X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C

Started Sep 11, 2019 | Discussions
ialarmedalien
ialarmedalien Senior Member • Posts: 1,055
X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C
18

I picked up a Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 Contemporary a little while ago but hadn't had a chance to test it out properly. This weekend, I went on a trip up to Bempton Cliffs, the UK's largest mainland seabird colony, to photograph gannets and other assorted wildlife, so I took both the Sigma 150-600 and my usual wildlife long lens, the FujiFilm XF 100-400mm, to compare the two. I don't have a Canon body so I cannot compare the performance on the "native" body (Sigma has reverse engineered the Canon AF protocol) to that on the X-T3.

Gannet skydiving team enjoying the strong winds atop Bempton Cliffs. XF100-400mm.

Lens set up

Sigma sells an optional dock which can be used to tailor the lens settings to your liking, update firmware, adjust focus (more relevant to cameras with mirrors), etc. One of the cooler features is being able to set up custom AF settings, including focus limits and AF speed. I created two custom focus settings, both with the highest AF speed setting (you might want to use lower speed AF changes for video work), and one setting with focus from 5m - infinity, and the other 10m - infinity. The lens also has three distance settings, 2.8-10m, 10m - infinity, and full focal range. For the majority of my shooting, I had the lens set to full range and switched between the two custom settings depending on where the birds were.

A gannet approaching its cliffside residence. Sigma 150-600 C.

Camera settings

I used the same camera set up for both lenses, including the same AF-C settings. Although I have the fancy Fringer that allows you to vary the lens aperture via a fake aperture ring on the adapter, in practice I shot wide open because AF performance at 600mm was dodgy at f/7.1 and unusable at f/8.0, even in very bright conditions.

AF at f/7.1 was very hit and miss; this seemed like a hit when I pressed the shutter but on closer examination, proved to be a miss. Sigma 150-600 C.

Although I usually shoot the XF 100-400mm at f/8, the Sigma produces a darker image, so I had to compensate by boosting the ISO by about a stop to achieve the same shutter speed.

I have posted the OOC JPG images so that differences between the lenses are not obscured by post-processing.

Handling

I don't have a gimbal head so I shot both lenses handheld. One of the big differences between the two lenses is the size and weight; that extra 555g of the Sigma can feel like a lot more if you're trying to focus on a small perched bird or waiting for a bird to take off; tracking moving objects is not too bad, although my arm and shoulder started aching after a while (I will have to adjust my gym routine). On the plus side, the XF 100-400 felt like a feather in comparison. I didn't test out the OIS particularly thoroughly as most of the time I had the shutter speed high enough that the effects were not noticeable. One of the nice features of the Sigma is the ability to lock the lens into place at whatever focal length you choose; you can unlock it manually or by a vigorous twist of the lens, which is handy if you want to quickly change focal length.

AF Performance

My main photographic targets were gannets, huge white and brown birds (2m wingspan!), at fairly close quarters, mostly against the backdrop of the sky or the ocean, so I expected a high success rate from both lenses. I also took quite a few shots of fulmars, which are smaller gulls, and a few perching birds for good measure.

Gannet portrait. XF100-400mm.

Gannet portrait (taken in flight), Sigma 150-600 C.

In general, I found the AF performance of the 150-600mm to be very good, and looking through the results, there were actually more missed shots using the XF100-400mm than the Sigma! This could be because I was more cautious with the Sigma, and waited until I was sure I had focus, or it may just be sampling error from the smallish set size.

Shooting with the Sigma is a more tactile experience than the Fuji lens; you can feel the motor moving as it keeps the subject in focus, which I liked. That also makes it clearer when nothing is happening; there were a couple of occasions where I just couldn't get focus, and from looking at the distance meter on the lens, it had obviously gone through the range and reached infinity without finding anything to focus on. I had to "reset" the focus at those times by pointing at something nearby as it took too long for the AF system to decide to recheck. I'm not sure if that's an issue specific to the lens or if it's a FujiFilm AF issue. I plan to contact the Fringer developer with feedback on it.

Another issue that I believe is a FujiFilm AF implementation problem is tracking small distant objects; I was excited to see a peregrin falcon, but was extremely annoyed when the camera lost it--I could see the blurry dot moving in the centre of the AF zone, but the camera couldn't seem to pick it up. I've had similar problems when trying to get ID shots of distant birds or aeroplanes; I believe the issue cropped up in the X-T3 v3 firmware update, but that may just be rose-tinted memories of AF-C performance in days of yore. It isn't a massive issue, since the target will be so small in the resulting images that you're not going to be able to do much with it, but I do find it annoying.

Peregrin falcon before it flew beyond the reach of the AF. Sigma 150-600 C.

The last quirk was some difficulty in obtaining focus on flying fulmars in bright conditions where the sun was sparkling off the sea behind them. I didn't have the XF 100-400mm with me for that session so I couldn't compare the performance of the two lenses directly, unfortunately.

I had a lot more difficulty in getting decent shots of small perched birds with the Sigma than I do with the XF 100-400. The combination of the weight of the lens, the very narrow depth of field, not being able to use smaller apertures with AF, weather conditions (strong blustery wind), and uncooperative small birds made it difficult to get anything usable. Time to start watching eBay for a decent gimbal head...

A small bird who was willing to have his photo taken. Sigma 150-600 C.

Conclusions

I was pleased and impressed with the Fringer + Sigma performance. I was aware that I was "holding back" somewhat with the Sigma due to unfamiliarity with it, and anticipate results improving as I use it more.

At the end of the day, I was very pleased with the performance of the Sigma 150-600C.

I'm happy to answer questions or post more photos if anyone has anything specific they would like to see.

Fujifilm X-T3
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Morris0
Morris0 Forum Pro • Posts: 29,573
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C
4

Thank you for the detailed review.  What AF-C settings were you using?  Would you say that one lens focused faster than the other?

For a small target, I find single point with a box about the size of the subject to twice it will work best for flight.  Closer you can use zone which works best when the subject fills 1/2 the frame or more.  Single point is very good for this as well, depends on your stile.  If you can get the single point on the eye or side of the head or body the best results happen.

I've had the fail to focus issue with the 100-400, particular when using a TC.  Focusing on the ground below your subject as you did will work and another approach is to zoom wider, acquire focus and zoom back in.

If you keep shooting with the Sigma you will get used to the weight.  It will take a few sessions.

Your results indicate that getting the Sigma is a worthwhile investment even if you need to get the finger adapter as well.  I'm not impressed by the AF performance of the 100-400 + 1.4x TC for flight and this is what makes me so curious about the Sigma.  Weather sealing is important to me yet I stopped shooting with the Sigma Sport after an injury and know I should not be carrying it around never mind hand holding.

Enjoy your new setup!

Morris

 Morris0's gear list:Morris0's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm X-H2S Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II XF 90mm +11 more
Fuji Maine Senior Member • Posts: 1,600
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C
2

Thank you so much for this! What a fantastic detailed review. What is the manual focus experience like with this lens? Clearly the desire with a setup like this would be auto focus but for things standing still I'd almost just assume manually focus. Lastly, am I correctly understanding that the light intake with the Sigma is lower than with the native Fuji at the same aperture setting? Perhaps it's worth taking a raw image with both using the same settings to see if it's a real difference of light intake or if Fuji is optimizing the jpeg with the native lens.

chkproductions
chkproductions Senior Member • Posts: 1,130
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C

Could you post a pic of your Fuji/Sigma setup, so we could see how it looks?

Thanks

chk

Jerry-astro
MOD Jerry-astro Forum Pro • Posts: 19,427
One alternative to consider...

Fascinating and extremely useful writeup.  Thanks very much for taking the time to document this in detail.  One side note... you mentioned that you were not shooting with a gimbal.  Up to recently, I've had no experience with gimbals at all, plus I had been using a substandard tripod.  With some guidance and advice from the pro who accompanied our group on a recent trip to South Africa, I not only decided to upgrade my tripod, but also acquired a fairly inexpensive gimbal-like attachment (Wimberly Sidekick) that offers a lot of the mobility for action shooting (like BIF) that a full gimbal offers, but at a considerably lower price.  You might consider checking into this and see if it might help you work with large lenses, like the Sigma, for tracking birds.  I haven't taken it out of a full-fledged birding excursion yet, but experimenting a bit in my backyard, I think it will end up being a huge improvement.

(P.S. I'm not on commission... just a bit of gear I really like ).

-- hide signature --

Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

 Jerry-astro's gear list:Jerry-astro's gear list
Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Fujifilm X-H2S Fujifilm XF 8-16mm F2.8 XF 150-600mm Canon Pixma Pro-100 +1 more
MartinM4nhunter
MartinM4nhunter New Member • Posts: 3
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C
1

Thanks for the review! I just got my Fringer Pro II this week and I've been anxious to go out with it. I joined this forum to read up on others' experiences with it and your post was the second thread I came to.

 MartinM4nhunter's gear list:MartinM4nhunter's gear list
Canon EOS 40D Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm Instax 210 Fujifilm instax mini 90
Morris0
Morris0 Forum Pro • Posts: 29,573
Re: One alternative to consider...

Jerry-astro wrote:

Fascinating and extremely useful writeup. Thanks very much for taking the time to document this in detail. One side note... you mentioned that you were not shooting with a gimbal. Up to recently, I've had no experience with gimbals at all, plus I had been using a substandard tripod. With some guidance and advice from the pro who accompanied our group on a recent trip to South Africa, I not only decided to upgrade my tripod, but also acquired a fairly inexpensive gimbal-like attachment (Wimberly Sidekick) that offers a lot of the mobility for action shooting (like BIF) that a full gimbal offers, but at a considerably lower price. You might consider checking into this and see if it might help you work with large lenses, like the Sigma, for tracking birds. I haven't taken it out of a full-fledged birding excursion yet, but experimenting a bit in my backyard, I think it will end up being a huge improvement.

(P.S. I'm not on commission... just a bit of gear I really like ).

I used to shoot wildlife handheld and when I started shooting with a heavy lens learned the many advantages of using a tripod.  We think of the tripod as locking you in one place and taking time to set up.  This is not the case and there is always the quick release when you need to move quickly.

Tripod Advantages:

- Sharper images, even at high shutter speeds with stabilization

- Ability to use very slow shutter speeds

- When waiting for a subject to move, or exhibit an interesting behaviour, you point your camera at the subject, pre focus and wait.  You don't have to look through the viewfinder so you are free to move around.  When it's time to take the photo you simply trip the shutter and get the shot.  Shooting handheld you will get tired of holding the camera on the subject and let it down.  By the time you lift the camera and compose the moment is gone.

- The tripod does the carrying (weight lifting).  When you get home, you are much less tired.

I recommend that you get a light weight tripod, carbon fiber is best and adds about $100 to the cost of tripods that have other options.  Aluminum is nearly as light yet a problem in cold weather as touching it can cause you skit to stick to it or be quite uncomfortable.

I use a Jobu Jr gimbal head.  It is fairly light and more than strong enough to support our lenses.  As we are using zooms one must compromise when balancing your camera and lens on the gimbal.  I like to balance mine for full lens extension as this is my most common focal length.

Morris

 Morris0's gear list:Morris0's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm X-H2S Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II XF 90mm +11 more
Jerry-astro
MOD Jerry-astro Forum Pro • Posts: 19,427
Re: One alternative to consider...

Morris0 wrote:

Jerry-astro wrote:

Fascinating and extremely useful writeup. Thanks very much for taking the time to document this in detail. One side note... you mentioned that you were not shooting with a gimbal. Up to recently, I've had no experience with gimbals at all, plus I had been using a substandard tripod. With some guidance and advice from the pro who accompanied our group on a recent trip to South Africa, I not only decided to upgrade my tripod, but also acquired a fairly inexpensive gimbal-like attachment (Wimberly Sidekick) that offers a lot of the mobility for action shooting (like BIF) that a full gimbal offers, but at a considerably lower price. You might consider checking into this and see if it might help you work with large lenses, like the Sigma, for tracking birds. I haven't taken it out of a full-fledged birding excursion yet, but experimenting a bit in my backyard, I think it will end up being a huge improvement.

(P.S. I'm not on commission... just a bit of gear I really like ).

I used to shoot wildlife handheld and when I started shooting with a heavy lens learned the many advantages of using a tripod. We think of the tripod as locking you in one place and taking time to set up. This is not the case and there is always the quick release when you need to move quickly.

Tripod Advantages:

- Sharper images, even at high shutter speeds with stabilization

- Ability to use very slow shutter speeds

- When waiting for a subject to move, or exhibit an interesting behaviour, you point your camera at the subject, pre focus and wait. You don't have to look through the viewfinder so you are free to move around. When it's time to take the photo you simply trip the shutter and get the shot. Shooting handheld you will get tired of holding the camera on the subject and let it down. By the time you lift the camera and compose the moment is gone.

- The tripod does the carrying (weight lifting). When you get home, you are much less tired.

I recommend that you get a light weight tripod, carbon fiber is best and adds about $100 to the cost of tripods that have other options. Aluminum is nearly as light yet a problem in cold weather as touching it can cause you skit to stick to it or be quite uncomfortable.

I use a Jobu Jr gimbal head. It is fairly light and more than strong enough to support our lenses. As we are using zooms one must compromise when balancing your camera and lens on the gimbal. I like to balance mine for full lens extension as this is my most common focal length.

Morris

That gimbal head looks terrific.  Wish I’d known about it when I went shopping for one recently.  Mine works pretty well, but offers a bit less mobility (for lack of a better term) than this one.  Totally agree about investing in CF.  The weight/strength ratio is unbeatable, and it remains pretty affordable, depending on brand, etc.

-- hide signature --

Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

 Jerry-astro's gear list:Jerry-astro's gear list
Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Fujifilm X-H2S Fujifilm XF 8-16mm F2.8 XF 150-600mm Canon Pixma Pro-100 +1 more
Ben Herrmann
Ben Herrmann Forum Pro • Posts: 21,156
And I've been harping on the fact that...
5

...the Fringer adapter is the best of the bunch for over a year now. And more and more of the naysayers are starting to succumb by purchasing the Fringer to be able to use with other 3rd party Canon based lenses (and of course, Canon lenses).

I had one guy PM me - a poster who was adamant about how he felt it was so ridiculous to purchase Canon (and other) lenses with an adapter - when you had a wealth of Fuji lenses available. Well, he tried it on a whim - he got both the EF-S 10-18 and the EF-S 55-250 - and he became an instant convert with both lenses costing him less than $450 and being stunned by the superb IQ he was getting.

-- hide signature --

Best of luck and health to you all!

Bernd ("Ben") Werner Herrmann
Fuquay Varina, North Carolina USA

Just a friendly reminder here homies - bear in mind that any posting of mine represents my opinion only - not those of other folks - nor am I implying that others will feel the same way that I do about a given issue or camera. I advance suggestions or information based on my having used a camera (or cameras) - not purely on blind speculation. However, If you feel absolutely compelled to argue about a personal opinion of mine, please feel free to go ahead and do so - without my participation of course - and that would be quite an interesting conversation to say the least.

 Ben Herrmann's gear list:Ben Herrmann's gear list
Canon EOS M Fujifilm X-E2S Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T20 Canon EOS M6 +4 more
htimm1948
htimm1948 Regular Member • Posts: 289
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C

Morris0 wrote:

Thank you for the detailed review. What AF-C settings were you using? Would you say that one lens focused faster than the other?

For a small target, I find single point with a box about the size of the subject to twice it will work best for flight. Closer you can use zone which works best when the subject fills 1/2 the frame or more. Single point is very good for this as well, depends on your stile. If you can get the single point on the eye or side of the head or body the best results happen.

I've had the fail to focus issue with the 100-400, particular when using a TC. Focusing on the ground below your subject as you did will work and another approach is to zoom wider, acquire focus and zoom back in.

If you keep shooting with the Sigma you will get used to the weight. It will take a few sessions.

Your results indicate that getting the Sigma is a worthwhile investment even if you need to get the finger adapter as well. I'm not impressed by the AF performance of the 100-400 + 1.4x TC for flight and this is what makes me so curious about the Sigma. Weather sealing is important to me yet I stopped shooting with the Sigma Sport after an injury and know I should not be carrying it around never mind hand holding.

Enjoy your new setup!

Morris

I'm glad to hear that you also not been impressed by the AF performance of the 100-400 + TC.  With small birds in flight it is not usable. I have used the X-T3 with the fringer pro 1st version with my Canon 500mm f4 and 1.4 TC and that performs even better for birds in flight than the 100-400 + 1,4 TC. For perching birds it is perfect but for BIF and I have heard it from many other birders which use there former camera's or sold there Fuji and buy their old stuff back again.

 htimm1948's gear list:htimm1948's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS M5 Canon EOS R5 Sony a1 +9 more
Jerry-astro
MOD Jerry-astro Forum Pro • Posts: 19,427
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C

htimm1948 wrote:

I'm glad to hear that you also not been impressed by the AF performance of the 100-400 + TC. With small birds in flight it is not usable. I have used the X-T3 with the fringer pro 1st version with my Canon 500mm f4 and 1.4 TC and that performs even better for birds in flight than the 100-400 + 1,4 TC. For perching birds it is perfect but for BIF and I have heard it from many other birders which use there former camera's or sold there Fuji and buy their old stuff back again.

Well, Morris (and likely you as well) is a far better and more experienced BIF photographer than I am, but TBH, I haven't struggled with BIF using the 100-400+1.4 TC to the extent you describe here. Admittedly, I primarily have been shooting larger birds, which is where the difference may lie... clearly somewhat less challenging for an AF system. I've had a fair amount of luck with smaller birds, but I admittedly do tend to photograph them more perched than in flight, which is a different "kettle of fish" in terms of challenging AF performance.

-- hide signature --

Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

 Jerry-astro's gear list:Jerry-astro's gear list
Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Fujifilm X-H2S Fujifilm XF 8-16mm F2.8 XF 150-600mm Canon Pixma Pro-100 +1 more
Morris0
Morris0 Forum Pro • Posts: 29,573
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C
1

That is a nice photo Jerry yet it's not crisp.  Your shutter speed is plenty fast enough.  Compare it to any portrait you've taken where you fill the frame with the 100+400 + 1.4x wide open at 560mm.  I bet you will see how much sharper the photo is.

I suspect there is some focus slop and the shallow DOF is showing.  I've been thinking of trying that combination at f11 to see if it does the trick.  The bare 100-400 is much sharper for flight images.  I'd love to be able to put the joystick on my subject's eye as I did with the D500 yet we are stuck we acquire and hope Fuji tracks what we want.

Earlier today I was reprocessing some of my old D500 + Sigma 150-600 Sport images and I was amazed how much more I could crop them and the D500 has fewer MP.

I love the portraits I get with the 100-400 and as you know I've taken some very good flight photos.  I find the keeper rate rather low due to soft focus when using the TC.

Morris

 Morris0's gear list:Morris0's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm X-H2S Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II XF 90mm +11 more
Jerry-astro
MOD Jerry-astro Forum Pro • Posts: 19,427
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C

Morris0 wrote:

That is a nice photo Jerry yet it's not crisp. Your shutter speed is plenty fast enough. Compare it to any portrait you've taken where you fill the frame with the 100+400 + 1.4x wide open at 560mm. I bet you will see how much sharper the photo is.

I suspect there is some focus slop and the shallow DOF is showing. I've been thinking of trying that combination at f11 to see if it does the trick. The bare 100-400 is much sharper for flight images. I'd love to be able to put the joystick on my subject's eye as I did with the D500 yet we are stuck we acquire and hope Fuji tracks what we want.

Earlier today I was reprocessing some of my old D500 + Sigma 150-600 Sport images and I was amazed how much more I could crop them and the D500 has fewer MP.

I love the portraits I get with the 100-400 and as you know I've taken some very good flight photos. I find the keeper rate rather low due to soft focus when using the TC.

Morris

If there's any lack of crispness (and I don't see a lot in that image), then I would agree that it's likely due to the fact that the image is a crop.  I would have thought that f/8 would yield sufficient DOF and the shutter speed, as you mention, should be plenty fast enough at 1/1700s.  My guess that thinner DOF would have to be the issue here, but again, to my eyes, the image appeared to be pretty crisp.

One last thought on your "much sharper" w/o TC comment... while there has to be some sort of optical impact when using the 1.4 TC, I can't say that I've seen much in the way of a noticeable degradation in IQ or apparent softness in my shots, and I use the TC a lot.  It's entirely possible that my standards are a tad lower than yours, however.  I will try some comparison shots including some at higher shutter speeds next time around and see how much of a difference it makes.

Appreciate the comments and it's definitely worth a second look.

-- hide signature --

Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

 Jerry-astro's gear list:Jerry-astro's gear list
Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Fujifilm X-H2S Fujifilm XF 8-16mm F2.8 XF 150-600mm Canon Pixma Pro-100 +1 more
Morris0
Morris0 Forum Pro • Posts: 29,573
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C
5

Jerry-astro wrote:

Morris0 wrote:

That is a nice photo Jerry yet it's not crisp. Your shutter speed is plenty fast enough. Compare it to any portrait you've taken where you fill the frame with the 100+400 + 1.4x wide open at 560mm. I bet you will see how much sharper the photo is.

I suspect there is some focus slop and the shallow DOF is showing. I've been thinking of trying that combination at f11 to see if it does the trick. The bare 100-400 is much sharper for flight images. I'd love to be able to put the joystick on my subject's eye as I did with the D500 yet we are stuck we acquire and hope Fuji tracks what we want.

Earlier today I was reprocessing some of my old D500 + Sigma 150-600 Sport images and I was amazed how much more I could crop them and the D500 has fewer MP.

I love the portraits I get with the 100-400 and as you know I've taken some very good flight photos. I find the keeper rate rather low due to soft focus when using the TC.

Morris

If there's any lack of crispness (and I don't see a lot in that image), then I would agree that it's likely due to the fact that the image is a crop. I would have thought that f/8 would yield sufficient DOF and the shutter speed, as you mention, should be plenty fast enough at 1/1700s. My guess that thinner DOF would have to be the issue here, but again, to my eyes, the image appeared to be pretty crisp.

One last thought on your "much sharper" w/o TC comment... while there has to be some sort of optical impact when using the 1.4 TC, I can't say that I've seen much in the way of a noticeable degradation in IQ or apparent softness in my shots, and I use the TC a lot. It's entirely possible that my standards are a tad lower than yours, however. I will try some comparison shots including some at higher shutter speeds next time around and see how much of a difference it makes.

Appreciate the comments and it's definitely worth a second look.

2 from with my Nikon/Sigma gear for comparison. Both crops

Morris

 Morris0's gear list:Morris0's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm X-H2S Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II XF 90mm +11 more
Fuji Maine Senior Member • Posts: 1,600
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C

Wow Morris I'm not terribly into bird photography but that first shot of the owl is gorgeous.

Morris0
Morris0 Forum Pro • Posts: 29,573
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C
1

Fuji Maine wrote:

Wow Morris I'm not terribly into bird photography but that first shot of the owl is gorgeous.

Thank you,

It is one of my award winning photos.

Morris

 Morris0's gear list:Morris0's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm X-H2S Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-17E II XF 90mm +11 more
htimm1948
htimm1948 Regular Member • Posts: 289
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C
1

Jerry-astro wrote:

htimm1948 wrote:

I'm glad to hear that you also not been impressed by the AF performance of the 100-400 + TC. With small birds in flight it is not usable. I have used the X-T3 with the fringer pro 1st version with my Canon 500mm f4 and 1.4 TC and that performs even better for birds in flight than the 100-400 + 1,4 TC. For perching birds it is perfect but for BIF and I have heard it from many other birders which use there former camera's or sold there Fuji and buy their old stuff back again.

Well, Morris (and likely you as well) is a far better and more experienced BIF photographer than I am, but TBH, I haven't struggled with BIF using the 100-400+1.4 TC to the extent you describe here. Admittedly, I primarily have been shooting larger birds, which is where the difference may lie... clearly somewhat less challenging for an AF system. I've had a fair amount of luck with smaller birds, but I admittedly do tend to photograph them more perched than in flight, which is a different "kettle of fish" in terms of challenging AF performance.

This is maybe not the place to show my Canon Images but I sincerely hope that the AF systems on the X-T3 gets an improvement because the images of perched birds are quite good or excellent. But here some off my BIF's with Canon.

 htimm1948's gear list:htimm1948's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS M5 Canon EOS R5 Sony a1 +9 more
ialarmedalien
OP ialarmedalien Senior Member • Posts: 1,055
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C

I'm going out today so I'll take both lenses with me and will take some comparison shots for you to demonstrate the difference in light intake. I haven't tried manual focus (mainly because it is difficult to hand-hold and focus manually at the same time) but the reserve I'm going to today has hides where I'll be able to give that a go.

ialarmedalien
OP ialarmedalien Senior Member • Posts: 1,055
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C

Morris0 wrote:

Thank you for the detailed review. What AF-C settings were you using? Would you say that one lens focused faster than the other?

My AF-C settings are pretty similar to those that you have posted, although I tend to change the "stickiness" setting depending on what I'm shooting -- for birds where I can track their trajectory steadily, I'll set it to 3 or 4, but for less predictable birds, I set it to 2. I also switch between zone and single point depending on what I'm shooting.

It's quite difficult to give an objective judgement of AF speed, especially when there are other factors that affect focus performance (e.g. moving and holding the lens in the appropriate position), but my subjective impression is that there was not a great deal to choose between the two lenses.

I've had the fail to focus issue with the 100-400, particular when using a TC. Focusing on the ground below your subject as you did will work and another approach is to zoom wider, acquire focus and zoom back in.

Ah, interesting - I'll give that a go if I have similar problems when I go out today.

If you keep shooting with the Sigma you will get used to the weight. It will take a few sessions.

Your results indicate that getting the Sigma is a worthwhile investment even if you need to get the finger adapter as well. I'm not impressed by the AF performance of the 100-400 + 1.4x TC for flight and this is what makes me so curious about the Sigma. Weather sealing is important to me yet I stopped shooting with the Sigma Sport after an injury and know I should not be carrying it around never mind hand holding.

In that case, maybe I should have given a less positive review so you aren't tempted to take a risk...!  I very rarely use the 1.4TC with the 100-400 as the AF feels too sluggish, especially since I find that combination gives sharpest results when stopped down a little. Using the Fringer with the 150-600mm is a great alternative, particularly for anyone who already has the Sigma lens or who finds the Fuji lens out of their budget.

ialarmedalien
OP ialarmedalien Senior Member • Posts: 1,055
Re: X-T3 + Fringer EF-FX Pro II + Sigma 150-600mm C

Sure - I will post a pic of the set ups later on.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads