[chrismiller]

<p style="margin:0cm;">So I’m in the situation of having my Canon equipment stolen a little while back, so the only camera I have is an X100T. I like to take pictures of windsurfing, so require a longish lens. I tried with the x100, waterproof case and strobes, but it really isn't suited.<span> </span>


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I was previously using a 5d with 70-200f4 plus a 1.4X converter. This wasn't really long enough, so at the time I was considering a swap to a crop body and either a 70-300l or 55-250stm.


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">Now I’m not really stuck with canon (I only have a 85mm 1.8 left) I’m considering other options:


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">D7200 + 300 F4 pf (plus maybe a converter)


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">X-t1 + 100-400


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">mft body and Panasonic 100-400.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">The 300mm Nikon looks very attractive with its compact size and low weight.


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">The D7200 would be good for wedding receptions too with the -3ev autofocus and strobes (see here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/intmoth/al...9028185158) I worry the xt1 wouldn't be great here, the x100t sure isn't and the old 5d would not autofocus either. I zoned focused in that album.


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I miss not having an ultra wide, so the x-t1 with 12 2.0 would be a nice compact package, good for astro.


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I also considered Sony. The a7s with voigtlander lenses looks interesting, but there are no native e mount telephoto options over 200mm.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I worry that the fuji and panasonic long lenses won't be great compared to say the canon 100-400 ii.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">One particular aspect that is of great importance is the rendering of specular highlights as breaking water causes lots of this.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">Anybody got any thoughts?


Chris

[toni-a]

if you are happy with a canon rebel and 50-250 IS quality for for it, I don't think you will find  better compromise, otherwise you said it yourself: canon 100-400 is ideal for such a job, especially its fast focus for such action photos

[chrismiller]

It's difficult to argue against the 55-250 stm unless you need a faster lens. A bit more reach could be useful

[Klaus]

 

<p style="margin:0cm;">So I’m in the situation of having my Canon equipment stolen a little while back, so the only camera I have is an X100T. I like to take pictures of windsurfing, so require a longish lens. I tried with the x100, waterproof case and strobes, but it really isn't suited. 

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I was previously using a 5d with 70-200f4 plus a 1.4X converter. This wasn't really long enough, so at the time I was considering a swap to a crop body and either a 70-300l or 55-250stm.

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">Now I’m not really stuck with canon (I only have a 85mm 1.8 left) I’m considering other options:

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">D7200 + 300 F4 pf (plus maybe a converter)

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">X-t1 + 100-400

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">mft body and Panasonic 100-400.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">The 300mm Nikon looks very attractive with its compact size and low weight.

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">The D7200 would be good for wedding receptions too with the -3ev autofocus and strobes (see here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/intmoth/al...9028185158) I worry the xt1 wouldn't be great here, the x100t sure isn't and the old 5d would not autofocus either. I zoned focused in that album.

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I miss not having an ultra wide, so the x-t1 with 12 2.0 would be a nice compact package, good for astro.

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I also considered Sony. The a7s with voigtlander lenses looks interesting, but there are no native e mount telephoto options over 200mm.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I worry that the fuji and panasonic long lenses won't be great compared to say the canon 100-400 ii.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">One particular aspect that is of great importance is the rendering of specular highlights as breaking water causes lots of this.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">Anybody got any thoughts?

 

Chris

 

 

Difficult.

 

My first thought was MFT because the GX8 + Leica 100-400 combines in-body IS with in-lens IS.

Then I stumbled across your statement about the breaking water. MFT has a shallower dynamic range and breaking water requires lots of it to be rendered nicely.

 

The X-T1 with 120-400mm should be better although I can't really comment on the quality of that lens. Sorry. 

 

The Nikkor 300mm PF seems to be superb from what Markus is telling me. However, I am slightly wondering whether a prime lens is the right lens for windsurfing (unless you got two bodies with different lenses).

 

If it's long enough the Canon 100-400L II is great - no doubts here.

 

Sony - well, as you mentioned probably not the best option. In theory you could use the Sony 70-400G on the A7x via adapter but that sort of destroys the mirrorless concept there.

[chrismiller]

it will be interesting to see the results of testing of the fuji and panaleica 100-400 tests. 

 

With regards the 300mm focal length for windsurf photography, I think this would be fine. I find typically I'm up the beach so am always at the long end of zooms.

 

thanks for your reply,

 

Chris

[Klaus]

it will be interesting to see the results of testing of the fuji and panaleica 100-400 tests. 

 

With regards the 300mm focal length for windsurf photography, I think this would be fine. I find typically I'm up the beach so am always at the long end of zooms.

 

thanks for your reply,

 

Chris

 

I'm not sure about a test of the Leica 100-400mm.

The tests of the the Tamron/Sigma 150-600mm is already a pain (full format) and the Leica is even more extreme.


Maybe I will do a "believe the tester's judgement" review rather than something in the lab.

[Rover]

The Tamron 70-300 VC is a nice and cheap option. I'm using one and I like it a lot. I haven't put it to the harsher tests like shooting sports though.

[chrismiller]

yes, the tamron is on my radar too. Shame they don't make it with a pentax mount

[toni-a]

You were gonna use Canon 50-250 IS on pentax ??

if you don't mind using adapters why not get the oldy tokina 80-400 ? you exercise wright lifting and take pictures at the same time 

[chrismiller]

ha ha, no - i'm currently bodyless. The pentax bodies are appealing though on a number of fronts (IBIS, sony sensor, build quality) but I was hoping for a lighter weight system. My old 5D + 70-200 was unappealing to cart about, especially on holiday.