Jump to content

Fuji prods Sony


Golem
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just saw the specs ... and reasonable price ... for

the Fuji X-Pro MkII. Sony needs some stimulus,

and the new Fuji looks to be just the thing. Even if

it results in no competitive innovations by Sony, the

new Fuji offers so much value for price that it may

prod Sony to price their stuff more realistically !

 

BTW, it has dual card slots. That might result in

further long delays in the introduction of premium

Sony camera bodies still under development ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw the specs ... and reasonable price ... for

the Fuji X-Pro MkII. Sony needs some stimulus,

and the new Fuji looks to be just the thing. Even if

it results in no competitive innovations by Sony, the

new Fuji offers so much value for price that it may

prod Sony to price their stuff more realistically !

 

BTW, it has dual card slots. That might result in

further long delays in the introduction of premium

Sony camera bodies still under development ;-)

 

 

Does it even come close to the already existing for a long time A99? Other than being a can of beer lighter    :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

how are their cameras not priced realistically? an a6000

with lens is $700 but it offers so much more than canon

or nikon at this price point in my opinion

The A6000 compares to the 24mp Fuji XE MkII, which will,

upon arrival, be the lesser cousin to the X-Pro MkII. You'd

need to extrapolate the price gap between the X-Pro 1 and

the XE 1 to approximate the price of the XE MkII, the latter

existing only as an obvious future model not yet announced,

nor even rumored.

 

Sony seems to have no intention of offering anything similar

to the X-Pro series. Perficklee reasonable as the X-Pro are

an odd genre of camera, and odd genres are, historically, a

Fuji specialty ! Note that the Fuji X series, for all the variety

within it, is based upon an odd genre of sensor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw the specs ... and reasonable price ... for

the Fuji X-Pro MkII. Sony needs some stimulus,

and the new Fuji looks to be just the thing. Even if

it results in no competitive innovations by Sony, the

new Fuji offers so much value for price that it may

prod Sony to price their stuff more realistically !

 

BTW, it has dual card slots. That might result in

further long delays in the introduction of premium

Sony camera bodies still under development ;-)

 

This is probably going to sound like trolling, but I mean it honestly. What do you like about the X-Pro2? I've read a few articles about it but didn't see anything that interested me. A Sony a7II is the same price and offers a full frame, stabilized image with better video features.

 

I use a number of different camera brands, so I'm happy to use the best tool for the job. If the X-Pro2 offers something really great, I'd be very interested in knowing about it. But other than dual SD card slots and a hybrid viewfinder, I'm not aware of anything significant. I'm happy to be proven wrong on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw the specs ... and reasonable price ... for

the Fuji X-Pro MkII. Sony needs some stimulus,

and the new Fuji looks to be just the thing. Even if

it results in no competitive innovations by Sony, the

new Fuji offers so much value for price that it may

prod Sony to price their stuff more realistically !

 

BTW, it has dual card slots. That might result in

further long delays in the introduction of premium

Sony camera bodies still under development ;-)

Sony's answer is the a6100. and will be cheaper.  Im sure your not trying to compare the x-pro to sony a7rii,  if you are, your on the wrong planet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is probably going to sound like trolling, but I

mean it honestly. What do you like about the X-Pro2?

I've read a few articles about it but didn't see

anything that interested me. .......

"Lemme be perficklee clear .... " that I did NOT say I

wanted one. Since all my lenses are pre-AF Nikkors,

the zooming optical finder prolly won't communicate

with them anyway.

 

The point I wanted make, and I re-read my OP and

found no need to reword it, was that Fuji is pushing

the envelope, without a premium price, and this is a

good thing for us Sonyphiles. Reason it's good for us

is that without Fuji, or with a Fuji that just becomes

stale, Sony would effectively be the monopoly in the

live-view systems game. Olympus etc may be quite

inneressing, but "serious" systems hafta be either FF

or APSC, so Olympus etc could hang by their heels

in Times Square and spit gold coins, but they'd still

be just a side show .... nothing that would prod Sony.

 

So most importantly, Fuji alone is the competitor that

can prod Sony to work harder to earn and maintain a

significant following. And I'm just saying it's good

to see the competition is hard at work.

 

 

----------------------------------------------------

 

 

If I were choosing a system on its own merits, without

regard to legacy gear already on hand, but with regard

for value-for-price, choosing Sony over Fuji is NOT, to

me, an obvious choice, not a "no brainer". I expect to

see replies pointing out that Fuji has no FF models. I

realize that. No big deal neither way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I preordered one the night they announced it. I don't think that most shooters who haven't shot Fuji will quite understand all of the allure as a lot of it is the intangibles. That is never an easy thing to put into words. All I can say is for me, I love the xpro form factor with hybrid viewfinder. I have a full bag of Fuji glass which I love. My beefs with the xt1 seem to be largely rectified with the xpro2. It will now be the most advanced mirrorless APSC AF system, arguably matches or exceeds sensor readout performance of the competitors currently, and continues to give you the Fuji shooting experience (which is what I love most about the whole system). If you have already bought into Fuji, the only thing this new body really lacks is the tilting LCD. Otherwise, it is the answer to all of our prayers for the last four years.\

 

My main issues previously were:

-ISO 6400 cap, now one stop better. Also, we are now able to record extended ISO in raw which will be very helpful when I shoot things like the 90/2 indoors

-High ISO detail loss (seemingly fixed now)

-AF in lower lighting and backlit scenarios

-Resolution (now significantly increased)

-Single card slot

-Viewfinder blackout

-Max mechanical shutter of 1/4000th

-Placement of battery door

 

Combine all those issues which have been addressed with some new features and you have a definite winner (especially for someone who is already deep into the system).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I preordered one the night they announced it. I don't think that most shooters who haven't shot Fuji will quite understand all of the allure as a lot of it is the intangibles. That is never an easy thing to put into words. All I can say is for me, I love the xpro form factor with hybrid viewfinder. I have a full bag of Fuji glass which I love. My beefs with the xt1 seem to be largely rectified with the xpro2. It will now be the most advanced mirrorless APSC AF system, arguably matches or exceeds sensor readout performance of the competitors currently, and continues to give you the Fuji shooting experience (which is what I love most about the whole system). If you have already bought into Fuji, the only thing this new body really lacks is the tilting LCD. Otherwise, it is the answer to all of our prayers for the last four years.\

 

My main issues previously were:

-ISO 6400 cap, now one stop better. Also, we are now able to record extended ISO in raw which will be very helpful when I shoot things like the 90/2 indoors

-High ISO detail loss (seemingly fixed now)

-AF in lower lighting and backlit scenarios

-Resolution (now significantly increased)

-Single card slot

-Viewfinder blackout

-Max mechanical shutter of 1/4000th

-Placement of battery door

 

Combine all those issues which have been addressed with some new features and you have a definite winner (especially for someone who is already deep into the system).

 

 

By any chance, do you happen to have the 10-24 and / or the 14mm? I'm thinking to buy into Fuji, for now to replace my Olympus travel setup but in the end who knows maybe even my Sony gear, and my lens selection is pretty much already done (18-55, 55-200, 35/1.4, 60 macro and an X200 when it will come out). But I don't seem to be able to decide, being actually unable to handle them in person, between the apparently beefy 10-24 (that has OIS though) and the 14. Some reviewer says the 10-24 is sharper, some other one swears for the 14, so it would be nice to hear for a "not-payed-by-Fuji" third party. That said, feel free to comment on the other lenses in my selection if you feel so ;)

 

The lack of the tilt screen and the finder smaller than the one in the X-T1 are the only two things that are giving me pause wth regard to the X-Pro2, but in the end I think I can learn live without (I did it for years, after all...). At this point the only thing I want to see is a proper test in a landscape setup (i.e. lots of fine detail) against an A7r to see if it's true that the sensor delivers the equivalent of 36Mp.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the a7RII system along with long Canon glass for birding. It's great because if I need to crop the shot, I can still get a sharp photo. When using the Sony, it's like photographing birds with a medium format camera. ........... I also use the Fuji XT1 system for Travel and Street. Anyone that doesn't think Fuji knows what their are doing, especially with their lenses, isn't paying attention. I've been pushing a shutter since 1964 and I have to laugh at people when they start bad mouthing someone else's camera system. Newbies to photography need to learn that a camera is only a tool. Concentrate on getting a good photograph, and not what kind of camera you're using.

What would be nice, would be for Sony coming out with some long lenses that would lock on and track fast for sports and wildlife. The Canon lenses work surprising good on the a7RII (with the Metabones adapter), but not quiet as fast as using them on a Canon body.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the a7RII system along with long Canon glass for birding. It's great because if I need to crop the shot, I can still get a sharp photo. When using the Sony, it's like photographing birds with a medium format camera. ........... I also use the Fuji XT1 system for Travel and Street. Anyone that doesn't think Fuji knows what their are doing, especially with their lenses, isn't paying attention. I've been pushing a shutter since 1964 and I have to laugh at people when they start bad mouthing someone else's camera system. Newbies to photography need to learn that a camera is only a tool. Concentrate on getting a good photograph, and not what kind of camera you're using.

What would be nice, would be for Sony coming out with some long lenses that would lock on and track fast for sports and wildlife. The Canon lenses work surprising good on the a7RII (with the Metabones adapter), but not quiet as fast as using them on a Canon body.

Not about the tool. Shooting over 50yrs, but, using Canon glass (because better than Sony long zoom), with the best adapter to date, with the best FF mirrorless camera to date,.... Not about the tool.

 

Thanks for the lesson.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By any chance, do you happen to have the 10-24 and / or the 14mm? I'm thinking to buy into Fuji, for now to replace my Olympus travel setup but in the end who knows maybe even my Sony gear, and my lens selection is pretty much already done (18-55, 55-200, 35/1.4, 60 macro and an X200 when it will come out). But I don't seem to be able to decide, being actually unable to handle them in person, between the apparently beefy 10-24 (that has OIS though) and the 14. Some reviewer says the 10-24 is sharper, some other one swears for the 14, so it would be nice to hear for a "not-payed-by-Fuji" third party. That said, feel free to comment on the other lenses in my selection if you feel so ;)

 

The lack of the tilt screen and the finder smaller than the one in the X-T1 are the only two things that are giving me pause wth regard to the X-Pro2, but in the end I think I can learn live without (I did it for years, after all...). At this point the only thing I want to see is a proper test in a landscape setup (i.e. lots of fine detail) against an A7r to see if it's true that the sensor delivers the equivalent of 36Mp.

 

 

Can't tell you anything about the 10-24, but I like my XF 14mm very much! It is very small compared to the zoom and fits well to the XE-2 or X-Pro1, which I have.

Imaging quality is fine (as all tests report say), and although not relevant for this focal length it has even a nice bokeh (to my taste, if you shoot close distance with this lens). It even works with polarization filter. I shortly tried the f10-24 and found it large...and I was concerned by the not so good image quality at the long end (as some reports say).

 

I also think the XF 18-55 is a good lens (much better than the Sony 28-70). I highly recommend the xf50-140, which is - I think - really outstanding. Try this lens, the speed, sharpness and bokeh is really great. The best image stabilization of this lens is combined to autofocus, making it really fast fast fast, and helps to shot in almost complete darkness out of the hand.

 

The good thing about the X200 (I guess it will be similar to X100) is: it is complete silent. The Alpha 7 shutters yours bones, the X-shutters little less noisy, but the central stop of the X100 ist really just lick a * click * - thats it. Makes a lot of fun.

 

and - last but not least - the x35/1.4 is excellent, but the XF60 macro, well, if you can live with all day long waiting until this lens finds its focus by itself,...

it has good imaging quality (little to much longitudinal color in macro mode), but focussing experience does not really make me happy... try before buy...  to my experience the autofocus does not work in macro mode, and manual focussing has such a big delay that I frequently loose patience when using it - I would not buy it again, the 50-140 is so much better...

 

 

(PS: I went to Sony Alpha 7R only for my vintage FF lenses ... I find now that ease of use of the A7R is even better than Fujis, although I do still not understand the PASM-blabla and some limitations (you may not select this and that feature when shooting in raw...)...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't tell you anything about the 10-24, but I like my XF 14mm very much! It is very small compared to the zoom and fits well to the XE-2 or X-Pro1, which I have.

Imaging quality is fine (as all tests report say), and although not relevant for this focal length it has even a nice bokeh (to my taste, if you shoot close distance with this lens). It even works with polarization filter. I shortly tried the f10-24 and found it large...and I was concerned by the not so good image quality at the long end (as some reports say).

 

I also think the XF 18-55 is a good lens (much better than the Sony 28-70). I highly recommend the xf50-140, which is - I think - really outstanding. Try this lens, the speed, sharpness and bokeh is really great. The best image stabilization of this lens is combined to autofocus, making it really fast fast fast, and helps to shot in almost complete darkness out of the hand.

 

The good thing about the X200 (I guess it will be similar to X100) is: it is complete silent. The Alpha 7 shutters yours bones, the X-shutters little less noisy, but the central stop of the X100 ist really just lick a * click * - thats it. Makes a lot of fun.

 

and - last but not least - the x35/1.4 is excellent, but the XF60 macro, well, if you can live with all day long waiting until this lens finds its focus by itself,...

it has good imaging quality (little to much longitudinal color in macro mode), but focussing experience does not really make me happy... try before buy...  to my experience the autofocus does not work in macro mode, and manual focussing has such a big delay that I frequently loose patience when using it - I would not buy it again, the 50-140 is so much better...

 

 

Thanks a lot for the info! I agree with the joy of using the X100 shutter. I bought one as soon as it hit the shelves, even if in the end that first model was maddening limited and I ended up selling it (this was with the first firmwares, mind you).

 

After your comment on the size of the 10-24 I'm even more skewed in favor of the 14. The abysmal af of the 60 in macro doesn't worries me, though, given I'd buy it only as a "normal" 85-ish equivalent (possibly my most used lens, regardless the format I shoot with). The 18-55 would be just for casual travel use and for those situations where is better avoid changing lenses (seaside, heavy snow or rain).

 

But the 50-140, unless should it work really well with the converter, it is a bit short for my taste. Basically I use either an 85mm eq. or a 300 and more, while I rarely use anything in between. Luckily, I just got an invite to another Fuji event in my area, so I should be able to try them all in person (but not the xpro2, sadly...).

 

My only gripe, so far, is that judging from the few raw landscape images I've seen so far from the non-preproducion xpro2 it looks it might still not be up to snuff in comparison with a 36mp sensor, despite Fuji's claims. That said, I don't know if the reviewers shot these images one-handed instead of using a tripod ;) , so for now I'm reserving my judgment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot for the info! ..........

 

My only gripe, so far, is that judging from the few raw

landscape images I've seen so far from the non-preproducion

xpro2 it looks it might still not be up to snuff in comparison

with a 36mp sensor, despite Fuji's claims. That said, I don't

know if the reviewers shot these images one-handed instead of

using a tripod ;) , so for now I'm reserving my judgment.

Not that I'm fond of "Laboratory test" type of review, but with

the more realistic "in practice" type of reviews we are then

unfortunately at the mercy of sloppy thinking and uselessly

vague language. It's quite likely that the Fuji sensor is not

the equivalent of a 36mp bayer array sensor in terms of detail

resolution, but may very well match the 36mp bayer in terms

of smoothness, and maybe fall somewhere in-between as to

"edge contrast" which used to be called acutance but now

seems to be something nobody discusses. Then we also have

the Bokeh Cult, who would obviously greatly value any gain

in image smoothness even if not accompanied by a significant

improvement in detail resolution.

 

Just gotta buy stuff, test for yourself, and expect to return

more of it than you expect to keep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I'm fond of "Laboratory test" type of review, but with

the more realistic "in practice" type of reviews we are then

unfortunately at the mercy of sloppy thinking and uselessly

vague language. It's quite likely that the Fuji sensor is not

the equivalent of a 36mp bayer array sensor in terms of detail

resolution, but may very well match the 36mp bayer in terms

of smoothness, and maybe fall somewhere in-between as to

"edge contrast" which used to be called acutance but now

seems to be something nobody discusses. Then we also have

the Bokeh Cult, who would obviously greatly value any gain

in image smoothness even if not accompanied by a significant

improvement in detail resolution.

 

Just gotta buy stuff, test for yourself, and expect to return

more of it than you expect to keep.

 

 

Agree 100%! And even if myself I am an honorary member of the bokeh cult (I use almost only Sonnars or Sonnar-based lenses), at the same time I value even greatly sharpness. A nice bokeh without sharpness is fine until you start printing your images larger than Facebook size; then what looked like a nice smooth image starts to resemble a jam-coveder piece of paper. Not a nice view at 30x40" ;)

 

Btw, should anyone else be interested I found 1 Fuji X-pro 2 raw sample properly shot (tripod etc.) here:

 

http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2016/02/x-pro2-render-my-raw/

 

The light mist might have been obscuring a bit of detail, but if I were to judge from the images I've seen so far my guess is that even the "normal" (i.e. non x-trans) 24Mp sensors of the A7 and A7 II hold more detail at least at base Iso, not to mention the A7r. And that even the much highly praised Fuji 10-24 it is not that sharp, possibly even much worse than the 18 Contax I've just started to use these days.

 

Again, I will have to see more images properly shot or try the camera myself for a definitive judgment. But if I'm right: dear Fuji almost there, but no cigar...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the opportunity to play with the X-PRO-2 today at my local dealer as the Fuji rep was there. I tested various combinations of lenses, 14, 16, 35, 56, 50/140 etc

 

I gotta say I was seriously impressed, I shoot weddings with A7R2's,  and this was easily a match if not better handling for me, the X-PRO-2 focussed very, very quickly and the focus adjust with the joystick is fantastic. The speed of use defies it's looks it was lightening fast with the exception of the 56/1.2 which I found a little sluggish.

 

Fantastic build quality great EVF, I didn't like the optical VF that is something I wouldn't use. Brilliant selection of lenses to boot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

X-Pro-2 image.

Just looked at the image. Must say I'm impressed. 

Just to look gave it a quick proces with my Iridient software.

Look pretty good.

Must say I'm an original Canon shooter which I continue to use for animal shooting (Some very long lenses in my possession )

But moved to Sony via Fuji

Use meanly sony for landscape shooting (A7R, A7r2 and A7s), Must say I'm in a landscape fase for the moment  B)

Use Fuji when I wan't to be compact and not to have any loss in quality: XT1, XE-1&2 and XM1 and a buch of lenses (IR, family, portrait, short travel with friends). 

Will not go to the pro but considering to wait for the XT2. 

 

But would like to see the quality of the 6300 versus the Pro ( same conditions).

Would be easier for me to go for one system.

To stay compact I could use my Contax G lenses witch are very good on my A7r2 

Quality of the 90mmf2,8 is amazing, even wide open it performs with corner tot corner sharpness, but like the size and quality at f5,6 (or more )of the 35mm & 45mm as well.

Just bought an adapter for the Fuji as well but not jet tested

 

Image joined is a crop of the original image, jpeg9 quality because jpeg12 was to big

 

So yes seems nice

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

X-Pro-2 image.

Just looked at the image. Must say I'm impressed. 

Just to look gave it a quick proces with my Iridient software.

Look pretty good.

 

 

I've been playing with DPreview samples (local stores are still waiting for the Xpro2, so no opportunities to try it out for myself).

 

Using Irident and the R-L Deconvolution sharpening at a 55 radius and 30 or 50 passages the Xpro2 files are downright impressive, even without disabling noise reduction! I may see myself simplifying my setup going all Fuji, instead of relying on Sony for landscapes and Fuji / Olympus for handheld "AF" stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So addicted2light

 

Iridient settings was R-L deconvolution

Radius 0,74 iterations 30 and clarity 30 and no masking and no noise reduction indeed

 

Can you find any of these processing info in the crop-image I posted ?   ...didn't know how.

 

so I'm also looking out to try one but would like it to try next to the 6300

But Fuji lenses are nice, good and very compact. 

 

BTW visited your website and see you've a 100-300 Contax, is it a C/Y lens and is the performance really like mentioned all over the net (with A7r)

Bought just one for 250 euro on Ebay but didn't see it was for spare parts :-(

Didn't read the whole post, was on the move, turns out and the back lens seems like a little misty...

Link to post
Share on other sites

So addicted2light

 

Iridient settings was R-L deconvolution

Radius 0,74 iterations 30 and clarity 30 and no masking and no noise reduction indeed

 

Can you find any of these processing info in the crop-image I posted ?   ...didn't know how.

 

 

At least in my browser, the image you posted shows no EXIF data. Sure it looks sharp though :)

 

 

BTW visited your website and see you've a 100-300 Contax, is it a C/Y lens and is the performance really like mentioned all over the net (with A7r)

Bought just one for 250 euro on Ebay but didn't see it was for spare parts :-(

Didn't read the whole post, was on the move, turns out and the back lens seems like a little misty...

 

 

Yes, it is the Contax Yashica Vario-Sonnar 100-300/4-5.6. The performance is impressive, even on the A7r. It is probably the sharpest lens I own, period (I've got mostly Contax Zeiss and Minolta M Leica glass, so that's something). And the colors are wonderful, typically Zeiss.

 

The (big) problem is due the earth shuttering shutter shock of the original A7r.

 

If the lens is attached directly on a tripod with an optional tripod collar the combo is unusable from 200mm and over at most shutter speeds.*

 

If you attach the camera to the tripod instead the results are much more consistent, but you will still have to watch your shutter speeds (and, supposedly, the mount of the A7r is not made for such an heavy lens; that said, I've never had any problem or wobble of sort).

 

The only two minor faults of the lens are (just) a tad of softening at the borders and a bit of vignetting, both mostly/only fully open. If you plan to use it handheld be advised that without IBIS, like any other manual focus long lens, it is difficult even to focus properly because the magnified image will jump everywhere.

 

 

*Please keep in mind I use an extra heavy duty Arca Swiss B1 ball head, that I bought when I used to shot with a 5x7" Linhof Technica large format camera, so it's definitely not a matter of an under-sized support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A2light

 

Yes seems sharp to me if I view it at 100%. But on the net it looks softer....

 

Thanks for the reply of the 100-300, the info is great

 

Any experience with thin filter conversion of A7 series, seems that the filters in front of the sensor are quite thick and can be the be the origin of smearing with some lenses. 

Have the A7R and A7R2

Would like to do this in Europe (from belgium)

Think I will make a new posting about this 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Posts

    • Have you used and compared the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS with the 2X teleconverter to the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS for birds and other wildlife?  I'm considering the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS (I already have the 2x teleconverter) to replace the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS. I've scoured the web but can't find many helpful direct comparisons.  Application, Environment and Background Info I walk 10-20 kilometres every morning on the southwest coast of British Columbia. It's winter, and in my area that means it's dark and dreary with lots or rain. There are all kinds of birds, from Bald Eagles to Swallows, Hummingbirds and plenty of shorebirds, with many passing through on their migratory paths.  I carry an A1 and FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS and an A7 IV with a FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS or FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II for closer opportunities and landscapes.  I'm happy with the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS when the light is good, but I'm in the middle of six months of this rainy season, so I'm usually shooting at 600 mm, f/6.3, 1/500 sec for stationary subjects, and 1/2000-1/4000 for things on the move. My ISO is often above 6400.  I don't use a tripod or monopod. I'm always on the move. I frequently crop to 200%.  I rarely do videos. I don't shoot sports. The FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS serves me well for large birds like Bald Eagles when the light is good.  Although I'm almost always at the long end (600 mm) of the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS, I use the zoom when a large bird approaches or for distant landscapes. I don't mind the weight of carrying two cameras with these lenses. Things I hope to change or improve Greater agility with a lighter, shorter lens I struggle to move the lens fast enough to catch swallows and other small birds in flight. I do much better with the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II, but I can't fill the frame with that lens.  I can sometimes keep up with those smaller, faster birds, even with the 2x teleconverter, but I still want more reach. Exploring with the 300 mm, fast prime lens I like the idea of expanding my photography as I look for subjects I can capture at 300mm at f/2.8 (people and pet portraits outside, musical acts on stage). Although I have tended to use zoom lenses (FE PZ 16-35 MM F4 G, FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS, FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II), I got the FE 50mm F1.2 GM and have enjoyed having to work with the fixed focal length and how that leads me in different directions. I wonder if I would find the same thing with the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS. Depth of Field and Bokeh I'm unsure if the shallow depth of field and bokeh will make a big difference for me. But I may find that these attributes present new opportunities like the FE 50mm F1.2 GM. Here's what I think will happen. I'll use the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS without the teleconverter on dreary days. I have used the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II (sometimes with the 2X teleconverter) for those days. I'll use the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS with the 2X teleconverter when there's better light.  Expectations of the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS with 2X teleconverter  The focus accuracy and speed with the 2X teleconverter will match or better the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS  The image quality will be at least as good as the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS  I'm happy with the image quality using the FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II and 2X teleconverter and can tolerate the slightly slower focus speed. I imagine the results will be similar with the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS but at least as good or better than the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS  It will be easier to track small birds in flight with the FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS with 2X teleconverter (1675 grams) vs FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (2115 grams). The difference is 340 grams (12 oz) and 5.1 cm in length. That should make a difference, right?  Questions Have you tried both? What are your experiences? Will you keep the FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS? Are my expectations realistic? Thanks for reading and thinking about this with me.
    • One post hit and run.  They must have figured it out. 
    • Other than your disapproval of the stripes.... they're kinda cool. 🫣
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...