I picked this lens up and the 100 II body wanting to try it out as a second body for wildlife, Canon R3 and RF600 F4 is main setup. When testing it and framing images the same as the Canon I was shocked at how little difference there was between 102mp and 24mp. Fuji also pushed the combo as good for wildlife but what I found even with larger mammals it was just nowhere close to the performance of a full frame body. After three months of trying it out I traded the combo back in on a R5 II and 100-500. The GFX 100 II is a nice body and the dynamic range is superb but overall it wasn't worth running two systems.
I'm a hobbyist bird/wildlife photographer and have weather resistant gear, but I, too, am not weather resistant! Reminds me of the golfer who says, "I shoot in the seventies... If it gets any hotter, I stay home.
Nice to see fujifilm extending the gf line up, but would love to see a gf 170mm giving an equivalent 135mm on full frame, this would perfectly round out its portrait friendly lens line up, that also includes the fantastic gf 250mm for a 200mm equivalent.
Hi Keith - I've used both the 250mm and the slower 100-200mm zoom on the gfx. With the latter only (which I think is a similar build type to the 500mm - ie. relatively light) I've had issues with camera shake on a tripod - not sure if it's just coincidence or use of ois on a tripod. Would be interested if you have any similar issues or related experience.
Yes, I'll see what I see when I go out with it. However, and this is a key point, I've no confidence that I've optimised AF settings on the camera for stuff like that. I just don't ever photograph such things with any of my cameras, so I'd be wary of damming the lens through my own lack of experience ;-) I'm very aware of [some of] the gaps in my own photography expertise...
Keith, why not architectural / city landscape; the long lens will result in a very special perspective and depth. Just an idea, and no birds in sight! lol
See how far up the ISO values you can go before quality falls below your standards of acceptance. Also, have you considered trying out some extreme detail shots of buildings and stitching them with the idea of producing very large prints? Something approaching a gigapano concept but smaller. That, or similar, is about the only obvious use I can think of for that lens in your market. If the system tech is good enough to cope with low light internal shots, shooting detailed interiors of historic places and churches might be another option.
Yes, I'll experiment, but exposure with the GFX100S [and many modern sensors] is no the simple thing it was just a few years ago. See here for a GFX100S ISO/exposure strategy blog.kasson.com/gfx-100/fuji-gfx-100s-exposure-strategy/
Oh really interesting in your feedback on this !!
A nice lens - depends a bit on the weather ;-)
I picked this lens up and the 100 II body wanting to try it out as a second body for wildlife, Canon R3 and RF600 F4 is main setup. When testing it and framing images the same as the Canon I was shocked at how little difference there was between 102mp and 24mp. Fuji also pushed the combo as good for wildlife but what I found even with larger mammals it was just nowhere close to the performance of a full frame body. After three months of trying it out I traded the combo back in on a R5 II and 100-500.
The GFX 100 II is a nice body and the dynamic range is superb but overall it wasn't worth running two systems.
Thanks - interesting to know.
That said, I definitely didn't get my own 100S for 'moving' subjects ;-)
I'm a hobbyist bird/wildlife photographer and have weather resistant gear, but I, too, am not weather resistant! Reminds me of the golfer who says, "I shoot in the seventies... If it gets any hotter, I stay home.
Yes - I'm not one for overly hot either ;-)
Nice to see fujifilm extending the gf line up, but would love to see a gf 170mm giving an equivalent 135mm on full frame, this would perfectly round out its portrait friendly lens line up, that also includes the fantastic gf 250mm for a 200mm equivalent.
Yes, there is a bit of a 'See, we can do long lenses' with this one ;-)
Hi Keith - I've used both the 250mm and the slower 100-200mm zoom on the gfx. With the latter only (which I think is a similar build type to the 500mm - ie. relatively light) I've had issues with camera shake on a tripod - not sure if it's just coincidence or use of ois on a tripod. Would be interested if you have any similar issues or related experience.
I'll have aa look - some IS systems have historically had issues when there is no movement.
@KeithCooper Could you photograph an animal moving? say a dog chasing a ball. I would like to see how fast the focus is on a moving subject. Thanks.
Yes, I'll see what I see when I go out with it.
However, and this is a key point, I've no confidence that I've optimised AF settings on the camera for stuff like that. I just don't ever photograph such things with any of my cameras, so I'd be wary of damming the lens through my own lack of experience ;-)
I'm very aware of [some of] the gaps in my own photography expertise...
@@KeithCooper thank you Keith :)
Keith, why not architectural / city landscape; the long lens will result in a very special perspective and depth. Just an idea, and no birds in sight! lol
Oh, I was always going to do some of that once I was out... ;-)
Just waiting for some weather...
@@KeithCooper Have fun and stay safe!
1:30 1375 g "not that bad", that is excellent, you will not find an other autofocus 500mm 5.6 Lens which is lighter !
Quite likely... My experience of 500mm lenses is limited ;-)
@@KeithCooper Take a look at GF 250mm, it weighs 1425 g, in fact the new GF 500mm is the only modern light weight Lens design of all the GF Lenses.
Hi there. Was the moon shot hand-held?
yes at 1/60 f/8 and 100 ISO
@KeithCooper That's pretty impressive, in my opinion.
Yes - impressed me with the IS. If it's clear tonight I'll try it at f/5.6 and with the teleconverter
See how far up the ISO values you can go before quality falls below your standards of acceptance.
Also, have you considered trying out some extreme detail shots of buildings and stitching them with the idea of producing very large prints? Something approaching a gigapano concept but smaller.
That, or similar, is about the only obvious use I can think of for that lens in your market.
If the system tech is good enough to cope with low light internal shots, shooting detailed interiors of historic places and churches might be another option.
Yes, I'll experiment, but exposure with the GFX100S [and many modern sensors] is no the simple thing it was just a few years ago.
See here for a GFX100S ISO/exposure strategy
blog.kasson.com/gfx-100/fuji-gfx-100s-exposure-strategy/
Can I use it for wildlife?
Don't see why not?
While you're testing the lens, I would like to see photos at the minimum focusing distance and magnification. Enjoy the lens.
Definitely will do that...