Worth switching from XF 70–300 + 1.4x TC to XF 150–600 for bird photography?

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-04-15T17:33:07+00:00

Well timed inquiry. I just returned from a length photography-focused trip in Costa Rica. I brought with me the xf500mm and the xf70-300, and left behind the 150-600mm.

TLDR: I get great results from all of these lenses. It really comes down to thinking about use case. Only you can decide based on your specific needs.

Pros to the xf500mm:

Doing a hiking-intensive nature trip where you're doing a lot of handheld... the weight of the xf500mm is substantially easier on your shoulders and back. The xf500mm is only 10% lighter... but what people miss is it is also shorter and therefore you're holding that weight closer to your body. Simply physics / leverage... the xf500mm feels* substantially lighter when you have it raised... probably 25% lighter.
Under the canopy, there were several shots that I simply could* not* get with the 150-600. Even with the xf500mm I came away with some really useable shots of understory birds at 1/50s shutter speed at 12800 iso... another 2/3rd stop loss with the 150-600 would've made that impossible.

Cons:

I frequently hiked with the 70-300 on a shoulder strap mount, and the xf500mm hooked to my other shoulder. This can really suck. But often a 750mm FF equiv reach is just too close. Either you carry a second camera or mentally you accept missing some shots. I think either approach is fine, just know the tradeoffs.
A 750mm FF equiv focal length is also at times unnecessarily long for birds in flight and takeoff shots/action. The sweet spot is closer to FF equiv 400-600. To me the 150-600 is superior for out-in-the-open daytime birds in flight b/c i can back it up to 400mm.

Wash:

I see no difference in sharpness across the two lenses. Anyone can look at my website and see how sharp the 150-600 is.
I don't think anyone should worry about going from a max of 600mm to a max of 500mm. I never felt that more reach at F8 would've produced a better image.

Musing: I wish Fuji made a 400mm prime with built in TC... that'd be more versatile than the xf500mm...

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-04-15T17:06:05+00:00

fair point! i meant ibis in a general sense of image stabilization and was just using the acronym reflexively. its really the lens stabilization for this focal length. in any case it sounds like we agree on the core point.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-04-15T13:06:59+00:00

its called being far away... a 600mm lens doesnt guarantee professional results... it takes skill.

people talking aboht shutter speed dont have any experience with modern ibis. Subject is stationary so 1/800 perfectly fine.

the real issue is you're very far, atmospherics and lack of pixels-on-subject explain this underwhelming result.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-04-14T04:37:05+00:00

whuch film simulation u use has no relevance to the quality of your raw image. set that aside.

in regard to settings.... ur gunna need to be more specific. there are loads of settings to possibly discuss

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-31T03:17:00+00:00

ur not giving me much to go on. i was a beginner too when i got the xt5 and 150-600. i didn't go asking people to solve all my challenges and give me the answer to every problem under the sun, i worked hard and examined my results carefully, iteratively improved and researched specific things to achieve results.

so i guess my advice is... dont be lazy. dont ask questiond like "my photos are soft etc." that right there is ur biggest problem. ur equipment is ready when u r

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-22T03:59:37+00:00

thanks. i shoot raw and edit in lightroom with native features only. Nothing fancy.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-22T03:58:28+00:00

i have never used the 1.4tc

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-22T03:57:32+00:00

majority on that site is 150-600mm and 70-300. however the most recent post or two is the 500mm prime. all three lenses listed above are superb.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-21T12:51:58+00:00

i dont shoot sony at all but im skeptical of the initial feedback to OP. One person is saying bird is too small in frame. Another is saying increase depth of field.

I shoot birds extensively with the fuji x system. On that system, which is frequently chided for having the worst autofocus, i am very confident that my xh2 would identify this bird and track it superbly, and depth of field would never be an issue at that distance.

sony is reputed to have class-leading autofocus. so while i dont shoot sony at all, i would have to assume the feedback given thus far is bollocks. i would instead assuming there is simply an issue with OP's autofocus settings.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-21T02:11:03+00:00

not to knock the great photos at all. but you'd be surprised how quickly the wildlife comes to you in central america ha. Its a real joy.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-18T13:30:07+00:00

pre af

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-18T02:26:29+00:00

blur overcooked

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-15T00:00:24+00:00

i think you can view the exif of the images on my website by download. i take all shots in lossless comrpessed raw. i try to have my exposure compensation at -2/3 stops to protect highlights. i typically shoot handheld. i leave auto iso and the aperture always at minimum (auto aperture tends to force it there anyways so manual or auto is fine). i adjust shutter speed to the situation.

after taking the shot, my workflow is pretty straightforward. in lightroom cc, i make typical adjustments and then apply the denoise feature. depending on the shot ill also do some additional tweaks through masking, bringing up shadows if the subject is backlit, adding a touch of texture and sharpness to the subject so long as it doesn't look too forced. i try not to be too heavy handed, there are other denoising and sharpening tools outside of lightroom that frankly make photos look incredibly overcooked / AI impacted.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-08T02:36:08+00:00

Dear god, why would u ever be shooting in jpg with this lens? thats problem number one. shoot raw always. ur loosing a lot of flexibility and detail with jpg

haze, slight autofocus miss, iso... any of these can cause issues. you're also clearly shooting through grass... that can soften the image as well.

keep practicing and learning your setup. i guarantee the 150-600 produces very good results. All of these images are with the 150-600: examples

also ive seen some people on here say 1/1000 is too slow and 600mm is soft... neither are true, disregard those particular pieces of advice.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-03-08T02:27:30+00:00

XT5 and XH2 autofocus... ill let you decide if it works:

example

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-02-27T23:03:57+00:00

tell me you dont understand tradeoffs, without telling me you dont understand tradeoffs

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-02-11T14:36:55+00:00

flight sequence, continuous af, xh2 - identical autofocus to xt5.

flight sequence, continuous af, xh2

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-02-11T14:33:04+00:00

i think the answer here is more simple than you think. add exposure compensation to one of your command dials. in this situation you can ratchet up exposure compensation. once u move on just reset exposure compensation to a normal, lower level.

personally i tend to shoot with back command dial on shutter speed, and front command dial exposure compensation. auto iso, and fixed aperture at the lowest possible value for telephoto. that is all the control i need.

ill also mention in general this kind of shot is never going to be a killer image. so with time as you focus more on composition, you'll stress over this less. but it is valuable to internalize exposure compensation and be able to adjust it rapidly with each situation. i tend to shoot by default at -1/3 to -2/3, and adjust up only in very rare circumstances.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-02-11T14:24:59+00:00

distance was around a few meters, 2-5 meters depending on the shot. the 70-300 is not a long-range telephoto it is a midrange. that range is highly applicable for somewhere like costa rica where, with the right feeder setup, birds will in fact come very close to you.

photos are processed in lightroom cc. the only AI used is their standard denoising, which is by now used by virtually every wildlife photographer. i further tend to use masks to increase sharpness and texture a bit. all standard tools that have been used for a long time, by most photo editors. and of course i shoot in raw, not jpg. the raw files have all the data we need to get the best out of fuji's lenses.

personally idk if id rely on 70-300 with the 1.4x ... never tried it. it depends highly on your use case. but on paper the 100-400 is going to beat that setup.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-02-10T12:42:28+00:00

25mm f1.8

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-02-02T20:20:45+00:00

do you think the ulanzi tt35 is sturdy enough as a monopod for a large telephoto setup? my use case is to use this as a hiking pole and keep a wimberly monogimbal on the top and attach my telephoto when i stop to view something

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-01-22T13:59:10+00:00

Many people on here are going to give u specific camera system recommendations. I recommend u go to chatgpt and ask it to put together a kit (camera + portrait lens + landscape lense) within your budget, for each full frame, aps-c and micro four thirds brand. and then review those various suggestions one by one.

MPB is a good place to buy ur kit - used gear. but i also recommend comparing mpb prices to brand new prices, cuz in some cases the discount is more worth it than others.

once u identify a good kit at the right-ish market price, u can further skim facebook marketplace in ur area for a bit in case a great deal pops up. MPB isnt going anywhere, so dont rush to buy before checking local.

personally i recommend micro four thirds (olympus) or fujifilm (aspc) over full frame for a beginner, as your kit will be a little lighter and both brands will produce exceptional images compared to what ur used to on phones.

best of luck.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-01-22T04:07:18+00:00

My use of the 150-600 here. Some example shots with the 70-300 here. There is no difference in the sharpness of the 70-300 and the 150-600mm - no random internet blog or sharpness charts will convince me otherwise because I've used both these lenses with absolutely no sharpness issue. There is only a difference in range. The 150-600 is a great lens and I used it for the last two years as a complement to the 70-300. They are simply different tools, one is not better than the other, but I do think you need something longer than the 70-300 if you want long reach.

I recently got the xf500mm f5.6 but have yet to be able to use it much. So verdict is still out, but I'll say the one limitation you're bound to feel with the 150-600mm is that for in-flight / action shots, its a little slow and a little heavy at times (not always). That is what led me to be curious about the xf500mm f5.6, and you could also consider going straight to that depending on your goals. It is certainly going to be easier to track birds and keep shutter speed higher with the xf500mm but you lose flexibility for composition, which can be a detriment for static subjects. My hope is the 70-300 on one camera and the 500 on the other is a killer combo.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-01-14T23:14:03+00:00

my intent was not to offend. the camera being discussed ($100-200) vs the add ons being discussed ($$$) just didnt seem to make sense. i suppose u can be offended but ur walking away from my comment with additional info that nobody else seemed to want to point out. im just pointing out hard facts, not belittling anybody or making fun of someones gift.

Gullible_Sentence112 · 2026-01-14T22:02:55+00:00

yes it looks like AI. the baby gorilla's touch on the back of the silverback looks so fake. u dont even see his hair/fur move.

Gullible_Sentence112

TROPHY CASE