I really like the handling of the X-T1\100-400 as a package, I much prefer it over the 1D4\7D\150-600. Hopefully the X-T2 will bring AF enhancements (better tracking and back button focusing) and I really hope they can do something with the EVF "blackout".
Don't take this wrong but the images posted in the 300pro forum seem to appear a lot more detailed (higher resolution). Is this because that lens is likely much higher resolving power or just due to difference in web processing (artificial sharpness) ?
you2 wrote:
Don't take this wrong but the images posted in the 300pro forum seem to appear a lot more detailed (higher resolution). Is this because that lens is likely much higher resolving power or just due to difference in web processing (artificial sharpness) ?
I see the same thing. Very little feather sharpness seen in the Fuji images, most likely due to the X Trans filter.
you2 wrote:
Don't take this wrong but the images posted in the 300pro forum seem to appear a lot more detailed (higher resolution). Is this because that lens is likely much higher resolving power or just due to difference in web processing (artificial sharpness) ?
What's the 300pro forum?
Edit: Ah, the Olympus? I've had a look at the thread, they are certainly shots in there with much more processing (sharpening\clarity) that I've applied that's for sure as I don't do much of that. It looks a stellar lens, you'd expect a prime to better a zoom though.
jj_glos wrote:
The Robin shot above is with the 1.4x TC wide open at 560mm, how much more detail do you want?
They all show the same lack of detail, at least compared to a Canon or Nikon Bayer sensor, which is what I'm used to back when I was into bird photography. This isn't the first time I've observed this so it's not your technique being critiqued here.
rattymouse wrote:
They all show the same lack of detail, at least compared to a Canon or Nikon Bayer sensor, which is what I'm used to back when I was into bird photography. This isn't the first time I've observed this so it's not your technique being critiqued here.
Well it's a better combo than my 1D4 and Tamron 150-600 that's for sure.
Edit: I'm not particularly into bird photography by the way, I've bought the lens for motorsports and airshows. So not being very good at it is a very likely scenario I know there's interest in the lens so posting stuff I wouldn't usually.
jj_glos wrote:
Well it's a better combo than my 1D4 and Tamron 150-600 that's for sure.
Edit: I'm not particularly into bird photography by the way, I've bought the lens for motorsports and airshows. So not being very good at it is a very likely scenario I know there's interest in the lens so posting stuff I wouldn't usually.
I dont know that Tamron lens but it must be pretty soft to bring a Canon 1D4 down to this level.
jj_glos wrote:
Well it's a better combo than my 1D4 and Tamron 150-600 that's for sure.
Edit: I'm not particularly into bird photography by the way, I've bought the lens for motorsports and airshows. So not being very good at it is a very likely scenario I know there's interest in the lens so posting stuff I wouldn't usually.
Well you wont run into this issue with motorsports, that's for sure.
rattymouse wrote:
I dont know that Tamron lens but it must be pretty soft to bring a Canon 1D4 down to this level.
It's a well liked lens, but I've never been been overly happy with the combo. I've never really taken to the 1D4 to be honest. I did buy focal pro but haven't got around to using it. I was happy using Canon/Fuji alongside each other but with the release of the 50-140 and now the 100-400 I'm considering going all Fuji... If it doesn't work out I'll probably swap the X-T1 for an X-E2 and just keep the Fuji primes for a lighter kit.
jj_glos wrote:
It's a well liked lens, but I've never been been overly happy with the combo. I've never really taken to the 1D4 to be honest. I did buy focal pro but haven't got around to using it. I was happy using Canon/Fuji alongside each other but with the release of the 50-140 and now the 100-400 I'm considering going all Fuji... If it doesn't work out I'll probably swap the X-T1 for an X-E2 and just keep the Fuji primes for a lighter kit.
you2 wrote:
Don't take this wrong but the images posted in the 300pro forum seem to appear a lot more detailed (higher resolution). Is this because that lens is likely much higher resolving power or just due to difference in web processing (artificial sharpness) ?
I don't know about the Xpro2 or the 100-400, but I will say processing differences between shooters makes a huge difference.
For the life of my I can't dig up the thread from a few years back, but I showed a person complaining about their lens that some processing voodoo went a long ways to improving the look. I wish I could find it now, just to show the before and after.
