Fujifilm Fujinon GF100-200mm F5.6 R LM OIS WR

[@dalkapur]

It's a very good lens. I would give it a B+. Detail quality does not 'blow me away' like that of the 32-64mm, which offers prime like quality. But that's being picky. One of the reasons why I upgraded from the 50S to the 100S is that a 100% crop still gives you a 26mp file. That's a very usable image size and it effectively turns the 200mm into a 400mm zoom! No need for an expensive and heavy 1.4 teleconverter for my uses.

[@DamianBrown]

I would have to agree with you!

[@duringthemeanwhilst]

I've had this lens for just over a year now. I use it in conjunction with the 23 - it is a fantastic companion to the wide-angle for landscape work

[@DamianBrown]

Brilliant combo! Good to hear this.

[@Clint_the_Audio-Photo_Guy]

Well I'm fine with the aperture. F/4 would be nice, but the lens would be larger and heavy, so this is probably the best option for landscape work. Just set it at f/8-f/11 and enjoy the IQ. I was always a maximum aperture snob too, but then I realized I shoot most of my photos at f/8-f/11 for maximum sharpness anyway, so why carry all the extra weight?

[@DamianBrown]

I agree Clint!! It's a top quality lens and I wouldn't want or need it to be bigger

[@russellbaston974]

Like other Fuji lenses with a tripod bracket they don’t make the foot with an Arca ( pretty much the ‘universal’) style fitting. Means one has to attach an additional Arca plate.

[@DamianBrown]

Rather annoying for me!

[@Pixelpeeps-69]

This is the 70-200 lens for medium format professional photography, great for studio work or outdoor event photography

[@DamianBrown]

Maybe the closest there is albeit it's closer to a 70-150, working out at 35mm equivalent of 79-158mm but definitely great for those styles.

[@isoawe1888]

I was excited until I saw the specs. 35 mm has always had the “Trinity” of zooms that match each other. This would be like you wanted a lighter lens and went f/4 rather than 2.8. I would take the weight for faster lens. Has the added benefit that all 3 would be 82mm filters. Maybe they’ll upgrade.

[@DamianBrown]

Great point, thanks!

[@CR055FIRE]

works good for astro too i fell backwards on a hill and my foot caught the tripod and it fell with me but was ok

[@DamianBrown]

Sounds like something that would happen to me

[@JoaquimGonsalves]

1050gms for a Fuji Medium format is good actually. It is no doubt a 5.6, but good regardless. Overall I guess the images look decent but maybe the YT compression was kinda reducing the image quality here, for me at least. Somehow this lens didn't excite me. But hey, just an observation based on this video and like you, I prefer a faster aperture overall. Thing is, at these prices and for this format, we really need things that go past the point of diminishing returns in some ways at least. Yes, people can shoot amazing stuff with just about any device if they know what they're doing, but still. Many people get away with great large commercial prints even with full frame but I must say I don't know much in that field due to limited experience there.

[@DamianBrown]

I agree. I've had wall sized prints out of a Nikon D200! I think these lenses are brilliant, but ye they don't have to be all for everybody. I know people who love this and I get that too.

[@JoaquimGonsalves]

@@DamianBrown and that's what truly matters at the end of the day.:) Well said!

[@6042833]

You should mount lens on tripod, You got camera on the tripod if I see properly. Great review my friends all the best.

[@jorgemoro5476]

This lens weighs nothing and you don’t have to use the collar. I use this lens on my 50r and 100s. No issues going on 2 years now I think.

[@DamianBrown]

As Jorge said, it's fine with this lens. Of course for heavier lenses it's the best practice. Thanks!

[@DamianBrown]

Good to hear this experience!

[@friendofarca6550]

A totally disappointing lens, at 200mm it is unusable soft and not only in the corners. A Sony a7r5 with the 70-200gm II is a toatal different league. The Fuji lens also suffers from strong blue fringing.

[@DamianBrown]

Thanks for your experience!!

[@SethCrilley]

@@DamianBrown I am with friendofarca6550 on this lens. I have owned this lens from launch for landscape work and it is a soft lens at all apertures from about 130-135mm onwards. I would not dream of strapping the converter to it. It is a poor lens for the sensor and its capability. It is nowhere near the calibre of the 45-100 or the 32-64mm lenses. I have shot the two lenses at their overlap- that is about 100mm - and shooting mountains there is no comparison. Even without getting to 50% the differences are stark shooting the same detailed mountain scene in the alps. I am a complete GFX devotee. I've had the system since its start. this lens is a disappointment. It is the biggest disappointment in the GFX line-up. My wish/hope is that Fuji have the courage to face up to its limitations and give us a 100-200 which matches the 45-100. To me, it is senseless to knock this out at circa £1700. We are all down the rabbit hole anyway if you run one of these systems. Paying more money for a benchmark zoom optic would just fall into line with the system cost and give us the quality which matches the prior investment in the system.. The immense resolution is just wasted beyond 135mm because the lens does not resolve very fine details with anything like the accuracy of the 45-100.