I have little doubt that this lens will adversely confront many Fuji users, after all, they adopted the X system because overall it is a small and light weight system, unobtrusive, and unashamedly retro. I get that as I generally enjoy Fuji equipment for that very reason, but I’m also a very keen wildlife photographer who is used to using heavy Canon equipment to deal with this specialised aspect of my hobby. Fuji have given me a wonderful alternative to my beloved Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II and 7D MkII. This Canon telephoto zoom lens weighs 1570g and is 193mm long and has internal focus. It focuses down to 0.98 meters with a reproduction ratio of 0.31x. On a Canon APS-C sensor its equivalent focal range is 160-640mm. This has been a wonderful wildlife lens and apart from a sore arm at the end of a day of use, I have zero complaints, it takes seriously brilliant images, way better than the Mk I version of the lens.
The big question is how does it stack up against the recently released Fujifilm XF 150-600mm f/5.6-8 R LM OIS WR lens? Well, this lens has a longer range being equivalent to 225-900mm (officially 229-914mm) in FF, it is very slightly heavier at 1605g and is longer at 314mm. It too has internal focusing that gets you to 2.4 meters from your subject with a reproduction ratio of 0.24x. The big issue is that it is a slower lens being f/5.6-8.0. These differences are significant, but don’t really help in making a comparison. I feel the best approach to comparing these two beasts is to spend time with both lenses shooting small birds in my garden. The alacrity of the avian fauna in my garden is a real challenge for any bird photographer, so before I give you my findings, here are my credentials from 54 years ago in 1970, when I was in my final year of primary school. The only A1 score I received in my school report was for “nature study” with a comment “Mark is an outstanding member of the bird club”. I got a few B2’s but that’s the only A1 ever!
I’ll start by making the point that comparisons are not always straight forward. So, while the Fuji is heavier than the Canon, it does have a fantastic rotatable and removable tripod foot to hold for better stability, plus the Fuji camera body is smaller and lighter than my Canon DSLR. Using the XH2, I can add to the 900mm length by having a denser pixel density to crop into – very useful for shooting small birds. The fact that the Fuji is slower at 600/900mm (f/8.0) compared to the Canon at 400/640mm (f/5.6) is offset by the incredibly efficient image stabilisation built into the Fuji. This is further amplified by the in-body stabilisation of the XH2 – collectively it works a treat. I feel the Fuji set up has a slightly better balance to it with both cameras having their respective camera grips attached to help facilitate vertical shots and help maintain power continuity during long birding sessions. The one thing that stood out for me was that while I often use flash for fill lighting and “pop”, this seemed less necessary on the Fuji system due to the exemplary stabilisation, even at 900mm! In fact, I pretty much used this lens exclusively at 900mm, no surprise as I have always used the Canon pretty much exclusively at its maximum magnification, but nonetheless, 900mm is a ridiculous focal length to be able to use in reasonable light and still get sharp images. I take my hat off to Fujifilm engineers.
If I have one major criticism of the Fuji lens, it is that the image stabilisation can cause the subject to jump about in the frame, especially small birds at 900mm. I also find it too easy to accidentally alter settings on the XH2. For example, the focus point shifts because I catch the wrong button. This is a general Fuji gripe, exacerbated by using the grip, which doubles up on buttons. This doesn’t happen so much with my older Canon set up. In terms of build/solidity, I’d give Canon 10/10 and Fuji 9/10 – both are great.
I wasn’t a massive fan of the bird detection mode at first, preferring to use the smallest centre focus point and single autofocus mode. This says more about me being set in my ways and sticking to old school methodologies, but I tried bird detection, and found centre point focus gave me a marginally higher hit rate of sharp images. However, with the smaller zone focusing area selected with continuous autofocus and bird detection dialled in, I have to admit, it is easier work shooting birds than using the centre focus point alone. Birds in flight are tricky if you have the lens set at 900mm equivalence – you’re better off dropping to 225mm equivalence then ramping up magnification to catch a shot. The same is true for the Canon lens, perhaps to a lesser extent, but it can be tricky locking on to birds in flight with either lens.
In terms of hit rate (nailing a sharp, well exposed shot), I’d say both systems are about the same, and when you get it right, image files are as good as they can be. The only thing that I really think sets the systems apart is that the Fuji can shoot at 900mm (more with a teleconverter), while the Canon can only hit the equivalent of 640mm. That 260mm difference is significant, and while both lenses are great, the Fuji wins because it gets to 900mm. Sure f/8.0 at 900mm is slow, but with the amazing built in stabilisation, the potential to boost ISO or add a Fuji EF-60 flash, you have a lens that is really special. Don’t be frightened to use the aperture fully open – it is super sharp at f/8.0 and 900mm.
The lens is weather sealed and has a fluorine coat on the front element, but my advice would be to buy a good quality protective filter (82mm) as this lens does have a high probability of impact as you wend your way through rocky gorges and dense wooded areas. I don’t often bother with a lens hood – 95% of the time they’re more nuisance than use. For what it’s worth, I have a Hoya UV HD filter attached, and it has no impact on the image quality as far as I can see.
To be honest, in use I found the Fuji to be much more fun to use for bird photography than the Canon, although the Canon is a really-top tier lens. Do you need both – no, but I can’t see myself getting rid of either…. both are special, the Fuji perhaps is just a bit more special!
Below is a selection of images taken on the Fuji XF 150-600mm f/5.6-8 R LM OIS WR lens, with a few thrown in taken on the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II. Mostly small garden birds, but with a few larger species for completion to give the fullest context to the Fuji lenses overall potential for birding.
Many of these images are of very small, very busy, very fast birds – the Fuji lens did really well. For comparison, below are some birds shot in my garden or surrounding areas on the Canon lens.
So, to summarise, my favourite overall lens for many years, the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II, has been usurped by the Fujifilm XF 150-600mm f/5.6-8 R LM OIS WR lens, my new go to birding lens. A lens that suits all manner of wildlife and landscape subjects. My rankings are:
Sharpness – 10/10
Build quality – 9/10
Autofocus – 8.5/10
Practicality for field use – 9.5/10
Suitability for travel – 9.5/10
Image stabilisation – 9.5/10 (10 out of 10 with bodies that have stabilised sensors)
Value for money – 10/10
Bottom line, this is probably my new favourite lens – you need to play with it to realise the optimal settings and conditions for rendering top rate images under a variety of scenarios, but once you’ve done this, you’ll be very pleased with your purchase. I tend to start with ISO 500, which is great in Australian light, but I do everything I can to avoid higher ISOs (>1600) as the resulting noise spoils the image (IMHO). Flash can help keep the ISO low and images clean, but judicious use is required to keep things looking natural. There is zero doubt in my mind that the VG-XH vertical battery grip is an essential item to achieve good portrait orientation shots of birds when using this lens. Butterflies to birds and seascapes to mountains, this lens is a real winner and sets the Fuji system up as a truly professional option for serious photographers.
I think I should add one aspect that I’m not too happy about, but this is partly down to nature. If you use the lens to shoot distant scenes, then you may encounter softer images and unpleasant, jittery bokeh. Close up bokeh is quite acceptable, but at a distance with a busy backdrop, it becomes quite nervous. The softness is a particular problem on warm/hot days where haze and heat convection can undermine an image due to telephoto compression of this physical phenomenon. However, this does not take anything away from the lenses ability to shoot incredibly sharp birds. This lens is a gold star optic, and Fuji have a real winner with it. The only real question you have to ask is, should I buy the 150-600mm lens or should I hold out and wait till my piggy bank has a few more coins in it and buy the slightly more expensive Fuji XF 500mm f/5.6 R LM OIS WR prime lens? The Fuji XF 500mm f/5.6 R LM OIS WR prime lens is reviewed here.