[Austrian]

Fuji XF 2,8 50-140 at the wide end?

[Rover]

Doesn't it look too go good to be true for u-wide?

Klaus, is the widest aperture of this lens 2.8, or this is just part of the chart?

If this is indeed a f/2.8 lens, now, which ones haven't yet been tested? Sigma 180/2.8 macro?

On a second thought, I stand corrected - I think this can't be a Canon mount lens tested on 5DsR because we know what it does to lenses. If not, then...  :blink:

[davidmanze]

 The Venus 60mm F2.8 macro, I can't remember whether you tested it, (no surprise) either way I can't find it on the overview....

 

 

....but emissions happen there!

[Klaus]

Fuji XF 2,8 50-140 at the wide end?

yup

[JJ_SO]

So, "only" 4 ☆ and "highly recommendable" or a bit more?   I was also tempted to get me one, there's an offer with converter for just 100.- more than without it. And since the converter is around 400.- ... But then I see my Nikon 70-200 collecting dust because I use it rarely and I don't want to "get smaller" with mirrorless and "get a huge suitcase for all that gear" again. So I went for the longer one, 100-400 without reading a test, pardon me.

[toni-a]

Lenses used to be a safer investment than camera bodies since the camera bodies rapidly become outdated check the value of a 1Ds now for instance versus canon 70-200f2.8 MKI bought at the same period,

Seems lenses are also evolving fast, and with the current trend of amelioration most of the lenses would become outdated in a few years which is a very positive thing

[JJ_SO]

I just don't see the positive side of "lenses becoming outdated" 

[Rover]

Lenses used to be a safer investment than camera bodies since the camera bodies rapidly become outdated check the value of a 1Ds now for instance versus canon 70-200f2.8 MKI bought at the same period,

Seems lenses are also evolving fast, and with the current trend of amelioration most of the lenses would become outdated in a few years which is a very positive thing

My Canon 70-200/2.8 IS (non-II) is seeing the third camera body (and double that if I count the stuff loaned at one point or another). Though I'm pretty sure I'm done upgrading bodies now.  Even more wide-angles have come and gone during that time.

[popo]

I just don't see the positive side of "lenses becoming outdated" 

I guess the implication is if an older lens is considered outdated, there must be something better available. And if you don't need that new performance, the old one will generally cost less than it did when current.
 

My Canon 70-200/2.8 IS (non-II) is seeing the third camera body (and double that if I count the stuff loaned at one point or another). Though I'm pretty sure I'm done upgrading bodies now.  Even more wide-angles have come and gone during that time.

Similar here... my 100-400L has been my main lens on the 50D, 7D, 7D mk2. While there is the shiny new mk2 out, I don't see enough reason to get it until the old lens dies, or something else much better comes along. Body wise, there was a noticeable jump from 50D to 7D (both AF and sensor), less so to the mk 2. So in a few years whatever the mk3 is better be really special.

In general, I still have the "good enough" theory on buying. If performance isn't good enough, you will spend more to get the best available. Once it reaches a good enough level, you stop there and other factors start becoming more important. e.g. possibly smaller size of mirrorless, or you buy lower down than you might have previously as it will still do the job.

[davidmanze]

    Most lenses are capable of good performance........... the big money is spent wanting to produce tack sharp

 

30X20"  prints shot wide open.......stuff we rarely do......

 

 

....I look at  whole bunch of great images on Flickr.....and there really is some fantastic stuff out there.......95% or

 

more of it is taken on very modest gear........mostly kit lenses.........

 

 

 

...the problem is........ paying for LBA therapy has now become just as expensive as buying this latest

 

     glass..........