Wide-open and even stopped down a little, the Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 achieves great subject separation with creamy out of focus areas and crisp subjects. At the very least, it seems a lot less unwieldy, but again, that's my own opinion and I haven't run tests specifically to compare the processing times required. I should also mention that I don't usually end up having to process large numbers of images in that manner. I only really use ED when some aspect of the image can benefit from the improved details processing (lots of foliage would be a great example of that). ED just seems easier and more straightforward. But that said, they're both good options and whichever one best suits your workflow would be a logical choice.

The overall build quality is excellent, in keeping with an X-series body like the X-T1, although we were a little disappointed to see that the lens barrel is mainly made of high-grade plastics, rather than being metal - still, it does at least help to keep the weight down. The Fujifilm XF 50-140mm F2.8 R LM OIS WR lens does boast a brass mount, focus/zoom rings and lens exterior, and a non-rotating 72mm filter thread. This is a meaty lens - but unlike popular full-frame f/2.8 telezooms, manages to sneak in at under 1kg on the scales (if you take off the tripod collar). Image quality of both is pure Fuji - beyond reproach. It's pretty clear by now why Hasselblad switched from Zeiss to Fuji for their H-series lenses. In the XF line-up the 14/2.8, 56/1.2 and now these two lenses underline that. I’m first and foremost a street photographer. I use primes. I use wide’ish to standard’ish primes. Not long telezooms. I appreciate a small kit, not a big one. But with that being said, I know there are MANY photographic disciplins that simply require a lens such as the 50-140mm.I hardly need to mention this in a Fujifilm lens review, much less for a red badge zoom, but yes — this lens is an absolute tank. While the hood is made of plastic, the lens itself is full metal.

On an older sensor like the X-Trans II, it is a slightly different story. The focus is nowhere near as snappy. Although still perfectly usable, it's not in the same league as when using it on an X-Trans III body. Inside the micro-corrugated cardboard box are pulp-formed cardboard holders for the plastic-wrapped lens and hood. A small folded tray of microcorrugated cardboard lies on top to hold the manual and lens wrapping cloth. Thanks for your suggestion. I love to have a lighter lens on my camera and I love shooting primes. I move more and my composition improves as a result. I’ve spent many years shooting f/2.8 zooms on Canon and Nikon and primes on Hasselblad/ Phase One and now Fuji. The 16mm f/1.4 is amazing and my go to w/a. I’d be happy to use this at f/1.4 (that’s my default setting) and at 2 stops faster it is perfect for dark churches, interior receptions and evening parties etc. I’d have that over an f/2.8 zoom any day. I’ll be taking the f/2.8 16-55 to America on my road trip for two weeks where in the deserts and canyons it will be far better suited than my non weather sealed primes. It will be bright in the deserts too so no problems there. The great news is we have a choice and what suits me might not suit someone else. Maybe we have too much choice. Kit should not be the topic of conversation, photographs are what counts. What kit was used to take them is immaterial most of the time. Football on Roof, 15 January 2015. Fuji X-E2, Fuji 50-140mm at 140mm, wide-open at f/2.8 at 1/3,000 at Auto ISO 200. Camera-original file.

This photo was taken with the 50-140 + 2x teleconverter, but heavily cropped. Fujifilm 50-140 vs 55-200

Light falloff is completely invisible even wide open, as shot on the X-E2 which is probably correcting it automatically.

For manual-focus override you have to update your camera firmware and turn AF+MF ON in a menu, and even then it only works while the shutter is half-pressed. It's too slow to be useful. I'd be careful about making that assumption, particularly with respect to the newer versions of LR. The fairly new Enhance Details function is capable of rendering details every bit as accurately as C1 or other alternatives can.