The Story of Two Zoom Lenses
I’ve never clicked with zoom lenses. For the last—oh, geez, it’s approaching 30 years now, going back to the film days—I have been using prime lenses almost exclusively. I’ve dabbled with zooms here and there, but invariably they end up collecting dust, and oftentimes eventually sold. I love my primes.
The reasons why I prefer primes over zooms are 1) they’re almost always sharper, 2) they typically have more good character and less bad characteristics, 3) they usually have larger maximum apertures, 4) they’re often smaller, and 5) they force you to remain within the constraints of that focal length. Composer Igor Stravinsky famously stated, “The more constraints one imposes, the more one frees oneself of the chains that shackle the spirit.” Pablo Picasso said, “If you have five elements available, use only four; if you have four elements, use three.” For me, prime lenses help with that; however, it doesn’t mean I’m anti-zoom, only that most of the time I prefer primes. Ideally, I’d purchase two or three primes instead of a single zoom that covers those focal lengths.
Fujifilm has an obvious hole in the prime-lens lineup: long telephoto. There’s the wonderful Fujinon 90mm f/2, which is one of my favorite lenses. The 135mm full-frame equivalent focal-length used to be quite common, but it’s not nearly as popular nowadays. After that there’s the 200mm f/2 and the new 500mm f/5.6, both of which are bulky and expensive (although I’m sure they’re quite excellent). What’s missing are a couple of smaller, more affordable options. Something like a 135mm f/2.8 (or f/3.5) that’s not more than 20% larger and heavier than the 90mm f/2, and not more than $1,500—the smaller, lighter, and less expensive the better. I’d also like to see something around a 330mm (500mm full-frame equivalent) f/4 (or f/4.5) that’s maybe roughly around the same size of the 70-300mm zoom, and under $2,000. But those two lenses don’t exist.
I’m strongly considering purchasing something more telephoto than the 90mm f/2, and the 200mm f/2 and 500mm f/5.6 are not an option. So that leaves me with zooms. I used to own the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6, and as much as I tried to like it because I spent a lot of money on it, I just couldn’t. It was a disappointment, so I sold it. Last weekend, at a local Fujifilm event, I was able to try out two zooms: Fujinon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 and Fujinon 150-600mm f/5.6-8. I want to briefly talk about those two, and at the end I’ll tell you what I decided.
The first lens that I tried was the 70-300mm f/4-5.6. It’s very lightweight for what it is. I was quite impressed with the image quality and overall performance. At the long end, there’s some obvious vignetting when wide open that seems to improve but not completely disappear as you stop down. I noticed some minor chromatic aberrations in a couple instances. It does seem slightly softer at 300mm than 200mm, but I didn’t use it enough to feel confident in that judgement, and it was still more than sufficiently sharp at 300mm. I feel like this lens isn’t perfect, but it significantly outpaced my expectations for a $950 zoom.
Above: Fujifilm X-T5 & Fujinon 70-300mm lens — BewareMyVelvia Recipe
The second lens that I tried was the 150-600mm f/5.6-8. This lens is much larger, heavier, and more expensive than the 70-300mm. I was impressed by the reach. I was able to photograph mountains that were far away. I wasn’t close to downtown, but I was able to photograph it nonetheless. It was definitely more difficult to use than the 70-300mm because oftentimes one doesn’t need 150mm, let alone 600mm. Still, the pictures are beautiful, and the overall sharpness and IQ seems to be just a little better than 70-300mm; however, at the longer end, say beyond 400mm and getting increasingly worse as you reach 600mm, the pictures become softer. Some reasons for this might be 1) atmospheric haze and heatwaves, 2) higher ISOs to compensate for the smaller maximum aperture and faster shutter speeds necessary, and 3) diffraction from the smaller apertures. I liked the image quality from the 70-300mm more at 300mm than the 150-600mm at 600mm; however, the 150-600mm seems to have slightly better IQ at 300mm than the 70-300mm has at 300mm. I also noticed some vignetting at 600mm.
Above: Fujifilm X-T5 & Fujinon 150-600mm lens — BewareMyVelvia Recipe
The lens that I decided on is the Fujinon 70-300mm. I’m also planning to purchase the 1.4x TC to occasionally give it just a little more reach when needed. I’ve heard good things about that combination. It seems like it will be more than good enough for what I need it for. If Fujifilm ever made that 135mm f/2.8 and 330mm f/4, I’d prefer that over the zoom. With the options available, the 70-300mm appears to be the best choice for me. It’s surprisingly good, and a bonus is that it’s reasonably affordable.
