm equivalent lens to 200mm lenses in the first place. The more accurate comparison would be with the 300mm f/2.8 lenses.
I think it makes sense for professional sports photographers. The Fujifilm X-T3 is supposed to be an outstanding sports camera according to some other experts.
Because it is. For the price at least. It's not a D5/1DX mk2 or Sony A9. But then who is claiming that? I'd say it fall short in just that use case compared to a D500. But then which camera outperforms a D500 for sports? The X-T3 is an amazing all-rounder. But it ain't the specialists weapon of choice. And that's fine.
Great point on possible upcoming Fuji sports camera to match this lens. Maybe thats why Sony put the brakes on the mythical A7000 because they got wind of this possible Fuji camera. Remember what Sony did to the X-H1...they obliterated it by dropping the A7iii weeks later.
There will undoubtedly be a sport oriented flagship coming at some point, but I doubt that was a massive factor in this lens' creation. Definitely, that body would have been weighted in the creation of this lens, but its not the outright reason. This is simply Fuji trying to upsell. Fuji's marketing is all about the 2x crop factor. That puts this lens in direct competition with the Sony 400 2.8 and similar lenses in the Canon/Nikon world. Again, we are seeing Fuji saying here... for half the cost and half the weight you too can match the giants. Whether you buy in to equivalence or not, is the only issue Fuji would have selling the lens.
Fujifilm needed a "halo product" super tele to get professional sports, motorsports, and wildlife photographers into the Fujifilm X/Fujinon XF lens system and the XF200 is that lens. The body that was specifically designed for this lens is the X-H1, and having shot with one for the better part of a year now, it is a superb performer, one of the 5 best cameras I've ever used (and two of those are Canon 1D-series bodies). Having shot with the XF200mm f/2.0 for 10 days including a major motorsports national championship event, the XF is a nothing short of a superb performer and provides an absolutely insane level for all the key image quality attributes: sharpness, color accuracy, color contrast, tonal contrast, tonal gradation, and acutance. Having owned and shot with Canon pro bodies and glass for the better part of 15 years for professionally accredited motorsports photojournalism, and having owned and used the Canon 300mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 L IS extensively (e.g. for MotoGP coverage) over many years, the Fujinon XF200 is the finest lens I have ever used, hands down, and is worth every penny of $6000. I know that Fujifilm X-Photographers and motorsports PJ's Jeff Carter and Ed Rourke have already bought and are using this lens for FIA Endurance Racing photojournalism.
I like your theory that the lens is made for a camera that is not out yet. Similar to what appears Canon is doing with their great RF lenses in my opinion. Basically, try to sell you into a great lens system with the hope that future bodies will make it worth the investment. That is how I started with Canon. Bodies keep changing, but the lenses are where most of the investment is. Will be interesting to see if Fuji announces something in the not to distant future.
Totally agree. They also have a "lens road map" with the range going far in to the zooms with only the 100-400 in it. Feels like a lot of empty space. It makes a lot of sense to produce the lenses first.
@@1BigBucks1 It really is inconvenient. What I do now is when I shoot RAW, I shoot JPG+RAW, preview in JPEG and when I find the few RAWs I like, process only those. LR is convenient, but not the best for Fuji RAW files.
The Great Vanzinni! I thought that when it was first released... But I’m not so sure now, apsc used to be for people who just haven’t made it to FF yet... now these latest APSC cameras by Fuji are so good they hold their own and it seems people are starting to question if they actually need a FF sensor. people woke up to the Mega pixel race long ago, I’m wondering if the same could be happening with sensors.
@@chrischan5168 Good points but will we be willing to pay FF prices? The reason a lot of us like most Fuji stuff is its affordability. I think FF will eventually take over the world. Perhaps our aps will be the new ???? M4/3's? The future is here. We just don't know what it is.
The Great Vanzinni! I think people already are paying FF prices with the latest Fuji cameras and lenses. But there will always be a selection of people that will opt for FF whether it benefits them or not when the prices are similar. I like what Fuji are doing with apsc and medium format... they seem to be on a completely different path to the rest.
The very Fuji people tell that X-H1 was misunderstood. It is not a video oriented camera. I own it and I agree, for me the IBIS adds more value to photography than to videography. Being able to shoot handheld with the 16mm for a third of a second, opens up a lot of posibilities.
Completely agreed but one thing i did not understand how could 200 F2 apsc lens is same size of full frame 200 F2. Canon 200mm F2 is almost same size. Is this designed for full frame? Again same thing with Fuji 100-400. It is bigger than Canon full frame 100-400. I think Fuji has to rethink the lens designs. This could kill them when canon can make full frame lens of same size.
After a certain focal length the lens size is dictated by the aperture and front lens element and smaller sensor does have little impact. A 200mm F2 lens needs to have a 100mm aperture, no matter how small is the sensor behind it.
I already mentioned this, a few times. Its too expensive. Neither I nor most of my students can afford it. Lensprotogo was the sponsor of the video, we wouldnt even be watching it without them, of course I am going to suggest them. They didnt make the lens.
And you appear to be a youtube troll... Why are people so damn cynical? No one is stopping you from buying the lens if you want, don't be all salty just because someone suggested that renting it might be more practical.
@@MMaven Fully agree, Michael. I shoot pro racing, but only need a lens like the XF200 two times a year; it makes no financial sense to buy a lens like this when it only gets used 2X a year. Cheers! -Stephen
The Samyang is better. No chromatic aberration, less coma smear, sharper, way more microcontrast, similar or slightly better build quality, it's basically neck and neck with the Zeiss, which beats it in build quality but loses to it in microcontrast. The Canon L has a slightly blue colour cast while the Samyang is more natural (leaning a tiny amount towards red though)
I agree with most of the comments, surely it's a great piece of glass but a lens that only covers APS-C sensor definitely shouldn't cost MORE than a 200mm F/2 for fullframe, especially when it's opponents are outstanding lenses on their own. One might say it's direct opponents are the 300 f/2.8 but things become even worse when you compare it to monsters like the Canon 300 f/2.8! P.S. I hope you will review the new Nikon S lenses soon, the MTF of the new 24-70 f/2.8 looks juicy, and Nikon doesn't lie about MTF!
Not sure what the Blink book reference is supposed to tell us. Are you telling us that you’re right? I have liked the photographic analysis on this channel but wearing of the philosophical and psychological analyses.
@@MMaven What makes the biggest difference for use with a lense like this? AF? Even though it looks great i guess that for a start a XT3 with the 100 - 400 mm lens might be more sensible, since i haven't been photographing since years and don't own a camera since i was 14 (12 years ago).
That camera you were talking about 3 years ago, is finally here. The Fujifilm X-T5, with 7 stops of IBIS, is perfect for this gorgeous lens. In addition, the X-T5 has a 40 megapixel APS-C sensor. It's a combo worth salivating over!
Xh2 and xh2s would make a better company with 200/2 than xt5.
The white color does makes sense. It’s to dissipate direct heat from the sun ☀️
congrats on 200K subs ... and the video too is about a 200mm lens.
what timing.
Thank you!
Isn’t the colour down to its use? I read that certain lenses are white because they have almost entirely outdoor use and white doesn’t heat up and cause the lens to expand in the sun.
Exactly! This is lens designed specifically for pro sports shooters.
I feel like bright white would not be great camo for bird photography.
I love mine and I am so glad I purchased it! Esthetically, the most beautiful lens I have ever seen. On the XT3 with the newest firmware and the XT4, it is flawless and focusses ultra-fast and accurately.
yessss. Agreed! I'm sad I sold it and I'm gonna buy it again :)
I felt cold watching this video. And I figured it out. You shaved your hair😂😂
I feel the same when Gordon doesn't wear his beanie.
A year down the line, I would like to see a follow on review as to what you think now Michael, More so now the x-T4 is out.
I think the XT4 is the first APSC sports shooting camera that competes with FF flagships. Still waiting on the new white lenses from FUJI.
From this incredible glass to the huge leaps in AF they've taken with the X-T3, I can barely contain my excitement for the X-H2. I fully expect it to be a game-changing camera, whenever it comes out.
I'm thoroughly enjoying my X-T3, but, I'm nearly impatient for that X-H2. :-)
My excitement for the X-H2 has cooled considerably because of the X-S10 and X-T4. They would have to have 4K120, the bigger battery and dual card slots to make one make sense
You might have a point there, also the 33mm F1.0(pretty large as well) makes more sense with a different camera than what they currently have available. They might launch an XZ-1, a different kind of beast, dedicated to sports photographers 😁
Based on your comments, why the hell are you doing a review on this lens. This is a professional lens and has a professional price on it. If you look at this product and it doesn't make sense to you you, you definitely shouldn't be doing a review on it!!!
Xt3 is perfect for sports and the shutter speed fps is faster than the Sony a9.....also dont forget to try this lens with the new firmware update with the xt3 the auto focus is unmatched.....
You the funny thing is that I’m considering buying the Nikon 200mm f2.0 VRII for the Nikon Z9, and then I saw the Fuji 200mm f2.0 and I immediately realized that they don’t have the right camera for this lens. And I know nothing about Fuji camera’s except I like the look of the Fuji X - T5……BUT it’s not built in proportion to the lens! And then I saw your video here….from 4 years ago….. and realized that Fuji still has not come out with a proper camera for this white 200mm f2.0 lens
It’s a shame that hood cost almost $300. And is plastic and not well made but does falls apart easily ,for a $6,000. Lens Fuji should be ashamed and Fuji refuses to replace the faulty hood with a new hood even though it’s under warranty still…absolutely amazingly cheap company
Now that the 40,5 megspixels sensors are here Xh2 and the Xt5, I'm curious abou the match up with this!
And now 2024 we know why ;) Xh2s + Xh2 with that lens omg its LOVE 😍
It would be nice to compare to the Nikkor AF 200mm f/2.0 G VR II
What about a xt4 matchup? - I've got it, considering buying Xf200 for 4000$ new
The color and the coating are specifically designed to prevent from sun damage
Now that we have X-H2 and X-H2s, it should be perfect.
seen it before but what could be the results now with the newer XH2/s cameras !
Man that stabilization
It was insane
Hi, congratulations on your channel and pretty down to Earth approach. I'm a recent subscriber and owner of a XT-3 16-55 and 50-140mm F2.8. Hobbyist in sports photography, Kite, surf, Mtb Downhill and moto sports and went in depth for the last couple of (confinement) months to study the camera itself. Current challenge is to focus sharp and move up from 'Ok picture' mode ;)
I wonder if you could point me the direction for the focus area? Usually on AF-C \single point [º], kind of uncertain how the size of the 'square' influences the sharpness of the subject. Checked your insta and Hawaii is still, at 56, a dream trip (surf since 11). Cheers and many thanks
I think this lens should be compared to Nikon/Canon 300mm F2.8. The price isn't so far apart from those 2.
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II = $5,496.95
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM = $6,099
No, your comparison is off. You are factoring in the cropped of 1.5 into the lens but that has to do with the camera's APS-C sized sensor. The Nikon 200mm f2 on a D500/D7500 is the same focal length when compared with the Fuji 200mm f2 on XT bodies. The thing is, both the Nikon and Canon versions can also be used on their full frame bodies. Fuji advertised it as an APS-C lens vs Canon and Nikon which are designed for FF but can also be used for cropped bodies as well. Unless this Fuji 200mm f2 is designed for a FF, it's way overpriced IMHO.
It's a 200mm lens so it should be compared to other 200mm lenses.
@@wenc8796 Fuji have never really been on value lens side even for a crop lens system (pretty much across the board). I agree I think the crop factor should = more appealing prices. FF seems to be on a roll lately - I like Fuji can't help but think they're maybe missing out longer term without a 35mm body
@@MrBazReviews That worked out great for Panasonic. Not.
@@EnterSpacebar Panasonic only just started out on full frame. Doubt they will get a huge following. More about the other makers, and what they do. What happens with Panasonic likely not very important. I can only say I think Fuji can do well, if they are at a level which is more appealing on cost. If it's too close to 35mm, clearly that will impact them. I wouldn't be too interested in a crop only system at this stage - perhaps others might
dont quite agree, you forgett that fuji showcased a new firmware for the xt3 which improves afc tracking. will be released soon. a lot of this + more will go into the XH2 though
Your dad has by far the best beared and stash I've seen !!!!
The colour does make sense. Image quality degrades with heat. White helps keep the lens cooler when shooting outside the whole day under the piercing sun.
You make a very good point. $6000 seems really crazy for APS-C line up Fuji has at the moment. It seems unlikely they will enter full frame market, but if there is some kind of premium sports shooter in APS-C size sensor that they are working on.... this might make a bit more sense. The price though, is still a stretch.
FUJI maybe coming out with a Medium Format APSC camera! Dont ask me how that works
That would be mind blowing! I can't even figure it out lol
Wow Johnny Sins does lens reviews.
I use a Canon 200mm f2.0 for indoor sports. Even when attached to an FF (36x24mm) camera, 200mm are often too long when shooting indoor sports. On a crop camera (APS-C) this lens is pretty much useless for indoor sports, unless you shoot in really large arenas (NBA).
The same applies for portrait photography. On an FF body you can fill the frame with a 23cm tall subject like a small face at the minimum focus distance (1.8m on the Canon, 1.9m on the Nikkor). Regardless of you desired composition, the focus distance is 50 % longer with an APS-C body. The bokeh difference between a subject distance of 2 and 3m is quite strong. If your subject distance is more than 8m, you lose the magic look such a lens creates. It then looks like a 200mm f2.8 or 4.0.
A 200mm f2.0 would be the ultimate lens for a medium format camera, but is wasted for APS-C.
Wish they made the 200 black. Or grey.
This lens on a X-T3 or X-H1 makes more sense than the 28-70 or 50 1.2 RF lenses on the RP. Sorry, just a Canon shooter that is beyond fed up with Canon. It will interesting to see if Fuji has another high end camera in the works.
Where is the professional shooter Fuji cam? :P
The lens is white because white reflects heat.
I think this lens was a "halo" model for Fujifilm, a way to show what they can do, an exotic item. But you add an interesting new perspective. A new camera around 2500-3000, with higher mech rate and bigger batteries, a more beefy XH-2 kind of thing?
Exactly! Why not??
Fast glass cost big bucks, and when I shoot sports I want the fast stuff. It definitely sets your photos apart, yes it is a speciality lens. I guess I'm addicted to fast big glass.
I think Fuji is fishing for more users, but with the X-H2.
Interesting review I hope you’re right I was thinking of pulling the trigger on this lens for wildlife photography but I’m waiting to see what Fuji’s roadmap is for going to be for next year if they sit on their hands then Nikon is going to get my money with the d850 and the 500mm pf
The advent of XT4
Alls I gotta say is... thank god I have no desire to pursue wildlife photography. *edit: the shot at 1:43 is absolutely incredible!
Thank you Jeremy!
Agree, I'm aware Fuji users say the AF performance on the xt3 is excellent, (as they did for the xt1 & 2), but I've found in reality it's not up there with certain other cameras. Not saying it's a bad camera, it's brilliant, but I just don't see it as a pro sports camera and the cost of this lense puts it squarely in that area.
My thoughts exactly!
Hmmmm....I guess I didn't shoot all those tens of thousands of frames of professionally accredited racing with my Fujifilm X-T2/X-H1/X-T3 then! 😉 Nor did I win a Nominee Award for my motorsports photojournalism entry for the 2018 Spider Black and White photography competition in Sports with a photograph I took with my X-T2...
@@stephenscharf6293 Stephen no one is challenging you about your own skills. What we are saying the XT3 does feel like it matches up in build quality & performance compared to something like say the Canon 1 DXii or Nikon D5.I was very clear to say the XT3 was a fine camera, just that the lens is something special & different. The target market customer who can afford the XT3 wouldn't be the type of customer who has the $$ for the 200mm. But, a pro sports shooter would....this is what my hunch is. Feels like something is coming that will out compete those flagships from the big boys. Thanks!
@@MMaven Hi Michael, understood that my skills were not being challenged, no worries! 😀 Its just that I didn't agree with Tony's assessment, based on my extensive experience with both systems. I wouldn't have sold all my pro Canon gear I used for many years if the Fujifilm X and Fujinon XF system could not do the job; the fact of the matter is they can, at least for what I do (motorsports). As for build quality and performance matching the 1DX and Nikon D-series, I agree with you, the X-T3 does not match up with the Canon 1D-series/Nikon D-series. It was never designed to; the X-T series is the equivalent to the Canon 5D series. The Fujifilm body that *does* match up with the Canon 1D and Nikon D-series is the X-H line, with exception that the X-H1 will not AF at -5 EV which the Nikon D5 will (the D850 won't either, for that matter). As for the camera body in the Fujifilm X-system that customers would buy to use the XF200? In my professional view, that is the X-H line of camera bodies. And Fujifilm Corporate agrees, as they specifically stated in their white papers published for the release of the X-H1. And I agree, that the something will come out, like the X-H2, and future X-H models, that will be quite impressive, indeed. Here's some reading for you from my blog regarding the X-H1's "Design Brief": bit.ly/2HYC8f6 Cheers, Michael! Best, Stephen
@leicanoct Its the Equivalent of a 300 2.8 FF. Add the adapter in and you are at 420mm
X pro 3 maybe? I'm going to rent this for the next big Strongman show I cover. It looks amazing.
U are joking. Xpro3 is designed for small primes. Maybe H2.
@@clopotari147 this comment was made over 2 years ago, before we even had specs on the xpro3
I won’t pay more than 4K for that lens, NO WAY!!
It’s sooo amazing tho...just incredible
Julio. must be poor.
I'm curious what other similar lenses can provide the same output for $4,000? And let's not forget this include the teleconverter.
Sacha Martin maybe none, however I won’t pay more than 4K for this lens. You find medium format lenses way cheaper than this!!!
Nice doggie shot kid👌🏾
welp....wrong lol
Dude, there are tons of lens that are 4-5 times more than the cameras you use them on. I paid $2899 for my D850 and $12,500 for my 600 f/4 lens, for example. For me, this 200 f/2 is a sports AND more importantly for myself, a kick ass portrait lens. Most photographers use a 70-200 f/2.8 for portraits and a 200 f/2 just destroys it. And what do you mean a high end sports camera from Fuji? They won't make a FF, so that's out. What more could you ask from the X-T3? It's metal, weather sealed, the best focusing system, up THIRTY fps, 11 fps mechanical, 20 fps electronic shutter, and 30 fps in the cropped sports mode. Yeah, it even has special sports modes. The X-T3 has a grip, dual card slots, the best video recording capabilties out of any camera as of right now. I don't know what you think they need to add. I'm sure I'm forgetting a lot too, lol.
You might be right! Fuji invited all of their sponsored shooters to a special private event a month ago and not a word has been said about it.
I didn’t know about it! Would be interesting to know what’s coming
Michael The Maven Zack Arias, Kevin Mullins and Michael Damböck all mentioned being invited to Japan last January for something on development. However none has spoke a word about that meeting afterward! 🤔
Is this perhaps Fuji making an early engineering statement.
To my mind, it doesn't fit with their current apsc bodies.
Rather like the recent mega fast ( and expensive) 50 mm lens, is this a little similar to Leica releasing various iterations of the kidney costing 50 mm Summilux 1.1, 0.59 super fast lens.
Of little practical use ,even for Pros, the design and manufacturing of these Leica lens were about Leica making a statement abour it's design and manufacturing abilities than the production production of a lens to be made in significant numbers.
It will be very interesting to see if Fuji will blind side the camera market and introduce a camera that would be a good "fit" for this lens.
No doubt, if so, the price point would too high to move me from my XT2 & XT3.
Doubtless, time will tell.
Excellent review! This 200mm prime is really a great piece of work from Fujifilm! I really love this lens. I compared its IQ with my Sony 400GM and, I have to say, it is at least on par with Sony 400Gm, if not better(actually I felt that Fuji 200 may be even very very slightly sharper than Sony 400 when really zoomed in). I fully share your views on the camera body. Non of the current Fuji X bodies can match this lens! What a shame! I had exactly the same focus issue when using this lens with X-t3 to panning shoot cars. I think that it is the X-t3 body to blame. I have this lens and tested it along with my other Fuji lens (i.e. 18-55) and found the exact problem. When I was panning with X-t3 to shoot a moving car, the first few shots were sharp and in focus but then the camera would lost focus after the initial grab! Quite disappointing! But this happens to all my fuji lens. Therefore, I do not think that it is the lens to blame. To be honest, focus tracking on X-t3 appears to be a quite bit behind Sony. My A7R3 has similar tracking character when doing panning for moving cars. It seems that the camera's CPU or whatever just cannot keep focusing with the constant moving target! But my A9 does not have this issue at all and it keeps tracking insanely well! Really hope that Fuji can bring a body to match this mega lens!
Love these shorter videos that you've been doing lately... Interesting hunch, and it makes perfect sense. Perhaps in time for the 2020 Olympics we'll see a body with build similar to the X-H1 but optimized for sports and nature??
The timing is curious!
What makes the X-H1 not good enough for sports?
Sacha Martin - I am not a sports shooter, but have shot sports. The X-H1 probably could work for certain sports applications, but it comes down to keeper rate. The X-T3 has better FPS and AF tracking plus superior target acquisition, hence would have a better keeper rate. The X-H1 has better handling with larger lenses, plus superior build quality. A body that combines the best of both X-T3 and X-H1 attributes ‘might’ be in the works?
Does it makes sense to purchase any $12 000 supertele which costs 5-6 times the camera body people are using them with? My problem with this lens is that it's too short for birds and wildlife.
ATG & I agreed that this should be branded as 300/2.0. Because it is only corrected in the center.
Meaning, the lens light opening will not cover 24mm X 36mm.
And since all camera (based on 35mm format) bodies are reduction cameras with 1.5 decreased of 24X36.
Unless, this lenses has an open of their APS medium format (GFX 50s or GFX50r) with adapter, then some will buy.
But it is best just to rent and use on with those reduction cameras.
Most people don't know that Fuji has been making lenses for China's world best cameras.
So Fuji is the only company that make three lens mounts.
Abbbbbssssooooooluttteeeeellllyyyyyy with you...not sure about the new APSC camera....especially with the xt3, but who knows maybe you're right, especially witht he home run they pulled getting camera of the year if not side by side by the a7iii. Tbh...I've been more upset at how they havent redone the 35mm 1.4...i really want that lens. or a full frame equivalent zoom w/OIS
That is one serious 'hunk' of glass Michael! To me this lens makes no sense at all. As you pointed out, which current Fuji user would actually purchase this lens? It is very specialist is some ways; obviously it would be great for some outdoor sports events and maybe indoor sports where lighting is tricky. It is the type of lens that a pro sports shooter would use but let's be honest; Fuji has not really released a specific camera body to pair with this lens (yet?) to attract sports and wildlife photographers. I would be more interested as a wildlife photographer to have a 200-600mm F5.6 lens for Fuji to tempt me away from my Nikon gear.
I think you are right it doesn't make sense. If it was a 300mm f2.8 and a couple of grand cheaper yes would be useful but anyone using it would likely use it with the 1.4 all the time and the fact that IS is not consistent with isn't good. But it looks nice.
Yes too much money. Blade optics tech with its compact lens if fujigilm teams with or fujifilm buys the company it make a new era in compact lenses
I would have liked you to compare the 200f2 with a 500mm lens f5.6 because the the Fuji 200f2 is the Equivalent of a 500mm lens at 35 mm... Fuji 200mm x 1.4 tele, the sensor crop 1.5 plus the 1.25 Corp when you shoot in 30 fps brings it to over 500mm
i think Sony has some new sensor tech but is doing the waiting game to announce it and maybe because of contractual restrictions fuji hasn't launched or leaked the new camera yet. hehehe
Regarding the missed shots and tweaks to correct it, you might want to look into changing your camera's I.S. mode. I vaguely remember a video by Ken Wheeler (aka The Angry Photographer) about changing the image stabilization mode on his X-T2 or X-T3 when shooting with the 100-400mm and 50-140mm. But for the life of me, I can no longer find it... nor do I recall what his reasoning was.
I got the same experience.The lens seems great but the Xt-3 is not match to the lens. It hunted for me few times when tested and also initial focus acquire was slower then expected (comparing to A7III with 400/2.8 GM). I don't think it's due to lens really.
0:38 like yours on explaining FF sensors vs croped? (sorry if i sound like a d*ck,)
I've never been a fan of TheoriaApophasis guy but when it comes to physics and light he is the guy to ask and you were unfortunately wrong..
I think you should make a video that explains this like it should be explained, without hate, bias or anything else, just come clean i beg you bc i you were my main channel i recomended to anybody I know as far it goes to technical aproach to cameras.. Keep up with the good work and make this fricking photo comunity HEALTHY, love from Croatia ^^
Hate to break it to you, but that video is correct. That’s a tough pill for him and others to swallow, but facts are facts. Had you carefully read any of the references provided, with an open mind and heart, you would learn something. Best wishes.
companies sometimes create gear for bragging rights. I feel this is such lens, they made it so they say say they did.
"Something big is coming from Fuji" - X-T3 with firmware update in April will be a very fast camera. The problem is - and this is from a Fuji- only user - that 90% of all pros automatically reach out for full frame. For sensors, bigger is just better, at least up to FF, beyond that the drawbacks (in terms of size, price, weight) outweigh the extra IQ... As far as I am concerned, I will not shell out that kind of money for an APSc money?
The logic of the video is strange: He would not spend 6k for APSc lens, and the lens is so much more expensive. So maybe he would if the camera would not cost 1,5k but 3k?
I am not a professional sports shooter. Professional sports shooters might if it was compelling.
As a portrait photographer, paying the same price as a full frame 200mm f/2, not to get the same depth of field, is a nonsense for me...
Actually it will give the same depth of field as those, if you shoot from the same distance.
What I don't understand is why a portrait photographer is comparing a 300mm equivalent lens to 200mm lenses in the first place. The more accurate comparison would be with the 300mm f/2.8 lenses.
You look like Johnny Sins in the thumbnail, and I thought youtube gives me a weird recommendation videos again
I think it makes sense for professional sports photographers. The Fujifilm X-T3 is supposed to be an outstanding sports camera according to some other experts.
Because it is. For the price at least.
It's not a D5/1DX mk2 or Sony A9. But then who is claiming that?
I'd say it fall short in just that use case compared to a D500. But then which camera outperforms a D500 for sports?
The X-T3 is an amazing all-rounder. But it ain't the specialists weapon of choice. And that's fine.
Firmware version of your camera?
Color makes sense. Ask Canon why it has white lens.
This lens is for x-h2. So buy a xh1 quick.
You nailed it, I think Fuji is coming out with a sport/wildlife APS-C camera for that lens. You nailed it. Sneaky Fujifilm. I'd love you Fuji
Nope, they weren't haha
The lens is white to reflect the sun/heat away from the lens.
Thought Statham was in da House..
Цельтесь в Луну… ибо даже если Вы промахнетесь - приземлитесь на одной из звезд
Great point on possible upcoming Fuji sports camera to match this lens. Maybe thats why Sony put the brakes on the mythical A7000 because they got wind of this possible Fuji camera. Remember what Sony did to the X-H1...they obliterated it by dropping the A7iii weeks later.
Good insight! Sony and Fuji are very aggressive with each other right now.
2019 Surprise from Fuji...the X-S1? :D
There will undoubtedly be a sport oriented flagship coming at some point, but I doubt that was a massive factor in this lens' creation. Definitely, that body would have been weighted in the creation of this lens, but its not the outright reason. This is simply Fuji trying to upsell. Fuji's marketing is all about the 2x crop factor. That puts this lens in direct competition with the Sony 400 2.8 and similar lenses in the Canon/Nikon world. Again, we are seeing Fuji saying here... for half the cost and half the weight you too can match the giants. Whether you buy in to equivalence or not, is the only issue Fuji would have selling the lens.
Fujifilm needed a "halo product" super tele to get professional sports, motorsports, and wildlife photographers into the Fujifilm X/Fujinon XF lens system and the XF200 is that lens. The body that was specifically designed for this lens is the X-H1, and having shot with one for the better part of a year now, it is a superb performer, one of the 5 best cameras I've ever used (and two of those are Canon 1D-series bodies). Having shot with the XF200mm f/2.0 for 10 days including a major motorsports national championship event, the XF is a nothing short of a superb performer and provides an absolutely insane level for all the key image quality attributes: sharpness, color accuracy, color contrast, tonal contrast, tonal gradation, and acutance. Having owned and shot with Canon pro bodies and glass for the better part of 15 years for professionally accredited motorsports photojournalism, and having owned and used the Canon 300mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 L IS extensively (e.g. for MotoGP coverage) over many years, the Fujinon XF200 is the finest lens I have ever used, hands down, and is worth every penny of $6000. I know that Fujifilm X-Photographers and motorsports PJ's Jeff Carter and Ed Rourke have already bought and are using this lens for FIA Endurance Racing photojournalism.
I like your theory that the lens is made for a camera that is not out yet. Similar to what appears Canon is doing with their great RF lenses in my opinion. Basically, try to sell you into a great lens system with the hope that future bodies will make it worth the investment. That is how I started with Canon. Bodies keep changing, but the lenses are where most of the investment is. Will be interesting to see if Fuji announces something in the not to distant future.
Totally agree. They also have a "lens road map" with the range going far in to the zooms with only the 100-400 in it. Feels like a lot of empty space. It makes a lot of sense to produce the lenses first.
the finish is absolutely gorgeous, all tele / super-tele lenses should come with that finish.
It’s got sparkle to it...like pearlescent
Well it may be made for the X-H3
Great lens for astrophotography
xt4!!! hello hope all is well be safe
So how about the X-t4?
Good thinking Mr. Maven....
XH2 should be out soon.. Would that be it?
Its possible. I would like to see 14-16 FPS mechanical minimum.
What's your workflow for post-processing Fuji RAF files?
Still figuring it out. Higher ISOs will likely end up going through Capture One. There are some other RAW engines Im still testing.
It is a challenge since LR and Fuji are not a great match! @@MMaven
@@1BigBucks1 It really is inconvenient. What I do now is when I shoot RAW, I shoot JPG+RAW, preview in JPEG and when I find the few RAWs I like, process only those. LR is convenient, but not the best for Fuji RAW files.
Agree
Xh2? Still aps though. You would think they'd have $3000-$4000 body for it. But those #'s don't make sense in the APSc world. Do they? XPro 3?
The Great Vanzinni! I thought that when it was first released... But I’m not so sure now, apsc used to be for people who just haven’t made it to FF yet... now these latest APSC cameras by Fuji are so good they hold their own and it seems people are starting to question if they actually need a FF sensor. people woke up to the Mega pixel race long ago, I’m wondering if the same could be happening with sensors.
@@chrischan5168 Good points but will we be willing to pay FF prices? The reason a lot of us like most Fuji stuff is its affordability. I think FF will eventually take over the world. Perhaps our aps will be the new ???? M4/3's? The future is here. We just don't know what it is.
The Great Vanzinni! I think people already are paying FF prices with the latest Fuji cameras and lenses. But there will always be a selection of people that will opt for FF whether it benefits them or not when the prices are similar. I like what Fuji are doing with apsc and medium format... they seem to be on a completely different path to the rest.
Hahaha screw that
😂
conclusion at 5:01
Maybe the XH2???
I guess a photo oriented XH1 is coming
The very Fuji people tell that X-H1 was misunderstood. It is not a video oriented camera. I own it and I agree, for me the IBIS adds more value to photography than to videography. Being able to shoot handheld with the 16mm for a third of a second, opens up a lot of posibilities.
Maybe The Xh2
Great review !
Completely agreed but one thing i did not understand how could 200 F2 apsc lens is same size of full frame 200 F2. Canon 200mm F2 is almost same size. Is this designed for full frame? Again same thing with Fuji 100-400. It is bigger than Canon full frame 100-400. I think Fuji has to rethink the lens designs. This could kill them when canon can make full frame lens of same size.
After a certain focal length the lens size is dictated by the aperture and front lens element and smaller sensor does have little impact. A 200mm F2 lens needs to have a 100mm aperture, no matter how small is the sensor behind it.
You appear to be a shill for Lensprotogo. That's why you don't recommend purchasing the lens but to rent the lens. Come on man.
I already mentioned this, a few times. Its too expensive. Neither I nor most of my students can afford it. Lensprotogo was the sponsor of the video, we wouldnt even be watching it without them, of course I am going to suggest them. They didnt make the lens.
that could be read into ... interesting find.
And you appear to be a youtube troll... Why are people so damn cynical? No one is stopping you from buying the lens if you want, don't be all salty just because someone suggested that renting it might be more practical.
@@JeremyGalloway Easy there Jeremy, I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. Aren't we all entitled to our opinions, Jeremy?
@@MMaven Fully agree, Michael. I shoot pro racing, but only need a lens like the XF200 two times a year; it makes no financial sense to buy a lens like this when it only gets used 2X a year. Cheers! -Stephen
a cheap alternative would be a canon 135 f2 with an adapter
The Samyang is better. No chromatic aberration, less coma smear, sharper, way more microcontrast, similar or slightly better build quality, it's basically neck and neck with the Zeiss, which beats it in build quality but loses to it in microcontrast. The Canon L has a slightly blue colour cast while the Samyang is more natural (leaning a tiny amount towards red though)
Lol Fuji shooter always say Sony FF lens’s is expensive
I agree with most of the comments, surely it's a great piece of glass but a lens that only covers APS-C sensor definitely shouldn't cost MORE than a 200mm F/2 for fullframe, especially when it's opponents are outstanding lenses on their own.
One might say it's direct opponents are the 300 f/2.8 but things become even worse when you compare it to monsters like the Canon 300 f/2.8!
P.S. I hope you will review the new Nikon S lenses soon, the MTF of the new 24-70 f/2.8 looks juicy, and Nikon doesn't lie about MTF!
Not sure what the Blink book reference is supposed to tell us. Are you telling us that you’re right? I have liked the photographic analysis on this channel but wearing of the philosophical and psychological analyses.
Have you read that book?
I'm currently looking at cameras and lenses. So does it make sense with an XT4?
Yes!
@@MMaven What makes the biggest difference for use with a lense like this? AF?
Even though it looks great i guess that for a start a XT3 with the 100 - 400 mm lens might be more sensible, since i haven't been photographing since years and don't own a camera since i was 14 (12 years ago).
15 FPS mechanical, ibis, better focusing
That 100-400 is a good start