Others have said this already, but I highly recommend renting the 100-400 before you buy it. I tried it and honestly came away unimpressed. The 70-300 you currently have is such a great lens for the size and bang-for-buck. By comparison the Fuji 100-400 It is a *lot* bigger and heavier and it really doesn’t give an image quality boost. Sigma have a 100-400 for Fuji mount now which is a fair bit smaller than Fuji’s offering. Maybe rent them both and the 150-600 and have a little series of videos on big lenses? I’m sure lots of us would love to see that. Thanks for all the great videos you shared last year and hope you have a great start to 2025
Hi Ian. As a fellow X-H2 shooter, who has considered similar options, let me share a couple of observations. On the tele for wildlife question, I initially considered the 100-400 , but finally settled for the 70-300 with a 1.4 TC. That combo gives me an effective focal length of up to 420mm, only a 1-stop "light tax", and the ability to keep the size and weight advantages of the 70-300. Coupled with the ability to crop deeply on the 40mp sensor, this has proven more than adequate for my purposes. There have been rumors that Fuji is planning to release a new version of the 100-400 in 2025, which if true means that second-hand versions could soon be much more affordable. I've also looked closely at the 150-300, but have decided that, at least at this stage, I don't shoot enough wildlife to justify lugging around that behemoth of a lens. On the mark II version of the 16-55/f2.8. I received my copy a few weeks ago, and since then have had a chance to use it enough to start forming some judgments. While I can't compare it to the mark 1 version, so far I have not found any significant improvements in sharpness or other dimensions of IQ over the 18-55/f2.8-4 or the 16-80/f4, which was not what I was expecting. The zoom ring is also extremely stiff and does not move smoothly, which could be an issue if you use it for video. And I've seen reviews from some users complaining about debris being found inside the lens---maybe they were just unlucky? Either way, in your position I would not rush into a purchase decision without a good amount of due diligence...
Great video Ian. A quick comment on the 150-600: I have my xs-10 paired with either that, or the 55-200/18-55 kit lenses, and I cannot express how satisfied I am in a single sentence. Yes the 150 is big and heavy compared to the 70-300, but compared to other super tele zooms it is small and light. Only nikon pf glass compares weight wise, and they are several orders of magnitude more expensive. And in terms of sharpness, color and reach the 70 and 150 simply do not compare. The big guy has higher resolving acutance at 600 than the small one has at 200 if that tells you anything. Also the 150 is the best autofocusing lens for the xf platform, only matched by the new 16-55 red badge. And the colors man, they are just beautiful in that special fuji way - I took some quick random snaps of ducks yesterday at 500 and 600mm, and the color, contrast and light fall-off are just so beautiful and vibrant sooc that I am going to print those snaps straight from jpegs. It's also worth mentioning that with the 150-600 you will never need a teleconverter. It is hard enough acquiring the subject at 900mm equiv, I can only make sense of greater reach for veeeery specific use cases. Also did I mention that subject acquisition at that range is hard? Because it is hard. Anyway cheers, all the best
I look forward to seeing what you expand your genre to. You do an amazing job of being so personable on your channel. I appreciate your thoughts on when I was looking at changing from my Canon R5 (and L series glass). I did sell over 18K of gear and right-sized to the Fujifilm line up. Bought the H-S2 first but fell in love with the back up X-T5 and sold the H-S2. Loving the creativity of Fujifilm. Thank you!
Thanks Ian, I always enjoy watching your videos they are inspiring calming and quite interesting watching your creativity. I say go forward with your plans in 2025 and may the year makes it all possible. Cheers from Oregon US.
I love your concept of shooting multiple genres of photography when you go out! I live in an area where this is an absolute requirement to stay active! Happy New Year!
Great video. I'm not a big into landscape photography but I did want to say you have a calming and peaceful demeanor and are a great presenter. That is such a very beautiful and isolated place would be fun to wander those hills as you did!
Hi Ian, I have the Fuji 100 400 for my XT3. its fantastic for picking out detail in landscapes and when I take it instead of the 50 140 it is heavier but not a deal breaker. I am an occasional and opportunistic wildlife photographer and if the correct settings are used , AFC, Constant high burst, high shutter speed and ISO then the results are really ok. I know I could get better results with a high end Sony or Nikon but the Fuji system suits me and I have most of the red badge zooms so heavily invested. Next step up for me will be the XT5. Thanks for all your efforts, I have learned a huge amount from you and wishing you a cracking 2025.
I have the 150-600 and I adore it! Bulky, certainly, but very light. Internal zoom and very well-balanced and the results have been stunning. By the way, it was through the discovery of your channel that swayed my decision to go with the Fuji system, so thank you!!
I can second your opinion. Choosed myself the 150-600 over the 100-400 and i'm really happy with the results. It is sharp with no need to step down and the intern focus is just great and makes the longer build forgotten.
All the best for you and your family, i hope you had a nice christmas time and that the new year turns out to be a good one. Many thanks for all your work and videos. Inspiring photos and helpful tips with some great shown locations, every video is always worth to watch.
I've got the 100-400 with the 1.4 converter and it is a very sharp lens. Apart from landscapes my interests are motorcycle racing and, like yourself, trying to get to grips with wildlife photography. I have great admiration for those photographers gaining high quality results with rarer birds (locating and spotting), birds in flight and the reality of photographing wildlife in the low lighting when they are usually most active - is massive. Not least their patience.
I've got RP with RF 24-240 and R50 with RF 100-400. Both zooms are under-rated. Great IQ. Low weight. Great range. Great value. Both of those are cheap enough to fit on APS-C. Leaves the door open for a body upgrade and keep the same lenses! And yes, choose your lens before the body!
I wish my 2X would work on the 100-400. I put the 2X on my 50-140, but isn't much different than my 70-300. Have you ever shot on 500mm on a Canon (full-frame) to compare what you get with the 100-400 and your 1.4X?
@@FeatureMoments Even if it worked, you are pushing uphill. Are you using FF or APS-C? If FF, then try it on an APS-C camera like the R50. I have RP + 24-240 and R50 + 100-400. Same batteries and mounts. On the R50 the 100-400 equivalent to FF is 160-640. A little more than the 1.4x converter without the extra glass and weight. However R50 plus 1.4 converter takes you out to an equivalent of 890mm! IQ is your question. Ask a store if you can take some sample shots with what you wish to check out.
Merry Christmas to you and your family. That location looks like a really good place to investigate. Thank you for all the video's you have shown us throughout the year and look forward to seeing what's install for 2025. Wishing you all the best for the future. I have just thought when when you mentioned about another vehicle which is a bit different. I recon you are thinking of a camper van. Look forward to the next one.
Hi Ian, Thank you very much for your videos from "my" Pembrokeshire and about Fuji gear. Despite I am Swiss and I live in Switzerland, I feel more at home in Pembrokeshire than anywehre else....and my Pembrokeshire Corgi Henry thinks alike .. 😊 Best wishes for a Happy and prosperous year to you! Henry and I look forward to watching your videos in 2025!
The conditions were certainly not ideal yet you still pulled off a fabulous shot of that rock outcrop. Looking forward to your further photo adventures in 2025 Ian.
I can whole heartedly recommend the 100-400, awesome lens. I hear you about the need for variety of photography when out shooting landscapes, I love shooting macro when out shooting landscape and the light isn’t playing ball! Not to mention macro lenses are a lot lighter than telephoto lenses
Total recommendation: rent the lenses first, then decide on the purchase… I’m in a different system but the 150-600mm is an excellent lens. The 100-400mm was always in the limit of being too short.
totally agree....you will regret the 100-400....I am using the 150-600 also,I have used the T.C2x with it no problem but I have only used it once.I am hoping to change up to the 60-600mm by sigma..both lenses are weighty but you get used to it.The 150-600mm is also great for landscape,believe it or not & thats why I want to go with the 60-600mm,which would make it a one lens system for me....I am running the Leica SL2.
@@dmystify1381 I have both a 100-400mm and 180-600mm. The former is often too short for wildlife photos at its longest, and the latter is too long for landscapes at its shortest. Each outing around my neighbourhood means a choice of what lens I take. For travels, I try to take both.
Merci Ian pour toutes ces vidéos de 2024 , passez de bonnes fêtes de fin d'année. Vivement les prochains contenus pour 2025 . Perso de choisirais le Fuji 150-600mm qui est de grande qualité optique. Perso j'ai eu le 100-400 mm mais c'est un peu court pour de l'animalier . Pour les objectifs de paysage, le Sigma 10-18 f2,8 et le 18-50mm f2,8 sont terrible , léger et de très bonnes qualités et moins cher. Merci encore à bientôt .
There's just a few photographers that I watch on TH-cam these days. You could say that you are one of those WORTH watching! Cheers Ian 👍 PS: Henry was the first person that I subscribed to - don't want you to get big headed, mate - haha
Great video, as always. If I could recommend a lens, I would suggest the Tamron 150-500. It truly is a high-quality lens, great build quality, and the image quality is outstanding. I had the fuji 100-400 for quite a while. Although a quality lens, with a build quality better than most, I think the tamron produced slightly better images.
Hi Ian, thanks for your great content in 2024. I have 150 600 lens and can thoroughly recommend it. You have to get your head around the fact you are going to shoot at high iso but in saying that the images look extremely clean and usable. I shoot shutter priority and let the camera work out aperture and iso. It will always choose f8 or 5.6 and minimum iso. The front wheel on my xh2 is easy to control shutter speed and camera does the rest. Image stabilisation makes it easy to shoot hand held. I have just got the 16 55 mk2 and all I can say is "get it!" Amazing !!.
Hallo Ian , Ich bin aus Deutschland und ich möchte dir sagen das ich mit dem 100 - 400 von Canon schöne Tieraufnahmen gemacht habe und sehr zufrieden bin !! Tolles Video und schöne Landschaft !!!!
Hello Ian: My kit is very similar to yours in the Fuji system. I purchased the 700-300 when It first came out and was impressed by how well it worked with the 1.4 teleconverter. Yes you lose a stop of light which may be more of an issue in the UK than it is in Western Canada where we get a lot of sunny days in the winter. I also owned the 100-400, which I was never completely happy with. I found the lens to be OK bur nor stellar. The performance with the teleconverter was not easy to use. Lots of hunting for focus which often led to me missing a shot. (I had an xt3 at the time, may be better with an xh2) As a result I had a lot of shots of empty branches where a bird used to be sitting. I now use the 150-600 when I'm on short walks and local hikes or near the car along with the xh2. I find it to be an excellent lens but on cloudy days in the winter (like today) it is dark at F8, although the images are very sharp even wide open. When weight is more of an issue, such as hikes in the Rocky Mountains with significant elevation gain, I take the 70-300 and the teleconverter. Light, extremely good image quality and generally a good reach (300x1.4x1.5) gives 630mm full frame equivalent. You are right each stop of light comes at a considerable cost. I toyed with the idea of breaking into the piggy bank and purchasing a 500 f5.6 but there is no way I can justify the enormous cost of this lens for a stop of light. All the best for 2025
I think you have a valid point about the Fuji 100-400. I've owned it and a 1.4x teleconverter and I was not convinced by the pairing on an X-T4. Sigma's 100-400 is lighter but doesn't have a teleconverter option. Frankly I'm going to hold out for the 500mm f5.6 and save for it. It will be a while as I'm fairly broke at the moment after a house move. I think that when one gets over the 400mm in a zoom, if weight is an option, and it is for me, the the 500 becomes a hot prospect with better optics.
Hi Ian. I really enjoy your videos. I have the Fujifilm 150-600 and I haven’t found it too heavy to carry. It’s actually not as heavy as some other lenses for that focal range. I used to use the Sigma 150-500 with my previous camera and that was heavier. I find it ergonomic to carry by the lens foot as I’m walking around. But it does limit what else I carry which is usually only one other lens so it is a space issue in the backpack. I imagine the best thing is to try out both telephotos and see which you prefer. I loved your Stonechat image. All the best!
Nice video! The 100-400, 150-600 are both great lenses, I was thinking of getting the new 500 f5.6 to pair with the 70-300 as a nice light setup. With the new standard lens you mentioned it would cover most everything you could shoot. Just a thought
It's a great suggestion, but I would only recommend the new XF 500mm if you plan to shoot a lot of birds. The XF 150-600MM is greatly complemented by the 70-300mm if you ask me, but it compliments better that 500mm. The 150-600mm is certainly more flexible but slower.
I’m excited to hear you do more wildlife photography. Wildlife photography has become my major focus over the last 18 months. I shoot on Fujifilm X-H2s. I was lucky to get a great price on a used Fujifilm 200mm f2 + 1.4x for speed and low light. I have the Fujifilm 150-600 for reach and flexibility. I rented the Fujifilm 100-400 prior to purchasing the 150-600. For me I preferred the internal zoom of the 150-600 as it’s easier to balance on a tripod or monopod or handheld. The extra reach is really helpful for smaller birds. On the 100-400 the zoom creep was really annoying for me, as it would zoom out when you walked, rather than retain the focal length I set. The aperture difference is bigger on paper than in reality as the 150-600 is sharp wide open, whereas the 100-400 is best stopped down. At 400mm the 150-600 is f7.1 Weight wise the 150-600 is only 60g heavier if you plan to use 1.4x teleconverter with the 100-400. We all have different needs that’s why there are so many choices. I just thought I’d share my decision process, in case it was helpful.
Thanks for the update. I’m also using an X-H2 (that’s what brought me to your channel), and have been using the 16-80 (which I’d say is “ok but nothing special”), and the 70-300 (pretty good). I recently got the 80mm macro which I like a lot, and the Viltrox 13mm (also like a lot so far, but haven’t had a chance to use much yet). I share your desire to learn wildlife / bird photography and I think I will rent the 100-400 and the 150-600 to see how I like them. I have the 1.4 TC as well.
I use the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters with the 70-300mm on my X-T4. They work beautifully, no degradation of the image at all because that lens is so sharp. If you put the 2x on a 100-400mm then you're looking at 1200mm of total reach. Who needs that haha!
I struggled so much trying to decide between an adapted Sigma 150-600mm C, Fuji's XF 150-600mm, the Tamron 100-500mm, and the Sigma and Fuji 100-400mm lenses. In the end I was able to get a deal on a like new XF 150-600mm for $1500 USD, and I am so happy I went with it. For the type of environment you are (cloudy/rainy) internal zoom makes the most sense. The XF 150-600mm is surprisingly light and has beautiful rendering. That being said, if you want to go more hardcore with wildlife photography, you're still on time to invest in a system with better AF (because once you try to shoot fast moving subjects you start to get quickly frustrated with FUJIFILM's mediocre AF). Good luck and happy new year!
Hi Ian, I chose the Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 instead of the 16-55. It's sharp and the AF seems to work really well. I tried the 100-400 but went with the 70-300 because of the weight. The 150-600 is very long rather than heavy and doesn't fit in many backpacks but is really good based on the images I have seen.. Whatever you choose I look forward to seeing the results.
XF 100-400mm zoom length not only is heavy as a dead dunkey, it also takes a hell of space in the camera bag... i owe one, doing a lot of landscape photography, but i have to admit i hardly ever take it for that, i mostly use it for other topics (events photography)
I have the 100-400mm and love it. For wildlife Fuji does best with sitting birds and other "not too active" type shots. If I'm out shooting specifically for wildlife that may be very active - aka birds in flight. I reach for my Nikon D850 and my Sigma 60-600mm lens. Years ago I was planning on selling all my Nikon gear and moving to Fuji...until I tried to shoot active wildlife with my X-T4 - not good. This is why I'm keeping my D850. The 100-400mm also does great with close in macro shots. I've gotten great macro shots with that lens. Cheers on your new car purchase and best of luck in the new gear acquisition.
I have the 70-300 + 1.4 tele, pretty versatile combo. I had the 100-400, fantastic lens. I swapped it for 150-600. In good light it is awesome, great AF & very sharp. As good, probably better that the 100-400. All lenses can use the 1.4 tele. In good light the long lens bang for buck puts you well into the realms of a £4000+ canon, sony & nikon wildlife lenses. It is a leap up. Give it a try, a must have for Fuji wildlife adventure the 100-400 can't give. Hope it helps.
In my experience, a 100-400 is perfect for an APS-C camera with 40 megapixel, and you are correct, the wider the aperture the better! That’s equivalent to 150-600 in Full Frame. I don’t think you’ll need the 1.4 teleconverter often - adding a 1.4 teleconverter is more than enough.
I'll be interested to see what you go with and how it performs for you. I've been using the 70-300 with the 1.4TC, and for the most part I'm happy with it, but the image quality can suffer a bit. I would also like a little more reach at times. The new 500mm is sure enticing, but expensive.
I personally recommend that you try the Fuji 100-400mm first. I didn't have a good experience with it. Since it's heavy and doesn't have great image quality over 350mm, I switched to the 70-300mm. My landscape and hiking experience is more pleasant with that choice. The Fujinon 70-300mm also has some macro capabilities that the 100-400mm does not have.
On my Fujifilm XH2 I use the 100-400mm Fujifilm and recently added the 1.4 converter for birds and wildlife, the downside is the increasing loss of the one f stop,Fujifilm just released a new 500mm 5.6, it's not cheap but maybe your best option. Good luck.
Ian, I traded the 100-400 for the 150-600 and much prefer the longer reach of the 150-600. If you’re worried about the gap, the 50-140 is an excellent lens (though a bit heavier) for filling the gap.
The 150-600 is a gorgeous lens and is significantly lighter than others with similar range. It even works with the 2X, though f11 is a pain. The 16-80 surprised me greatly and I use it far more than the 16-55. I do love that Viltrox as well. The additional lenses for the X100VI are great as well, making it more useable. It's become my main camera for model work because of the leaf shutter and ease of carry.
Good luck with getting your hands on the mark 2 16-55. Mine has been on pre order since early November with a camera shop not a million miles from where you do a lot of your filming!! In fairness it’s not their fault just a question of stock supply , something Fuji have a bit of a rep for😂😂😂
@@ian_worthJust a quick follow up, Carmarthen Cameras came up trumps and it arrived today. First impression is how much lighter and smaller it is than the original. In fact I did a double take thinking they might have sent an 18-55 in error. This is going to be a great walk about lens for travel.
Some of my best Wildlife images have actually been taken with my Sony 210mm kit lens. The 70-350 obviously can help, but it's not exactly a 'carry all day' on your back lens, unless you are touring the bird hides or something.
It's difficult to offer advice without a budget, but as you considered the 150-600, I'll take £1700 as a ballpark. Im a Fuji/Canon shooter, the former for family stuff and lightweight options, and the latter for wildlife and landscapes. A used Canon R6, with either a 400/5.6 or a 100-400 zoom can be doable in that price range. Animal eye AF, IBIS, high ISO capabilities, it's a very good setup. If I were you, I'd get the 150-600 from the off. As soon as you start birding, the focal length is everything, and you'll soon want to upgrade. I know you've already told someone you want to combine landscape/wildlife, but they really are incompatible for me. I have a Canon FF, the 16-35/4, 70-200/2.8, 100-400, 300/2.8, and 500/4. For landscapes, it's the 16-35 and 70-200 ( sometimes I swap the 70-200 for the 100-400 ), for wildlife, it's one of the other options. The 100-400 is usually the winner, its the best of both worlds. If I'm not going too far, it's the 500/4 everytime, its hard to take a bad pic with that lens.
Hi Ian. What a great channel:) Have you considered a change to Micro Four Thirds? Panasonic and OM System offer a great range of lenses. They are lighter than FF equivalents. Don't listen to the FF "know it alls" telling us that MFT cannot be used for this and does not do that, etc. You say you are leaning toward wildlife photography, OM System is geared up for that as well as other genres. In one of your earlier videos you told us of how one of your lenses was damaged because your bag was stored in a damp area. I leave my gear in my bag but I have a good amount of silca bags with my gear. The silca deals well with any sort of moisture. Cheers, Ivan.
I was going to suggest the same thing. My LUMIX G9II and 100-400 weigh less than my old Sigma 150-600 Contemporary. Plus the effective doubling of focal length, ff equivalent of 200-800. Chopped my Canon equipment for LUMIX and don’t regret it one bit.
ive had the X-T5 for a while now but 2024 has had limited use. I also use the 100-400 with tripod and sharp photos from it ( well worth buying). good watch as ever ... if you do buy a teleconverter I would appreciate a review within your video especially if you buy the 100-400 lens
Yeah the light goes from bad to perfect if the bird just stands the right way :) I guess it is like scouting a landscape possibility, but instead of the right day you need the right action
Ian, I see a van in your future. 😂 For wildlife I would recommend a 150-600mm lens. I use both the 100-400 with a 1.4 teleconverter (Canon APS-C) and a Sigma 150-600 C. I prefer the larger lens but it does get heavy. For landscapes I carry the 10-18, 18-150, and the 100-400. The 18-150 is a good all round lens when I want to hike light. When I go out to shoot wildlife, I only carry the one heavy lens. Good luck with your choices my friend.
I have the xh2 and 100-400 . You can use the the built in teleconverter setting in the menu, sold my 1.4tele as I didnt realise in menu teleconverter settings 1.4 and 2😂
Yes digital but tracking is not the best possibly 1 out of 7 can be sharp for me have not tried using firmware 5.1 since updating. Love fuji but possibly going to change to sony or canon as continuous auto focus has been a nightmare for me 👍
Nice video Ian. I have a similar setup to you. I have a Canon R7, and I mostly take landscapes. I have a Sigma 150-600 for ocasional wildlife photos. Im less intersted in capturing rare animals, and more interested in animals and birds in nice compositions. Something else to consider is the sigma 105 macro. I use this a lot more than the 150-600 and insects and other small things are always in abundance, plus in macro I can always use a small tourch to apply some aritficial light from the side to stop an image being flat. I usually use my headtourch shone through a diffuser or even an off camera small godox flash with a small diffuser box to the side. Do consider a macro lens to lift those days with boring light. And macro does not aways mean tiny things, it can also be capturing super fine detail of things like rock pools. For this I also use a polariser on my 105 macro. Its my intention to photograph the life in rockpools in 2025. You will definitely have a lot of fun with a long lens, and develop some extra fitness carrying it. Something else to try with it is scene compression. Joe Cornish has a nice video using the 150-600 to compress a scene.
Thanks Ian for all your advice. Re the nature/ bird lens, have you considered the great and fairly light Canon 400 f5.6 with a Fringer converter. I think second hand EF lenses are very good value today. I used the Fringer with my Canon 100-400 on an X-T3 with great results but the weight of the canon 100-400 was too high for me so I sold the Canon lens and now use the Fuji 70-300.
I'm not familiar with Fuji's current line of gear but I understand your desire to stick with the system, it is however difficult to ignore the amount of wildlife photographers that have flocked (no pun intended) to OM-System for the amazing benefits it has for lightweight super telephoto photography
HI Ian, good video and excellent explanations!. I first noticed that your lenses of choice are so very similar to mine, when I bought that big 16 to 55 some years ago I more or less gave up using the 10 to 24 and the others because of the outstanding image quality and spectacular focusing speed. I did have the 100 to 400 at that time as well but was a trifle frustrated by the image quality and small aperture, especially with the tele-converter on it. When the 70 to 300 appeared I was tempted but waited a year or two, now that I have it I find myself using it so much, more than all the others!, it is absolutely wonderful for extreme close-ups of small insect, tiny flowers and fungi!, it also allows the application of the tele-converters giving significant total magnification at relatively small distances, sadly at wide aperture the shallow depth of field is an issue and I am too lazy to bother with focus stacking!. Now that this new 500 mm lens is coming I am very tempted because of the outstanding image quality and relatively wide aperture, three thousand pounds is too much to pay for me at this time! so I will stay as I am for now. Cheers, Richard.
Good luck with a new genre most TH-camrs only try one! I don’t do landscape but do do wild life and tried Fuji a few years back. It appeared to see the subject but when examined in post missed critical focus a lot. I think the autofocus has improved since then but no wildlife channel I follow shoots with Fuji. I think 100-400 is going to be too short in many cases and I’d not put a xconvereter on any long lens unless starting at f2.8 or f4. Well unless you’ve going to shooting in sunnier areas of the world than the UK. For wildlife you need long glass, 200-600 is a good starting point Sony do a g master which is good value and pair with say a used A9II. Never shot Canon for wildlife but take a look at Aussie Duade Paton who is awesome ( but has the light) and shoots canon and is very realistic about the good and not so good points.
High Ian. I have the 70-300, the 100-400 and the 1.4 tc on my XT5. The 100-400 is a great lens for landscape and short range wildlife. The 1.4 tc doesn't really help much. The loss of light and image quality isn't worth it unless perhaps you are shooting video where the image quality loss would not be that noticeable. The 100-400 is so cheap used that it is probably your best bet. The 100-400 also does very well as a telephoto macro lens. I usually try to shoot my 100-400 at f7.1 to f11. At 5.6 and 400mm the IQ is not that good.
A decent affordable option which gives you a bit more reach and better close focusing is the Tamron 150-500. Heavier than the other options but it paired well with my 70-300 for birding or wildlife from the vehicle / campsite when I was shooting Fuji. The r6ii & 100-500 has been a noticeable (but not massive) improvement and the r7ii is rumored to have stacked 32 megapixel sensor which for me is a better set up than having 2 lenses with one body.
Ian, I'm sure you already know but just in case you don't. Fuji do a hire service in the UK so you could check out the lenses. I've used all the telephoto lenses being the Fuji fanboy that I am, but the only one that really impressed me has been the 50-140 sometimes paired with the 1.4x....150-600mm can only use it bright light, 100-400mm nice but starts getting really soft after 300mm, 70-300 pretty much the same beyond 200mm. Sigma 100-400mm very decent especially for the money but AF doesn't quite match Fuji 100-400mm. I now use my Nikon Z for the rare times where I need long reach (200-500mm). To me my Fuji's have become the system I use with prime lenses.
Ian, to me this was a very relaxing video to watch, and your image at the end is beautiful. A question I've always wondered about. Is there anything wrong with keeping a circular polarizer on you camera most of the time? It's adjustable or do you have a concern of possibly losing a stop of light or the frequent need to use ND filters?
I guess not every scene requires polarisation. I wouldn't use a polariser on a wide angle lens either. So for me, it only comes out when it's crucial to the composition.
Having had many systems, for someone looking at wildlife as well as landscape, with smaller form factor/less weight imho you’d be better iffy to sell the Fuji gear and move to the Olympus OM system. The 4/3 size means lenses are even smaller and have more crop factor ‘magnification’, they have plenty of suitable v.sharp longer lenses, and with their world leading IBIS and stacking tech are incredibly good at macro and more than good enough for online viewing and 90% of prints.
@ Certainly if you wanted to do close up nature or macro shots. Their in-body focus stacking is unparalleled and saves hours otherwise needed in software processing, blending etc.
A while ago I was considering getting xf100-400 but seeing online picture quality and I don't like it at all but if you fancy that focal length better go for Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 OSS G Master Lens, if you pair with A7RV you will get a good combo . I also contemplating getting A7RV but instead go for 70-200 f2.8 mk ii
I have the 70-300 and the 100-400. I use the 70-300 much more but the 100-400 has a good edge on IQ. The thing is that it’s an older lens and I’m assuming that fujifilm will probably continue to replace the red badge lens with new models. And if that’s the case I would wait. There are alternatives from Sigma and Tamron and I would test those too.
The 150-600mm is a great lens with great AF but yes, it’s big and a bit heavy. I have a separate carrying case just for this lens with camera attached. I do love it though. The 100-400mm lens is smaller however my own feeling is that it’s just not a very big increase over the 70-300mm which is so much smaller and lighter. How about saving up for the new 500mm prime? Fixed focal length but might be a good compromise between the zoom lenses if you want the extra reach?
Dear Ian, I had the same thoughts, I exchanged the Fuji set for the Canon R6MK II with some lenses... Within a month I changed back... Not for the quality that is great, but for other reasons. These reasons were definitely 'Weight, Size, and expenses. For quality lenses you pay triple, double the price of the Fuji set. For weight, average difference is more then half the weight more sometime compared to Fuji. As in camera or lenses or combined.... Then the difference of setting! No aperture or time settings, every setting you have to do on you screen...every change of lenses are different, a sort of other way around. Please when ever you can work with another system try it first in practice and then decide. I am really happy that I could change back, greets Guus
I like the idea of several projects. I'll adopt that, thanks :-) btw, it's "homing in". "honing" means sharpening. I wish you luck choosing another car/vehicle.
I owned the 100-400 plus the TC1.4. It worked well, but it's too similar to the 70-300. F8 is often too dark though. So I would have a closer look into the newer / longer options from Fuji and Tamron.
What I say may surprise you. But when I’m traveling, I carry the 16-55 2.8, and when I need a tele-photo I bring the 90 F2. I was using this for telephoto shots which I could crop. Now with the XT5 and 40 megapixels it’s even a better choice. Just think how light your tele-photo would be.
If it is not big or hairy or nasty, or big hairy and nasty it's not really wildlife. Can I suggest you and a couple of photographer mates head to Africa and spend a few weeks in Kenya, you will not regret it. Hire your own driver tracker spotter ( all in one ) and get one of the small tour companies to work out a trip for you with accommodation. ( can recommend one if needed ) For your camera, maybe you can consider a Tamron 150 to 500mm on your xh2, it is equivalent to 640 mm on that camera and that will be needed. Fast AF, sharp and half the price as what has been discussed here. We used that same rig for 5 weeks in Africa and it handled all the dust and speed bumps in the back of a Toyota Landcruser troop-carrier no probs and is still going strong and will for the next trip.
Hi Ian, I own the 1.4x Fuji extender & use it with the 50 to 140. The extender is very sharp & a lightweight addition. As for downsizing your kit, have you considered the XT 30 mk II ? I have a number of F1.4 & 1.2 lenses but the weight is a killer as you get older. I've just started purchasing the fujicron lenses, lightweight & perfect for overseas travel. I have 3 of the 5 & I'm super impressed with the image quality. They also have the advantage of weather sealing. Really enjoy your channel, thank you. Cheers Steve
I know it's a different way of thinking and I've mentioned this before but the reason I went into GFX and the resolution it actually allows me to carry less lenses. I carry only two lenses now often on my shoots which is the 20 to 35 which is 16 to 28 but I can crop into 70mm and get a 50 megapixel file on my 100 to 200. I can crop in to insane levels at 400 mm with a 50 megapixel file or even 450 mm and retained a 43 megapixel ..... It's just a different way of thinking and the GFX 100 S doesn't weigh as much as what people think it does it weighs less than many full frame cameras. Thankfully I have found my ideal set up. I never intended to go into medium format but because Fuji didn't make a full frame camera, I ended up there but now I'm here. I'm loving it but yes, having a longer lens is good but it's often difficult to carry two. .... sometimes I carry my 35 to 70 only one lens but I can crop into 200 mm and retain a 40 megapixel file with a 70 mm lens so this is one of the reasons I love GFX and it just doesn't get mentioned enough the insane amount of cropping that you can do create so many creative options thank you for your year. Thank you for all your videos.. oddly I still have my XT5 but I'm actually trading it with a friend for an X 100Vi the reason I'm doing that is just so I've got a small fun camera to play around with and it's not costing me any money to change over
What about the 1.4TC and the 70-300? You lose a stop relative to the 100-400, but the cost is much less and you get more versatility. Maybe rent one and see?? You are out often in good/decent light so you aren’t likely to be hampered often by f8.
My issue with the 70-300 is that it isn't that sharp at 300mm wide open, well my copy isn't. So I would need to stop down as well which would mean I'm at f11 with the 1.4 converter. Then i'm battling with diffraction on the xh2. So it's probably not going to work out too well. I'm going to test it out in the new year, these are just my initial thoughts, I might be wrong.
Really good points. The 100-400, as you say in the video, then is in the lead for your needs. Sample variation is an annoying thing. It explains to a degree why people have different opinions about lenses. For example, my copy of the 70-300 is decently sharp at 300mm. Yours might be less sharp. Anyways, great video and channel! I am enjoying your work from all the over here in Canada. Cheers and happy new year!
Have you considered getting an OM SYSTEM (Olympus)?...you can get a used one...they are ideal for transporting, excellent quality and light lenses for wildlife!!!
I liked the video and the last photo. Are we thinking of maybe buying a camper van or buying a vehicle and converting it into a camper van????? Cheers.
📸 - Join us on the Lake District Tour - www.henryturnerphotography.co.uk/photography-tours/p/lake-district-photography-tour
Others have said this already, but I highly recommend renting the 100-400 before you buy it. I tried it and honestly came away unimpressed. The 70-300 you currently have is such a great lens for the size and bang-for-buck. By comparison the Fuji 100-400 It is a *lot* bigger and heavier and it really doesn’t give an image quality boost. Sigma have a 100-400 for Fuji mount now which is a fair bit smaller than Fuji’s offering. Maybe rent them both and the 150-600 and have a little series of videos on big lenses? I’m sure lots of us would love to see that.
Thanks for all the great videos you shared last year and hope you have a great start to 2025
Thank you Ian for all the wonderful videos this year. All the best for 2025.
Many thanks, much appreciated, and to you 🙏
Hi Ian. As a fellow X-H2 shooter, who has considered similar options, let me share a couple of observations.
On the tele for wildlife question, I initially considered the 100-400 , but finally settled for the 70-300 with a 1.4 TC. That combo gives me an effective focal length of up to 420mm, only a 1-stop "light tax", and the ability to keep the size and weight advantages of the 70-300. Coupled with the ability to crop deeply on the 40mp sensor, this has proven more than adequate for my purposes. There have been rumors that Fuji is planning to release a new version of the 100-400 in 2025, which if true means that second-hand versions could soon be much more affordable. I've also looked closely at the 150-300, but have decided that, at least at this stage, I don't shoot enough wildlife to justify lugging around that behemoth of a lens.
On the mark II version of the 16-55/f2.8. I received my copy a few weeks ago, and since then have had a chance to use it enough to start forming some judgments. While I can't compare it to the mark 1 version, so far I have not found any significant improvements in sharpness or other dimensions of IQ over the 18-55/f2.8-4 or the 16-80/f4, which was not what I was expecting. The zoom ring is also extremely stiff and does not move smoothly, which could be an issue if you use it for video. And I've seen reviews from some users complaining about debris being found inside the lens---maybe they were just unlucky? Either way, in your position I would not rush into a purchase decision without a good amount of due diligence...
Thanks for the info, very helpful 👍
Great video Ian. A quick comment on the 150-600: I have my xs-10 paired with either that, or the 55-200/18-55 kit lenses, and I cannot express how satisfied I am in a single sentence. Yes the 150 is big and heavy compared to the 70-300, but compared to other super tele zooms it is small and light. Only nikon pf glass compares weight wise, and they are several orders of magnitude more expensive. And in terms of sharpness, color and reach the 70 and 150 simply do not compare. The big guy has higher resolving acutance at 600 than the small one has at 200 if that tells you anything. Also the 150 is the best autofocusing lens for the xf platform, only matched by the new 16-55 red badge. And the colors man, they are just beautiful in that special fuji way - I took some quick random snaps of ducks yesterday at 500 and 600mm, and the color, contrast and light fall-off are just so beautiful and vibrant sooc that I am going to print those snaps straight from jpegs.
It's also worth mentioning that with the 150-600 you will never need a teleconverter. It is hard enough acquiring the subject at 900mm equiv, I can only make sense of greater reach for veeeery specific use cases. Also did I mention that subject acquisition at that range is hard? Because it is hard.
Anyway cheers, all the best
I look forward to seeing what you expand your genre to. You do an amazing job of being so personable on your channel. I appreciate your thoughts on when I was looking at changing from my Canon R5 (and L series glass). I did sell over 18K of gear and right-sized to the Fujifilm line up. Bought the H-S2 first but fell in love with the back up X-T5 and sold the H-S2. Loving the creativity of Fujifilm. Thank you!
May your new year be a prosperous one, all the best Ian. Keep shooting.
You too 👍
Ian, I quite enjoyed the video and loved the rock outcrop image.
Thanks Ian, I always enjoy watching your videos they are inspiring calming and quite interesting watching your creativity. I say go forward with your plans in 2025 and may the year makes it all possible. Cheers from Oregon US.
Thanks so much 👍
I love your concept of shooting multiple genres of photography when you go out! I live in an area where this is an absolute requirement to stay active! Happy New Year!
Thanks so much 👍
Great video. I'm not a big into landscape photography but I did want to say you have a calming and peaceful demeanor and are a great presenter. That is such a very beautiful and isolated place would be fun to wander those hills as you did!
Thanks so much 👍🙏
Hi Ian, I have the Fuji 100 400 for my XT3. its fantastic for picking out detail in landscapes and when I take it instead of the 50 140 it is heavier but not a deal breaker. I am an occasional and opportunistic wildlife photographer and if the correct settings are used , AFC, Constant high burst, high shutter speed and ISO then the results are really ok. I know I could get better results with a high end Sony or Nikon but the Fuji system suits me and I have most of the red badge zooms so heavily invested. Next step up for me will be the XT5. Thanks for all your efforts, I have learned a huge amount from you and wishing you a cracking 2025.
Thanks buddy, thats great 👍
I have the 150-600 and I adore it! Bulky, certainly, but very light. Internal zoom and very well-balanced and the results have been stunning. By the way, it was through the discovery of your channel that swayed my decision to go with the Fuji system, so thank you!!
I can second your opinion. Choosed myself the 150-600 over the 100-400 and i'm really happy with the results. It is sharp with no need to step down and the intern focus is just great and makes the longer build forgotten.
Many thanks, much appreciated 🙏
Thank you for another great year of photography videos Ian. Wishing you and yours a great holiday season. Cheers.
Thanks, you too!
All the best for you and your family, i hope you had a nice christmas time and that the new year turns out to be a good one. Many thanks for all your work and videos. Inspiring photos and helpful tips with some great shown locations, every video is always worth to watch.
Many thanks, much appreciated 🙏
Great video. Have a great Holiday season and all the best in theNew Year to your family and yourself. Looking forward to ypur upcoming adventures.
Thanks so much, happy new year to you too 👍
I've got the 100-400 with the 1.4 converter and it is a very sharp lens. Apart from landscapes my interests are motorcycle racing and, like yourself, trying to get to grips with wildlife photography. I have great admiration for those photographers gaining high quality results with rarer birds (locating and spotting), birds in flight and the reality of photographing wildlife in the low lighting when they are usually most active - is massive. Not least their patience.
Thanks for sharing 🙂
I've got RP with RF 24-240 and R50 with RF 100-400. Both zooms are under-rated. Great IQ. Low weight. Great range. Great value. Both of those are cheap enough to fit on APS-C. Leaves the door open for a body upgrade and keep the same lenses!
And yes, choose your lens before the body!
I wish my 2X would work on the 100-400. I put the 2X on my 50-140, but isn't much different than my 70-300. Have you ever shot on 500mm on a Canon (full-frame) to compare what you get with the 100-400 and your 1.4X?
Look at Simon d'Entremont re wild life tips etc. He's a plain talking common sense Canadian with excellent shots and great advice.
@@FeatureMoments Even if it worked, you are pushing uphill. Are you using FF or APS-C? If FF, then try it on an APS-C camera like the R50.
I have RP + 24-240 and R50 + 100-400. Same batteries and mounts. On the R50 the 100-400 equivalent to FF is 160-640. A little more than the 1.4x converter without the extra glass and weight.
However R50 plus 1.4 converter takes you out to an equivalent of 890mm!
IQ is your question. Ask a store if you can take some sample shots with what you wish to check out.
Just retired and do lots of of walking and really fancy having a go at photographer so just subscribed and let’s see if am up to it
You can do it, thanks for the sub 🙂
Merry Christmas to you and your family.
That location looks like a really good place to investigate.
Thank you for all the video's you have shown us throughout the year and look forward to seeing what's install for 2025.
Wishing you all the best for the future.
I have just thought when when you mentioned about another vehicle which is a bit different.
I recon you are thinking of a camper van.
Look forward to the next one.
Thanks buddy, much appreciated 👍
Hi Ian,
Thank you very much for your videos from "my" Pembrokeshire and about Fuji gear. Despite I am Swiss and I live in Switzerland, I feel more at home in Pembrokeshire than anywehre else....and my Pembrokeshire Corgi Henry thinks alike .. 😊
Best wishes for a Happy and prosperous year to you! Henry and I look forward to watching your videos in 2025!
Many thanks, much appreciated, you too 🙏
The conditions were certainly not ideal yet you still pulled off a fabulous shot of that rock outcrop. Looking forward to your further photo adventures in 2025 Ian.
I can whole heartedly recommend the 100-400, awesome lens. I hear you about the need for variety of photography when out shooting landscapes, I love shooting macro when out shooting landscape and the light isn’t playing ball! Not to mention macro lenses are a lot lighter than telephoto lenses
So true, great to hear you enjoy the 100-400 👍
Total recommendation: rent the lenses first, then decide on the purchase… I’m in a different system but the 150-600mm is an excellent lens. The 100-400mm was always in the limit of being too short.
totally agree....you will regret the 100-400....I am using the 150-600 also,I have used the T.C2x with it no problem but I have only used it once.I am hoping to change up to the 60-600mm by sigma..both lenses are weighty but you get used to it.The 150-600mm is also great for landscape,believe it or not & thats why I want to go with the 60-600mm,which would make it a one lens system for me....I am running the Leica SL2.
Many thanks, much appreciated 👍
@@dmystify1381 I have both a 100-400mm and 180-600mm. The former is often too short for wildlife photos at its longest, and the latter is too long for landscapes at its shortest. Each outing around my neighbourhood means a choice of what lens I take. For travels, I try to take both.
It’s worth renting the lenses to see which you like best 😊 Pete
Totally agree!
Merci Ian pour toutes ces vidéos de 2024 , passez de bonnes fêtes de fin d'année. Vivement les prochains contenus pour 2025 . Perso de choisirais le Fuji 150-600mm qui est de grande qualité optique. Perso j'ai eu le 100-400 mm mais c'est un peu court pour de l'animalier . Pour les objectifs de paysage, le Sigma 10-18 f2,8 et le 18-50mm f2,8 sont terrible , léger et de très bonnes qualités et moins cher. Merci encore à bientôt .
Many thanks, much appreciated 👍🙏
There's just a few photographers that I watch on TH-cam these days. You could say that you are one of those WORTH watching! Cheers Ian 👍 PS: Henry was the first person that I subscribed to - don't want you to get big headed, mate - haha
Thanks buddy, Henry was the first I subscribed to as well 👍
Great video, as always.
If I could recommend a lens, I would suggest the Tamron 150-500. It truly is a high-quality lens, great build quality, and the image quality is outstanding. I had the fuji 100-400 for quite a while. Although a quality lens, with a build quality better than most, I think the tamron produced slightly better images.
Thanks for sharing! 👍
Hi Ian, thanks for your great content in 2024. I have 150 600 lens and can thoroughly recommend it. You have to get your head around the fact you are going to shoot at high iso but in saying that the images look extremely clean and usable. I shoot shutter priority and let the camera work out aperture and iso. It will always choose f8 or 5.6 and minimum iso. The front wheel on my xh2 is easy to control shutter speed and camera does the rest. Image stabilisation makes it easy to shoot hand held. I have just got the 16 55 mk2 and all I can say is "get it!" Amazing !!.
Thanks buddy, that's great 👍
Hallo Ian , Ich bin aus Deutschland und ich möchte dir sagen das ich mit dem 100 - 400 von Canon schöne Tieraufnahmen gemacht habe und sehr zufrieden bin !! Tolles Video und schöne Landschaft !!!!
Hello Ian: My kit is very similar to yours in the Fuji system. I purchased the 700-300 when It first came out and was impressed by how well it worked with the 1.4 teleconverter. Yes you lose a stop of light which may be more of an issue in the UK than it is in Western Canada where we get a lot of sunny days in the winter. I also owned the 100-400, which I was never completely happy with. I found the lens to be OK bur nor stellar. The performance with the teleconverter was not easy to use. Lots of hunting for focus which often led to me missing a shot. (I had an xt3 at the time, may be better with an xh2) As a result I had a lot of shots of empty branches where a bird used to be sitting. I now use the 150-600 when I'm on short walks and local hikes or near the car along with the xh2. I find it to be an excellent lens but on cloudy days in the winter (like today) it is dark at F8, although the images are very sharp even wide open. When weight is more of an issue, such as hikes in the Rocky Mountains with significant elevation gain, I take the 70-300 and the teleconverter. Light, extremely good image quality and generally a good reach (300x1.4x1.5) gives 630mm full frame equivalent. You are right each stop of light comes at a considerable cost. I toyed with the idea of breaking into the piggy bank and purchasing a 500 f5.6 but there is no way I can justify the enormous cost of this lens for a stop of light.
All the best for 2025
We sometimes get sunny days in the summer in the UK.
I think you have a valid point about the Fuji 100-400. I've owned it and a 1.4x teleconverter and I was not convinced by the pairing on an X-T4.
Sigma's 100-400 is lighter but doesn't have a teleconverter option.
Frankly I'm going to hold out for the 500mm f5.6 and save for it. It will be a while as I'm fairly broke at the moment after a house move. I think that when one gets over the 400mm in a zoom, if weight is an option, and it is for me, the the 500 becomes a hot prospect with better optics.
700-300 ? that's some lens 🤡🤡😂😂😂😂😂😂
Many thanks, much appreciated 🙏
Hi Ian. I really enjoy your videos. I have the Fujifilm 150-600 and I haven’t found it too heavy to carry. It’s actually not as heavy as some other lenses for that focal range. I used to use the Sigma 150-500 with my previous camera and that was heavier. I find it ergonomic to carry by the lens foot as I’m walking around. But it does limit what else I carry which is usually only one other lens so it is a space issue in the backpack. I imagine the best thing is to try out both telephotos and see which you prefer. I loved your Stonechat image. All the best!
Thanks so much 👍
Nice video! The 100-400, 150-600 are both great lenses, I was thinking of getting the new 500 f5.6 to pair with the 70-300 as a nice light setup. With the new standard lens you mentioned it would cover most everything you could shoot. Just a thought
it's a very valid thought as well, that might be the direction I go.
It's a great suggestion, but I would only recommend the new XF 500mm if you plan to shoot a lot of birds.
The XF 150-600MM is greatly complemented by the 70-300mm if you ask me, but it compliments better that 500mm.
The 150-600mm is certainly more flexible but slower.
I’m excited to hear you do more wildlife photography.
Wildlife photography has become my major focus over the last 18 months. I shoot on Fujifilm X-H2s. I was lucky to get a great price on a used Fujifilm 200mm f2 + 1.4x for speed and low light. I have the Fujifilm 150-600 for reach and flexibility.
I rented the Fujifilm 100-400 prior to purchasing the 150-600. For me I preferred the internal zoom of the 150-600 as it’s easier to balance on a tripod or monopod or handheld. The extra reach is really helpful for smaller birds. On the 100-400 the zoom creep was really annoying for me, as it would zoom out when you walked, rather than retain the focal length I set.
The aperture difference is bigger on paper than in reality as the 150-600 is sharp wide open, whereas the 100-400 is best stopped down. At 400mm the 150-600 is f7.1
Weight wise the 150-600 is only 60g heavier if you plan to use 1.4x teleconverter with the 100-400.
We all have different needs that’s why there are so many choices. I just thought I’d share my decision process, in case it was helpful.
Thanks for the update. I’m also using an X-H2 (that’s what brought me to your channel), and have been using the 16-80 (which I’d say is “ok but nothing special”), and the 70-300 (pretty good). I recently got the 80mm macro which I like a lot, and the Viltrox 13mm (also like a lot so far, but haven’t had a chance to use much yet). I share your desire to learn wildlife / bird photography and I think I will rent the 100-400 and the 150-600 to see how I like them. I have the 1.4 TC as well.
That's a great idea, I think I will probably do the same 👍
@6:40 true! Me too. So what do you use for vlogging this video? What’s in your hand? Seems light, wide, and decent!
I use the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters with the 70-300mm on my X-T4. They work beautifully, no degradation of the image at all because that lens is so sharp. If you put the 2x on a 100-400mm then you're looking at 1200mm of total reach. Who needs that haha!
Great video made！Thank you for sharing！
Thanks so much 👍🙏
I’m going with the canon R8 great auto focus and good supply of lenses
Looking forward to new adventures in 2025. I have the X-H2 with the 100-400 and it works great for wildlife. 600mm FF reach works well for wildlife.
Great to hear!
I struggled so much trying to decide between an adapted Sigma 150-600mm C, Fuji's XF 150-600mm, the Tamron 100-500mm, and the Sigma and Fuji 100-400mm lenses.
In the end I was able to get a deal on a like new XF 150-600mm for $1500 USD, and I am so happy I went with it.
For the type of environment you are (cloudy/rainy) internal zoom makes the most sense. The XF 150-600mm is surprisingly light and has beautiful rendering.
That being said, if you want to go more hardcore with wildlife photography, you're still on time to invest in a system with better AF (because once you try to shoot fast moving subjects you start to get quickly frustrated with FUJIFILM's mediocre AF).
Good luck and happy new year!
Nice one Ian, I would try to rent or borrow any new lenses your considering to see which one fits best… Looking forward to your upcoming adventures… 👍
So true, great advice 👍
Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for watching!
Hi Ian, I chose the Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 instead of the 16-55. It's sharp and the AF seems to work really well. I tried the 100-400 but went with the 70-300 because of the weight. The 150-600 is very long rather than heavy and doesn't fit in many backpacks but is really good based on the images I have seen..
Whatever you choose I look forward to seeing the results.
Thank soo much 👍
Super video!🙂
Thanks so much 👍
XF 100-400mm zoom length not only is heavy as a dead dunkey, it also takes a hell of space in the camera bag... i owe one, doing a lot of landscape photography, but i have to admit i hardly ever take it for that, i mostly use it for other topics (events photography)
I have the 100-400mm and love it. For wildlife Fuji does best with sitting birds and other "not too active" type shots. If I'm out shooting specifically for wildlife that may be very active - aka birds in flight. I reach for my Nikon D850 and my Sigma 60-600mm lens. Years ago I was planning on selling all my Nikon gear and moving to Fuji...until I tried to shoot active wildlife with my X-T4 - not good. This is why I'm keeping my D850. The 100-400mm also does great with close in macro shots. I've gotten great macro shots with that lens. Cheers on your new car purchase and best of luck in the new gear acquisition.
I have the 70-300 + 1.4 tele, pretty versatile combo. I had the 100-400, fantastic lens. I swapped it for 150-600. In good light it is awesome, great AF & very sharp. As good, probably better that the 100-400. All lenses can use the 1.4 tele. In good light the long lens bang for buck puts you well into the realms of a £4000+ canon, sony & nikon wildlife lenses. It is a leap up. Give it a try, a must have for Fuji wildlife adventure the 100-400 can't give. Hope it helps.
Thanks so much,
In my experience, a 100-400 is perfect for an APS-C camera with 40 megapixel, and you are correct, the wider the aperture the better! That’s equivalent to 150-600 in Full Frame. I don’t think you’ll need the 1.4 teleconverter often - adding a 1.4 teleconverter is more than enough.
Many thanks, much appreciated 👍
I'll be interested to see what you go with and how it performs for you. I've been using the 70-300 with the 1.4TC, and for the most part I'm happy with it, but the image quality can suffer a bit. I would also like a little more reach at times. The new 500mm is sure enticing, but expensive.
So true 👍
I personally recommend that you try the Fuji 100-400mm first.
I didn't have a good experience with it. Since it's heavy and doesn't have great image quality over 350mm, I switched to the 70-300mm.
My landscape and hiking experience is more pleasant with that choice. The Fujinon 70-300mm also has some macro capabilities that the 100-400mm does not have.
Thanks for sharing 👍
On my Fujifilm XH2 I use the 100-400mm Fujifilm and recently added the 1.4 converter for birds and wildlife, the downside is the increasing loss of the one f stop,Fujifilm just released a new 500mm 5.6, it's not cheap but maybe your best option. Good luck.
Yes, that prime lens looks to be a great option, I don't think my budget would stretch that far though.
Ian, I traded the 100-400 for the 150-600 and much prefer the longer reach of the 150-600. If you’re worried about the gap, the 50-140 is an excellent lens (though a bit heavier) for filling the gap.
I dabble in wildlife photography and use the 70-300mm with the 1.4x teleconvertor. I'm very happy with the results
Thanks for the info, very helpful 👍
I've owned the 100-400 for a couple of years and am very happy with it
it's 5.6 at 400 before a TC
Good to hear 👍
I use the Nikon Nikkor Z 100-400mm S f/4.5-5.6 with the 1.4TC for my long and wildlife. I recommend one like it.
Thanks so much 👍
There isn’t a new version of the 16-55 f2.8. It’s a 16-50 variable, which is a replacement for the kit 18-55.
Yes, and a new 16-55 F2.8 MK2
@ ah I missed that one. Thanks for the info.
The 150-600 is a gorgeous lens and is significantly lighter than others with similar range. It even works with the 2X, though f11 is a pain. The 16-80 surprised me greatly and I use it far more than the 16-55. I do love that Viltrox as well. The additional lenses for the X100VI are great as well, making it more useable. It's become my main camera for model work because of the leaf shutter and ease of carry.
Thanks for sharing
Good luck with getting your hands on the mark 2 16-55. Mine has been on pre order since early November with a camera shop not a million miles from where you do a lot of your filming!! In fairness it’s not their fault just a question of stock supply , something Fuji have a bit of a rep for😂😂😂
I'm in no rush, thankfully 🙂
@@ian_worthJust a quick follow up, Carmarthen Cameras came up trumps and it arrived today. First impression is how much lighter and smaller it is than the original. In fact I did a double take thinking they might have sent an 18-55 in error. This is going to be a great walk about lens for travel.
Some of my best Wildlife images have actually been taken with my Sony 210mm kit lens. The 70-350 obviously can help, but it's not exactly a 'carry all day' on your back lens, unless you are touring the bird hides or something.
Thanks for the info, very helpful 👍
Get the 100-400 in your hands and test it, bulky but good. For emergency get the 1.4 converter for a good reach under reasonable light conditions.
Many thanks, much appreciated 🙏
It's difficult to offer advice without a budget, but as you considered the 150-600, I'll take £1700 as a ballpark. Im a Fuji/Canon shooter, the former for family stuff and lightweight options, and the latter for wildlife and landscapes.
A used Canon R6, with either a 400/5.6 or a 100-400 zoom can be doable in that price range. Animal eye AF, IBIS, high ISO capabilities, it's a very good setup.
If I were you, I'd get the 150-600 from the off. As soon as you start birding, the focal length is everything, and you'll soon want to upgrade.
I know you've already told someone you want to combine landscape/wildlife, but they really are incompatible for me. I have a Canon FF, the 16-35/4, 70-200/2.8, 100-400, 300/2.8, and 500/4.
For landscapes, it's the 16-35 and 70-200 ( sometimes I swap the 70-200 for the 100-400 ), for wildlife, it's one of the other options. The 100-400 is usually the winner, its the best of both worlds. If I'm not going too far, it's the 500/4 everytime, its hard to take a bad pic with that lens.
Many thanks, much appreciated 🙏
Hi Ian. What a great channel:) Have you considered a change to Micro Four Thirds? Panasonic and OM System offer a great range of lenses. They are lighter than FF equivalents. Don't listen to the FF "know it alls" telling us that MFT cannot be used for this and does not do that, etc. You say you are leaning toward wildlife photography, OM System is geared up for that as well as other genres.
In one of your earlier videos you told us of how one of your lenses was damaged because your bag was stored in a damp area. I leave my gear in my bag but I have a good amount of silca bags with my gear. The silca deals well with any sort of moisture. Cheers, Ivan.
I was going to suggest the same thing.
My LUMIX G9II and 100-400 weigh less than my old Sigma 150-600 Contemporary. Plus the effective doubling of focal length, ff equivalent of 200-800.
Chopped my Canon equipment for LUMIX and don’t regret it one bit.
ive had the X-T5 for a while now but 2024 has had limited use. I also use the 100-400 with tripod and sharp photos from it ( well worth buying). good watch as ever ... if you do buy a teleconverter I would appreciate a review within your video especially if you buy the 100-400 lens
Thanks so much 👍
Wildlife is a lot of fun, and it might be a great thing to focus on when the light isn't perfect for landscape.
My thoughts too, Although I'm learning that light is just as important for wildlife as it is for landscapes, maybe just a different type of light.
Yeah the light goes from bad to perfect if the bird just stands the right way :) I guess it is like scouting a landscape possibility, but instead of the right day you need the right action
Ian, I see a van in your future. 😂 For wildlife I would recommend a 150-600mm lens. I use both the 100-400 with a 1.4 teleconverter (Canon APS-C) and a Sigma 150-600 C. I prefer the larger lens but it does get heavy. For landscapes I carry the 10-18, 18-150, and the 100-400. The 18-150 is a good all round lens when I want to hike light. When I go out to shoot wildlife, I only carry the one heavy lens. Good luck with your choices my friend.
Thank you 🙏
I have the xh2 and 100-400 .
You can use the the built in teleconverter setting in the menu, sold my 1.4tele as I didnt realise in menu teleconverter settings 1.4 and 2😂
I'm assuming that's a digital crop? If so, would it be better to crop in post?
Yes digital but tracking is not the best possibly 1 out of 7 can be sharp for me have not tried using firmware 5.1 since updating.
Love fuji but possibly going to change to sony or canon as continuous auto focus has been a nightmare for me 👍
I shoot primarily wildlife. Sony A7iv with their 200-600 lens. I think 600 mm is a must. I don't like teleconverters because of the light loss.
Thanks for the info 👍
Nice video Ian. I have a similar setup to you. I have a Canon R7, and I mostly take landscapes. I have a Sigma 150-600 for ocasional wildlife photos. Im less intersted in capturing rare animals, and more interested in animals and birds in nice compositions. Something else to consider is the sigma 105 macro. I use this a lot more than the 150-600 and insects and other small things are always in abundance, plus in macro I can always use a small tourch to apply some aritficial light from the side to stop an image being flat. I usually use my headtourch shone through a diffuser or even an off camera small godox flash with a small diffuser box to the side. Do consider a macro lens to lift those days with boring light. And macro does not aways mean tiny things, it can also be capturing super fine detail of things like rock pools. For this I also use a polariser on my 105 macro. Its my intention to photograph the life in rockpools in 2025. You will definitely have a lot of fun with a long lens, and develop some extra fitness carrying it. Something else to try with it is scene compression. Joe Cornish has a nice video using the 150-600 to compress a scene.
Thanks Ian for all your advice. Re the nature/ bird lens, have you considered the great and fairly light Canon 400 f5.6 with a Fringer converter. I think second hand EF lenses are very good value today. I used the Fringer with my Canon 100-400 on an X-T3 with great results but the weight of the canon 100-400 was too high for me so I sold the Canon lens and now use the Fuji 70-300.
I have considered third party lenses but my worry is the autofocus wont be as good as with native lenses.
What make is your backpack I like the idea of reverse zip tia
I'm not familiar with Fuji's current line of gear but I understand your desire to stick with the system, it is however difficult to ignore the amount of wildlife photographers that have flocked (no pun intended) to OM-System for the amazing benefits it has for lightweight super telephoto photography
So true, I have given the om system some consideration, it looks great 👍
HI Ian, good video and excellent explanations!. I first noticed that your lenses of choice are so very similar to mine, when I bought that big 16 to 55 some years ago I more or less gave up using the 10 to 24 and the others because of the outstanding image quality and spectacular focusing speed. I did have the 100 to 400 at that time as well but was a trifle frustrated by the image quality and small aperture, especially with the tele-converter on it. When the 70 to 300 appeared I was tempted but waited a year or two, now that I have it I find myself using it so much, more than all the others!, it is absolutely wonderful for extreme close-ups of small insect, tiny flowers and fungi!, it also allows the application of the tele-converters giving significant total magnification at relatively small distances, sadly at wide aperture the shallow depth of field is an issue and I am too lazy to bother with focus stacking!.
Now that this new 500 mm lens is coming I am very tempted because of the outstanding image quality and relatively wide aperture, three thousand pounds is too much to pay for me at this time! so I will stay as I am for now.
Cheers, Richard.
Many thanks, interesting thoughts, much appreciated 🙏
Good luck with a new genre most TH-camrs only try one! I don’t do landscape but do do wild life and tried Fuji a few years back. It appeared to see the subject but when examined in post missed critical focus a lot. I think the autofocus has improved since then but no wildlife channel I follow shoots with Fuji. I think 100-400 is going to be too short in many cases and I’d not put a xconvereter on any long lens unless starting at f2.8 or f4. Well unless you’ve going to shooting in sunnier areas of the world than the UK. For wildlife you need long glass, 200-600 is a good starting point Sony do a g master which is good value and pair with say a used A9II. Never shot Canon for wildlife but take a look at Aussie Duade Paton who is awesome ( but has the light) and shoots canon and is very realistic about the good and not so good points.
Thanks for the info, very helpful 👍
High Ian. I have the 70-300, the 100-400 and the 1.4 tc on my XT5. The 100-400 is a great lens for landscape and short range wildlife. The 1.4 tc doesn't really help much. The loss of light and image quality isn't worth it unless perhaps you are shooting video where the image quality loss would not be that noticeable. The 100-400 is so cheap used that it is probably your best bet. The 100-400 also does very well as a telephoto macro lens. I usually try to shoot my 100-400 at f7.1 to f11. At 5.6 and 400mm the IQ is not that good.
Many thanks, much appreciated 🙏
A decent affordable option which gives you a bit more reach and better close focusing is the Tamron 150-500. Heavier than the other options but it paired well with my 70-300 for birding or wildlife from the vehicle / campsite when I was shooting Fuji. The r6ii & 100-500 has been a noticeable (but not massive) improvement and the r7ii is rumored to have stacked 32 megapixel sensor which for me is a better set up than having 2 lenses with one body.
Many thanks, much appreciated 👍
Ian, I'm sure you already know but just in case you don't. Fuji do a hire service in the UK so you could check out the lenses. I've used all the telephoto lenses being the Fuji fanboy that I am, but the only one that really impressed me has been the 50-140 sometimes paired with the 1.4x....150-600mm can only use it bright light, 100-400mm nice but starts getting really soft after 300mm, 70-300 pretty much the same beyond 200mm. Sigma 100-400mm very decent especially for the money but AF doesn't quite match Fuji 100-400mm. I now use my Nikon Z for the rare times where I need long reach (200-500mm). To me my Fuji's have become the system I use with prime lenses.
Thanks for the info, very helpful 👍
Ian, to me this was a very relaxing video to watch, and your image at the end is beautiful. A question I've always wondered about. Is there anything wrong with keeping a circular polarizer on you camera most of the time? It's adjustable or do you have a concern of possibly losing a stop of light or the frequent need to use ND filters?
I guess not every scene requires polarisation. I wouldn't use a polariser on a wide angle lens either. So for me, it only comes out when it's crucial to the composition.
Having had many systems, for someone looking at wildlife as well as landscape, with smaller form factor/less weight imho you’d be better iffy to sell the Fuji gear and move to the Olympus OM system.
The 4/3 size means lenses are even smaller and have more crop factor ‘magnification’, they have plenty of suitable v.sharp longer lenses, and with their world leading IBIS and stacking tech are incredibly good at macro and more than good enough for online viewing and 90% of prints.
it's definitely something worth considering 👍
@ Certainly if you wanted to do close up nature or macro shots. Their in-body focus stacking is unparalleled and saves hours otherwise needed in software processing, blending etc.
A while ago I was considering getting xf100-400 but seeing online picture quality and I don't like it at all but if you fancy that focal length better go for
Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 OSS G Master Lens, if you pair with A7RV you will get a good combo .
I also contemplating getting A7RV but instead go for 70-200 f2.8 mk ii
I have the 70-300 and the 100-400. I use the 70-300 much more but the 100-400 has a good edge on IQ. The thing is that it’s an older lens and I’m assuming that fujifilm will probably continue to replace the red badge lens with new models. And if that’s the case I would wait. There are alternatives from Sigma and Tamron and I would test those too.
Thanks so much 👍
The 150-600mm is a great lens with great AF but yes, it’s big and a bit heavy. I have a separate carrying case just for this lens with camera attached. I do love it though.
The 100-400mm lens is smaller however my own feeling is that it’s just not a very big increase over the 70-300mm which is so much smaller and lighter.
How about saving up for the new 500mm prime?
Fixed focal length but might be a good compromise between the zoom lenses if you want the extra reach?
Thanks buddy, much appreciated. It's definitely worth considering 👍
Dear Ian, I had the same thoughts, I exchanged the Fuji set for the Canon R6MK II with some lenses... Within a month I changed back... Not for the quality that is great, but for other reasons.
These reasons were definitely 'Weight, Size, and expenses. For quality lenses you pay triple, double the price of the Fuji set. For weight, average difference is more then half the weight more sometime compared to Fuji. As in camera or lenses or combined.... Then the difference of setting! No aperture or time settings, every setting you have to do on you screen...every change of lenses are different, a sort of other way around. Please when ever you can work with another system try it first in practice and then decide. I am really happy that I could change back, greets Guus
I like the idea of several projects. I'll adopt that, thanks :-) btw, it's "homing in". "honing" means sharpening. I wish you luck choosing another car/vehicle.
Thanks so much 👍
I owned the 100-400 plus the TC1.4. It worked well, but it's too similar to the 70-300. F8 is often too dark though. So I would have a closer look into the newer / longer options from Fuji and Tamron.
Thank you, thats very helpful 👍
Looking forward to 2025 and what more you bring to your channel. Cheers
Thanks buddy 👍
What I say may surprise you. But when I’m traveling, I carry the 16-55 2.8, and when I need a tele-photo I bring the 90 F2. I was using this for telephoto shots which I could crop. Now with the XT5 and 40 megapixels it’s even a better choice. Just think how light your tele-photo would be.
Thanks for the info, very helpful 👍
Happy New Year 2025 buddy wishes from India 🇮🇳
If it is not big or hairy or nasty, or big hairy and nasty it's not really wildlife. Can I suggest you and a couple of photographer mates head to Africa and spend a few weeks in Kenya, you will not regret it. Hire your own driver tracker spotter ( all in one ) and get one of the small tour companies to work out a trip for you with accommodation. ( can recommend one if needed ) For your camera, maybe you can consider a Tamron 150 to 500mm on your xh2, it is equivalent to 640 mm on that camera and that will be needed. Fast AF, sharp and half the price as what has been discussed here. We used that same rig for 5 weeks in Africa and it handled all the dust and speed bumps in the back of a Toyota Landcruser troop-carrier no probs and is still going strong and will for the next trip.
Hi Ian,
I own the 1.4x Fuji extender & use it with the 50 to 140.
The extender is very sharp & a lightweight addition.
As for downsizing your kit, have you considered the XT 30 mk II ?
I have a number of F1.4 & 1.2 lenses but the weight is a killer as you get older. I've just started purchasing the fujicron lenses, lightweight & perfect for overseas travel.
I have 3 of the 5 & I'm super impressed with the image quality.
They also have the advantage of weather sealing.
Really enjoy your channel, thank you.
Cheers Steve
Thanks so much 👍🙏
I love that beach Ian ❤
You should try to photograph Puffins that would be be really cool.
Yes, its on the list for 2025 👍
I know it's a different way of thinking and I've mentioned this before but the reason I went into GFX and the resolution it actually allows me to carry less lenses. I carry only two lenses now often on my shoots which is the 20 to 35 which is 16 to 28 but I can crop into 70mm and get a 50 megapixel file on my 100 to 200. I can crop in to insane levels at 400 mm with a 50 megapixel file or even 450 mm and retained a 43 megapixel ..... It's just a different way of thinking and the GFX 100 S doesn't weigh as much as what people think it does it weighs less than many full frame cameras. Thankfully I have found my ideal set up. I never intended to go into medium format but because Fuji didn't make a full frame camera, I ended up there but now I'm here. I'm loving it but yes, having a longer lens is good but it's often difficult to carry two. .... sometimes I carry my 35 to 70 only one lens but I can crop into 200 mm and retain a 40 megapixel file with a 70 mm lens so this is one of the reasons I love GFX and it just doesn't get mentioned enough the insane amount of cropping that you can do create so many creative options thank you for your year. Thank you for all your videos.. oddly I still have my XT5 but I'm actually trading it with a friend for an X 100Vi the reason I'm doing that is just so I've got a small fun camera to play around with and it's not costing me any money to change over
Thanks buddy, some interesting thoughts 👍
Hi Ian great content
Can I just ask what tripod would you recommend when travelling
I'm using the falcam tree root at the moment, I really like it 👍
What are thoughts on thew Sigma 100-400??
I haven't tried it, but it looks like a decent option
Hi Ian, love your videos. I have the 100-400 great lens very sharp and is with the xt5 works well. I’m not a big fan of tele converters.
Many thanks, much appreciated 🙏
What about the 1.4TC and the 70-300? You lose a stop relative to the 100-400, but the cost is much less and you get more versatility. Maybe rent one and see??
You are out often in good/decent light so you aren’t likely to be hampered often by f8.
My issue with the 70-300 is that it isn't that sharp at 300mm wide open, well my copy isn't. So I would need to stop down as well which would mean I'm at f11 with the 1.4 converter. Then i'm battling with diffraction on the xh2. So it's probably not going to work out too well. I'm going to test it out in the new year, these are just my initial thoughts, I might be wrong.
Really good points. The 100-400, as you say in the video, then is in the lead for your needs.
Sample variation is an annoying thing. It explains to a degree why people have different opinions about lenses. For example, my copy of the 70-300 is decently sharp at 300mm. Yours might be less sharp.
Anyways, great video and channel! I am enjoying your work from all the over here in Canada. Cheers and happy new year!
Have you considered getting an OM SYSTEM (Olympus)?...you can get a used one...they are ideal for transporting, excellent quality and light lenses for wildlife!!!
I have given the om system some consideration, it looks great 👍
Ooh , _phew_ !, when I saw the title I was worried you were going to announce you were getting an hasselblad
I would rather pay my mortgage off. lol 😂
I liked the video and the last photo. Are we thinking of maybe buying a camper van or buying a vehicle and converting it into a camper van????? Cheers.
Thanks so much, maybe a van 👍🙏
Thanks for creating and sharing your work! It's wonderful to watch and learn. Any interest in the macro realm?? Cheers mate!
Great video as always! Do you have your 4x5 camera? Would be nice to se a video featuring that camera!
I do, but the film is so expensive 👍