RoamingScott wrote: Steve Spencer wrote: RoamingScott wrote:
And I would likely take 1% as many landscape photos were I to be tied to a tripod. I live on the move and am supremely grateful for modern IBIS
Poo-pooing non-tripod or non-stitched landscape photography is asinine. There are fantastic single-frame images to be made, even on the move (but try to stop moving for at least as long as the exposure!).
Portability is a big reason that I am moving to Fuji X mount for landscape shooting. I think my kit will be:
Fuji X-T5 - 557g
Sigma 10-18 f/2.8 - 250g
Tamron 17-70 f/2.8 VC - 530g
Fuji 70-300 f/4-5.6 OIS - 580g
Total weight - 1,917g with very good stabilization so I think I can get by without a tripod
This compares really well to a Sony FF setup of:
Sony A7r V - 730g
Sony 16-25 f/2.8 G - 409g
Sony 24-105 f/4 G - 663g
Sony 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 GM - 1,395g
total weight - 3,197g also with very good stabilization
I know myself and what I can carry for the type of day trip that I am likely to do these days. I can carry 2 kg pretty easily all day, but 3 kg gets to be a bit much by the end of the day. What I like about the Fuji APS-C option is that it gets me down to the 2 kg weight with good stabilization so I don't have to add the extra weight of a tripod either. I just want to be sure that I will be happy enough with the images the Fuji kit gives me.
The FE 100-400 to X 70-300 is quite the downgrade of IQ/performance, but is giving you the most weight savings of course. The Sony 70-300 plus light cropping is a more appropriate comparison IMO and still saves you half a kg over the Sony.
It really comes down to what you value most. For me, I know I'm only going to be in some of these places one single time in my life, and often I have a tremendous amount of Type 2 fun while out in the field with my FF kit. There have been shots that I know would have really suffered with a similar Fuji kit, but the Sony or Nikon FF kit delivered in tough conditions with ease.
Hi Scott,
Have you used the Fuji 70-300 or are you just speculating? I am sure that the Sony 100-400 GM would be a better lens, and produce better images, but I suspect that the Fuji will at least equal the Sony 70-300 up until the FF equivalent of 300 and be better once you start to crop the FF image to get the longer reach and the Sony is no lighter than the Fuji lens and Sony has a slower aperture in their shared focal length range except from 214 to 300mm FF equivalent.
The bottom line for me is that the Sony 100-400 just adds too much weight and the Sony 70-300 I don't think would bring anything to the table that the Fuji doesn't bring and still leave me with a kit that is about half a kilo/a pound heavier without any clear advantage to the heavier kit, and that heavier kit still pushes the weight to more than I will be comfortable carrying for a day.
Sep 30, 2025 at 10:29 AM
Previous versions of Steve Spencer's message #16899722 « Fuji for landscape »
