Thanks for this video Scot- great to see several pics with the 70-300 + 1.4TC ...after changing the video setting to HD , most of the pics look very sharp when u had decent light, even at 420mm and zoomed in. I noticed many of the stationary/ non flight pics were taken at 1/2000 SS , so results could potentially be even better at 1/500 to 1/1000 SS to reduce ISO /noise. Overall, very impressive !
It does make it long but if I only showed a few great photos it wouldn't create the right expectations. I could have and maybe should have reduced the shutter for some shots that being said I never new when an opportunity would show itself to catch some action. Some of the high ISO are better than I would have expected and some of the lower iso were worse than expected but mostly very useable especially at normal sizes.
jamie REUSCH, thank you for that recommendation. I am probably going to buy one of these lenses and was disappointed with the quality until I saw your recommendation about the RUclips video settings. The images looked fine after making that change.
I have the 70-300 and it is exceptional. Having used the 1.4 converter on the other two Fuji tele zooms I found that it was not worth buying as the standard zoom lens cropped x 40% is better than using a convertor perhaps you could try a comparison of convert or shots compared to cropped shots that would be quite valuable.
Nice video! It's very helpful to see 'real world' user reviews of the 70-300mm and adding the TC1.4. Seems like you are happy with the lens but maybe wouldn't recommend it with the teleconverter? Do you think the OIS is good enough to slow down your shutter speed a stop or two on some of these shots and gain back some detail?
I think the teleconverter is good. With that being said hopefully this week I will test with and without to answer is just enlarging a photo from the plain lens as good or better than adding a TC. Pretest nothing against them but perhaps the 2x would be going to far. As far as shutter speeds I could have slowed them down when ever birds were still but had it up for birds in flight speeds.
Would you recommend a 70-300 over a 100-400 with converter because I find the weight of the 100-400 and there for the speed on aiming quiet a thing. It's a bloody cannon holding in hand.
Nice video！have you compared the IQ between it at 300mm w/o the tele converter and 300mm w/ the converter (～215mm on lens )？is the impact on sharpness and CA noticable？
@@Scot_Photo it must be selling pretty darn good because I ordered mine when it came out and I'm still waiting here in Canada. They keep pushing the delivery date back, and I'm not very happy! LOL!
I don't know what to say, people are happy what they're getting for the money, but Fuji didn't do great job designing this lens. It's designed and marketed to work with tc's, but it's tuned to be better on short end comprising on long end. Shouldn't be the other way around for this kind of lens, I would think. I had big hope for it, when it was announced, but I calmed down a bit, resolving power at 300/f5.6 is below average, it reminds me to old Nikon 70-300mm. Nikon had to reissue it, with the much better lens, afterwards.
I hear you, that being said it is not uncommon for zooms to vary across their range. I'd prefer it be sharper at the long end vs the short but it is what it is and for the money not bad. If we pixel peep we see it loses a little but given good light many of the max zoom wide open shots are still pretty good.
@@Scot_Photo Yeah it's not uncommon for telephoto zoom lenses to vary in contrast/sharpness, especially when you get to the tele end. For example, I use a Sigma 150-600mm C lens on my Nikon D7500 and it is a bit softer beyond about the 500-600mm range even if you stop the aperture down.
If you compare the 55-200 to 70-300 the 70-300 smoookes the 55-200! The 70-300 actually has sharpness and details all the way up to 300. As the 55-200 gets soft from 135-200. The 70-300 its WR, has an aaaaaamazing OIS, its just totaly insane. Its lightweight compared to others. Did i say i love the 70-300? 😅
Great content. A lot of sample photos to show the lens's real performance. Thank you for your work.👍
Thanks for this video Scot- great to see several pics with the 70-300 + 1.4TC ...after changing the video setting to HD , most of the pics look very sharp when u had decent light, even at 420mm and zoomed in. I noticed many of the stationary/ non flight pics were taken at 1/2000 SS , so results could potentially be even better at 1/500 to 1/1000 SS to reduce ISO /noise. Overall, very impressive !
It does make it long but if I only showed a few great photos it wouldn't create the right expectations. I could have and maybe should have reduced the shutter for some shots that being said I never new when an opportunity would show itself to catch some action. Some of the high ISO are better than I would have expected and some of the lower iso were worse than expected but mostly very useable especially at normal sizes.
jamie REUSCH, thank you for that recommendation. I am probably going to buy one of these lenses and was disappointed with the quality until I saw your recommendation about the RUclips video settings. The images looked fine after making that change.
I have the 70-300 and it is exceptional. Having used the 1.4 converter on the other two Fuji tele zooms I found that it was not worth buying as the standard zoom lens cropped x 40% is better than using a convertor perhaps you could try a comparison of convert or shots compared to cropped shots that would be quite valuable.
Your not the first one to ask that question and it's worth a test.
Sorry to anyone looking for this one, I took this off public temporarily until RUclips finished processing 4K.
Nice video! It's very helpful to see 'real world' user reviews of the 70-300mm and adding the TC1.4. Seems like you are happy with the lens but maybe wouldn't recommend it with the teleconverter? Do you think the OIS is good enough to slow down your shutter speed a stop or two on some of these shots and gain back some detail?
I think the teleconverter is good. With that being said hopefully this week I will test with and without to answer is just enlarging a photo from the plain lens as good or better than adding a TC. Pretest nothing against them but perhaps the 2x would be going to far. As far as shutter speeds I could have slowed them down when ever birds were still but had it up for birds in flight speeds.
Would you recommend a 70-300 over a 100-400 with converter because I find the weight of the 100-400 and there for the speed on aiming quiet a thing. It's a bloody cannon holding in hand.
Yes, I have the same question as contemplating changing to 70-300 plus 1.4 TC from the 400mm which I can hardly lift these days!
Nice video！have you compared the IQ between it at 300mm w/o the tele converter and 300mm w/ the converter (～215mm on lens )？is the impact on sharpness and CA noticable？
I haven't yet but I'm also very curious to find out so will.
Really not bad for $ to get to 420mm on fuji.
I think it is great for the money and this lens alone will probably sell some cameras for Fuji.
@@Scot_Photo it must be selling pretty darn good because I ordered mine when it came out and I'm still waiting here in Canada. They keep pushing the delivery date back, and I'm not very happy! LOL!
I don't know what to say, people are happy what they're getting for the money, but Fuji didn't do great job designing this lens. It's designed and marketed to work with tc's, but it's tuned to be better on short end comprising on long end. Shouldn't be the other way around for this kind of lens, I would think. I had big hope for it, when it was announced, but I calmed down a bit, resolving power at 300/f5.6 is below average, it reminds me to old Nikon 70-300mm. Nikon had to reissue it, with the much better lens, afterwards.
I hear you, that being said it is not uncommon for zooms to vary across their range. I'd prefer it be sharper at the long end vs the short but it is what it is and for the money not bad. If we pixel peep we see it loses a little but given good light many of the max zoom wide open shots are still pretty good.
@@Scot_Photo Yeah it's not uncommon for telephoto zoom lenses to vary in contrast/sharpness, especially when you get to the tele end. For example, I use a Sigma 150-600mm C lens on my Nikon D7500 and it is a bit softer beyond about the 500-600mm range even if you stop the aperture down.
If you compare the 55-200 to 70-300 the 70-300 smoookes the 55-200! The 70-300 actually has sharpness and details all the way up to 300. As the 55-200 gets soft from 135-200. The 70-300 its WR, has an aaaaaamazing OIS, its just totaly insane. Its lightweight compared to others.
Did i say i love the 70-300?
😅