09-09-2021, 08:41 AM
Allow me to disagree 
Most sports shooters do indeed use full-frame cameras already, the lower resolution kind, though (Canon 1Dx, Nikon D5/D6), because they don't need the high resolution but want the cameras to be as tough as possible.
For wildlife, there are slightly different needs, depending on what you're shooting. If you're sitting in a tent for a whole day with the long lens mounted on a tripod, aiming at and prefocused on a given spot where you hope your 'prey' will show up, you don't care about AF at all. If, however, your favorite subject has wings and you prefer to capture when using those, you certainly do (talking about real birds here, not war-birds... airshow photographers have lower requirements ). The D500 is so popular among bird shooters because it combines the fast AF of the bigger bodies with wide AF coverage in the frame and high frame rates. Plus, it adds some extra reach due to the crop factor.
One thing all those use cases have in common: if you have the funds for one (or maybe even more) of the 'big guns', resolution power of the lens will not be the limiting factor, regardless of what camera you use.
The XF 200/2 you mention is a really nice lens, indeed. Well designed, fast, sturdy... the only things that Fuji ignored or missed is that drop-in filters are standard in this lens class.
One remark though: you can't look at the 'light gathering capability' of the lens alone, but you need to look at the whole system. Recommended read (haven't discussed that one for a while ):
https://www.opticallimits.com/Reviews/986-equivalence
In the general image, you'd likely get an equivalent full-frame 300/2.8 from most other brands for less money than what you'd have to pay for a XF 200/2, no matter if you buy the latter new or used... to buy it used, you'd actually have to find one, though.
The biggest issue of the lens is, however: it's sort of an exotic item in the Fuji portfolio, a solitary island disconnected from the rest of the system. First of all, for birding the lens is likely too short, even with the provided TC. And on any of the current Fuji cameras, it will be very front heavy. The best match for it would be a X-H1, which is discontinued, or one of the upcoming X-H2 cameras (if they are similar in size and weight.
There is one more issue: Fuji is not necessarily known for providing the best AF tracking performance in the market...
Most sports shooters do indeed use full-frame cameras already, the lower resolution kind, though (Canon 1Dx, Nikon D5/D6), because they don't need the high resolution but want the cameras to be as tough as possible.For wildlife, there are slightly different needs, depending on what you're shooting. If you're sitting in a tent for a whole day with the long lens mounted on a tripod, aiming at and prefocused on a given spot where you hope your 'prey' will show up, you don't care about AF at all. If, however, your favorite subject has wings and you prefer to capture when using those, you certainly do (talking about real birds here, not war-birds... airshow photographers have lower requirements
). The D500 is so popular among bird shooters because it combines the fast AF of the bigger bodies with wide AF coverage in the frame and high frame rates. Plus, it adds some extra reach due to the crop factor.One thing all those use cases have in common: if you have the funds for one (or maybe even more) of the 'big guns', resolution power of the lens will not be the limiting factor, regardless of what camera you use.
The XF 200/2 you mention is a really nice lens, indeed. Well designed, fast, sturdy... the only things that Fuji ignored or missed is that drop-in filters are standard in this lens class.
One remark though: you can't look at the 'light gathering capability' of the lens alone, but you need to look at the whole system. Recommended read (haven't discussed that one for a while
):https://www.opticallimits.com/Reviews/986-equivalence
In the general image, you'd likely get an equivalent full-frame 300/2.8 from most other brands for less money than what you'd have to pay for a XF 200/2, no matter if you buy the latter new or used... to buy it used, you'd actually have to find one, though.
The biggest issue of the lens is, however: it's sort of an exotic item in the Fuji portfolio, a solitary island disconnected from the rest of the system. First of all, for birding the lens is likely too short, even with the provided TC. And on any of the current Fuji cameras, it will be very front heavy. The best match for it would be a X-H1, which is discontinued, or one of the upcoming X-H2 cameras (if they are similar in size and weight.
There is one more issue: Fuji is not necessarily known for providing the best AF tracking performance in the market...
Editor
opticallimits.com
opticallimits.com