Syllog
Well-known member
Thanks Alan - currently considering options as I have an on again off again relationship with my XF 100-400 and would like more reach but not sure if I want to give up the Fuji colour handling.
? Best Autofocus Tracking Camera Body around $3K
- Thread starter VinnyH
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
abc123brian
Well-known member
Wouldn’t it really be just figuring out which AF mode to use and ideal customized buttons? I would think you could get it setup fairly close to how you want so I wouldn’t rule out a switch without a Steve equivalent. I’m wondering if she just wasn’t going to be happy because of unfamiliarity than anything else. I know some people that resist change so much they aren’t going to like something different no matter how much better it is.
abc123brian
Well-known member
I used Fujifilm for quite a few years, they are nice travel cameras and I really liked their prime lenses. I also really struggled with the 100-400mm. Sometimes it seemed good and sometimes it just seemed really soft. I often found the lack of detail in fur and got frustrated. I’m not sure if I had a bad copy or what the issue was. I decided to buy a used 200-500mm and D750 as a temporary solution and waited 2 years for Fujifilm to release another long lens before taking a look at the Nikon Z6. That combination worked so much better for me and I never had the softness issue. It has now been quite a few years and Fujifilm still has not released a wildlife lens. I see rumors of one now, but it’s an F/8 so not sure it is ideal. The Z cameras are fairly close in colors, not the same, but I’m very happy with them and find the images more detailed. I held onto my X-Pro2 and a couple small primes but sold the rest now because of my experience with the XF100-400mm.
Syllog
Well-known member
Thanks for sharing you experience - I am in a similar position with inconsistent results from the 100-400 that I have not been able to get to the bottom of. Only shoot wildlife handheld predominately while walking so currently looking at mirrorless alternatives A1, R5 etc but will probably wait to see what Fuji announce
I had a similar experience with the Fuji 100-400. I simply could not get acceptably sharp images at the 400 end. Everything I read online suggested it was technique, however when the Fringer came available I bought one and used it with my 300PF with a 1.4TC and immediately started getting sharp images so I sold the 100-400 and bought a 500PF (after having rented one) . I then had the opportunity to to get a almost new D500 for a very good price, so now I use the D500 with the PFs for wildlife and the Fuji with a set of primes for everything else
abc123brian
Well-known member
with an announcement rumored very soon, it makes sense to wait to see. I‘m curious to see what the X-H2S brings as it sounds like they might be finally building the sports/wildlife camera. Having jumped to trying to use Fujifilm exclusively with the X-T1, I just got frustrated waiting on a different lens besides the 100-400mm.
That was my experience too. So many people love that lens and swear it’s one of the best. I tried endlessly to get satisfactory results and just couldn’t. I rented the 200-500mm to see if I did any better and the difference was night and day. The discussion on the 100-400mm seems to be heatedly debated in the Fujifilm forums. About 80-90% of the people love it and the 10-20% have the experience we did. Maybe it’s sample variation. I almost ordered a replacement to try, but opted for the used 200-500mm and D750 for about the same price as an interim. It worked great shooting the two systems, but eventually I moved to the Nikon Z so I could share lens, batteries, and have a backup.
One thing that had to be hard for her would be switching from a crop camera to a full frame. Everything probably seemed so tiny in the viewfinder. Plus switching from dslr to mirrorless, plus switching brands and getting used to unfamiliar menus.
Plus it's not her beloved d500 which shooters seem very passionate about. The Canon 7dii dslr evokes similar passion, which is why the R7 is generating the excitement. It would be like Nikon shooters having a mirrorless d500.
Last edited:
I appreciate all the posts. I knew I would see a variety of tech info and user experiences.
VinnyH
VinnyH
Dr_J
Member
Not sure if I’ve missed a similar reply, but you could consider a s/h D5?I appreciate all the posts. I knew I would see a variety of tech info and user experiences.
VinnyH
ATB, J
Yes - the Fringer smart adapter.
I use it on my X-T4 with Nikkor 200-500mm, 500 PF, and 17-55mm glass. Also a Tokina F-mount 100mm macro lens. Have used all of them on the X-T4 with the Fringer and good results. I also have a D500.
While acknowledging that using the Fringer does not provide the ultimate level of performance that native glass provides it never-the-less works very well for my needs,
Case in point - out of curiosity I tested the Fringer with my 500 PF on the X-T4 and then the D500 (w/o Fringer obviously) shooting BIF of a local flock of buzzards/vultures. With the Fringer the X-T4 with 500 PF worked very well. After several hundred shots very little difference in acquiring and locking AF was noticed with the Fringer/X-T4/500 PF vs my D500/500 PF in that BIF situation. This test was done over 2-3 late afternoons with clear skies when the buzzard flock was cruising overhead during their afternoon feeding patrols.
With the flexibility to use my Nikkor 200-500mm and 500 PF for long glass shooting on my X-T4 as well as possible newer Fuji X-mount bodies I'm toying with selling/trading my D500 - it gets little use now-days.
Fuji has added an X-mount 150-600mm f/5.6 to their lens roadmap for possibility sometime in 2022. That may lessen my desire to hang onto the Nikon 200-500mm and 500 PF lenses depending on Fuji's 150-600mm price, performance, etc.
Last edited:
I understand your hesitancy after witnessing this real life experience, Tom but I rented the Canon R5/100-500 combo and had no difficulty setting it up. I'm a Nikon shooter, but during periods of restlessness have rented the Canon 7D with 100-400 - a sweet combo at the time, then the R5. I like the Canon menu system and find it easy to use. Would have been very interested in the R3, but at 24MP it's not for me.
Chris K
Well-known member
I used a Fringer briefly with an X-T4 and a 500PF.
It definitely worked, but I use my 500PF frequently with a 1.4x, and when doing so, it had a VERY difficult time acquiring any subjects.
Without the 1.4x it was pretty good. I'd say about as good as my Z6. I returned it because my Z6 had no issues with the 1.4x.
Syllog
Well-known member
Thanks Chris - appreciated.
Syllog
Well-known member
Thanks for your feedback - much appreciated. I will probably wait for the imminent Fuji announcements before deciding on a pathway. Leaning toward A1/200-600 or possibly R5/100-500 at present. Both these options cheaper than Z9 + ??? in Australia.
hark
Member
Since you are currently using a D780, it doesn't have the focus points all the way across its sensor, does it? I'm using a D750 and a D500 myself. Although I don't have any suggestions, you might want to keep in mind how far focus points stretch across your viewfinder especially for wildlife. The nice thing about my D500 is the wide spread of points. And if I choose to use Dynamic 153 (all the focus points) with AF-C, at times it is helpful. But my point is being able to move a focus point to the edges of the frame vs. what my D750 has to offer. I'm assuming the D780 is more similar to my D750.
Whether you stick with Nikon or move to mirrorless is up to you. With DSLR's not being made nearly as much, mirrorless is becoming the standard for camera bodies. So if it were me, I'd be inclined to switch to mirrorless.
Here is a web photo showing the D500 viewfinder.
I think you should sit tight until you have a clearer idea of what performance you need and why.
The D780 is a good DSLR, but it's not cutting edge in terms of AF performance. It's essentially a Z6 in a DSLR format. The Z6ii is a small upgrade plus provides mirrorless. A D850 would be a step up in some ways, but a step back in others. The Z7ii is a step up in most areas but also increases resolution. In the mirrorless arena, the upcoming Z9 based action camera would fit well with your current lenses. The Z6ii and Z7ii are perfectly capable cameras for action, but not "action cameras" in the typical sense. For most situations, those cameras are more balanced.
Are you looking for an action camera specifically? That's not what you said, and your current gear is not action oriented - it's a nice balanced kit.
Are you planning on upgrading lenses? That will take you out of a $3000 budget range. Of the lenses listed in your signature, the 150-600 is not particularly fast focusing for action and there are better options - with a price tag. There is a lot of difference in lens AF speed - especially when you look at newer lenses designed for that purpose.
Macro and landscapes don't require fast, action oriented AF. There are other features that are a lot more important. How big a part of your photography are those genres?
My initial reaction is changing brands is an $8,000-10,000 decision to maintain the level of equipment and performance you have today. You'll get some upgrades with the right newer gear selections, but only if you are targeting the right features for your needs. If you gave me a $5000 budget right now, I would not spend it on a camera body or switching systems.
- Status