gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.12 #5 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF. | |
Bruce Marriner wrote:
I love my couple of Fuji cameras, one of which being the XT5 and for all the things I do with them, I have zero problems with the autofocus, it's plenty fast and very rarely inaccurate. But, I'll be very quick to admit that the XT5 isn't a camera body for birding/sports. You can do those things with it, and I have done so, but it will take more effort, be a bit more difficult, and have less keepers than using a camera body more suited to the task.
My AF experience with the XT5 is a bit different than yours.
In my experience the AF performance is excellent with the small (and some slightly) primes that I use with it. For street photography and travel (subjects that overlap for me) I primarily rely on the 14mm f/2.8, 27mm f/2.8, and 50mm f/2. These are very sharp lenses that AF effectively and reliably. I also use the 80mm f/2.8 macro and the 90mm f/2, and their performance is in the same category. Though I use them less, I have the older 35mm f/1.4 and 23mm f/1.4, which are also solid, reliable performers.
Recently I’ve been having some issues with Fujifilm zoom lenses though that I’m still trying to fully sort out. I have three:
16-55mm f/2.8 (original model)
50-140mm f/2.8
100-400mm f/4.5-5.6
Let me get the middle one, the 50-140, out of the way first. It is a fine lens, sharp and autofocusing accurately.
Now to the 16-55 and 100-400…
Both have produced some photographs with excellent sharpness for me. And I’ve been paying extra careful attention to this recently because…
…. sometimes they don’t, and for reasons that only partially make sense to me.
I recently used the 16-55 more extensively than usual during six weeks of overseas travel where I photographed subject from landscapes to city stuff, including things like cathedral interiors. The interiors usually ended up just fine, but the landscape results were very inconsistent, despite the fact that I’m a careful photographer who is very attentive to things like camera stability and careful shutter release operation. I saw a number of photographs that were simply too soft, with no obvious reason.
I’ve had similar experience with the 100-400. During the past couple of years I’ve used it for some wildlife photography and some landscape photography. The results with the wildlife (mostly migratory birds like cranes and geese, but some smaller birds, too.) have been disappointing. With the AF mode set to birds, the camera appears to track bird targets pretty well, but I get way too many images that are slighlty but noticeably OOF. (I shoot a full frame system alongside the Fujifilm system, and it isn’t a problem there… suggesting that it isn’t my camera handling.) Yet, at the same time, with the camera and lens on a tripod and using AF rather than manually focusing, I have some very sharp landscape photographs made with the same camera and lens.
Any way, FWIW, that’s my story…
|
