Fuji XF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 R LM OIS WR lens review with samples
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ม.ค. 2022
- A series of exciting new Fuji lenses have been coming out recently, and this long telephoto option works for me - let's see what it can do.
All pictures taken by me on a Fuji X-T3 camera.
Find it here (Amazon affiliate link):
geni.us/Fuji70300
Support the channel over on Patreon! / christopherfrost
Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate links):
Canon EOS R5: geni.us/CanonEOSR5Body
Canon EF-RF Adaptor: geni.us/CanonEFtoRF
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 'Art': geni.us/Sigma50mm14Art
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM: geni.us/CanonRF35mm18Macro
Marumi Fit and Slim CPL Filter: geni.us/MarumiFitSlim77
AudioTechnica AT2020USB+ Microphone: geni.us/AT2020USBPlusMic
Rode Smartlav+ Microphone: geni.us/RodeSmartLavalierPlus
Rode SC3 adapter: geni.us/RodeSC3MicAdaptor
Zoom H1n Recorder: geni.us/ZoomH1nMiniRecorder
DJI Mini 2 Drone: geni.us/DJIMini2FlyMore
Music:
'Opportunity Walks', Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons.org/licenses/b... - แนวปฏิบัติและการใช้ชีวิต
I don't know where we'd be without you man, your tests are objective, consistent and cover such an enormous range of optics. Without them, we'd be so much worse off as we'd have to guess and take risks when gauging recommendations from different inconsistent sources.
Great review as usual, my favourite lens that practically lives on my X-H1. Its close-focus capabilities negate the need for a dedicated macro lens for the majority of my usage. I've even started using it on a tracker for deep-sky astro. One of Fuji's best efforts in my book 👍🏻
I own one of these and just want to add another positive about it. It works with the Fujifilm teleconverters! Love the extra zoom with my 1,4x
Awesome lenses indeed! To bad I already own the 55-200. But maybe soon 👍
How about the autofocus performance? Does it get slower or confused at some situation?
@@Durio_zibethinus I have the teleconverter on 98% of the time so it's a bit hard to compare, but I have not noticed any unusual focusing problems. Possible it's ever so slightly slower but it's nothing that have affected me.
@@Jekay thank you for your reply, really appreciate it
One thing I really like about your presentations, they are very consistent. Which makes decision making easier.
Many thanks 🙂.
This is awesome! I was just starting to look into buying this lens and I was wishing there was a Christopher Frost video on it and magically it's here! Thanks!
Your video reviews have really helped to inform me as to which lenses to buy… unfortunately my list keeps getting longer, but needless to say: thank you for taking the time and effort to put these together.
Most helpful reviews of fuji lenses, can't thank you enough!
thank you for what felt like an indepth and accurate review. I'll go buy the dang thing now.
the part where you turned on the OIS and then wrote (also makes pedestrians appear!) made me crack a smile 🙂
I am planning to get into photography, and I like Fuji and Sony cameras. I always look at your videos for reviews about lenses, and in some way, has made me knowledgeable about camera lenses without even owning a camera 😅
Please continue on posting reviews, I hope you have many more content to come 👍
Always bang on reviews ❤
Fujis are at their best when they really embrace their relatively compact dimensions and the fun-side of photography. Felt like too many people have been taking it too seriously as of late.
I think the reason people are getting stricter with camera equipment is simply because smartphones are removing any need for lower end stuff
As a Sony guy: Fuji would be my next choice. Compactness and light weight is the main reason i ended up with Sony. So i understand the allure of Fuji as well. Portability and versatility are the only thing that is keeping me shooting a dedicated camera when phones have gotten so good.
Your work is an absolute godsend
Your review on this lens is simply the best. I start saving to buy it.
Thanks for this review! Hoping to buy this lens shortly.
Thanks for putting together these great videos! You are a treasure 📸
This was very informative to me! Thanks!
Fujifilm sports shooter here and I have to say I’m a little offended! Only joking 😁
I do agree to an extent about the slower aperture but I’ve found this only presents a problem in the UK Winter owing to the afternoon light (or lack thereof). I had been using this lens almost exclusively for football up until the clocks went back in October - since then the 50-140mm is the only tool for the job. But just to say it is a perfectly usable lens for fast sports, just so long as you have ample light. Great review as always Chris and your findings generally echo my own.
I totally agree with your conclusion after using the lens a few weeks now. It’s an ideal combination with the XF 16-80 if you don’t need the very bright apertures. In my view it replaces the earlier set of XF 55-200 and XF18-55 lenses.
The 18-55 is the only lens among those you just mentioned that does video well. The 16-80 is hilarious, the least parfocal lens ever made by humans. Just a 1mm focus ring touch makes the focus motor jump out of the chassis and run for the hills, come back with a pack of ice and migraine medicine, and fail to focus correctly 3 times before getting in focus
It seems like a great companion to the 18-55, I think it would be a fantastic addition to that kit for a bit extra reach.
I was looking for comment as I own the 16-80 and love the versatility.
That jazz piano drives me nuts
Thanks Christopher! Love your reviews as always. For the manual focus issues - have you tried changing between linear and nonlinear focus, in the button/dial setup menu? I don't think Fuji has the best focus-by-wire system so that might not *really fix* it, but I think some people might find one option better than the other.
The difference is that linear focus is adjusted by distance - rotate it halfway left, halfway right, you're right back where you started.
Non-linear is affected by the speed at which you change focus, so rapidly moving focus will affect it in less predictable ways.
Thank you for review!
And the IS works a dream for hand-held video on an XT3. I shot a historical re-enactment event with this lens - rock steady footage with no tripod.
2:42 The only lens that summons pedestrians. 🤣
It's a real game changer
I'll be saving up for this lens, for sure.
You missed one small, but nice feature at 0:57 , you dont need to unlock it. a gentle twist of the zoom ring will unlock it. actuallly very practical.
The best bang for the buck in lens country I think!!
I went back to rewatch your review as I have photographed many birds with this lens but did notice chromatic aberration on birds slightly out of reach at 300mm. It is a wonderful lens and I like having the ability to add the 1.4tc to it for that added reach. Funny how you mention sports photography being crazy on Fujifilm bodies. The H2S kinda fixes this problem, don’t you think? Really helped with my BIF shots.
Nice review! I'm very happy with this lens, although as far as built quality goes I was at first a bit worried about the wobbly nature of the part that extends as you zoom, even when it is fully retracted. Image quality did not seem to suffer from this tho. Is it something normal for a plastic zoom lens with external zoom?
Great review! Really want to see your review of the XF50-140 to compare with this lens.
I was wondering whether you’d be looking at any auto lens mount adapters ((such as Fringer EF-FX Pro II) the obvious more expensive option). The whole thing is a bit of a minefield. It seems that they work better for fixed focal lengths. What’s the fitting like and is there movement. Many affect infinity on cameras, as well as inconsistencies in flange focal distance affects sharpness. How fast is the autofocus is comparison with using a native lens etc? Many can not be used with continuous focus in video, so better for stills. I’ve asked on this video as Fujifilm has limited lens options, so is something that people are more likely to consider. I personally was thinking of telephoto options from Canon, but unsure whether that is the best option also for a Fujifilm camera or whether other manufacturers Nikon/Sony lens (Tamron lens) would be the adapter to go for.
Thank you!
Fuji really needs to get the focus by wire system fixed, its a pain for photos and even worse for video. I love the camera and the glass they make but I can't use manual focus.
I just bought this lens. It'll be a perfect companion for my X-T5 and 16-55mm for when I'm out and about in the countryside. I did ponder getting the extra-precise 'red badge' 50-170mm instead, but that one's a whopping 415g heavier than the 70-300mm. I didn't want to carry so much weight that it'd take the pleasure out of walking (although, at 3 stone overweight, maybe me losing a few inches around the waist would make up for it!)
I hear ya Mike! Good comment, and I’m thinking of getting this for my “lowly” XT-1! 😆
@@georgedavall9449 A few days ago fuji did a handy firmware update for video for the 16-55mm that you can download off their site. Improved a few key things (sound, exposure, focusing) for video. I'm still loving the combo. A week ago I accidentally dropped the 70-300 fairly hard onto my laminate flooring and it still appears 100% fine, despite being a relatively light build (lighter than the more metallic 16-55). Nice.
@@mikefoster6018 Hi Mike, yeah, that’s what I like about Fuji, always putting out updates, and taking care of things. Sorry about the lens, and hope it is Ok. Do some test shots and make sure none of the elements got knocked off center?!
The age old debate of “Metal VS Plastic,” Doncha know! Plastic tends to “give” more, of course will crack if hit hard enough, but Ive had a metal bodied Canon high end P&S fall off my waist, in a case, onto vinyl flooring, and the corner was dented in! Fortunately I had a local shop and the Technician was able to get it straightened out. That was an old 5 megapixel S50. 🙄😀 YMMV. Peace
Hi Chris, Any chance of you testing Fuji medium format cameras and lenses ?
I had a 70-300 canon and also a 55-300 Nikon. This lens beats them easily. It is sharp, has a fast focusing system and is nice to handle. The image quality is a little below a professional 70-200 2.8 lens at f4, but is only half as heavy and beats every other 70-300 I have ever seen. Thanks for your review!
The Nikon Z 50-250 is also very sharp or even sharper. There's a review on his channel
“Howdy Everyone,” another Fine review by Mr. Frost. I’m thinking this will look nice on my XT-1!?
LOL, wow @02:43, those pedestrians just “teleported “ there! Amazing capture! 😯😆
Serioulsy, appreciate your fine efforts on ALL of Your reviews. GOD Bless and Cheers! 👍✌🙏📷
Can anyone with this lens help me out?
I just got this lens, but I am noticing a noise whenever I pan the camera or focus. It's loud enough to be picked up by the camera, making video's unusable. I don't have this noise with my other OIS lens, the 16-80mm. Is this normal, or should the 70-300 be silent?
Is the wobbling because of the ois mechanism inside the lens?
Been keeping my eye on one of these lenses, but the stock levels in the UK aren’t they best. I want it to replace my Fuji 100-400 which is an excellent lens, but it is big and heavy and difficult to use for landscape work. Excellent for wildlife though…
Hi.What raw edit is use with fuji raw file.thank you
For the superb image quality, this is a sharp lens in all ranges, given it stops down to f/8.
Don't worry Christopher, this is normal for fuji film. That's why so many people love the clutch of the old 16mm
Hi Chris, there is missing Canon EF 28-300mm f/3,5-5,6L IS USM review. Might be great comparison of such lenses👌
Thanks so much. I have been wanting to get one but everyone is out of stock for months! :(
I almost wish people would start coping the lens barrel design of Fuji's lenses because they look so good, but on the other hand, that design language helps Fuji stand out more at a glance.
This is really where APS-C shines, with 70-300s (or maybe 55-300s as well) that aren't fast, but offer the kind of range that you can only achieve with a lens weighing 1.5kg or more if you have a fullframe system. I think only Canon offers something equivalent for their RF system with the 100-400/5.6-8.
The Sony E 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G OSS would be another one. However, the Sony lens does not accept teleconverters.
I prefer this Fuji lens to Canon - the only benefit I find of the canon is the autofocus on the camera
X-HS2 of course for sports!
But I guess this video was before launch. Afaik there are just 1 cam from Nikon with a stacked sensor and the A9. That´s it.
+ APSC is more a benefit for sports as you can easier get a huge range.
At this point you are the only one I trust
Thanks!
Thanks!
Christopher Please would you comment on my question.
I bought the Fujifilm xf 70-300 in 2022 when it came out. I have now bought the Fujifilm X-S20. You said in your video that the 70-300 sometimes missed focus and you had no explanation? The X-S20 now has improved autofocus as in the X-H2S. If focus is missed, do you think it is the fault of the lenses or the cameras please? Thanks
Probably the camera, even the XT-4 has unreliable AF.
This lens is a unicorn.
That expensive? )
I was lucky enough to buy a copy at release. I genuinely don't feel this lens reaches out very far even at 300mm. It does take wonderful photos but if anyone wants a wildlife lens they should wait for the XF600mm coming out this year.
Works great for wildlife in my experience. I have the 1.4TC and it definitely helps
Oh I WISH they were making a 600mm prime. Sadly it's a 150-600 zoom.
@@Vinterloft I mean I love Fuji, but their only long telephoto prime so far, the 200mm f2, is really notable insofar that it's probably the first "millionnaire's toy" lens that's APS-C only. I don't even want to imagine what a 600mm f4 prime would cost...
Debating between this and the XF 50-140. I wish this mounted with a tripod collar. Worried about that massive tube extending out in front and causing sagging of the image. Any wind could be an issue too.
I didn't use telephototo lenses that much other than zoo pictures, but i do love going to the zoo regularly. Looks like I'll have to add this one.
Hi Padre, apparently you have Nando's in the UK?
In motor sports there is actually some amazing Fuji shooters. Look up Andrew Hall for example
How does this pair with the sigma 18-50? Will I miss the 20mm gap? Or better go with the 55-200?
50-70 doesn't really make that big of a difference
I have been waiting for months to buy this lens in Europe but it is out of stock for months now :(
Howdy Chris!
Please do a review on fuji 100-400
haven't seen it in stock for the last half year unfortunately, it is high on my wishlist.
Check out maps camera in Tokyo . They have great reviews and they have fast shipping. I ordered mine and received it in 2 days. They ship direct to US, without issues like things coming from other areas.
I rented the 50-140mm once and that one is really weird in terms of the wobble of the lens elements when it's turned off. You can really hear the elements drop
I don't know why but mine 50-140 doesn't, I'm being honest.
It’s got floating elements. It shouldn’t affect long-term durability as I own one for a while now and it’s still fine optically.
All the LM (linear motor) lenses in Fuji line up behave like that.
If only you could buy one,,,
A better buy than 55-200. Weather sealed. Linear motor.
Hallelujah! :D
At time stamp 7:03 you mention "I don't know many sports photographers who shoot Fuji, do you?" I use a Fuji GFX for ice hockey. If you would like sample images, please let me know. When I try and add a link to this post to some samples, I receive all sorts of errors. Not sure if any of my prior posts made it through as I don't see them. Thank you for posting these videos, they greatly aid me in deciding in a system or not.
I’m sure he probably means Fuji APS-C cameras rather than Medium format; which is a whole different beast
@@MitchWebb94 CF does refer to X-series. My point is GFX is a slower system than the X-series and individuals such as myself do use it for sports. But to his point, the number of photographers who do use Fuji for sports is relatively small in comparison to the big three: Nikon, Canon & Sony with OMD dominating the wildlife scene.
One of biggest problem of Fuji's telephoto lenses is they lacks stablization mode. Nobody can take a panning shot with slow SS.
Is it a professional lens? Can it b used for wildlife photography? What is the maximum magnification?
Sorry to ask so many questions at a time☺️. thanks in advance🙏
1:10 "Wobble when turned off" my understanding is that it's normal for a lens with OIS.
It also admits teleconverter
i had this lens. but unfortunately someone stole my xt-4, fuji xf 35mm f2 and this 70-300mm. 💔💔
That really sucks
Awww man that's rough. Can't Imagine how you feel.
Both my 16-80 and 70-300 perform poorly. I guess I got really unlucky with the copies I bought
Camera?
$1050. in Toronto.
People who don’t have the experience of shooting sports with fuji cameras as a tradesman always blames his tools instead of his own lack of experience 😂😆📸
@@djstuc I own every Fuji lens and I do bird photography and sports and I just carnt stop laughing about the comment that nobody uses Fuji for sports photography 😂
@@djstuc Jeff carter used an xt1 shooting motor sport and back in the day the xt1 produced amazing images !!! So now like you said the Fuji xt4 is so effortless at shooting fast moving subjects and even an amateur like myself manages to get fantastic results and these TH-camrs are only presenters and they mostly shoot still subjects only and give a full review as if they’ve used the camera gear like a pro 😂
Ah, too bad that you didn't test the image quality with teleconverter. I'm really curious how much degradation we'll get
With 1.4 TC none or you have to blow up image to 400% and look extreme corners.
Great review! I'm wondering, is your way of describing sharpness (excellent, good, average etc) the same for all camera brands? I've noticed that for example Sony lenses, which you described as having excellent sharpness, resolve way finer details than similar lenses on Fuji.
@@djstuc I'm not sure how I've offended you. Did I write something wrong?
@@djstuc I'm certainly not accusing the reviewer of being inconsistent, his reviews are among the most objective and consistent around. After all, we can all do cross-comparisons by ourselves, just open two tabs side by side and draw your own conclusions. I've just noticed from these reviews, and from my experience personal experience of using Fuji and Sony in parallel, that lenses with "excellent sharpness" on Fuji look less sharp/detailed than lenses with excellent sharpness on other systems. You don't have to believe me, check for yourself, Chris is using the standardized tests for every lens. This could be due to the quality of lenses, but it can also be due to the sensor or simply due to the RAW processing (like using Adobe software to process Fuji files). Either way, it's perfectly OK to grade lens in relative terms, compared to other lenses for the same system, and not in absolute terms. A lot more people are shopping inside the same system, than there are people who look to change the system altogether, so it makes sense to compare it either way.
Again, I'm sorry if I offended you in any way, but that does not give you the right to throw insults and use such an aggressive tone. It's immature and rude, and certainly way below the standards of this channel.
@@djstuc It's pretty easy actually, a lot of lenses are going to look sharper and resolve far more fine details than Fuji 18mm 1.4. Looking at central sharpness and contrast, Sony 20mm 1.8 G looks much sharper and resolves much more fine details even on a 42-megapixel body. Sigma 24mm F2 looks better as well, though not as much as GM. Viltrox 24mm F1.8 looks more/less the same sharpness/contrast-wise in the center as Fuji 18mm 1.4. I'm referring only to sharpness/(micro) contrast here since you can easily cross-compare that using the standardized chart. Fuji 18mm 1.4 is a great lens no doubt, IMHO more/less on the same level of image quality and performance as the best lenses from Canon/Nikon/Sony, without some obvious weaknesses.
Regarding confirmation bias, I used to have a pretty strong bias regarding Fuji lenses, since I've been using that system for 7 years and constantly read about how awesome those lenses are. So when I started using Sony in parallel, my expectations were that my Samyang primes and Tamron zooms are going to be at best on the same level of image quality as my Fuji lenses (and possibly a tad worse) but with better AF. I was quite surprised to find out they are better actually better in many aspects of image quality, despite being much cheaper and smaller, so I have to reevaluate my biases. I also had an expectation that AWB on Sony would be similarly reliable as on Fuji, but the reality proved me wrong since Sony is much worse in that area. So in a nutshell, I have little problems in challenging my biases when presented with facts.
@@djstuc I really don't understand this. I've sent you the lenses you've asked for and you are still complaining. Did you compare Sony 20mm 1.8 G and Fuji 18mm 1.4 and saw a difference in sharpness and (micro) contrast, or you have just ignored my previous post? It's not an opinion, you can clearly see that Sony 20mm 1.8 G is resolving much more, at least on this chart. My original question is why two lenses, which are marked as both having excellent sharpness, produce such different results.
While I'm using mostly Sony these days, I still follow the news/reviews from other camera manufacturers, including Fuji. Most of my friends are shooting Fuji, so they are often sending me interesting articles from FujiRumors or links to reviews. I'm in no way tied to a single brand, and if some other brand in the future stars offering better gear for my needs I would be more than happy to switch. That includes going back to Fuji as well if things change significantly in the X or GFX world.
And I would like to ask you again, why you are so rude in this conversation and with such an aggressive attitude?
@@djstuc I think that you are not reading my posts since I'm at no point trying to compare the overall optical qualities of Fuji 18mm 1.4 (or 70-300) to any other lenses. I'm only referring to sharpness/contrast, central sharpness to be precise, and are descriptions such as "excellent sharpness" same for every system or relative to the other lenses on the same system. It's really simple, just open two reviews in two different tabs (make sure it's 4K) fast forward Fuji 18mm 1.4 to 3:00 and Sony 20mm 1.8 to 3:10 and compare the results. Both are described as having "excellent sharpness" (actually "truly awesome" for Fuji), yet the results are drastically different.
So just to reemphasize again, I'm not discussing which lens is better (we can do that on a different thread if you like), I'm just trying to understand why "excellent" or "truly awesome" sharpness on Fuji looks less sharp than "excellent" on other brands (such as Sony).
I'm not sure how you did the analysis of my comments, but I can only state that your methods are wrong, since I'm most active on Sony-related videos/threads/boards.
I used to own the 55-200 but that lens had horrible image quality at 200mm. The 70-300 renders very nice (like my 35 & 50mm f2 primes) and pretty sharp, even at it's widest apertures. Together with my xh1 the image stabilization is out of this world. I was able to get 1/12 shutter speeds hand held!
I have a 55-200mm and the image quality is excellent at all settings. Yours must have been faulty or sub-standard.
TBH I'm not happy with my copy , it is definitely not sharp equally across the aperture ranges , it is sharper at f8 , I am no professional but I struggled to get sharp photos with this lens , idk if it were just my copy or all are the same but I will sell it.
Eu aprende vc fera... Muito bom
Great review. Sport photographers on Fuji 😅😂
These Lenses are just as small as the Olympus and the Panasonic 75-300….M34 is really falling behind in terms of size advantages. At this point I rather get a fuji or a canon, the bodies are the same size and their new lenses are smaller now with a bigger and better sensor.
I do not share your positive feeling on this lens, and I think you have blushed over some critical shortcomings here!
"Definitely not parfocal" (1:40) is an understatement: I'd call this a flawed design. Here is what I observe: if I turn to MF, focus on an object, and zoom, I get horrible focus glitching; the focus plane seems to jump back and forth. Might have to do with OIS, and I regret there is no physical button to turn OIS off. Worse even, the glitching confuses the autofocus (X-T4). In consequence, I can hardly zoom in or out in AF-C without loosing focus on an object, which is a major show stopper in wildlife photography (birds in my test case). I find the lens quite dark (it's not the "high end xf lineup" (0:20), after all, those are the ones with red labels).
Focus problems and darkness naturally get emphasized by a teleconverter, which would otherwise be a useful gadget (as other comments suggest).
Another show stopper is chromatic abberation, which I fond quite noticable when photographing birds in trees against light sky; acknowledged, that is a difficult situation, and in my case it was on shots with the 1.4 TC. Yet my wife's Tamron 100-400 (adapted) performed much better in the same situation, and it was cheaper second hand.
In terms of sharpness, my copy of the 70-300 cannot compete with the XF55-200 (which also has none of the aforementioned problems), though I didn't test as careful as you, it's just my uneducated pixel peeping.
So overall, yes the lens is light for travel, has a great zoom range, and it might be good for some use cases. Yet to me, having the 55-200, it was a disappointment. I'll resell it, stick with the 55-200, and save for the 100-400.
But maybe a direct comparison of those three, optionally with TC, would be great for another video?
Cheers, and thanks for your videos!
The reviewer should know by now that the "clunk" sound is coming from the focus group which is driven by linear motor,and this is perfectly normal when LM is not powered ON.Mentioning this in each video with disappointed voice is a bit waist of viewer time.
probably controversial but...OMG why are reviewers so concerned with corner sharpness etc, 95% of people using lenses trying to take good photos are not even interested in corners if they get a good shot, they don't care about corners as long as the overall image is good?
There are a lot of compositions where the corner is the start of the composition…especially leading lines
@@The_CGA and a lot of landscape photographers seek to have sharpness throughout the frame, not just the center
@@Eyeofkamau right…but there’s stopping down for that. Which one needs to do anyway to get the depth of field for a landscape. I can think of a few limited landscape compositions (stuff with wildlife or crowds near dusk) where shooting wide open (just for exposure’s sake)…and those are the only places I would be having to worry about corner sharpness (which clears up on all but the most trashy lenses by F5.6 and basically always by f/8.).
So…we are basically talking about a limited situation with landscapes in which focus stacking is both on the table, and we need stuff in the corner/edges to reach the same degree of sharpness as the center (they’ll both be sharp at f/8, so we’re arguing about “more sharp” in the center and “less sharp” at the corners. something like a railing or leading line, or flowers in the foreground and city or mountains / tree line in the back.
To me it seems like corner sharpness is mostly a concern for wildlife and sports, where we don’t always have perfect control over where in the frame the decisive moment happens in the burst. or high shutter speed, less formal portraits where kids and neurodiverse people are free to move around a bit more and we can re-compose with a crop.
Really the most important aspect of corner sharpness might be for video in my opinion, where we often want to compose shots with much more padding around the subject, with asymmetry or where the subject moves across the frame. But then again…audiences are so much more forgiving of glass in the video world. So…eh.
I’d be happy to be wrong, I can imagine that continuous tracking and always-on AF likely do a lot better in lenses with better corner sharpness. I am still in the XT3 world where C-AF isn’t something to rely upon…so I don’t have that problem yet.
@@The_CGA stopping down doesn’t guarantee sharpness though. You can have a deep depth of field with smudged corners as there are plenty of lenses that don’t see the benefits of increased sharpness when stopping down. Some do get increased sharpness with stopping down, but not all. In landscape photography, where the subject often encompasses the entire frame, sharpness throughout the frame is sought.There are folks who buy lenses that have the best corner sharpness specifically for that case when there isn’t time for focus stacking. But focus stacking is indeed the way to go for optimal sharpness throughout the frame.
Being a sports & fitness photographer, find corner sharpness isn’t a concern, because majority of the time you’re opening up the aperture to isolate the subject or blur out distracting backgrounds; so corners are are blurred out anyway making sharpness in those areas a nonfactor and the subject never really gets too close to the edges of the frame. I know me personally, Whenever I get a photo like that, I scratch it haha. For wildlife, I can’t speak for it, but majority of wildlife photos I see, the subject is isolated & close to the center of the frame with a shallow depth of field - leaving nothing to be sharp in the corners other than bokeh. But there are definitely points where the subject fills the frame in wildlife too and during then, corner sharpness may be sought but I don’t see when a wildlife photographer would stop down far enough to see that sharpness in the corners. Could be wrong though, obviously not a wildlife photographer.
I will say though, I love having sharp corners for street (where your leading lines point comes in) architecture, real estate and interiors! For me personally those are some cases where corner sharpness is vital. I usually shoot at f8 for real estate to get everything in focus but some lenses just don’t have that corner sharpness to enhance the quality of the image - which is beneficial when clients are blowing up images on billboards, etc.
Corner sharpness is also somewhat of an indicator of off-center sharpness and plenty if not most photos have their subject off-center.
Motor sports photogs use fuji
Подарите мне такой
Ah, it is just a Fuji.
You really think there is no professional who shoot sport with a Fuji? Lol