why not do a comparison at maximum focal length and crop the 200 to the same image as the 300 and see if there is a difference to justify the price difference
Great video Matt. Probably everyone watching you shares the feeling about having a beautiful sunset/sunrise present itself and the rush of juggling lenses and wanting to change composition because it's brilliant in one section of sky instead of another. They are so fleeting and 30 seconds can make all the difference. ...but that's what makes it so special. Anyway. I've got the 55-200 and the 100-400...They're both faster throughout the range than the 70-300 so for me a bit more versatile. ...but whenever possible I leave them both behind for the 90mm. That is a lens.
The 90 f2 is currently my longest Fuji lens and I use it for sports often. That lens is so good for many things. But, I would like to get something with more reach for sports and wildlife. My dream lens has always been the 50-140, but it's so expensive as is the 100-400. So, I here listening to the thoughts about these two lenses.
good video, One thing i would add is the XF70-300 supports the Fuji teleconverters to give you a 420mm F/8 or a 600mm F/11 lens if you really want to get close
Hmm, what about 200mm from both lenses? at 70mm they look almost identical +- What was the point of the "Vs." It was just more a vlog with drone shots, etc. But technically it's a very pure comparison. Anyway thanks for the attempt. (and btw only 4869 and 4875 of panoramic rafs (55-200mm) were useful, 1/40 was too long for 70.5mm, so all the rest shots was smudged a bit.
Hi! I do have a question about lower light photography. Does the 3.5 vs 4.8 make a big difference between these two lenses (given that the 300-700 is newer and has other features to improve light etc). I often take pictures in lower light situations and want to know what's the best choice due to the difference in aperture. Thank you!
Great video Matt. Understand your frustrations in feeling like you didn't make the most of the lighting and conditions, but I thought your lighthouse pano was great. Beautiful drone footage of the location 👌 Just got my hands on the 70-300mm after a being on the wait list for over 6 months, so can't wait to test it out!
Loved the drone footage Matt, what a great looking location and the images were fantastic. Think you are being too hard on yourself as you are consistent with your planning and delivery of great images
A few other points of comparison between the 2 lenses, beyond size, weight, and image quality (where they are substantially the same). Beyond a longer focal length, the 70-300 has several features not found on the 55-200 that I have found very useful: -- weather resistant; -- ability to use a tele-converter for extra reach (I use the 1.4x); and -- ability to get faster AF lock by using the range limiter switch. One other consideration. If you are using the 16-55 or 18-55 as your mid-range zoom, moving to the 70-300 will leave a gap in focal length between 55-70mm. Depending on what and how you shoot, that may be inconvenient. I eliminated the issue by changing my mid-range zoom to the 16-80, which I have found to be extremely versatile as a "default" travel and landscape lens.
why not do a comparison at maximum focal length and crop the 200 to the same image as the 300 and see if there is a difference to justify the price difference
Great video Matt. Probably everyone watching you shares the feeling about having a beautiful sunset/sunrise present itself and the rush of juggling lenses and wanting to change composition because it's brilliant in one section of sky instead of another. They are so fleeting and 30 seconds can make all the difference. ...but that's what makes it so special. Anyway. I've got the 55-200 and the 100-400...They're both faster throughout the range than the 70-300 so for me a bit more versatile. ...but whenever possible I leave them both behind for the 90mm. That is a lens.
90mm prime?
Yep...the 90mm f2 from Fuji is really really good. @@bernteman
The 90 f2 is currently my longest Fuji lens and I use it for sports often. That lens is so good for many things. But, I would like to get something with more reach for sports and wildlife. My dream lens has always been the 50-140, but it's so expensive as is the 100-400. So, I here listening to the thoughts about these two lenses.
good video, One thing i would add is the XF70-300 supports the Fuji teleconverters to give you a 420mm F/8 or a 600mm F/11 lens if you really want to get close
Hmm, what about 200mm from both lenses? at 70mm they look almost identical +- What was the point of the "Vs." It was just more a vlog with drone shots, etc. But technically it's a very pure comparison. Anyway thanks for the attempt. (and btw only 4869 and 4875 of panoramic rafs (55-200mm) were useful, 1/40 was too long for 70.5mm, so all the rest shots was smudged a bit.
Hey mate, have you tried any of those Lens for surfing photos? Thanks 🤙🏼🤙🏼
this is where I grew up! So good to see it on your channel!!!
Your noise is terribly clipping
Hi! I do have a question about lower light photography. Does the 3.5 vs 4.8 make a big difference between these two lenses (given that the 300-700 is newer and has other features to improve light etc). I often take pictures in lower light situations and want to know what's the best choice due to the difference in aperture. Thank you!
Great video Matt. Understand your frustrations in feeling like you didn't make the most of the lighting and conditions, but I thought your lighthouse pano was great. Beautiful drone footage of the location 👌 Just got my hands on the 70-300mm after a being on the wait list for over 6 months, so can't wait to test it out!
What a fantastic location. Stunning sunset. I've got 55-200mm lens and it has been on my XT2 forever! Thanks for the review
Super hiped by your work
but i am not able to get the photos
Loved the drone footage Matt, what a great looking location and the images were fantastic. Think you are being too hard on yourself as you are consistent with your planning and delivery of great images
A few other points of comparison between the 2 lenses, beyond size, weight, and image quality (where they are substantially the same).
Beyond a longer focal length, the 70-300 has several features not found on the 55-200 that I have found very useful:
-- weather resistant;
-- ability to use a tele-converter for extra reach (I use the 1.4x); and
-- ability to get faster AF lock by using the range limiter switch.
One other consideration. If you are using the 16-55 or 18-55 as your mid-range zoom, moving to the 70-300 will leave a gap in focal length between 55-70mm. Depending on what and how you shoot, that may be inconvenient. I eliminated the issue by changing my mid-range zoom to the 16-80, which I have found to be extremely versatile as a "default" travel and landscape lens.
70-300 is better for colours and contrast,sharpness and more zoom but sometimes is 3.5- 4.8 better than f4-5.6 ;)
I think you should shift from landscape photography to XXX hardcore lamington photography and indulge your true passion
The 70-300 is pretty much impossible to find in stock in the US.
I got the 70-300 used. Yeah new is hard to find. I love it. Slapped it on the X-E4 with the 1.4 teleconverter. Do some "bird watching" pics with it.
Thanks so much! Beautiful images!
The big decision for me is the difference in the aperture as the 55 - 200 is F3.5-4.8 and the 70 - 300 is F4-5.6 hence why I prefer the 55 - 200
But the 70-300 is 5.6 at 300mm. How bright is it at 200mm? Might be just the same as the 55-200
Beautiful photos. Both lenses look great. 👍👍
Thank you for review mate
Awesome dude.
Crikey mate!
Budget lenses?....
Good Bro🙂✌️
At 3:30 I quit… you didn’t even start comparing these lenses