Fuji S5 Zoom

Richie15

Richie15

Messages
1,442
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
Hi

I currently have a Fuji S5 and also a Nikon D40x and have a Sigma 17-70 HSM lens which I use as a walkaround lens. I also occassionally swap to a fixed 24mm 2.8 AFD or a 50mm 1.8.

I am concious that the S5 needs good glass, is there any merit in upgrading the Sigma to the Nikon 16-85 VR or is their any alternative, max budget £500?
 
Richie, welcome to TP :)

The Nikon 16-85 is supposed to be a good piece of kit, but I'd say your Siggy is a pretty solid walabout lens, if a little short at the long end.

There are a lt of short zoomss staring arojd the 18mm mark but there are only a few that offer anything longer than what you've already got – the 16-85 Nikkor, the 24-120mm Nikkor etc. What about a 18-200mm VR? £500 and gives you a massive zoom range and the benefit of VR.
 
The 18-200 VR is the last lens I would recommend for the S5 Pro.

Fuji actually advises against this lens as they say its too soft.

I do have some crops of this lens vs the Tamron 17-50 when both are at f/8 on a S5 Pro and the Tamron and Nikkor are in a different league.

The S5 Pro doesn't play well with it at all.

The 16-85 VR works very well on the S5 Pro, but its not really much if any of any upgrade from the Sigma.

I'd be looking at constant f/2.8 glass - ie Tamron 17-50 or Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 as you need VERY sharp glass on the S5 Pro due to its strong AA filter.
 
Puddleduck, that's interesting what yousay about the 18-200mm. It's not a lens I'd be looking myself but have heard good things about it. Obviously it's not as good as the reviews say.
You're right about his current lens – wouldn't be a massive change if he got the NAF 16-85, not enough extra length to warrant the money and the apertures aren't as good as the Siggy.
 
For an S5 Pro these lenses are good enough for publishable and sell-able pictures, and will produce critical sharpness at 100% viewing:

-Tokina 12-24 f/4 DX
-Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Di
-Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 DX
-Sigma 30mm f/1.4
-Nikkor 35/2 AF-D
-Sigma 17-70 f/2.8 - f/4.5
-Nikkor 18-70 DX
-Nikkor 70-200 VR
-Nikkor 300mm f/4 AF-S
-Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 VR

Lens the S5 Pro doesn't like much for some unaccountable reason:

-Sigma 150mm
-Nikkor 18-200 VR
-Sigma 10-20

If I was buying 4 lens for the S5 Pro it would be: Tokina 12-24 f/4, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Di, Nikkor 35/2 AF-D, Nikkor 70-200 VR.
 
puddleduck said:
For an S5 Pro these lenses are good enough for publishable and sell-able pictures, and will produce critical sharpness at 100% viewing:

-Tokina 12-24 f/4 DX
-Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Di
-Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 DX
-Sigma 30mm f/1.4
-Nikkor 35/2 AF-D
-Sigma 17-70 f/2.8 - f/4.5
-Nikkor 18-70 DX
-Nikkor 70-200 VR
-Nikkor 300mm f/4 AF-S
-Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 VR

Lens the S5 Pro doesn't like much for some unaccountable reason:

-Sigma 150mm
-Nikkor 18-200 VR
-Sigma 10-20

If I was buying 4 lens for the S5 Pro it would be: Tokina 12-24 f/4, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Di, Nikkor 35/2 AF-D, Nikkor 70-200 VR.
Click to expand...

Many thanks all makes sense, if I were to improve my lineup then what would you swap first

I have Sigma 17-70, Nikon 24mm AFD 2.8, Nikon 50mm 1.8 & Nikon 55-200VR. I also have a Nikon D40x and its good to be able to swap the lenses i.e. AFS/HSM
 
I have also thought about upgrading my 50mm to the 60mm Macro AFS, any views on this?
 
what lens you want kind of depends on which you use the most doesnt it? i think whichever lens best suits your needs in pd´s list will be a good bet
 
At the moment 24mm for landscapes and 50mm for portaits. I have no macro lens and would be interested in exploring this hence the 60mm, would the 60mm be a good replacement for the 50mm?
 
specialman said:
Richie, welcome to TP :)

The Nikon 16-85 is supposed to be a good piece of kit, but I'd say your Siggy is a pretty solid walabout lens, if a little short at the long end.

There are a lt of short zoomss staring arojd the 18mm mark but there are only a few that offer anything longer than what you've already got – the 16-85 Nikkor, the 24-120mm Nikkor etc. What about a 18-200mm VR? £500 and gives you a massive zoom range and the benefit of VR.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your welcome.

I am not really a fan of lenses with such a broad range, I have been moving towards prime lenses for quality still like using a lens such as the Sigma for range. I have found that down at 17mm it is not the best performing though.
 
Richie, no worries. I like the sound of a wide ranging zoom but in reality, they're never going to offer great image quality because they're obviously itched at the lower end of the market, hence the price.
I'm a big fan of fixed aperture lenses like my NAF 12-24mm f/4 and you can tell the difference in quality. That said, my 18-70mm Nikon is amazingly good, defying the usual thing that cheap means rubbish.
 
Puddleduck did you ever get hold of a D2x and how would this compare with the S5?
 
specialman said:
Puddleduck, that's interesting what yousay about the 18-200mm. It's not a lens I'd be looking myself but have heard good things about it. Obviously it's not as good as the reviews say.
Click to expand...

The 18-200 was seriously over-hyped by the likes of Ken Rockwell, the range is handy, but optically it's nothing special.
 
Richie15 said:
Puddleduck did you ever get hold of a D2x and how would this compare with the S5?
Click to expand...

I shot a D300, D2X and S5 Pro side by side around November - December 2007 and didn't keep either of the Nikons.

The D2X is very sharp with incredible accuity. However it has absolutely awful noise performance much past ISO320, and dynamic range is poor too.

A great ISO100 camera. Its better at base ISO accuity wise than either the D700 or D3 for example.

I do actually really like the D2X, and I'd rather have a D2X than a D300, but probably rather have an S5 Pro than a D2X.

Not sure if that helps!

I have quite a few shots comparing the S5 Pro and D2X online, my web server is down at the moment, but I'll link them.

To cut a long story short - for dynamic range, JPEG quality, tonality, and general image "niceness", the S5 Pro is my preference over a D2X.
 
puddleduck said:
I shot a D300, D2X and S5 Pro side by side around November - December 2007 and didn't keep either of the Nikons.

The D2X is very sharp with incredible accuity. However it has absolutely awful noise performance much past ISO320, and dynamic range is poor too.

A great ISO100 camera. Its better at base ISO accuity wise than either the D700 or D3 for example.

I do actually really like the D2X, and I'd rather have a D2X than a D300, but probably rather have an S5 Pro than a D2X.

Not sure if that helps!

I have quite a few shots comparing the S5 Pro and D2X online, my web server is down at the moment, but I'll link them.

To cut a long story short - for dynamic range, JPEG quality, tonality, and general image "niceness", the S5 Pro is my preference over a D2X.
Click to expand...

Thanks that has confirmed my decision, albeit I would be keen to see your comparison, if you wouldnt mind sending me the link when your site is up and running.

I am going to sell my D40x, Sigma 17-70 HSM, Nikon 55-200 VR & 50mm 1.8. Keep my S5, 24mm add the Tamron 17-50 and the Nikon 60mm AFS then later the Nikon 70-300VR.
 
puddleduck said:
To cut a long story short - for dynamic range, JPEG quality, tonality, and general image "niceness", the S5 Pro is my preference over a D2X.
Click to expand...

I just bought an S5 over a D2X and it's nice to hear that other people think it's a good choice to make. Over £300 cheaper too at the price I paid.

When it arrives I'll see what glass I have performs best on it, and come back and share.
 
Thanks for all the replies, got my Nikon 35mm F2 today and have ordered the Tamron 17-50. I am interested to see how this flairs against my 24mm prime at 24mm
 
Interesting re the Sigma 10-20, I was also considering the Sigma 12-24 vs the Tokina. I am also keen to make sure I buy FF lenses so that when I finally get my D700 :D all lenses work
 
puddleduck said:
For an S5 Pro these lenses are good enough for publishable and sell-able pictures, and will produce critical sharpness at 100% viewing:

-Tokina 12-24 f/4 DX
-Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Di
-Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 DX
-Sigma 30mm f/1.4
-Nikkor 35/2 AF-D
-Sigma 17-70 f/2.8 - f/4.5
-Nikkor 18-70 DX
-Nikkor 70-200 VR
-Nikkor 300mm f/4 AF-S
-Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 VR

Lens the S5 Pro doesn't like much for some unaccountable reason:

-Sigma 150mm
-Nikkor 18-200 VR
-Sigma 10-20

If I was buying 4 lens for the S5 Pro it would be: Tokina 12-24 f/4, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Di, Nikkor 35/2 AF-D, Nikkor 70-200 VR.
Click to expand...

Andy, I have acquired the Tamron and the 35mm, is there a cheaper option than the Nikon 70-200 VR?
 
nikon 80-200 af-d, one in the classifieds....sharp lens chunkier than say sigma 50-150 but full frame compatible and only a bit slower than the 70-200 (im told)

well done on 35 f2, love mine on s5 :D
 
fontmoss said:
nikon 80-200 af-d, one in the classifieds....sharp lens chunkier than say sigma 50-150 but full frame compatible and only a bit slower than the 70-200 (im told)

well done on 35 f2, love mine on s5 :D
Click to expand...

That sounds like a good plan, I am keen to make as many of my lenses FF so that further down the line they will be a straight swap onto a D700.

Would I miss the VR? and how would this compare with a 70-300 VR?
 
puddleduck said:
For an S5 Pro these lenses are good enough for publishable and sell-able pictures, and will produce critical sharpness at 100% viewing:

-Tokina 12-24 f/4 DX
-Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Di
-Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 DX
-Sigma 30mm f/1.4
-Nikkor 35/2 AF-D
-Sigma 17-70 f/2.8 - f/4.5
-Nikkor 18-70 DX
-Nikkor 70-200 VR
-Nikkor 300mm f/4 AF-S
-Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 VR

Lens the S5 Pro doesn't like much for some unaccountable reason:

-Sigma 150mm
-Nikkor 18-200 VR
-Sigma 10-20

If I was buying 4 lens for the S5 Pro it would be: Tokina 12-24 f/4, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 Di, Nikkor 35/2 AF-D, Nikkor 70-200 VR.
Click to expand...

Have you tried the Sigma 50-150?
 
is this an esxclusive issue to the s5? if so it doesnt make sense. A lens just produces an image on the sensor. Assuming similar sensor sizes, and distance between lens and sensor, there is no reason to presume why any said lens would optically perform better on one back or another

If the optics are great, they are great,m if they are poor they are poor, regardless of the back
 
Richard King said:
is this an esxclusive issue to the s5? if so it doesnt make sense. A lens just produces an image on the sensor. Assuming similar sensor sizes, and distance between lens and sensor, there is no reason to presume why any said lens would optically perform better on one back or another

If the optics are great, they are great,m if they are poor they are poor, regardless of the back
Click to expand...

The anti-ailiasing filter on the S5 is rather strong compared to other DSLRs, so what may be seen as sharp on say a D80 would be less so on the S5.
 
how does that compare with a typical Canon camera? - where the filter used seems to make all things seem soft
 
I dont think there is much difference between the Nikon 16-85 vR lens and the Sigma 17-70mm lens. I've got one on an S5 Pro and the other on a D200 but have just got myself another S5 Pro so will transfer it to that and post my verdict on the two lenses soon after I have made a comparison. The Sigma is a sharp lens and is also handy for close up photography as the min focus distance is amazing. The Nikon is slower but has the VR capability. I've produced some amazing portraits with the Sigma on my D200. I'll let you know how it performs on the S5 Pro.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
The 18-200 was seriously over-hyped by the likes of Ken Rockwell, the range is handy, but optically it's nothing special.
Click to expand...

I have the 18-200VR - yes it's fantastic as a walkabout / holiday lens but don't buy one if your work is critical. Get the 70-200VR as this is Pro quality. Or if you're on a budget an older 80-200 f2.8 ED is the way to go.
http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f206/laser_jock99/Fuji S5 Pro/?action=view&current=Dscf1179_21.jpg

The Sigma 10-20mm works well on the S5 Pro too.
http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f206/laser_jock99/EQUIPMENT/SIGMA 10-20mm ZOOM/
 
I have just finished changing my lenses and now have

Tamron 17-50
Nikon 35mm F2
Nikon 60mm
Nikon 28-105mm Macro

I am really pleased with the 28-105, Puddleduck said it was a good lens and I reckon I am going to use this as my walkabout, it does everything from landscape to detailed macro at 105mm.

The 60mm macro is interesting, seems fine upto 12ft but after that goes a bit soft.

I think I just need a 80-200 now but have run out of cash!
 
Richie15 said:
I have just finished changing my lenses and now have

Tamron 17-50
Nikon 35mm F2
Nikon 60mm
Nikon 28-105mm Macro

I am really pleased with the 28-105, Puddleduck said it was a good lens and I reckon I am going to use this as my walkabout, it does everything from landscape to detailed macro at 105mm.

The 60mm macro is interesting, seems fine upto 12ft but after that goes a bit soft.

I think I just need a 80-200 now but have run out of cash!
Click to expand...

How do you find the Tamron 17-50? That would cover a 'gap' in my range.
 
laser_jock99 said:
How do you find the Tamron 17-50? That would cover a 'gap' in my range.
Click to expand...

Before this I had the Sigma 17-70, the Tamron in my opinion is far superior, what else have you got wide angle? Good buy 2nd hand as well at £270.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top