solamnus

Its a tough choice , but at the same time like someone else said here its a big difference when it comes to the final performance of the cameras. So it really depends on what you are after. I own them both, just got the X100F like 2 weeks ago. Im deeply invested in Fuji from before and started with a few compacts to the X-T1 and now the X-T2. I shoot with Nikon as well and the Fuji system was going to be my travel cameras. Now i use them more than my Nikon cameras for a lot of things. The X-T2 i would consider taking job assignments with because it has come that far. Its a beast of a little camera.

Now the X100F tugged at my heartstring in another way, and before i was getting it i was redaing up on that and a few different Leicas, primarily the Leica Q. The cost there was such a deal breaker as well as the size so in the end i got the x100f. Its a FUN camera, and like you i like street a lot so that was my main focus for that.

Before that i took my X-T2 though and used my 90 lens to take great street shots. Only problem was it was not as portable as it was with my smaller lenses any longer. Hence the X100F. I would not be lost "just" using the X-T2 for street though because as you said with something like the 23 or 35 etc its not a big camera but perfect for street as well.

Whatever u choose though you will get a great camera for sure, its just that i would really sit down and think it through to figure out what the end needs are :)

Good luck!

/Martin.

And yet another one from this weekend in Stockholm.

 

And another one...

 

<p>Have shot a few weeks now with this lens, and although it is indeed heavy, i love the feeling of it. Such a versatile lens. Thanks again for your suggestions!<br>

/Martin.</p>

<p>Ok, so some feedback on my choice now. First of all thank you for all your advice and patience with me ;)<br>

I went in to town today and straight for the store. i tried the F4 and the VR2 there. i was not able to try the VR1 version out today unfortunately. But after testing the other two and felt both were great lenses in their own way, i took a coffee break and mulled it over a few hours, came back and knew i wanted the VR2, mostly because of the faster AF and the quality feel of the lens. it just felt better though heavier all around. Even so the F4 was great.<br>

Im already crying mentally because of all the money, but hopefully i will feel better after shooting a few frames hehe;)<br>

Cheers guys, Martin.</p>

<p>Thank you Shun and Kent again. Yes i know i am overthinking, i always do this before ending up with a lens. Still, most of the time i am very satisfied with the lens i get because i read so much and weight the pros and cons alot before getting it. In this case im sure all of these lenses are great lenses in their way, and especially the VR2 is the better choice even if the cost is high.<br>

But i know i would be happy with all of them, the VR1 would be fine im almost sure of, since i do not care that much about the soft corners. My problem lies in that i have to consider the price a bit at this moment, or i would already have got the VR2.<br>

So im trying to figure out if i can live with the "shortcomings" of those other two, which the more i read the more i believe i could. The F4 im trying to figure out if i can compensate with one of the great primes i have.<br>

So now im mulling my options over to decide. Im actually going into town today to test the F4 and the VR2 just to see...i will let you guys know if i decided on one.<br>

Thanks! /Martin.</p>

<p>And have you any experience with the VR1 version on a FF body in those situations?:)</p>

<p>yeh i do not know:) Well i do know i need something down the line since when i have shot stuff lately indoors the 180 has not been sufficient and not as versatile for my needs there. Hence i started looking around.<br>

Still you are right in that im still a bit unsure of what i exactly want from the lens. So i will think it through again. I actually got another offer for a tropical grey 70-200 VR1 version close to me for around 900 EU. But i will sleep over this and might test it out this weekend and see how i feel after.<br>

Thank you so much for the input, its been great:)</p>

 

<p>Great review cheers:) I think i will have to really decide what would be my best use for the lens i buy. I think that is where im stuck currently. I think id be most happy with the VR2 lens, but that will be at that huge cost. If i know any of the other lenses would do what i wanted( a little bit of everything, from events indoors/outdoors maybe portraits and landscapes) then id rather get that...so if i get a cheaper lens i just have to realize it might just do parts of what i would like it to do.</p>

<p>Shun, and others that used the F4 lens. How good is it?? is it a great lens? i mean close or as good a quality when it comes to bokeh and character as the other lenses? Or do you "feel" that its a lesser lens when you use it? I think that is almost more important for me...then only get sharp pictures tbh. I do not want a lens that "feels" cheap if you know what i mean. I know its a cheaper lens...still what is your opinions?<br>

Also, a great plus seems to be the weight there...the other pro lenses seems very big...i tend to leave even the 24-70 home at times and rather get a prime. So that IS something im considering as well. But if the quality character is so much compromised i would not want the F4 even if its cheaper/less weight...</p>

<p>I actually found a used 8-200 AF-D in great condition now near where i live for 500 EU. Tempting...<br>

Not sure if i should go with that or the 70-200 VR1...thats a little more expensive of course.</p>

<p>Thanks Shun, got it :)</p>

<p>Thank you everyone, want to give an answers to all of you since you have been so kind to take the time and give me some good suggestions.<br>

So, what i have so far is a lot of good suggestions, but a lot of input both from this thread and forum but also from DPreview that has been quite contradictory hehe. What i mean buy that is for example that a lot of photographers has said for weddings and indoors only the VR2 version will suffice( more or less) while some have suggested it is a great lens for those occasions as well, since the softness in the corners on the VR! version wont effect you unless you shoot landscapes or such where you need the whole image sharp.<br>

What i have learned about the F4 listening to experiences from many different photographers , is that it is a great lens( no one has actually said that its not good), BUT it doesnt have that pro feel and it might let me down indoors( some thought) and maybe at weddings( while some has said its fine there as well due to the great VR.<br>

The older 80-200 lenses are great from what i have heard and great build quality etc, but the newer lenses would be better choices for my D810 when it comes to faster AF etc. Also i havent found any of those used thus far except one that was the non Af-s version so not as good.<br>

I had one offer of a 70-200 VR1 for around 850 EU and that guy is giving me answer ina few days since another guy was interested there as well.<br>

Also had some offers about the VR2 for 1300 EU.<br>

To be honest im leaning towards the 2,8 VR1 as of now. And that is cause im afraid i will think the F4 one is going to let me down with its "feeling" ( build quality, character etc). i remember buying and looking for wideangles in past and was let down buy most of the consumer lenses until i found the 24 G 1,4 and the Zeiss 21 distagon. But i have not tried it so it is only speculation from me. The VR2 would be the best of course, but i bought tons of expensive stuff for my hobby/business this year and if i CAN save a little cash but still get something i will be satisfied with, that is what im going for. But not 100% sure yet what will satisfy me in the end hehe.</p>

<p>Ow yes, then i understand why you would want the F4 a lot. Also i think just being lower weight in general for a lens is a good thing if its still a good quality lens. That means you will get it out more often than not, and that is a major thing to be honest. Have several great lenses that more often gets left at home cause of the added weight.</p>

<p>ok, hmm...im on the fence then still. The reason i started looking for one is it would be quite nice to get something as versatile as possible, i will probably shoot at least a few weddings but also a lot of stuff outside like football but also some karate tournaments inside gyms etc. S i will need to try and decide on the most needed of those lenses but at same time considering price and weight which is also pretty important.<br>

Hard! ;)</p>

<p>Thank you for the responses guys, good suggestions and input.<br>

@Andreas. Yes you are right:) that is actually what i ddi last time when i was looking for a wide angle.<br>

I think this time i am going to buy it second hand, but a very good idea to go there and try them out for sure.<br>

So far i had offers for all three lenses. The 80-200 they wanted around 600 EU for, the 70-200 Vr im not sure yet, and the 70-200 VR2 they wanted around 1300 EU for.<br>

@EJ, well...as i said to Shun im after a zoom rather then the prime in this case to get some more versatility. I love the 180 prime, it is just a bit too long sometimes and sometimes not in certain situations, also the AF is pretty slow etc on that lens, so hoping for some faster AF on one of the zooms.<br>

@Shun Great comparison an nice input about how you experience them. Actually the f4 lens seems very nice...just wish it was 2,8. then again maybe since it has VR it will do ok on events etc anyhow. What do you use it mostly for?<br>

Also nice with the smaller size too!<br>

Cheers guys, Martin.</p>

<p>So Shun would u still recommend the 70-200 VR1 version for a D810? Or is the corner softness bad enough for you to not recommend it an tell me to rather choose one of the others lenses?</p>

<p>Hey Mathew. Ok thanks for the respons. I kind of like being able to stop down if its needed on events and such. Would you consider the 70-200 a better choice than the older 80-200 though for the D810? Im not after anything super sharp , i would like a little better AF than the 180 primelens and the zoom, that is it. I also read about the softer corners on the FF bodies for the 70-200, still if its a better option than what i have and a better lens over all id consider it anyhow.</p>

<p>He Shun and thanks. Well actually i think 200 is enough, but it would rather be the versatility and the speed perhaps that would matter. i reckon the older 80-200 is probably no much faster then my prime, but at least i have the ability to zoom with it.<br>

/Martin.</p>

<p>So i have a Df and a D700 i gave my wife but also a D810 i shoot with. i rarely need a longer lens than my 180 prime. But sometimes lately when shooting events and things for my kids i feel i need a telezoom. I have been considering these 3 lenses. The 70-200 VR the 70-200 VR2 and the older 80-200. I realize the newest VR2 is onviously the best of the lot but its also pretty expensive. So i just want to hear your opinions about what the others would be in comparison on my D810, would it be a waste?<br>

Give me some advice:)<br>

/Martin.</p>

<p>Yes!:) Any idea of when it might be incoming? <br>

/Martin</p>

<p>I also bought that 27 inch( 5K) Imac with a 1 TB hard drive , 16 GB memory and a good AMD card installed. I was not blown away by the speed and performance of the image. It is fairly silent in my estimation and the screen is gorgeous to use. But the power of it when editing etc is not anything spectacular. Everything works fine most of the time but was also expecting it even more smooth of the whooping price i payed.<br>

Still, it was a lot for the screen that i bought it, and for editing and gaming its really nice in my opinion.<br>

/Martin.</p>

<p>Got an email a while ago with a link to the new beta site. It looked pretty nice and much more modern in my opinion. Is that going to be launched ? or is it still just a demo etc?<br>

Another thing that i really liked was, that a lot of my photos uploaded to this site have a strange color tone that does not show up on my other two photo sites I'm a member of. I had this brought up to someone on this site like a year ago or so, but i never got an answer more than that he thought it was odd and interesting .<br>

But on the new Beta, those colors looked fine again, so that was definitely a plus for me. Now i just renewed my sub here hoping that beta will go live som day:)<br>

/Martin.</p>

<p>Ok so i know PS "quite" well meaning i do most of my editing myself but and it is partly from school but also from a lot of short courses online and a lot of self learning. I still have tons to learn though and especially when it comes to more advanced editing and creative stuff in PS but also id like very much to get a better structure when im editing from scratch to advanced when it comes to creating multi layered editing using smart objects and groups etc. I do not use that much for the editing i do. I know most tools good enough as well as most filters etc and know my way around the software pretty good.<br>

So im after some good lengthy courses online that makes me practice a little of everything to get a good solid base for attacking most situations you end up in as a retoucher.<br>

Any good ones out there? ( cost doesnt really matter if it is a good course that give you a lot of education for that money).<br>

/Martin.</p>