Experiences with Fuji 55 - 200 lens softness?

[mshea]

Hi All,

I finally sold my 55-200. While shots from 55mm to approximately 150mm were tack sharp, anything above that looked somewhat soft and no amount of sharpening, both in LR and Capture 1, improved things (I warned the buyer of this and he noted the same issue, but it didn't bother him). I'm wondering if I just had a poor copy. Curious to know others' experiences.

Thanks,

Merrill

[Johnny_Johnson]

Hi Merrill, I suspect that something was off with the one that you had. Mine seems to be consistently good all the way through the zoom range. Also, I've shot it side by side with my Canon 70-200/4 IS L on my 7D and don't see any differences in the resolution between the two at 200mm.

Later,
Johnny

[JV]

Hi Merrill, I suspect that something was off with the one that you had. Mine seems to be consistently good all the way through the zoom range. Also, I've shot it side by side with my Canon 70-200/4 IS L on my 7D and don't see any differences in the resolution between the two at 200mm.

Later,
Johnny

What aperture do you shoot at?

I don't own the lens myself but from what I have read the lens needs to be stopped down to f11 or f16 at 200mm, otherwise it is very soft even in the center.

Thanks, Joris.

[Johnny_Johnson]

It actually peaks at f5.6 across the zoom range. I normally use it at f8. At f11/16 diffraction would be lowering the resolution.

Later,
Johnny

[JV]

It actually peaks at f5.6 across the zoom range. I normally use it at f8. At f11/16 diffraction would be lowering the resolution.

Later,
Johnny

Interesting, this test gives a significantly different result at 200mm:
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/fujifilm_xf_55_200mm_f3_5_4_8_r_lm_ois_review/sharpness_5/

Sample variation?  In any case it would be interesting to know from the OP at which f-stop he typically shot.

[Johnny_Johnson]

The battle of the reviews.   :-)   Pick the one that best fits your experience with the lens plus makes the most sense logically.

http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x/879-fuji55200f3548?start=1

Later,
Johnny

[mshea]

Darned if I remember what f/stops I typically used at the long end. I probably trashed most images and the lens sat unused for months before I sold it. Since then I've used an X-E2 with the 14mm for mostly street work—a superb lens/body combination—and relied on my Leica kit for most everything else. Maybe it's worth trying another 55-200 copy. The 50 -140mm looks interesting, though I can't find any in-depth reviews.

Thanks for everyone's input!

Merrill

[Ken Bennett]

I had all sorts of issues with my 55-200 until I tried turning off the image stablization. For whatever reason, the stabilizer caused bands of softness especially at longer focal lengths. It was repeatable, and went away when I turned off IS. So I keep it off unless I am shooting below 1/125 or 1/60 or so, and use careful technique to get sharp photos at higher shutter speeds.

I do find the lens pretty sharp even at 200mm.

[StephaneB]

Hi All,

I finally sold my 55-200. While shots from 55mm to approximately 150mm were tack sharp, anything above that looked somewhat soft and no amount of sharpening, both in LR and Capture 1, improved things (I warned the buyer of this and he noted the same issue, but it didn't bother him). I'm wondering if I just had a poor copy. Curious to know others' experiences.

Thanks,

Merrill

I see the same thing. It not as good at 200mm as it is at 140mm. But I expected that. Anything better with that zoom range, at that price, that lens size and weight would be miraculous.  And if I compare to the Nikkor 70-300mm, the loss is much less severe on the Fuji than on the Nikkor.

I do not plan to sell the 55-200mm.

[Paul2660]

I had all sorts of issues with my 55-200 until I tried turning off the image stablization. For whatever reason, the stabilizer caused bands of softness especially at longer focal lengths. It was repeatable, and went away when I turned off IS. So I keep it off unless I am shooting below 1/125 or 1/60 or so, and use careful technique to get sharp photos at higher shutter speeds.

I do find the lens pretty sharp even at 200mm.

I had the same experience with mine. I rarely use the OIS with the 55-200.

The new 50-140 has my attention but the price point came in a bit too high for me.

Paul

[maddogmurph]

Frankly I always attributed the loss of IQ as being part of the 16MP sensor when cropped to 100%.  But handheld I've always had amazing results with mine.  My d810 doesn't produce this quality handheld unless I really crank the shutter speed up, but then of course I've got to shoot at lower F stops or higher ISO.

This image is f/13, 1/350, ISO 200, -1.3 exposure, 164mm - 246mm Equivalent, handheld.

In my general analysis, I'd like to be able to see the craters on the moon here when I zoom in and I cannot.  This poses the question to me, if I shot this same shot with the exact same settings on my d810, would I see the craters?  Or is it simply that the tree is in focus and the background is not?  Could I have shot this better on the fuji by focusing for the moon, or infinity at f16 and introducing the resulting diffraction?

[Ken Bennett]

Even at f/16 the moon will still be soft if you focus on a terrestrial object. The only way to get both sharp is to shoot two images and combine them.