In Northern Europe f/5.6 is much to dark and as it was said, these lenses are bought mostly for wildlife and sports. F/4.0 300 would be much more useful.

@@kallepyoraniemi5552 Well there are definitely still gaps in the Fujifilm lens lineup. But a lens like you describe is for another target group. Personally, I don't need something like that, I prefer something light and flexible.

does anyone know the release date of this lens?

@They Caged Non thanks

Fuji = bad Bokeh is just a stupid generalization that isn’t true. They have the 56mm F1.2 50mm F1.0 and the 90mm F2 that prover otherwise. Ofcourse variable zooms are worse in this aspect and this is no exception. But that says more about the type of lens then the brand.

And one to me 😎

Nope

I've got the 50-230, but I'm thinking of adding this to my wish list. 10-24 wr first though.

Mine is on order. Bit of a risk before a reliable review like this. Glad I pulled the trigger though.

@@daxvolfan yeah the 10-24 is in my head since quite some time too. I have the 55-200 already but will upgrade to 70-300. I always did miss some last steps of reach.

I have the 55-200 as well and will buy the 70-300 too. I did always miss some last step of reach. Or that the 55 did not support the teleconverters. So quite happy about this new lense.

The 100-400 isn't super great beyond 300mm, anyway. I avoid using it beyond 300mm if I can. This looks like a great option, especially for the price.

@@mixwellusa thanks for the input and good to know about the 300mm mark for the 100-400 lense.👍

I like the K-01 too. I’ve got the big Pentax K-1 with great lenses as well as Fuji X-E4 and a bunch of lenses (including this 70-300) as Olympus OM-10 and a range of lenses but I quite like the style of the K-01 and honest simplicity of the whole shooting package. That 16mp sensor was great in it’s and it still delivers very nice clean raw images.

Better than shot on iphone memes

@@MUSTDOS a modern iphone would have better image quality tho :')

@@kylosalvesen TBH, iphones fail except in dynamic range. It even has worse or non-existent color accuracy. it only beats the pentax when it comes to rolling shutter issues. Not even modern phones can beat an SX280hs nor an Olympus E-3 with a Soviet lens (Helios44m4) in image quality. I personally tested that.

@@kylosalvesen The shot at 0:16 was done with my iPhone XR, so you be the judge!

@@thatjordandrake the K-01 has clearly the much nicer looking colors - accurate or not.

I think Fuji knocked it out of the park with this one :) there arent much (if any) cons here.

Do keep in mind, while comparing this to the Lumix lens, that you're comparing the same focal length lens between two different formats. All other things equivalent, shaking will be more apparent on the Fuji at 300MM (450mm equivalent.)

I'm using the DA* 50-135mm F2.8 and the old DA 16-45mm F4. Glad you liked the framing, I'm trying to have a bit of fun with this setup.

@@thatjordandrake it actually looked pretty good, amazing work mate!

Great work 💪 Jordan. Its the man with the machine. Really looks nice!

Definitely not me ... It felt so good to see photos examples instead this terrible soft footage ... It feels like sharpest lens on the planet! :D

It's pretty poopy

Easily noticeable that it wasn't even true 1080p, but heavily upscaled.

I'm watching this on my phone at 360p.

Soft AF.

What's the new update lens called?

@@acarlos818 its the 1.10 update i think.

Same.

yeah

@@CR055FIRE hey I liked it when you punched goro in the balls

Can't say I was impressed...

Occasionally, but really I needed it for video editing and it does have affordable power. I hate so many things about it though. The fan control is jank, and the noisiest ever. Build quality is suspect, and it isn't the most stable platform, probably due to the insane heat it generates. I think they've solved some of those issues in newer models though.

@@niccollsvideo gaming notebooks and noise is so annoying, that's what makes be stay at a desktop. Recently there's been a huge jump in video editing performance at lower power with the new AMD processors, though

I can see it very clearly on my 27 inch monitor. It's far softer than their footage usually is.

@@jensdanbolt6953 i can see a huge difference even on the phone , but it's a fun challenge

worse than bad 😂

Hey, I was about to write the same comment. 55-200 is great!!!

Indeed! I heard (and was incredibly distracted by) it throughout almost the entire video. Suppose it might very well be the Pentax amp or something relatively simple and discrete like that-but regardless of what is actually causing it, the end result is an amazingly painful thing to listen through! I suspect the tone noise might actually just simply register at a frequency that’s too high for most adults (generally over the age of 25) to perceive, and that’s why it went unnoticed and uncorrected with this video? In some ways, the noise indeed reminds me of the dreaded, civil rights-abusing so-called “Mosquito Device” that reached peak popularity around the mid 2010s or so: www.noisehelp.com/mosquito-tone.html Gah, I hate those things. Anyway, all of that aside, I’m really intrigued by this lens and definitely now considering buying one for myself!

Looks like you said the same thing twice: > 1:2 macro for APS-C or true 1:2 macro they both mean a 48mm object takes up 24mm in the frame. Compared to the same magnification on a full frame sensor, on APSC this means the object will fill the frame's width, as opposed to filling just the frame's height.

The 16-80 starts to crap out IQ wise between 70 and 80. I was going to sell it and get the 16-55 2.8 however with the 70-300 and 10-24 in my bag as well I go from 10mm to 300 (plus 1.4x) in three lenses which with a camera body weigh in at just over 2Kg. not to sniffed at for travel.

@@kaneclements7761 I will have that exact set up but you’ll be missing the 55-70mm range which is often very handy to have.

@@kaneclements7761 having previously owned the 16-80 and now owning the 16-55, I can tell you that the image quality is night and day. The 16-55 is exceptional if you have a stabilized camera body. Its greatest weakness is softness at 55mm, but with 26 mp sensors and Fuji’s image quality/detail, cropping that 20 mm between the 55 and 70 seems a non-issue.

@@awake780 Hi Andy. I had been weighing up selling the 16-80 as well and getting the 16-55 and now you have raised those nagging doubts. Thanks for that ;-) I have both an X-T4 and X-S10 so lack of stabilisation in the lens is a non issue.

@@kaneclements7761 the 16-55 is a revelation. I’ve used it in poorly lit indoor shooting conditions on several occasions, and I’m blown away by its autofocus performance and image quality. The 16-80 is a solid travel lens, but I can’t recommend the 16-55 highly enough. In fact, it has made a couple other lenses I own completely irrelevant. Given the 16-55, 70-300, a teleconverter, and a fast prime of your preferred focal length, I’m not sure any Fuji shooter needs more lenses. Best of luck on your path forward! :-)

18 to 55 and 50 to 200 then just crop is the budget way to go .

Camera or photographer? Just trolling that old chestnut!

I think it's that Jordan is that good.

For my experience, using a converter gives the same result as cropping the image. Just because the converter always degrade the quality of the picture makes it a little soft.

They posted images with both converters in the links below the video.

@@awake780 thank you

They don't leave Calgary.

Yah more and more tend to stay, and with 2021 as an extreme exception, we usually don't get THAT cold. Now I love Winnipeg, but I'm amazed that anything stays over the winter there, any year! 😉