|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on September 21, 2022 Pros: Sharp, good aperture, relative footprint, AF speed, WR Cons: Weight , noises during transport. Opinion: Used on X-T3 gave me excellent results. The autofocus is fast and both the build quality and the rendering in terms of sharpness and blur are great. The noises that come from the lens during transport with the machine off will not be dangerous, but they are certainly not reassuring. The weight is felt and I can safely say that after a day spent with two cars in the bag (I kept an X-T3 with the 50-140 and another X-T3 with the 10-24) I regretted having sold the 55-200, so if you do not need large openings or tropicalization, I recommend taking the 55-200, darker but with good performance and much lower weight, if you want the maximum, well, take the 50-140 with your eyes closed, it will hardly disappoint you. |
  | sent on April 27, 2022 Pros: All Cons: Diaphragm ring Opinion: We are certainly talking about a masterful lens. Super bright to be a super canvas. It competes with the legendary Canon 70-200 2.8 (which I own and use for years for work). The only negative note that I would like to point out is the fact that the diaphragm ring, in my opinion, should be a little harder, like that of the X100F, to be clear. The complaints about the hood of other users, in my opinion, leave the time they find, ditto the criticisms on noise, for me absent. To photograph football matches I use it in combination with the 1.4x multiplier and it is more than fine. |
 | sent on February 06, 2021 Pros: AF Speed, Stabilization, Construction, Minimum MaF Distance, Optical Yield, Weight and Size, Weather Resistant, Internal Zoom Excursion, Price Cons: Aesthetics, Paraluce Construction Opinion: [Review after one year of use] The optics I have been using more and more is the 70-200 so this 50-140 was the first lens I purchased in conjunction with my switch from Sony to Fuji. The optics have a really remarkable construction, a lot of metal and even the rubber of the rings is of excellent quality (and flows internally), too bad for the plastic (ccia) lampshon really not in line with the construction quality of Fuji. As for the really important point of view, that of practical use and optical quality, here there is little to say: a perspective studied and developed really carefully, allows to make incredible close-ups thanks to the very short focus distance and has incisiveness and a TA yield with relative blurry truly noteworthy. All this like a bit of all Fuji optics, offered at a really ridiculous price when compared to FX competitors, because net of paranoid/inferiority syndromes of those who see only the Full Frame as the only format with which to work this system offers excellent value for money and in many cases exceeds fx offers such as optical yield and performance (see the distance of MaF in this case). It also behaves egregiously on Video with a really precise tracking (and customizable from menu in the car) that I personally use little by almost always turning in MF or with focus assist but that represents an excellent feature for those who approach the video world and want an optics with which to learn and take home the shot without too much trouble. Finally aesthetically maybe it is the visually ugliest optics I have had, I understand the philosophy of compact (or as many say "mirrorless philosophy", I get the chills every time I read it) but to date I still do not understand this obstinacy on the part of Fuji to make optics that tighten at the tip. |
user148470  | sent on September 11, 2020 Pros: Construction, internal zoom, WR, focal Cons: Nothing Opinion: Purchased together with the 1655 I immediately appreciated the quality of the files with incredible detail. The Af is amazing and never makes mistakes. I often use it in conjunction with the mcex10-16 extension tubes and allows you to make excellent macros while maintaining the usual quality and even a certain range of maf. Sometimes I blur it in particular light conditions, I think it's nervous. |
user63757 | sent on March 15, 2020 Pros: Sharpness, Construction, Ghiere. Cons: Foot Tripod, Bokeh under certain light conditions, Weight. Opinion: Used for a period the 50-140 then sold for weight reason. Put on the scales the 50-140 complete with foot tripod caps and lampshade comes to weigh 1200g for me tabu. As sharpened various optical errors this almost perfect optics no distortions, chromatic aberrations, only very light vineyard with focal 140 mm. The tripod foot did not or found a nice thing not possible to detach even the ring on this optics that would have saved a can of weight. Those looking for the best Bokeh and made very high better the Fuji 90 f2 optical record maximum opening quality, instead photography landscapes recommend the 55-200 lighter in addition comes to focal 200 mm. Mechanical construction Ghiere AF WR perfect only one internal higher stabilizer noise respects the other Fuji optics, the noise remains even when you turn off the stabilizer. This optical 50-140 recommended best Zoom Fuji in absolute hard alternatives we find a 55-200 zoom but compared to the 50-140 nothing to do lower almost everything else one made negative the weight of 50-140. |
 | sent on February 13, 2020 Pros: Colrori Sharpness , AF, construction, three-dimensionality, blurred quality, stabilization Cons: Minkion lampshade, weight, loud but normally declared engines af off. Opinion: Excellent optics, for my tastes and uses, especially I use it for sports ceremonies and landscape,returns excellent colors and contrast, the bokeh is for my taste perfect, does not make me regret a 56 f1.2 at the bokeh level of fixed optics that would make my life difficult during the service, I would say promoted with flying colors and recommended for professional uses. For me it is even better than the 70-200 f2.8 is 2 that I used with the Canon, impeccable construction af even better than the canon and the bokeh at 140 very pasty similar to a fixed optics. The money spent is worth them all, the lampshade given the cost of purchase could be done better, the AF system is lightning but produces noise when not active due to the movement of some optical elements and piezoelectric engines , otherwise deserves a nice 10. Used initially on XT2 bodies and battery packs, with XT-3 even without battery expresses the best of its performances in terms of Af |
 | sent on February 13, 2020 Pros: Sharpness, colors, AF speed, robustness, brightness, weight Cons: The kidney given for having it, effect maracas with off optics, energetic Opinion: I waited a month to write the review, I tried it on 3 different Fuji, under different conditions: macro, sports, portrait. He collected the baton of the 90 F2, very heavy legacy, for me the best Fuji optics there is, this is "just a zoom"... And the F2.8 you could almost say it's dark! Well, we have an AF https://we.tl/t-g4n3hkv1b9?src=dnl, a macro sharpness, a range of focals really so versatile, a weight of 1 KG that is very acceptable, it is the classic professional lens that brings home every day the loaf, made crystal clear, reliable, in any condition.... Almost boring so much that he catches us! But that 140 2.8 from magic to portrait photos, detaches like the 56 but with the sharpness (almost) of the 90 and the flexibility of a zoom. Of course less light comes in but with a TT350 godox you solve anything for sunset shots. For events/sports/theatre is the really definitive weapon, in addition its resolution will allow you to clean the noise in posts even at VERY high ISOs without losing too much detail. The cost is very salty but it actually applies, by off the electromagnetic motors come off, so it starts to pebble like a maracas as soon as you shake it. I use it on X-H1, every now and then with BG, the energy demand is similar to that of a Boeing 747, between stabilization and AF (if you aim at the minimum distance of MAF and then infinity moves so strongly the lenses that it seems to vibrate), then prepare the usual 24-25 spare batteries. In combination with the 16-55 you turn the world and there is no scene in the sun/dark/in rain/freeze that you will not be able to photograph... Well! From National Geographic, package photographer (I) permitting. P.s. holds 2 macro tubes as if it were fresh water. |
 | sent on November 25, 2019 Pros: Versatility Construction Stabilizer Sharpness Cons: Maybe the weight Opinion: Wonderful Optics Built At Art Rule. Extreme sharpness all over the frame already from f 2.8 Versatile and as portrait optics is phenomenal Stabilizer Remarkable Bokeh Maybe a little nervous compared to 56 and 90 but cmq very appreciable Price in line with the performance Maybe a little heavy but for me that us or almost always the battery grip for vertical shots is not a problem |
 | sent on April 07, 2019 Pros: Sharpness, bokeh, stabilizer, speed, flexibility, robustness, construction, f/2.8 aperture Cons: Don't have it Opinion: It remains fantastic images, engraved and contrasted, not to mention the bokeh which is spectacular. Although it is not a feather I also use it for video, where the yield is comparable to fixed lenses. It is my preferred optics, which I cannot do without, given its excellent performance. A tele performance that is worth all the money it costs, try to believe |
 | sent on March 01, 2019 Pros: Incisiveness, it's a razor. MF Fast, balancing Cons: Weight, cost, lens hood Opinion: Already possessor of the Nikon 70/200 is F2,8 that F4, in my opinion, this optics is at least equal if not higher. It's really a pleasure to shoot freehand with a similar IOS. It is a professional lens and like that coast, but worth all the money spent. One of the few lenses that I will never sell. Since I bought it is always mounted on XT1. Highly recommended. |
 | sent on June 01, 2018 Pros: Construction, optical quality, Nano Gi treatment, brightness, autofocus performance, high sharpness, quality stabilizer, important performance at all focal lengths/diaphragms Cons: Weight/size, cost, bokeh a little too engraved for my liking, hum always present even with stabilizer deactivated, without battery grip on X-T2 not really comfortable to use Opinion: This lens (comparable to a 70-200 on 35mm) is built really beautifully. Top quality materials, solidity, glass with Nano GI treatment that guarantee excellent performance even with reflected light. In short, on paper is really an excellent optics in everything and sharpness high even at 2.8. The stabilizer allows the use of unthinkable times otherwise for a focal of the genre and the autofocus to me warning is the fastest among the various Fuji optics. I sold it to move to 55-200, lighter (unfortunately the weight of 50-140 goes a bit against the philosophy ML) and performance very similar to closed diaphragms. Surely those who need a bright tele-zoom will remain fully satisfied. For me Partwith was not painful, both because I used it on a few occasions, both because the 60mm in more than 55-200 make me comfortable for landscapes. I can tell you that at the construction level the difference between the two is so much and you also feel just holding them in your hand both. But I was amazed by the bokeh of 55-200, which I find less nervous and more creamy, in short, really very pleasant. A small note on the AF motor or stabilizer (I still do not understand): Some say that the optics have two inside of which one always active that emits a noise continuously. When I sold it the buyer thought it was defective the optics. Ease all: It's just a feature of this 50-140. Not a problem in most situations, but at the theater maybe it could create a nuisance to someone. If I would recommend it: Yes, but only to those who need a fixed 2.8 with such high quality. For all the others the 55-200 lends itself well for various uses, even sports (main outdoor) and allows you to have + 60mm, which are certainly not few. |
 | sent on March 23, 2018 Pros: Stabilizer, professional optics, construction, quality! Cons: not harmonic for a compact system, difficulty of integration with the light system proposed by fuji. Opinion: We have always read a great good on this view, well, it's all true, but unfortunately the thing that does not make it so popular is the difficulty of accepting this format for the small Fuji, in short if you have a kit optics, or a small fixed, you feel free, light, you want to bring the room in every place and in every way, often shots between people and you have the ease of a smartphone, do not give great stimuli in people around you, nor between subjects framed, well mounting this canvas forgotten the imprint that many made to choose the comfort of the mirrorless ... rnMontato the cannon 2.8 the crowds are frightened the subjects if not treated properly stiffen, and our neck gets tired, even the ' grip remains uncomfortable and poorly balanced, not to mention who is used to shoot from the display. The return to the usual ocular is almost obligatory.rnInsomma for those who have made the leap of living easy, it is a dip in the past.rnCerto then seeing the final result we are motivated for all the diffipast cures! Compared to Kit, adds poetry with every click, it is difficult to make mistakes even in difficult situations, enchantingly positioned the camera to the eye you forget the difficulties and you take taste ... rnSensation that the very high-performance autofocus consumes more battery compared to other objectives ... rnGuestation?!? Difficult to accept compromises in quality and systems, perhaps for these focal lengths are still more appropriate SLRs, although honestly this is the best zoom ever built for APS-C systems! RnI recommend an evaluation before purchase, but if you decide to take it , then you have overcome all the inertia said and will be sure love. You would not say but I love it! Rn |
user117231 | sent on March 17, 2018 Pros: Excellent construction and mechanics in style Fuji.rnQuality of the image.rnStabilization eccelsa.rn Cons: Probably nothing really significant. I wonder why everyone always points the finger on the Fuji hoods. Opinion: This is a fantastic lens. Although all the FUJI lenses are of great quality.rnIf the JPGs produced by Fuji are usually of good quality, with the use of this 50-140..they are even more.rnFocus excursion 75-210 with image quality and extreme care and mechanical-construction quality with acceptable weights and dimensions.rnThe first impression is absolutely positive and is immediately confirmed at the first click.rnNevertheless all the differences-limits between the ML APS-C and REFLEX FF system, this lens holds up well comparison with the equivalent 70-200 f / 2.8 on the market.rnPoter shoot freehand with absurdly low times is a great added value. I believe that used on the new Fuji X-H1 with battery grip, can be absolutely functional for those who take pictures of a profession. |
 | sent on February 04, 2017 Pros: build quality, optical quality, reliability even in adverse weather conditions Cons: frankly nothing: the size and weight are those expected at the start. Indeed, frankly bracket for the stand offers a good alternative to handle :-D Opinion: purchased for about a year, was a surprise on every expectation for speed, sharpness, color rendition, ease of use in particular for the stabilization and resistance to harsh environments and struck me pleasantly blurred that contributes greatly to perception of sharpness. Ultimately, extraordinary for portraits ... From the beginning I switched off the hood, so I took off the problem reported by many |
 | sent on April 08, 2015 Pros: As close to the fixed zoom ring perfect, stabilized, weather sealed. Cons: Some pesantino but bearable, hood hard to insert and remove, cost. Opinion: I bought this little gem about two months ago. I use it with xt1 and the first thing I noticed was the speed AF very responsive compared to 14mm. The sharpness is the highest level for a zoom and very close to fixed. At f / 2.8 it makes it well already, going to close clearly is better but I must say that it is appreciated for its uniformity at all focal lengths. Fantastic the zoom ring very well adjusted to the right clutch. Note on the stabilizer that can so dear to do its job. Fuji, once again, has a center adding to its optical XF this goal. Highly recommended to those who want to buy it. |
 | sent on February 12, 2015 Pros: IQ, OIS, ergonomics. Cons: No foot ark swiss and considerable weight, he did discuss many. Opinion: ? This is the first professional lens with constant aperture and quality almost comparable to fixed XF.Dopo two months of hard use and after trying out your face detection, autofocus C and landscape photos on the stand, ie nce with filters, I decided to do a full review that found on: http://instantart.it/?p=2594#more-2594 |
 | sent on January 06, 2015 Pros: Excellent sharpness, excellent color rendering, three-dimensionality great especially at longer focal high and delicious boken, ois very very good and very useful. Cons: Surely the weight (but physics as the math does not lie) Opinion: Superb optics, allows excellent close-ups at different focal colors always incisive and sharpness at the highest levels, very fast single af af more than adequate continuous stabilizer allows handheld shooting at focal boost speeds unthinkable, of course the weight is felt and unbalances the camera forward, highly recommended if xt1 the battery grip that makes its use more natural. |
| sent on January 05, 2015 Pros: Sharpness at all focal lengths and total openness, made colors, bokeh Cons: Weight Opinion: Recently I wanted to make the madness of buying this goal, but it is a really fantastic optical head in all focal lengths and the various openings, 2.8 is incisissimo and allows you to make the fantastic crop without losing detail. The only flaw weight and size but then for a perspective of this caliber you can sacrifice. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
