Originally posted by reh321 F/8 at long end with this camera is like f/32 with my K-30 {yes, some of my lenses go that far!}; it is there, but nobody demands that you use it.
And these lenses are seriously diffraction limited by ƒ8
A K-3 image at 500mm f8 (35mm equivalent 750mm)
An XG-1 image. 224 mm (1248 equivalent mm) ƒ6.4
K-3 and DA 55-300 PLM and 1.4 TC. You can do worse with an APS-c camera just by going cheap and expecting too much of your gear. This image taken with $2000 worth of gear on APS_c. The larger the format, the more you pay for less.
You can see that the XG-1 has more diffraction than the others, but does that even matter? It's personal decision. It doesn't matter to me, in any case. Just not as good as the APS_c image. If you aren't directly comparing you can still enjoy the image. Especially considering one was taken with a $1300 camera 1 $3000 lens and $300 adapter, that's $4600, and one was taken with a bridge camera that cost me $250. You might like the APS_c on, but are you wiling to pay $4300 for it?
If you think you might like to get into birding, a P1000 is cheaper than a DA*300 and gives you more reach. Personally I just love that my XG-1 gives me a chance at shots like this without carrying a lot of weight. The Nikon with a tripod would be a lot better.
Last edited by normhead; 07-11-2018 at 10:55 AM.