Jump to content

Lens Recommendation to mimic P900/1000 Functionality?


Luna_Tick

Recommended Posts

On the long end, the p1000 is a 3000 mm FF equivalent.

Longest native lens is the 100-400 mm. Couple it with the TC 2x you get 800mm, so 1200 mm FF equivalent. 

You'd get much higher quality than the pxx00 with that combination but far from the focal length.

You will never get such a versatile zoom range in one (or even 2) lense(s) on the Fuji system.

 

Edited by flamidey
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
On 9/22/2020 at 1:36 PM, Luna_Tick said:

@flamidey Thanks! What are your thoughts on using the Canon EF 800mm with a Fuji camera? Strange that there are no competitors to the Nikon ultra zooms (which are so Amazing for astronomy, actually). I was hoping there would be a Fuji-compatible DIY solution that beats the p1000/p900 in all areas (of performance/quality).

Missed your reply, sorry.

You will probably have a hell of a time focusing at 800mm unless it's a completely static subject or using very high aperture numbers.

The 800 will only give you 1200mm equivalent anyway, so off by a wide margin.

If you're going for astro at 3000mm, you are going to need a 2000$ mount and you won't be able to see anything because you'd be at f11+ equivalent (except for moon).

For the moon, you will get the same or better results with the 400 + 1.4x than with the p1000. The p1000 has a 1/2.3" sensor. That's 13 times smaller surface, which means you can crop a lot from the APS-C of the Fuji and get equivalent results.

You will probably need some kind of stabilization, either a very good tripod or a stabilized lens (like the Fuji 100-400)...

A few links about Astrophotography and the Fuji :

https://fujifilm.blog/2018/04/30/an-introduction-to-astrophotography-with-your-x-series/

https://www.myfujifilm.co.za/news/2019/10/24/an-introduction-to-astrophotography-using-fujifilm-x-series-cameras-by-jon-kerrin

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4251928

Edited by flamidey
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Because the sensor assembly is moved electrmagnetically. When there is no power it is essentially free moving.
    • Ahoy ye hearties! Hoist ye yon Jolly Roger and Cascade away. NGC 1502 The Jolly Roger Cluster:

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

      This is the equivalent of 43 minutes, 40 seconds of exposure. NGC 1502 is a neat little cluster located in the Camelopardalis Constellation. This region of space was thought to be fairly empty by early astronomers, but as you can see, there is a lot there. Kemble's Cascade (a.k.a. Kemble 1) is named for Father Lucian Kemble, a Canadian Franciscan friar who wrote about it to Walter Scott Houston, an author for the Sky And Telescope magazine. Houston named the asterism for Fr. Kemble and the name "stuck". NGC 1501 is the Oyster Nebula. A longer focal length telescope is needed to bring this one into good viewing range, but it is well worth the effort. NGC 1502: https://skyandtelescope.org/online-gallery/ngc-1502/ Camelopardalis Constellation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camelopardalis Kemble's Cascade (and NGC 1501: The Oyster Nebula): https://www.constellation-guide.com/kembles-cascade/ Arrrrrr Matey.
    • Looking for input; there are some decent deals and might want to take advantage to expand my lenses for my 100s already own: 110/2 32-64 35-70 100-200 + TC   Shooting mostly family shots, bringing my kit to capture family outings indoors and out. Tracking the 63/43 effective FLs on the two, but has anybody used both? Would the 55 (covered by two zooms right now) be redundant? Would the 80 be too similar in character to my 110 for portraiture?
    • See what I mean? Two instantaneous ads. Worthless.   
×
×
  • Create New...