Saw my cat sunbathing in our garden. Focused in on her left eye with above mentioned lens. Enlarged it on pc, could see the inner backside of my own eyes reflected inside her eyeballs. Stunning lens.
I own the XF55-200mm and love it. I Picked xc50-230 up for $130 in the sales as a 'disposable' travel lens, disposable in the sense it would be used in extreme conditions and if lost or stolen it would be no big deal. Wow, it really is a cheap, tacky, piece of plastic junk... BUT, it performs fantastically optically and as a travel lens (if you overlook the build quality). It is sharpish (if you don't pixel peek or print larger than A4) it held up to a lot of abuse and as I didn't care if it got damaged , it caught images my XF55-200 would never contemplate. Coupled with my XF27mm for low light and my XF18-138 general use lenses it made the perfect travel setup. Do yourself a favour, put aside gear snobbery and grab one if you can get one at a good price. I did.
@@pifilos getting risky shots that could maybe damage the Lens. You dont want to damage your very expensive lenses but with a relatively cheap Lens you can take those shots.
Yeah, it's the ~$200 street price which makes it a decisive purchase for a Fuji prime-favourer, starter, or thrifter. The Thrifty Three: XF27 + XC50-230 + XF35F1.4
I have a natural hand tremor, so I’m sensitive to good OIS. I have tested this lens on my X-T20 at low shutter speeds (even 1/30), no tripod and elevated IOS (up to 3200). The results have been excellent. And I can say without a doubt this is the sharpest lens I have ever had, even at 230 mm and the lens open wide at f/6.7. I would wholeheartedly recommend this lens to anyone. Remind the naysayers who indicate this lens is “slow” that even “faster” telephoto covering this range of focal lengths will only get you another stop or 2...does that really make that big a difference? If so, use a tripod!
Hey Andrew - Like you I never thought I would buy an XC lens however after seeing another TH-camr who bought the XC 50-230mm used talk about how surprised he was at the performance I went on MPB and found a copy in like new condition for $225. I agree totally with your assessment of the lens. It's a great value when you need the reach. I have both the X-T1 and the X-T2 and most of the time I keep this lens on my X-T1. I did try it out on the X-T2 and I think the focus is a little faster on it.
I’m so pleased that, at last, a pro has realised the benefits of this lens. Did you mention the good bokeh for travel portraits using the long end? It’s great on the x-h1 with extra image stabilisation. By the way, using the lens hood does improve contrast (sharpness) slightly at the telephoto end. For super-lightweight travel kit I take my iPhone and this lens on the x-t3 body. Sorted! Cos it’s cheap on eBay I don’t even have to worry about bashing it around in my back pack. Plastic mount is fine - just wack it on to a body without worrying about metal hitting metal.
I rarely shoot 'long'...my style is almost always W.I.D.E. so it is a huge choice to carry around a heavy tele-zoom. I had at first owned the XF55-200. I used it to little and it added a lot of weight to my bag. I too borrowed an XC50-230 and was so impressed with what I could get with is (and it is a bit more of a reach) so I sold the XF55-200 and the XC50-230 came to live (mostly un-noticed) in my bag for those very few times I need the reach. Good honest review.
I have this lens in my collection and really enjoy using it. I don't do much telephoto length work, but when I need to, this lens delivers. Build quality of course, is nothing to write home about. I have been very pleased with the images though.
Love this lens. I have the first version (I believe the difference between the 2 'generations' is in the quality of the OIS) and it is really sharp, even at 230mm.
If the individual couldn't afford the 55-200, then yes this 50-230 is a good second choice, nothing wrong with that...I use the 55-200 for travel and it's been a joy to use.
Perfect companion for the 18-55 f2.8-4 lens. It has the same filter size, nearly the same weight and makes you extend your zoom range with a really low budget.
I picked this lense also ois 2 up for 160€ around 180$ a week ago in the online shop Techin the basket! It arrived today and everything is super fine. Original packaging and everything. For that price its just amazing
Two things worth mentioning. Surprisingly usable/steady for handheld video, even at the long end. Also you can snag them for next to nothing on eBay. I got one mine for 100 bucks...
@@Ray-mj4hz He probably bought it on eBay. It's available right now on eBay. Some Hong Kong and Thailand buyers have it brand new for $200, silver or black. Did you buy it?
@@da009999 In Australia the regular retail price is 200 AUD, which works out to about 130 USD, I picked mine up brand new during a 20% off sale at a local retailer, which means I paid right on a hundred us dollars. For that kind of money this is easily THE best Telephoto lens on the market in its price range.
I have this lens. I am far from professional. When I first used the lens on my X-T1, I was a little disappointed with the sharpness. I focus manually , and hand hold. So, at the long end of the lens I had the shutter speed at twice the FF focal length - actually, 800 shutter speed. Then, by accident, I had the shutter speed at 125 with the lens fully extended, and was amazed at the increased sharpness. At first I thought it was a fluke, but after a couple of weeks of using this set up the improved sharpness is maintained. Is this the preferred shutter speed for OIS II? I can't imagine why, but...
I think for the money, it's a good lens but I am not a fan of the build quality. I'll never buy plastic lens mounts again after my few bad experiences with them haha. For not much more the 55-200 is a far better option. It's not much better, still light and slightly better in low light. It's also made with better materials and it's an XF lens so it has an aperture ring when I am so used to now. It would feel weird without! Before I switched to Fuji, I shot full frame Nikon and my favorite lens was the 70-200 f/4 and I had no problems carrying it around with me as it fairly compact for a full frame lens. So the logical route for me is the 50-140 f/2.8 even though it's bigger, heavier and cost significantly more...I think it's worth the money though. However, I've been shooting without any telephoto for over a year now and I haven't missed it yet, so I haven't decided on buying a telephoto lens yet for my Fuji. But everyone's situation is different.
great review! The most amazing part is actually the pictures you created with the lens.. how and where do you even encounter scenery like these!! It's infuriating o.0
I got a bit of a stupid dilemma; the 50-230 or the 15-45? The idea is to have a lens for outdoor family videos that doubles as a decent 50mm outdoor portrait lens. The 15-45 seems obvious, but I am wondering if I will need the extra zoom more with kids running or at see and things like that🤔
Thanks - clear and informative as always. I grabbed a used 100-400 a couple of years ago. As I do wildlife, the better autofocus and wider aperture of the 100-400 make it preferable for me, although pricey and really big.
Personally I prefer the 55-200 for a little more $£€, The optics and image stabilisation are great, not the mention the fit and finish are superior to the XC series. You have captured some cracking images with this lens. It's more photographer than lens. Another cool YT vid...another 👍🏻s up from me.
Sample photos are really nice! I need a zoom lens for my X A7. Kit lens isn't enough. Im not a professional photographer but taking photo is my passion. Thanks for the review!
Thanks for the content. The lens also has the same filter thread as the 18-55mm and 14mm for a nice light trio. However, the lens has a habit of letting me down with IQ/softness when you need it at the longer focal lengths. Time for an upgrade.
I have this lens as my tele for landscapes, I only share images online for now so I'm really happy with it. My knees love the lens too when I go on a big hike!
I moved from Fuji to full frame Sony and this is the lens I miss the most! - I bought a Tamron 70-300mm which comes close in weight, but it's much longer in length and has no stabilisation at all which makes it unusable handheld. What would you say is the closest available alternative for Sony FE with good in lens stabilisation?
I have owned both the 50-230 & 55-200 they are both really good when it comes to optics, build quality is why you fork out for the 55-200 if you need a lens get the cheaper one if you aren’t professional working constantly!
Got mine, mint condition, for €120, so a no-brainer for outdoor events. Heading to the Red Bull Ring today. I'll try to get some shots as good as yours! Well, I can try...
Kind words indeed. Years back I had a similar cheap telephoto zoom lens for the Olympics E system and it served me well. However these days I'm not sure I'd go for such thing. I do own Fujis 18-135mm lens that I use occasionally (that would be a good review don't you think?) that I use for, yes, family vacations. Is, super zoom, the only lens you need etc. But I'd switch it for the 16-55mm f2,8 in a hart beat. Course IQ is incomparable. And I'd add some telephoto prime just for the reach. Even if it has to be a vintage lens, in the case I'm broke, after purchasing the 16-55mm 😁 But that's me...
Tomislav Miletić I love the 18-135 for its great bokeh (compared to Nikon and other big name travel zooms) and sharpness (I can crop hard and get great pics and don’t need to carry other lenses). I also have the XX 50-230mm which is a great travel lens.
@@barrymayes6712 I know 18-135mm is a good lens, otherwise I'd get rid of it years ago 😁 It's just that I guess I'm old school guy, so I rather use primes, that's it...
Thanks for the review! Love watching your videos when they come up and this is no exception as my wife has wanted a longer zoom for amateur wildlife photography, so this is great to hear about. I’m curious about sharpness ... a lot of the photos you’ve shared here seem over-sharpened around some edges, but fuzzy on some details, and over-saturated. It leaves the shots feeling a bit flat to me, something I’ve never noticed with any of your photography I’ve seen in the past, which makes me curious: Were these post-processed prior to showing here? Did you find you needed to use a lot of sharpening to compensate for a lack of sharpness in these photos? Do you find this to be a concern for you?
TH-cam is not the most reliable place to view sharpness, unless zoomed in and studied comparatively. For what it's worth, I have not applied any sharpening in post. For processing they are mostly classic chrome with very minor correction and curves adjustment. This lens absolutely will not give you sharper images than what more professional lenses will.
Cheap zooms are the best. I use an inexpensive 70-300 on my Nikon FF body and it works like a champ and doesn't break my back or wallet. I'd do the same with Fuji if I needed a zoom. However, it does sound like the 70-300 is probably a better lens than this one. It's sharp as hell in addition to being inexpensive.
Ordered one (used) yesterday - one of NYC big box stores who had rated it a 10, used but appears as new, $318. For the last year I have postponed getting a tele zoom - was looking at the 55-200 - but at approximately $700 was not sure I could justify the price because I shoot wide most of the time. So I may have missed out on some potentially great landscape zoom pictures in Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico while trying to decide (live in the four corners region and the four corners often requires tele, not wide, for landscapes). Looking forward to seeing how it performs - I DO make prints although seldom larger than 11 x 14.
I have really enjoyed your videos. They're very helpful, well done, and cover just what I need, thank you. I purchased the 50-230 a couple of months ago used on ebay for really cheap and have absolutely loved it. All the best on the continued success of your videos and business!
Enjoyed your review, but at the end you show a sunset beach shot saying the lens hunts too much. In a beach shot, why do you need autofocus? I use autofocus a very great deal of the time, but not all the time. In that beach sunset shot, I would put the lens in manual and if I can lean against something all the better to reduce shake, even though the lens has image stabilization.
I bought it with e-coupon when purchasing X-E3 in Hong Kong and it cost me only HKD$1099, which is around US$140, absolutely love this lens for traveling and everyday use, although I also own 50-140.
I'm wondering how well this could work for concerts... not the small club concert with dim lights, but festivals or large ones with a decent lit stage, or during the day. It's surely not perfect given the aperture, but in the past I used a manual vintage zoom or 135mm prime on a lens turbo, which means enough light but no autofocus at all and really soft images even when I nail the focus in one out of 20 images. This lens can be found really cheap on ebay, but I'm still not sure how much of a tradeoff the autofocus would be vs. the high ISO needed. That an XF Lens would be better is a no brainer, that I can't afford one, esp. for just 2-3 concerts per year, too.
@@AndrewGoodCamera The question is maybe how good a good light has to be. From my past concert experience I hate going above ISO 3200 on the X-T1, with my vintage setup I often got away with Iso 400-800, but at f6,7 I fear having to go way beyond 3200. Not sure if the added sharpness makes up for the high ISO.
Thanks for your thoughtful review of the 50-230. I got it as part of my X-T20 kit and use it for fun and family only. Love it for play! (And saving for the 50-140 for serious event photography :-) You're right-on Andrew!
I bought it for €150 brand new, it's a great lens for landscapes details, used at f/8 - f/11, but other than that, I find it not sharp enough wide open, and better go for the XF 55-200. It's a great lens for me to bring in the mountains for it's low weight.
Can't complaint with the cons you've mentioned with it's price tag (I bought it at around $140USD in HK) and weight versus the quality. It is good that Fujifilm offer a budget choice for their customers. I have 50-140F2.8 but it is so much heavier that I won't bring it with me everyday. I was a Nikon DSLR user before I switch to Fujifilm and owned similar price tag lens by Tamron and Sigma (around 18-200mm I think), this XC lens quality is way better than those superzoom lens. I'll bring this lens with the kit 18-55F2.8-4 and a fast prime lens for trips with family for sure.
I've never shot with the 550-200. I didn't go into this with the intent to buy or decide over the other. One day I'll try the 55-200 as well and be able to decide if a swap is in order. But for now, I'm satisfied with the 50-230.
Errr...The price of the 50-230mm new is $399. The price of the 55-200mm is $699. It is all about price. For someone who just needs a long zoom for certain rare occasions, cost is a major issue. You buy what your budget allows. If a long zoom is critical for you, and you use it often, the 55-200mm is a no brainer.
I don't get why TH-camrs always say the MSRP when it is so far from the real price. For the 50-230mm is150€ in Taiwanese stores, around 200€-250€ in local ones.
Why would you keep comparing this lens to the 50-140mm 2.8 which is a pro lens more than 4x its price? I would be more interested in how it compares to the 55-200mm which much closer to it in focal length and price
Old video new comment, my copy of this lens is sharp as hell even at 230mm, beautiful bokeh all the way, struggles with auto focus and WORTHLESS in low light, after golden hour you just put it away and play poker or something. LOVE YOUR CONTENT.
I have an XT2. Bought this lens and basically after a long winded explanation from Fuji IT DOESNT WORK. Pretty upset. Basically I turn all the dials like ISO, shutter, ap. And nothing changes. If i take the pic the settings work, but not in the preview. My lens doesn't come with a particular button on the side and that has something to do with compatibility with the camera. It's just insane that these are both Fuji products and it doesn't work.
After schlepping the 50-140 around on our family vacation I could see myself opting for a lighter xc lens next time. Unfortunately, even though I had it with me, I found myself rarely using the xf zoom. It simply wasn’t practical to leave it mounted on the camera. Convenience and practicality are more important then IQ when you’re on holiday.
Saw my cat sunbathing in our garden. Focused in on her left eye with above mentioned lens. Enlarged it on pc, could see the inner backside of my own eyes reflected inside her eyeballs. Stunning lens.
I own the XF55-200mm and love it. I Picked xc50-230 up for $130 in the sales as a 'disposable' travel lens, disposable in the sense it would be used in extreme conditions and if lost or stolen it would be no big deal. Wow, it really is a cheap, tacky, piece of plastic junk... BUT, it performs fantastically optically and as a travel lens (if you overlook the build quality). It is sharpish (if you don't pixel peek or print larger than A4) it held up to a lot of abuse and as I didn't care if it got damaged , it caught images my XF55-200 would never contemplate. Coupled with my XF27mm for low light and my XF18-138 general use lenses it made the perfect travel setup. Do yourself a favour, put aside gear snobbery and grab one if you can get one at a good price. I did.
Hey there. Just wondering since i am trying to decide for a telephoto lens. In what terms the 55-200 would never contemplate ?
@@pifilos getting risky shots that could maybe damage the Lens. You dont want to damage your very expensive lenses but with a relatively cheap Lens you can take those shots.
Yeah, it's the ~$200 street price which makes it a decisive purchase for a Fuji prime-favourer, starter, or thrifter.
The Thrifty Three: XF27 + XC50-230 + XF35F1.4
I have a natural hand tremor, so I’m sensitive to good OIS. I have tested this lens on my X-T20 at low shutter speeds (even 1/30), no tripod and elevated IOS (up to 3200). The results have been excellent. And I can say without a doubt this is the sharpest lens I have ever had, even at 230 mm and the lens open wide at f/6.7. I would wholeheartedly recommend this lens to anyone. Remind the naysayers who indicate this lens is “slow” that even “faster” telephoto covering this range of focal lengths will only get you another stop or 2...does that really make that big a difference? If so, use a tripod!
I bought it to go to a F1 Grand Prix, and it rocked. So impressed with the results!!!! Great value.
Wow! What did you attend?
That is exactly why I am watching this video lol, just went to Monza last weekend and wished I had a proper camera and lens to take shots of the cars
Hey Andrew - Like you I never thought I would buy an XC lens however after seeing another TH-camr who bought the XC 50-230mm used talk about how surprised he was at the performance I went on MPB and found a copy in like new condition for $225. I agree totally with your assessment of the lens. It's a great value when you need the reach. I have both the X-T1 and the X-T2 and most of the time I keep this lens on my X-T1. I did try it out on the X-T2 and I think the focus is a little faster on it.
I’m so pleased that, at last, a pro has realised the benefits of this lens. Did you mention the good bokeh for travel portraits using the long end? It’s great on the x-h1 with extra image stabilisation. By the way, using the lens hood does improve contrast (sharpness) slightly at the telephoto end. For super-lightweight travel kit I take my iPhone and this lens on the x-t3 body. Sorted! Cos it’s cheap on eBay I don’t even have to worry about bashing it around in my back pack. Plastic mount is fine - just wack it on to a body without worrying about metal hitting metal.
I rarely shoot 'long'...my style is almost always W.I.D.E. so it is a huge choice to carry around a heavy tele-zoom. I had at first owned the XF55-200. I used it to little and it added a lot of weight to my bag. I too borrowed an XC50-230 and was so impressed with what I could get with is (and it is a bit more of a reach) so I sold the XF55-200 and the XC50-230 came to live (mostly un-noticed) in my bag for those very few times I need the reach. Good honest review.
I have this lens in my collection and really enjoy using it. I don't do much telephoto length work, but when I need to, this lens delivers. Build quality of course, is nothing to write home about. I have been very pleased with the images though.
I’m that guy with single wide angle prime lens on vacation :D
I got a good deal for a copy of this lens (
Love this lens. I have the first version (I believe the difference between the 2 'generations' is in the quality of the OIS) and it is really sharp, even at 230mm.
Your reviews are super helpful. You hit the important feature points, show examples, and cover a lot of ground quickly. Well done.
If the individual couldn't afford the 55-200, then yes this 50-230 is a good second choice, nothing wrong with that...I use the 55-200 for travel and it's been a joy to use.
Perfect companion for the 18-55 f2.8-4 lens. It has the same filter size, nearly the same weight and makes you extend your zoom range with a really low budget.
I picked this lense also ois 2 up for 160€ around 180$ a week ago in the online shop Techin the basket! It arrived today and everything is super fine. Original packaging and everything. For that price its just amazing
Two things worth mentioning. Surprisingly usable/steady for handheld video, even at the long end. Also you can snag them for next to nothing on eBay. I got one mine for 100 bucks...
Buying it for $400 I don't know, I purchased it on sale new for $200 several years ago and for that money this lens is a beast
Sergey Vasilishin where did u buy it?
@@Ray-mj4hz He probably bought it on eBay. It's available right now on eBay. Some Hong Kong and Thailand buyers have it brand new for $200, silver or black. Did you buy it?
@@da009999 In Australia the regular retail price is 200 AUD, which works out to about 130 USD, I picked mine up brand new during a 20% off sale at a local retailer, which means I paid right on a hundred us dollars. For that kind of money this is easily THE best Telephoto lens on the market in its price range.
@@CJTheReal Did you buy it online or in a store?
@@da009999 Online, but the store I bought it from has a brick and mortar location in my city.
i just bought mine version 11 for $185 AUD fantastic value. Love it
I have this lens. I am far from professional. When I first used the lens on my X-T1, I was a little disappointed with the sharpness. I focus manually , and hand hold. So, at the long end of the lens I had the shutter speed at twice the FF focal length - actually, 800 shutter speed.
Then, by accident, I had the shutter speed at 125 with the lens fully extended, and was amazed at the increased sharpness. At first I thought it was a fluke, but after a couple of weeks of using this set up the improved sharpness is maintained.
Is this the preferred shutter speed for OIS II? I can't imagine why, but...
Very strange!
@@AndrewGoodCamera I know, right?
Someone mentioned that at higher shutter speed the OIS actually introduces vibration to the images. That's what I read haven't tested it yet
It great value too as the lens is the same diameter as the 18-55 kit lens so you can swap filters 😀
the 55-200 is an amazing lens, so light and the IOS is amazing
What a great review. Ordered this one on ebay this morning for 230$ cad. Im excited!
I think for the money, it's a good lens but I am not a fan of the build quality. I'll never buy plastic lens mounts again after my few bad experiences with them haha. For not much more the 55-200 is a far better option. It's not much better, still light and slightly better in low light. It's also made with better materials and it's an XF lens so it has an aperture ring when I am so used to now. It would feel weird without! Before I switched to Fuji, I shot full frame Nikon and my favorite lens was the 70-200 f/4 and I had no problems carrying it around with me as it fairly compact for a full frame lens. So the logical route for me is the 50-140 f/2.8 even though it's bigger, heavier and cost significantly more...I think it's worth the money though. However, I've been shooting without any telephoto for over a year now and I haven't missed it yet, so I haven't decided on buying a telephoto lens yet for my Fuji. But everyone's situation is different.
I love pictures you take, man, great sense of composition! Enjoyed your review. Wish you good luck and keep on posting great shots 🙌
great review! The most amazing part is actually the pictures you created with the lens.. how and where do you even encounter scenery like these!! It's infuriating o.0
I got a bit of a stupid dilemma; the 50-230 or the 15-45? The idea is to have a lens for outdoor family videos that doubles as a decent 50mm outdoor portrait lens. The 15-45 seems obvious, but I am wondering if I will need the extra zoom more with kids running or at see and things like that🤔
Thanks - clear and informative as always. I grabbed a used 100-400 a couple of years ago. As I do wildlife, the better autofocus and wider aperture of the 100-400 make it preferable for me, although pricey and really big.
Another great review, in-depth and thorough as per usual. Definitely the channel of choice for Fuji reviews IMHO. 👊👊👍
Personally I prefer the 55-200 for a little more $£€, The optics and image stabilisation are great, not the mention the fit and finish are superior to the XC series. You have captured some cracking images with this lens. It's more photographer than lens. Another cool YT vid...another 👍🏻s up from me.
Bought a very cheap second hand mk1 version for a trip to Africa, for the money it’s a great lens, for a casual tele shooter it’s enough.
Very valuable review even after 4 years! thank you :)
Sample photos are really nice! I need a zoom lens for my X A7. Kit lens isn't enough. Im not a professional photographer but taking photo is my passion. Thanks for the review!
Thanks for the content. The lens also has the same filter thread as the 18-55mm and 14mm for a nice light trio. However, the lens has a habit of letting me down with IQ/softness when you need it at the longer focal lengths. Time for an upgrade.
Thanks mate, I was indecise if purchasing or not, but you definitely highlighted the right points for this lens, so just score one
Mine 2. Gen were extremely sharp at f16 230mm against the sun.
In general with lots of ligth it grows
Very nice review, thank you. Btw, the images are lovely
I have this lens as my tele for landscapes, I only share images online for now so I'm really happy with it. My knees love the lens too when I go on a big hike!
Is this okay for taking photo of moon?
Да
I moved from Fuji to full frame Sony and this is the lens I miss the most! - I bought a Tamron 70-300mm which comes close in weight, but it's much longer in length and has no stabilisation at all which makes it unusable handheld. What would you say is the closest available alternative for Sony FE with good in lens stabilisation?
Hi! Do you remember, is the OIS in this lense better than in XC 16-50 II?
I have this lens, give it enough light and it'll make you very happy.
Although you mentioned it was a bit slow to focus, you seemed to get a decent number of birding shots. Well done. I am curious how it is for video.
Haha. Yes. It's all relative. It's actually pretty remarkable compared to what we had five years ago on any camera. :)
It's a "no" for landscapes? I was hoping the IQ would be good enough. The size and weight seem reasonable to take it around hiking.
The budget choice is how does it stack up vs the 55-200, which bought used isn't that much more expensive.
I have owned both the 50-230 & 55-200 they are both really good when it comes to optics, build quality is why you fork out for the 55-200 if you need a lens get the cheaper one if you aren’t professional working constantly!
Got mine, mint condition, for €120, so a no-brainer for outdoor events. Heading to the Red Bull Ring today. I'll try to get some shots as good as yours! Well, I can try...
What is the difference between FUJIFILM len 50-230 OIS vs OIS 2
Its a great lens for occasional and outdoor use, i bought mine (used) for $160 on eBay last week, in barely used condition
Kind words indeed. Years back I had a similar cheap telephoto zoom lens for the Olympics E system and it served me well. However these days I'm not sure I'd go for such thing. I do own Fujis 18-135mm lens that I use occasionally (that would be a good review don't you think?) that I use for, yes, family vacations. Is, super zoom, the only lens you need etc. But I'd switch it for the 16-55mm f2,8 in a hart beat. Course IQ is incomparable. And I'd add some telephoto prime just for the reach. Even if it has to be a vintage lens, in the case I'm broke, after purchasing the 16-55mm 😁
But that's me...
Tomislav Miletić I love the 18-135 for its great bokeh (compared to Nikon and other big name travel zooms) and sharpness (I can crop hard and get great pics and don’t need to carry other lenses). I also have the XX 50-230mm which is a great travel lens.
@@barrymayes6712 I know 18-135mm is a good lens, otherwise I'd get rid of it years ago 😁
It's just that I guess I'm old school guy, so I rather use primes, that's it...
Has the performance improved after the recent update? Fuji just says bug fixes on the recent firmware update.
Thanks for the review! Love watching your videos when they come up and this is no exception as my wife has wanted a longer zoom for amateur wildlife photography, so this is great to hear about.
I’m curious about sharpness ... a lot of the photos you’ve shared here seem over-sharpened around some edges, but fuzzy on some details, and over-saturated. It leaves the shots feeling a bit flat to me, something I’ve never noticed with any of your photography I’ve seen in the past, which makes me curious: Were these post-processed prior to showing here? Did you find you needed to use a lot of sharpening to compensate for a lack of sharpness in these photos? Do you find this to be a concern for you?
TH-cam is not the most reliable place to view sharpness, unless zoomed in and studied comparatively. For what it's worth, I have not applied any sharpening in post. For processing they are mostly classic chrome with very minor correction and curves adjustment. This lens absolutely will not give you sharper images than what more professional lenses will.
Hi, do you think this lens is suitable for astrophotography (like shooting the moon etc)?
Cheap zooms are the best. I use an inexpensive 70-300 on my Nikon FF body and it works like a champ and doesn't break my back or wallet. I'd do the same with Fuji if I needed a zoom. However, it does sound like the 70-300 is probably a better lens than this one. It's sharp as hell in addition to being inexpensive.
Ordered one (used) yesterday - one of NYC big box stores who had rated it a 10, used but appears as new, $318. For the last year I have postponed getting a tele zoom - was looking at the 55-200 - but at approximately $700 was not sure I could justify the price because I shoot wide most of the time. So I may have missed out on some potentially great landscape zoom pictures in Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico while trying to decide (live in the four corners region and the four corners often requires tele, not wide, for landscapes). Looking forward to seeing how it performs - I DO make prints although seldom larger than 11 x 14.
That's a beautiful area. Been wanting to get down there. I'd love to hear how it performs for you for landscape and prints.
Mike 5467 you will love the XC 50-230. Keep it in your pocket when travelling to capture those long shots.
Perfect info. for my needs - thank-you :-)
Can you help i got the 50-230mm lens and cannot get it to Focus?
I have one, only paid $200. It certainly will surprise you if on a budget and the light weight makes you throw it in the bag on all occasions.
Can you please review XC 35mm prime lens?
Cool pics and informative as ever
What's the diferent between fujinon xc 50-230mm OIS & OIS ii? Please lemme know the diferent
Extremely helpful video! Thank you!
This Lens can be purchased here in Australia, brand new, from authorised Retailers, for under USD$125.00.
Dan Tan not anymore , cant find it under 200 USD anymore
Man San Diego looks lovely in your pics - btw have you mailed the film? Just wondering :)
Yes the film was mailed a week ago. Probably take another week at least.
@@AndrewGoodCamera cool just making sure! I'll keep an eye out : )
I have really enjoyed your videos. They're very helpful, well done, and cover just what I need, thank you. I purchased the 50-230 a couple of months ago used on ebay for really cheap and have absolutely loved it. All the best on the continued success of your videos and business!
Can i attach a uv filter on this lens?
Enjoyed your review, but at the end you show a sunset beach shot saying the lens hunts too much. In a beach shot, why do you need autofocus? I use autofocus a very great deal of the time, but not all the time. In that beach sunset shot, I would put the lens in manual and if I can lean against something all the better to reduce shake, even though the lens has image stabilization.
I don't remember that as this video is old now. But when I use this lens on the beach I'm photographing people and birds as much as sunsets.
$400usd? I bought this recently here in Australia for $249aud and it's still that price
I bought it with e-coupon when purchasing X-E3 in Hong Kong and it cost me only HKD$1099, which is around US$140, absolutely love this lens for traveling and everyday use, although I also own 50-140.
I'm wondering how well this could work for concerts... not the small club concert with dim lights, but festivals or large ones with a decent lit stage, or during the day. It's surely not perfect given the aperture, but in the past I used a manual vintage zoom or 135mm prime on a lens turbo, which means enough light but no autofocus at all and really soft images even when I nail the focus in one out of 20 images. This lens can be found really cheap on ebay, but I'm still not sure how much of a tradeoff the autofocus would be vs. the high ISO needed. That an XF Lens would be better is a no brainer, that I can't afford one, esp. for just 2-3 concerts per year, too.
In good light, I wouldn't hesitate to use it.
@@AndrewGoodCamera The question is maybe how good a good light has to be. From my past concert experience I hate going above ISO 3200 on the X-T1, with my vintage setup I often got away with Iso 400-800, but at f6,7 I fear having to go way beyond 3200. Not sure if the added sharpness makes up for the high ISO.
Great review ... and lots of great shots. Thanks.
Great - clear and informative. Wonder how you'd see the 18-135mm in the all purpose holiday context?
Haven't shot with that one yet.
I bought this lens from CEX in the UK for £85
Thanks for your thoughtful review of the 50-230. I got it as part of my X-T20 kit and use it for fun and family only. Love it for play! (And saving for the 50-140 for serious event photography :-) You're right-on Andrew!
I prefer the 55-200 for me. But it's just my opinion. Thanks so much for the very informative video. As always. 👍
Like the video. How about the 55-200mm?
I bought it for €150 brand new, it's a great lens for landscapes details, used at f/8 - f/11, but other than that, I find it not sharp enough wide open, and better go for the XF 55-200.
It's a great lens for me to bring in the mountains for it's low weight.
The lens is good enough for the money, and the lens is good for all photographers.
If want lowlight lens then go for prime.
Can't complaint with the cons you've mentioned with it's price tag (I bought it at around $140USD in HK) and weight versus the quality. It is good that Fujifilm offer a budget choice for their customers. I have 50-140F2.8 but it is so much heavier that I won't bring it with me everyday.
I was a Nikon DSLR user before I switch to Fujifilm and owned similar price tag lens by Tamron and Sigma (around 18-200mm I think), this XC lens quality is way better than those superzoom lens. I'll bring this lens with the kit 18-55F2.8-4 and a fast prime lens for trips with family for sure.
Hey bro I am really fascinated by the color of ur pic. What film simulation did you use ?
Classic chrome with small tweaks
Nice review! How come you chose to this lens over the 55-200 f3.5-4.8?
I've never shot with the 550-200. I didn't go into this with the intent to buy or decide over the other. One day I'll try the 55-200 as well and be able to decide if a swap is in order. But for now, I'm satisfied with the 50-230.
Errr...The price of the 50-230mm new is $399. The price of the 55-200mm is $699. It is all about price. For someone who just needs a long zoom for certain rare occasions, cost is a major issue. You buy what your budget allows. If a long zoom is critical for you, and you use it often, the 55-200mm is a no brainer.
Just get the 55-200mm. It’s a damn good lens.
Thanks for another great review. I just bought this lens new for €152. I think money well spent..?
I'd say. But I'd love to hear what you think.
Grey market has it way cheaper than $400 and makes it even more attractive.
Never paid attention to any of the XC lens, but will they fit on any of the X series cameras? I have an XT1 and i wanna make sure it’ll be compatible
Yes they will
Would love a video on the Fuji lenses that are the best value for the money! :)
Do you recommend this lense for xt20 ?
I use this on my xt20. With good lighting condition it gives you very good images.
I don't get why TH-camrs always say the MSRP when it is so far from the real price. For the 50-230mm is150€ in Taiwanese stores, around 200€-250€ in local ones.
It's $749.00 NZD in nz
I bought my copy of this lens two years ago for 150€. I did a couple very nice pictures with this light lens in good light conditions.
Why would you keep comparing this lens to the 50-140mm 2.8 which is a pro lens more than 4x its price? I would be more interested in how it compares to the 55-200mm which much closer to it in focal length and price
Simple. Because the 50-140 is the one I had.
Old video new comment, my copy of this lens is sharp as hell even at 230mm, beautiful bokeh all the way, struggles with auto focus and WORTHLESS in low light, after golden hour you just put it away and play poker or something. LOVE YOUR CONTENT.
Thanks a lot!
Is this manual or auto?
Nailed it! The professional vacationers choice 😂😎
Haha. Professional fun-having... That elusive dream.
Nice video but lower the lowmids with eq
Thanks for this superb video! Keep it coming ;)
Your Photos are always so nice with strong contrast, I suppose its all that sunshine or do you have some secret settings :)
I have an XT2. Bought this lens and basically after a long winded explanation from Fuji IT DOESNT WORK. Pretty upset. Basically I turn all the dials like ISO, shutter, ap. And nothing changes. If i take the pic the settings work, but not in the preview. My lens doesn't come with a particular button on the side and that has something to do with compatibility with the camera. It's just insane that these are both Fuji products and it doesn't work.
You got to be more specific, what does not work, AF?
Very good photos, love it😘
Optically, 55-200 is superior and you can find used copy for $400-$450 ... I think it's a way better deal than 50-230.
After schlepping the 50-140 around on our family vacation I could see myself opting for a lighter xc lens next time. Unfortunately, even though I had it with me, I found myself rarely using the xf zoom. It simply wasn’t practical to leave it mounted on the camera. Convenience and practicality are more important then IQ when you’re on holiday.
Yeah exactly
Get the XC 50-230mm and you will be amazed at how it increases your flexibility. I love this lens because you can always have it due to low weight.