Fuji Fuji XF 70-300

[tonyturley]

This lens should not tempt me, but it does. For cycling, it would be useless, unless I carried it in a backpack and swapped to it when I wanted to use it. Certainly not an ideal situation. But for short walkabouts, it could be useful. I still like to occasionally photograph songbirds around the yard, and I currently have nothing that will do that. Fujinon XF70-300mmF4-5.6 is Weather Resistant - Fuji Rumors

 

[davidzvi]

If I still had Fuji gear this would be very interesting to me. It could also plug one of the holes I see in the Fuji lens lineup, the gap between the 200/230mm and 400mm zooms.

 

[Bobby Tingle]

If it works with the teleconverters, this will be very interesting for me.

 

[drd1135]

It looks like a sweet lens. Thank heaven I have the 55-230 to dampen my enthusiasm to switch.

 

[tonyturley]

If it works with the teleconverters, this will be very interesting for me.

Your wish is granted. Check out photo #10 in the photo section of the article about yesterday's summit. I've been thinking of picking up a lightly used 50-230 II or 55-200, but this one has me wondering if holding out is a better option. Unfortunately, it will probably run around $1,000-1,200. SIZE COMPARISON: Fujinon XF70-300mmF4-5.6 vs XF55-200mmF3.5-4.8 vs XF100-400mmF4.5-5.6 vs XC50-230mmF4.5-6.7 - Fuji Rumors

 

[Bobby Tingle]

Awesome!

 

[gryphon1911]

I’m interested. Long lens is my favorite. I’ve really come to appreciate the quality of the 50-230, so if this is as good/better and longer...could be a good mate to the XT3.

 

[Biro]

This lens does sound intriguing. The 100-400 gets filed under too big and too heavy in my book. But this might be interesting. On the other hand, I sold my X-T3 and X-H1 a few months back and I'm not sure that I'm going to replace them. The 70-300 might not be be a very good pairing with my X-Pro3.

 

[Tim Williams]

It does work with converters and it is in my cart at B&H. I'm going to give it a go on the XT3 with a 1.4.

 

[jazz1]

I'm interested in this lens, and I've searched out every pre-release review I could find. Most early reviewers of course note they are working with an early pre-release model. One thing I'm a bit worried about is that some of the posted pictures don't seem very sharp. Some pictures do. I suppose it could be a combination of having a pre-release lens and different photographers getting used to the lens?

I own both the 1.4X & 2.0X teleconverters, so between the relatively low price of the lens it seems like a "no brainer" to purchase one. But, I'm worried that it might be too out classed by my 50-140mm (with our without teleconverters). If I could afford the Red Badge 100-400mm I'd probably go for that.

In the end I'll keep my eye out for reviews of production models, and see what the latest reviewers say about this lens. If anyone out there gets their hands on one please share your experience and insight, and of course pics! I trust this group!

 

[jazz1]

This lens does sound intriguing. The 100-400 gets filed under too big and too heavy in my book. But this might be interesting. On the other hand, I sold my X-T3 and X-H1 a few months back and I'm not sure that I'm going to replace them. The 70-300 might not be be a very good pairing with my X-Pro3.

If I get this lens I'll let you know how it physically handles. I currently own both the X-Pro3 and XH-1. I do sometimes mount a 50-140mm with 2X teleconverter on the XPro3. I basically hold the lens, and not the camera or hold it loose in my free hand). Talk about the placing the "cart before the horse"!

 

[Biro]

If I get this lens I'll let you know how it physically handles. I currently own both the X-Pro3 and XH-1. I do sometimes mount a 50-140mm with 2X teleconverter on the XPro3. I basically hold the lens, and note the camera. Talk about the placing the "cart before the course"!

And, after a dalliance with the X-S1, I now have the X-T4, which is where I would use this lens. I'm still wondering if the decision to let the X-H1 go was the right one. But too late now.

 

[Bobby Tingle]

I own both the 1.4X & 2.0X teleconverters, so between the relatively low price of the lens it seems like a "no brainer" to purchase one. But, I'm worried that it might be too out classed by my 50-140mm (with our without teleconverters). If I could afford the Red Badge 100-400mm I'd probably go for that.

How is the image quality and AF performance of the 50-140 with the 1.4 and 2.0 TCs? I am thinking over several different telephoto options. Since I have the 50-140, adding TCs is one of the considerations. The 70-300 and 100-400 are also possibilities.

 

[jazz1]

How is the image quality and AF performance of the 50-140 with the 1.4 and 2.0 TCs? I am thinking over several different telephoto options. Since I have the 50-140, adding TCs is one of the considerations. The 70-300 and 100-400 are also possibilities.

I’ve pretty much only used the 50-140 with the 2.0X teleconverter on my XPro-3, and XH-1 (mostly on the XH-1). I’ve gotten some great deer and bird shots that I believe are pretty sharp. And the auto focus is fast. I imagine without the teleconverter it would be even better.

I’ve even cropped in close and have been satisfied with the results. Thus my dilemma regarding the potential purchase of the 70-300mm. Would reasonable cropping on the 40-140 with the 2.0 teleconverter be equal to or better than the 70-300mm at a similar telephoto range? Then of course the longer telephoto reach of the 70-300mm with the teleconverter (which I already own) be worth the expense.

Then of course, money aside, could I justify the cost of the 100-400mm? Probably not for my non-professional use. I would not sell my 40-140mm. I just like it too much!

 

[jazz1]

And, after a dalliance with the X-S1, I now have the X-T4, which is where I would use this lens. I'm still wondering if the decision to let the X-H1 go was the right one. But too late now.

Well if you get nostalgic we can trade Just kidding. Enjoy the X-T4!!!