Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - Printable Version +- Opticallimits (https://forum.opticallimits.com) +-- Forum: Forums (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4) +--- Forum: Fujifilm (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=9) +--- Thread: Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm (/showthread.php?tid=688) Pages:
1
2
|
Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - Klaus - 08-03-2016 ...arrived in da lab. Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - thxbb12 - 08-03-2016 Quote:...arrived in da lab. Woohooo!! Any ETA yet? Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - Klaus - 08-03-2016 ETAs are there to be broken ... ;-) The 100-400mm is really a brick. And it has probably the worst tripod mount ever (tiny). Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - JJ_SO - 08-03-2016 Hold a 150-600 Sports, then get back to your "brick". Makes me laugh, your complaint... Tripod mount is good, especially that I can remove it completely. And I can tell you, this lens with its tripod mount is more stable on a tripod than a Nikkor 70-200/4 or 300/4 PF with their plastic barrels! I would have appreciated and Arca compatible foot, though. Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - Klaus - 08-03-2016 The Fuji 100-400mm is longer than the Canon 100-400mm/Sony 70-400mm/Nikkor 80-400mm and just slightly less heavy. In terms of "brickness" we really have to compare the physical focal length & speed, not the equivalent one. The Leica 100-400mm is almost tiny in this comparison just to mention. Makes me wonder whether the Fuji is actually a full format lens ... And I was talking about the size of the foot of the tripod mount, not about the ring or something. Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - obican - 08-04-2016 Do you have the teleconverters too? I made a few shots with the 100-400@400mm with the 2.0x TC, the results were not really pleasing but that might be due to the fact I had no tripod at that time. Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - Rover - 08-04-2016 Quote:The Fuji 100-400mm is longer than the Canon 100-400mm/Sony 70-400mm/Nikkor 80-400mm and just slightly less heavy.Bad as in "Nikkor 70-180 bad"? http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/358-micro-nikkor-af-70-180mm-f45-56-d-ed-photozone-review--lab-test-report Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - Klaus - 08-04-2016 You remembered this one? :lol: Yes, almost that bad. Makes me really wonder why ? I mean - just an extra cm cannot make much of a difference in terms of costs. Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - thxbb12 - 08-04-2016 Quote:Bad as in "Nikkor 70-180 bad"? In that review, the "next" link is broken: it goes back to the home page. Instead it should be "http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/358-micro-nikkor-af-70-180mm-f45-56-d-ed-photozone-review--lab-test-report?start=1" Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 and 100-400mm - Rover - 08-04-2016 Quote:You remembered this one? :lol:I remembered the line about "the mechanical designers smoking some really hard weed" or something, and then I looked it up. Wasn't sure it was that lens specifically - but yes, I've been reading PZ since those times. It really looks like both the photographic fads and design errors inevitably return sooner or later. |