Agreed, it's really relaxing, that's why I enjoy it so much.

thanks!

AeroPR How do you like the camera? Hopefully as much as I do.

+David Anderson If you're referring to the 150-600mm lenses, yes the Fuji is definitely smaller.

Yes they're growing fast with lots of quality products.

Excellent review 👍🇬🇧

Not in the traditional sense, but we have articles on our mirrorlesscomparison.com website (and a few 4K video comparisons on the youtube channel).

I got my X-T2 yesterday and I'm planning to use it with the 100-400mm again. Probably after Photokina.

+Mathieu Gasquet (MirrorLessons) cool! Looking forward to it :)

Thanks. I tried the 200-500mm with the D500 for BIF and it was a stunning combo but the X-T2/100-400 pair is definitely lighter.

I've used the X-T3 with the 100-400mm and it performs really well.

+James Parkhill did you watch my 300mm Pro review? There's also BIF in the Pana 100-400mm review (taken with the E-M1).

+Mathieu Gasquet (MirrorLessons) Yes, I did watch those videos and they were also great. I had not read your blog though. I was wondering if you would use the Olympus for pro work and your recent blog addresses that.Thanks for the informative and helpful vids. I shoot a lot of sports so high iso and af tracking are important.

+James Parkhill I'm waiting for the E-M1 successor, hopefully Olympus will improve the AF and make it one of the best on the market :)

Thank you very much!

If you don't want blackouts on the X-T30 you need to use the electronic shutter.

Mathieu Gasquet Yea , I tried it, doesnt feel natural. Maybe Im old school. Did you do Birds in flight with the ES? How was your experience?

+ffooxx20b very similar performance overall

thanks!

The AF is the same actually, but I would prefer the X-Pro2, or even an X-T2.

+Daniel It's the peak design slide strap. I attached one end to the camera and the other end to the tripod mount of the lens via a arca swiss plate (supplied with the strap). You also get the anchor links to attach the strap and quickly detach it when needed. It is by far my favourite strap.

Thanks! How do you like your G7?

I love it ! Its got a great form factor and very light body. The 50 mm prime gives me tac sharp pics. The 4 K mode is super cool and I think it is one of the best video cameras in market for this, price. The 4k picture, option is a very clever way of using the 4k , 30 fps mode and then converting, it to still images. This was my first Panasonic and I love the menu system, which is so intuitive. However I do feel there are a few issues - The image stabilisation is so important in these format of camera, because the advantage you get out of holding & walking with it in your hand, is lost if you have a shaky image. But G7 doesn't have IS. Further, I feel the micro 4/3 format in general suffers from darker images, in, low light condition and because the issue is accentuated with a crop factor of 2. I generally use lens with a aperture of more than 2.3, which struggles to render good images. Most of my telephoto lenses have 4.3 and higher aperture. A similar lens in a full frame might receive more light thus better for low light. This issue is very visible whilst using the Panasonic. So, unless the light is really bright, and if I to have use a higher shutter speed for wild life photography then the output gets too dark ( I don't like to crank up ISO, generally). I am waiting to buy a 300 or 400mm telephoto lens as that would, unleash the absolute full potential of this camera. I am glad that, the 4/3 system generally have lower entry point from price point of view (same lens of canon 600 mm would cost over 12k while here is costs just over 599 USD). This makes it a great camera for "enthusiast" who want to rub shoulders with a professional. I do sometimes however also feel the form fact is too small for my large hands. What's been your experience? Is there a word around for issue of low light ( without increasing the ISO)?

An aperture of f/2.3 will give you the same exposure on micro four thirds and full frame cameras (with same ISO and shutter speed values). There can be a tiny difference due to the light transmission capabilities (T stop) of the individual lens but otherwise the exposure remains the same. So it's not that the camera gives you darker images in low light. The difference is that because the sensor on the G7 is smaller, the noise ratio is higher so noise can be more visible at high ISO especially on the micro four thirds camera. If you use a telephoto lens at 4.3 or 5.6 and need a fast shutter speed (like for birds in flight), you need to raise your ISO even with good light. As for IS, it's one of the only thing that the G7 is lacking and Panasonic fixed that with the new G80 (5-axis + Dual IS).

True. For now I guess I will manage with higher ISO. Its definitely a great camera for the price ($800 with kit lens).

I watched Tony's videos on the matter. But I did some side by side comparison shots and the exposure is the same. I wrote an article about it if you are interested. You can even see a side by side comparison between an A7r II and RX10 II (1-inch sensor so smaller than m4/3): www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/02/08/aperture-equivalent-sensor-size/ That's one of the reason the f number exist, to be able to compare the speed of lenses among different camera systems.

I think it should be fine, but I personally always prefer to have one end of the strap attached to the lens, if not both depending on how heavy it is. Obviously it depends on the strap as well.

If you go to a wildlife preservation centre or similar locations and they have a bird feeder, usually you can get close enough. As soon as you arrive they'll fly away but after a few minutes they'll come back if they you are not moving closer. I think they also more used to see people around. In your garden it can be different, if they are not used to human presence, it can be more difficult. But then it might be a matter of just waiting patiently. Wearing "mimetic" clothes to match the environment can be also a good idea.

Mathieu Gasquet Cool cheers. I'm not sure there's any preservation anywhere close to me, but i will certainly look it up, would be a cool day out :) I've seen people set up mini hides in gardens, maybe a bit OTT but if I could find a nice little cheap set up might be worth it

+Arsalan uljamil you can find it here: www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/04/27/sony-a6300-vs-fuji-x-pro2/

Mathieu Gasquet Thank you. Will read it shortly.

I too would like to see this

Hi Carlos, which camera do you use?

@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons Thank You. I would say 'Wow' first, as I didn't expect such a quick reply. Means you are way above average! My camera is XT3 with the latest firmware updated. Cheers Carlos

I use the AF-C Custom Setting 4 with BIF, or Set 6 with custom settings to make it as reactive as possible (0, 2, Auto). I never photographed windsurf but Set 2 sounds a good choice, or you can try Set 1 and see if that improves the keeper rate. If the subject is always far away, perhaps it is also a question of Focus area. Which one do you use? Something like the Zone AF 3x3 grid should work well.

@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons Thank You Mathieu for the follow up. Very impressed! I fully agree with your approach. Have been using Set 2. Made attention to DOF and shooting F8 or higher between SS500 and 1000 with XF50140mm F2.8. Got a little better but still in 'OK' picture mode! Had a close review to the XF100-400 including your review and thought that would help since the subjects are far away (approx. 2 soccer fields length). Bought the 100-400; subjects are closer, but problem persisted even with the monopod. I shoot under winds over 30 knots. Average 20 Kts. Browsed the net over handling the camera, breathing as well. Made a slight improvement on my last shoot, as I have been changing settings, but one at the time to trouble shoot. I changed from Set 2 to Set4 and got my best picture so far. It's not 'tack sharp' but it is getting close. Tried to get as sheltered as possible, tucked in between a few rocks! Using Zone Area mostly 3X3 and tried 5X5. To have 'the picture' in Windsurf, as most sports, need the athlete's face sharp, but I understand that must be hard for the system to lock on that point, where the face skin is mixed with the bright sail colours and wetsuit. Looping around in the air doesn't help either!!! I will follow your suggestions on my next shoot and see if I can consolidate Set 4 with zone area 3X3 Then I will try Set 1 and the Set 6 (0,2,Auto). Wondering if the athlete's face can be tracked differently considering the CENTER | AUTO | FRONT zone are switching?! Thanks a lot for the support! I'II keep you posted as well. Cheers

With Center, the camera will prioritise the focus points at the center even if the subject is not at the centre of the image, so it depends how well you can track the windsurfer. If he is more or less always at the center, then it's worth trying the CENTER setting. For birds in flight, I choose Auto because I'm not good enough in keeping the bird at the center at all times, so with Auto the camera will switch to other focus points more quickly.

IQ would be very similar as well as the speed. The X-T1 might give you something more because of phase detection AF (make sure to use firmware 4.0 or later). A more relevant difference will probably be the X-T2 if it has the same sensor/AF system of the X-Pro2. P.S.: There isn't a teleconverter for the Pana 100-400mm lens. The only one you can find for m4/3 is the Olympus TC 1.4 that is compatible with the 40-150mm 2.8 and the 300mm Pro.

Thank you for your response, I thought the Olympus TC 1.4 would work on the Pana… In this case it’s a different story I will stick with my Fuji set up get the 100-400 with 1.4 convertor and wait for the X-T2. Have you had a chance to try the XF2X TC ?? According to rumours it should be announced in July. Let’s see … Thank’s again for your reviews that help us to make the right choices …

The 2x TC has been announced already. It should be available soon.

+Unum sed Leonem both lenses focus really fast. As for sharpness they do equally well but you do loose a tiny bit when using the teleconverters. As for the bokeh I am not sure but with the teleconverters you loose one or two stops (f/4 with the TC 1.4x and f/5.6 with the TC 2x). If you need the 300mm or 400mm reach for wildlife, I would say go with the 100-400mm. The teleconverters work with that lens too so you could go even further.

Mathieu Gasquet Thank you, Mathieu. The reason I'm asking, is because I prefer the physical characteristics of the 40-150mm (more robust construction, internal focusing and zooming: for reference, I couldn't stand the well-regarded Canon 18-55 F2.8 of the Tamron 24-75mm F2.8 VR - the zoom ring never feels sufficiently smooth), higher max. aperture when, a tad smaller and 30% lighter, no zoom creep and so forth. I'll be shooting mostly portraits (outdoors as well as in a studio) and occasionally wildlife. You said, the sharpness is very comparable. Then the main criteria (save for the physical design) - is background separation and bokeh. I wish there were side-by-side comparisons of the output of all the options... 😏 Another question, after using an A7r for years I bought the Fuji to discover: - The Fuji lacks clarity (and sharpness) in comparison to the A7r (the Fuji has so far been used with a 50mm F2 WR lens; while the Sony - mainly worth a Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS II L and a Canon 85mm F1.8 - via the Metabones adapter). I feel, worth Fuji files I have to boost the clarity in post-production to the max. That, while the 50mm F2 is rated as Fuji's sharpest lens - sharper even than the 90mm F2 or 40-150mm F2.8 / 100-400mm F4 /F5.6 (according to LensTip)! - The Fuji gives off ugly reflected colour casts (reflected colours) - much more than the Sony, especially of greens (grass, teal or clothing) and warm tints (a terracota colour of the walls) - The Fuji has a very unreliable white balance. - Contrary to the popular opinion, the Fuji appears, to me, to have a bit of an issue with skin tones. That's not to say the Fuji hasn't strong suits of its own (a lovely physical design), physically well-built, relatively compact lenses (for the sensor size), stylish, better post-acquisition support (or so they say), etc. These are my findings. Would you agree?

If you are interested in portraits mainly then the 50-140mm is definitely a better choice. As for sharpness, try to Iridient Developer, it works very well with Fuji files.

Did you find out ? I would think great pared with the new focusing system the XT3 has

Was going to comment the same thing. With an upgraded af it looks a taker!

Yes it's near Aberystwyth. I go there every time I have a super telephoto lens to test :)

When I remember to do it :-). On a serious note, I know that many recommends this, but I never found it to be a problem in my experience, not just with Fujifilm but other brands as well. Where it is available, I select the vertical shake correction only (I don't think this lens has it though).

The X-T4 has a better AF system overall, not a night and day difference but it's there.

@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons Thaks for your reply.

+Mark Mak Fuji released a firmware update for the X-Pro1 (Ver.3.60) to make the X-Pro1 compatible with the 100-400mm. The AF will be much slower but for static subject you could still get decent results. It depends how fast the X-Pro2 is able to lock the AF with such a lens.

Thanks for your promptly reply, I should get one and test with my X-pro1 :)

non je ne penses vraiment pas, c'est un objectif conçu pour les appareils hybrides sans miroir. La distance entra capteur et objectif sur le S3 Pro serait trop longue.

Lightroom mainly and occasionally Iridient.

Awww that's very interesting. For which types of shots do you find it unnecessary to use Iridient? As my understanding is that Iridient is quite a bit superior in sharpness/details. Thanks for the reply!

with some landscape shots for example, it can render better details with green foliage or grass, especially if they are at a distance. I can use Iridient if I want to print, especially at a large size. For web or small prints what I get from Lightroom is enough.

+Mathieu Gasquet (MirrorLessons) great insight, thanks a lot!

Not sure, it depends if I manage to get both at the same time.

+Mathieu Gasquet (MirrorLessons) Thank you, that would be great. Even though I'm firmly in Fuji camp and have recently acquired Fuji 100-400, I'm curious to see how it compare to Panasonic 100-400 as it will be 800mm equivalent on the long end compared to 600mm on Fuji.

Same here

I think it’s still a very good lens in 2021, and I’ll compare it to the 70-300mm very soon.

@@MathieuGasquetMirrorLessons Many thanks. Please don't make me cry when you compare the two ;) As you know even a used 100-400mm is $$$$

Are you saying that you can’t select the EVF?

I figured it out. It's the lever on the camera. I didn't realize the OVF won't appear inside the lens on longer zoom lenses.

+Greg Thurtle hmm, not sure what are you referring to :D

Perhaps he's referring to the small stuffed eagle.

Brilliant accurate process in your comments complimenti !!!!

Yes, a few years ago, with the 200-500mm 5.6. Still one of the best, but cameras like the A9 have a better AF now.

I will try to review it when it comes out, I would probably have to wait until it becomes available to rent.

It's good but slower, and sometimes less accurate than the lens alone.

Peak Design Slide Pro.

+Benito Rossi Anchor Links, they’re made by Peak Design

Mathieu Gasquet Thanks

The AF system is the same and actually Fuji improved the AF algorithm on that camera so I'm sure it can do well.

Mathieu Gasquet ok thanks, should I get 16mm f1.4 or 23mm f1.4 or 23mm f2 or 18-55mm? For majority of daily camera, lifestyle and street, landscape, architecture and video shooting. other area will be wild life and moon, but that will be another lens for that in future. I like to have a prime lens to get creativity instead of standstill and zoom, so prime is higher chance I will get, originally I want to get 23mm but heard it has noisy autofocus motor and the glasses is old design, 23mm f2 has soft corner so I don't like to get it and I wanted to have a lens I can manual focus and zone focus meter so the kit package is not suitable for me although I like to get one of them originally. after read some review the 16mm is their best glass yet. I afraid 16mm is too wide(even the FF 28mm on the Leica Q people say it's too wide) but after a video of it with sample photos, I see that it is not that bad, it's close to what I shoot, and a lot time I like to shoot wider and a lot far away with a tele lens, so this lens suit me well and with a tele lens in future will be perfect. So this lens seem good for me, what do you think? And should I get silver or black lens to pair with the silver camera? What lens has silver color?

NETVO TV 18-55 has ois, if you're interested in video that's probably the one to get, it's very sharp for what is considered a kit lens.

+NETVO TV the 16mm 1.4 is a great lens and can cover lots of genre if you don’t hesitate to get closer when you need too. I don’t think it’s available in silver though.

+Steven Monrad it if is about using the OVF for birds in flight, it's on mirrorlessons yes and more precisely here: www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/03/30/fuji-x-pro2-ovf-birds-in-flight/

+Mathieu Gasquet (MirrorLessons) Indeed. Very useful information. You must realize that the competition for this type of photography by birders are the giant Canon OIS lens DSLR setups which run $8-10K. There are a surprising number of birders with these setups looking for these kind of shots. This makes the Fujifilm gear very interesting. I have X-E2's, the 100-400 & the 1.4TC and will get an X-Pro2 once I'm familiar with the E2. The goal is not beautiful bird photos - they are everywhere - but to get information for ID. The other challenge for AF is smaller birds in low-lit foliage. This lens with AF-C may be good for that as well. The best settings combo is always difficult and your BIF write-up is very much appreciated.

+Steven Monrad thanks. With smaller birds in low-lit foliage the AF can behave more randomly especially if there is more light in the background (the lens goes back and forth or simply focuses on the background). But reducing the single AF point size helps.

Exactly, but BIF in front of a background is the toughest case for me with mirrorless because it becomes difficult to keep the small AF point exactly on the bird and using larger areas the camera (NX1 in my case) loves to focus on the background.

I didn't find the lens to be soft, I was very pleased by the results.

Thanks for your answer

It's a red kite, I call it Milvus ;)

What's the question here...? His point was to demonstrate the effectiveness of OIS on a non moving subject.

he's very helpful for sharpness tests ;-)

That's a very low keeper rate. I've used this lens with the X-T2 as well and recently the X-H1 and I averaged between 60 and 70%. Do you remember the settings you used?

Mathieu Gasquet all of them hahah. I tried everything. Nothing would work. Rubbish!! And very expensive. In my view I think this lens should not have a red badge on and should be £800 max

+J.E._330 Yes I'll do an x-pro2 review as well ;)

Great! I look forward to it.