Fuji GF250mm f4 vs Canon 300mm f2.8LISmk2
Using a GFX100s and a Fringer EF to GFX adaptor with latest firmware.
All chart images taken from the same distance at Iso 100. auto shutter speed.
no processing on the images at all.. simply imported and cropped.
Canon 300mm @2.8
And finally a comparison to compare bokeh and rendering.. the Canon has a much better isolation (subject mid point between camera and background). for the same framing.
if you look at the text on the canister you'll see that whilst the fuji has greater depth of field at f4.0 vs f2.8 the actual acuity is very comparable... perhaps even just in the canons favour... but really nothing in it.Canon 300mm @ f8 Corner crop
I certainly can't see any real difference other than the warmer tones from the canon.
but then the canon is a £6500 lens and the Fuji is a £2800 lens. so perhaps its to be expected..
without question the fuji is crazy sharp... but the adapted canon gives more reach and more versatility.GF250mm plus 1.4 @f8 corner crop
Ok this is where the GF 1.4 really shows its quality.. way sharper than the Canon 1,4x TC shown below..
BUT... its a 350mm lens with maximum aperture of f5.6 vs the 300mm at f2.8 maximum aperture.. is you look at the 300mm naked in the corner its just as good as the GF with the TC.Canon 300mm plus 1,4 TC @f8 corner crop
yep no getting away from it the Canon TC even the Mk3's have some pretty significant fall off in the corners. but then if I'm shooting wildlife I'll be generally centering the subject then cropping. in this instance the falloff probably helps with bokeh rendering.
but yes I'm making the answer fit my conclusion here :) until Fuji release a GF 500mm or 300mm 2.8 then I think I'll go with the adapted canon and have the versatility.. if I want something in the 200mm range the canon 200mm f2.8 is super compact and perhaps not quite as sharp as the GF250 but also only £450250mm iso500 1/9th sec handheld
blurry.
So my thoughts on the handhold ability and image stabilisation of the lenses.. I'd say the lenses probably have about the same amount of IS performance.. but the physical size of the 300mm plus the longer focal length do make it harder to handhold with confidence.
but I'd also note that the T stop for the Canon is clearly better producing a brighter image for the same aperture and iso/shutter speed.. so there is opportunity there. Further these were all taken at F4 to remove that variance... but obviously the canon has a full stop waiting in reserve if you can live with the reduced DoF,