Posts: 7,958
Threads: 1,832
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
45
500mm ;-)
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 1,244
Threads: 111
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
19
Nice, but quite big.
I suspect the Tamron 50-400mm F4.5-6.3 will follow. That one will be more interesting I think.
Posts: 976
Threads: 174
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation:
7
09-22-2022, 08:04 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-22-2022, 08:05 AM by stoppingdown.)
Yes, only 500mm. And it's the same weight of the Fujifilm super-tele, more or less, it has no weight advantage as e.g. it happens for the SEL200600G (*). But it is 500 bucks cheaper.
(*) BTW, I just bought it. But this is a topic for the other forum.
stoppingdown.net
Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm Æ’/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm Æ’/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm Æ’/2.8, Samyang 8mm Æ’/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm Æ’/2
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.
Posts: 7,958
Threads: 1,832
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
45
The Tamron is probably a better choice for the X-H2 at least. At f/6.7 it can at least approach the resolution of the sensor - theoretically.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 3,045
Threads: 31
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation:
20
Fun thing is, I keep hearing that this lens is f/6.3 until the last few millimetres. Wonder why they couldn't/ wouldn't just shave these off, round up and market it as f/6.3, which probably sits better with the user base (after all, f/6.3 has seemingly been accepted - if grudgingly - as a "valid" max aperture in lieu of f/5.6, but everything narrower is still frowned upon).
Wonder what else they'll bring to Z mount. I'm still eyeing that with interest, and the 50-400 would make a killer two-lens combo with a wideangle ... At least in theory.
