Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
so the phantom (XF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6) is finally here ...


1900US$ ... not as terrible as feared ...

1.4kg ... no surprise ...


I'm already praying to the goddess of QC. Fuji is currently my worst nightmare.

 I'm wondering if it covers FF!

Dave's clichés
[Image: pic_01.gif]

[Image: lens-construction.png]

Comparing the element sizes with the FF Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS USM II, my guess is that it will not cover FF. Seems like Fuji is not planning to go the Sony/Leica route yet. The Fuji X mount looks to be a bit narrower than the Sony E-mount to me too, so maybe FF is not even an option?

No reason for nonsense anyway ...

Thanks for the info BC!..........


...............the insinuation was of course..................


...........were there any sneaky clues for an upcoming FF body....


       .....looking at this lens only unfounded rumours! 

Dave's clichés
Quote: I'm wondering if it covers FF!
Even if it had, there's nothing FF you can mount this on (now or in the foreseeable future), so it's sort of academic.
Quote:Even if it had, there's nothing FF you can mount this on (now or in the foreseeable future), so it's sort of academic.
It was all about the ever present ......".Fuji are working on a full frame".......optimists gossip column department........


    Rumours are academic by nature!
Dave's clichés
Some sample pics here:


out of focus highlights look interesting... 

Quote:It was all about the ever present ......".Fuji are working on a full frame".......optimists gossip column department........


    Rumours are academic by nature!

I'm not getting it  Sad Why would Fuji give up what they already excel in, for a FF sensor with new lenses in? All the lightweight, small size advantages to be given up for a thing others already are doing (Sony, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Leica)


Why? FF is not the answer to the question about LIfe, Universe and Everything, That already is 42. Rolleyes  I'll keep one FF Nikon and most wide angles, but for tele my investments are targeted to Fuji. I think I just sold the 150-600 and will get this 100-400. Occassionally I'll need a faster AF, but that we'll see after the next Friday, when my X-E2 gets the firmware making it a X-E2s.


Fuji representatives clearly stated APS-C is big enough and 24 MP are also enough. Their sensor is made by Sony and gets the X-Trans pattern instead a Bayern one, if I recall correct. The Fuji interface is superior in many aspects to the one form Nikon's consumer-grade bodies. Even at Nikon rumors forum there are people using FF Nikon and APS-C Fujifilm coexisiting.




<div style="margin:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;"><a class="" href="">haroldp</a> <span style="margin:0px 8px 0px 0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;color:rgb(204,204,204);">Posts: <b>943</b>Member</span>

<div style="margin:0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;">
<div style="margin:5px 0px 0px;font-weight:inherit;font-style:inherit;font-family:inherit;">When the mission is critical, or the subjects are moving or far away, or I need high ISO I use Nikon FX.

For most other photography (grandkids, travel etc.), I use Fuji DX.

Why ?:

The control system equivalent of Nikon professional body (D810 etc) in a body smaller and lighter that d5nnn.

A series of lenses for DX format that are across the line as good as Leica's, Light, small, and not hideously expensive. Fuji's 18-55mm / 28 - 4 is every bit as good as Nikon's 17-55 / 2.8, it is 1/3 the size and weight, 1/3 the price, and image stabilized.

Fuji's 90mm/ 2 is the sharpest lens I own (including Leica 90/ 2 summicron).

Fuji's other fast primes (56 /1.2, 16 / 1.4, 24 / 1.4) are much better wide open than their Nikon equivalents, even shooting Nikon FX at comparing results at the same image size.

Mirrorless does have real optical design advantages for wides because of lens to focal plane clearance, but even Fuji's DX teles's are better.

Nikon's engineers are certainly as good as any in the world, I think the difference is that Fuji management takes this market seriously.

Most Fuji shooters including myself say that the reason for choosing Fuji over Sony, Samsung etc. is the lens line up.

I just pre-ordered a Fuji X-Pro2. I will not be buying a D500, I almost certainly will buy the next D810 replacement.

This forum is much more interesting than Fuji's.

Regards ... H
My gosh, what a lens! I don't recall the last time a lens so easily surpassed all my expectations.  :blink: I can carry it including camera with two fingers, it's just perfectly balanced and it doesn't feel like having more than 2 kg (including body).


I just got it this evening, took it for a walk although it started to darken. The pictures here were made between 5.30 and 6.50 P.M. 


[Image: _DSC1097-M.jpg]


Thanks a lot, Andy for the right bag for it - those slingshots are really cool to put the elbow on and get a more stable shot, although the lens has an extraordinary stabilizer, 1/15, 1/20, 1/60 at 200 mm or 400 mm, just doesn't matter - if the object is not moving, it's output is astounding.


[Image: _DSF1979-XL.jpg]

1/15 @ 340 mm


And if the object's moving, the output is astounding as well  ^_^


I also don't recall the last time I found a new lens so cool: the hood is very cool, fast in it's place and a slider at the botton side to manipulate a polarizer. Very easy to handhold, with or without the removable tripod socket (all the pictures were made handheld). All rings are perfectly placed, focus or aperture ring, just great. I also got the converter (the picture of the stork was made with it. And cropped, so please don't use the usual superhigh PZ quality guidelines for it  Rolleyes


The converter is so tiny, I'd say if swallowed just take a gulp of water to move it down.


Okay, most shots were without much action. The AF-C mode of the X-E2 is not what I'm used from the Nikons - especially not in those dark situations, but I was prepared for far far worse results. Of course I want to use it also in bright light. If the results in evening, grey and shitty light are already that good, I'm ready for something really excellent.


Now, about those 1.5× crop: I was curious and used a scale to weigh the FF backpack with 150-600 + 35/1.4 + 85/1.4, because in the smaller slingshot were the equivalents 100-400, 23/1.4 + 86/1.2 (just forget the debate about DoF, I'm not accepting that crap -what counts, is the light the lens delivers to the sensor). 5kg Fuji (incl. bag) against 11 kg Nikon (including bag and necessary light tripod). If I wanted to use the appropriate tripod with a Gimbal, just add 4 kg more.


Question remains: Can the Fuji deliver a satisfying IQ? At least as satisfying as the D750/150-600 Sigma Sports combination? I'm somewhat afraid it can. But I'm yet not ready with that comparison. Sure, the Contemporary version or the Tamron would alter some things, but when hiking, I really think I found a very good camera system to take it with me without backpain the other day.  Wink


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)