Wildlife Weekend; My Thoughts On Using Both Fujifilm And Olympus Cameras And Long Lenses For Photographing Birds

Lift Off!  Snow geese leaving the water. (click to enlarge)
Olympus E-M1 Mark II; 300mm f/4 PRO lens; 1/1600th sec. @ f/8; ISO 800

As I previously had mentioned here and here, I spent last weekend prowling the Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge looking for snow geese, tundra swans, ducks, herons, egrets, Bald Eagles and any other mammal or fowl I could find to photograph.  As is usual with me, I also kept my eye out for anything else of interest upon which I may stumble in my travels (I'll post some of those images on Monday).  I used both my Fujifilm X-T3 attached to the Fujifilm 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 lens (without and with the 1.4x tele-converter) as well as my Olympus E-M1 Mark II attached to the Olympus 300mm f/4 PRO lens (also without and with its tele-converter).  

Besides wanting to get out of the house, break the winter routine, practice wildlife photography (and I need infinitely more practice!) as well as get my creative juices flowing once again, I also wanted to find out which of the two camera/lens combinations produced a higher rate of success based upon the subject matter and my skill level.  

I made a total of 1505 images over the three days.  Of those 966 were made using the Fujifilm X-T3, 119 using a Fujifilm X-H1 and 420 using the Olympus E-M1 Mark II.  I didn't choose either the X-T3 or the E-M1 Mark II (is that name long enough?) for any particular type of photo, I just tried to break up my photography using both.  I didn't realize I had used the X-T3 at a higher rate until I started going through my images.  The use of each camera was sort of dictated by the circumstances at hand.

I found the image quality between the two different sized sensor cameras to be virtually indistinguishable.  Even when cropping to 100%, the image quality was excellent.  Many images were made at ISO 3200, but with Lightroom I was able to minimize the noise.  I don't find a little bit of digital noise a problem.  I tend to no longer "pixel peep" as I see that as a destructive behavior.  It is as though you are looking for defects and wanting to cause dissatisfaction with your images rather than enjoying them as a whole.

When looking at acquiring sharp focus with these three cameras, here is the breakdown.  The Fujifilm X-T3 produced 54% of the images in sharp focus, the X-H1 100% (these were all static subjects of urban landscapes) and the Olympus gave me 66% of the images in sharp focus.  

The difference between the Fujifilm's 54% and the Olympus' 66% is due to the fact that I made many more images trying to track flying birds with the X-T3, which of course, is more difficult that sitting birds.  More of the Olympus images were of static subjects but quite a few were tracking moving targets as well.  In this short experiment, I think both performed as I would have expected.  The success rate of sharply focused images is a reminder that you just can't go out a couple of times a year to photograph with very long lenses (and trying to do it handheld) and expect better results than I had.

Hooded Merganser (click to enlarge)
Fujifilm X-T3; 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 lens + 1.4x Tele-converter @ 560mm (840mm FF); 1/500th sec. @ f/8; ISO 3200

Overall, I guess I am pleased with the performance of both camera/lens combinations.  I wasn't really pleased with my performance but this outing was a reminder to me how hard really good bird photography is.  Some may criticize me for not utilizing a tripod for the majority of these images, but one of the reasons I like smaller sensor cameras is for their smaller size and lighter weight.  The two camera/lens combinations I used are certainly handholdable, if you do it regularly.  

I think if you were a wildlife/birds/birds-in-flight photographer and wanted maximum success, I still wouldn't recommend mirrorless quite yet, with the exception of potentially this new Olympus E-M1X, which I understand has an autofocus and tracking system head and shoulders better than the E-M1 Mark II's AF capabilities.  But that is to be determined when the camera reaches the hands of the birding photography experts.  I think the Nikon D850, D500 and the Sony A9 our perform my two cameras easily.  I say that only from what I have read and watched over the past year or two.

I think many of my images that were of static subjects that were not in focus was due to camera movement as I allowed the shutter speeds to be slower to gain in lower noise with a slower ISO.  That was a mistake.  The image stabilization systems (and my ability to handhold a really long focal length) was overestimated by me.  This is my issue, not either cameras.


The snow geese and tundra swans were much father away than I would have liked.  The images posted here are heavily cropped, even with using the 1.4x tele-converter.  I found both camera systems struggled to acquire focus on small subjects, such as individual birds, at such a distance, even with a lot of contrast on which to lock focus.  But that makes sense.

Since it was very cold, windy and we were at the edge of the Atlantic Ocean with nothing to break the wind, I chose to position my vehicle in such a way to be able to monitor the snow geese and photograph them if they lifted off en masse.  I tried using a small bean bag on the edge of my window, but that didn't work very well.  On Saturday and Sunday mornings, I sat and waited for almost 3 hours before there was any movement from the geese.  I don't think I have the patience to stand behind a tripod in the cold and wind for that period of time waiting for them to fly.

Here is generally how I had both cameras set up:

Manual exposure
AF-C
Auto ISO
Continuous High FPS
Handheld
Minimum 1/1600th second shutter speed for anything moving faster than a crawl
Aperture wide open or sometimes stopped down one stop
IS turned on
RAW file format
Multi AF points were used

A couple of comments about the Fujifilm gear:

Custom AF-C settings could affect success rate.  I tried three.  I tried number 2, 5 and 6. Custom AF-C setting 6, which I custom set for all three parameters to their maximum.

I shot on Continuous High, 11 FPS, with the electronic first curtain and mechanical shutter enabled.  At that speed there is no EVF blackout and the camera continually tracks focus.

Handheld all images.  ISO was on Auto and shutter speeds generally ranged from 1/1600th of a second to 1/2000th of a second.  Is it better to have image stabilization turned off when shutter speeds are that high?  I should have experimented a bit with that to compare.

When reviewing my images, often times I saw the focus (multiple AF points) locked on background or foreground grass rather than the subject itself.  I suspect in those circumstances I should have switched quickly to a single AF point instead of the multi-point that I pretty much used all the time.  In the case of the X-T3, I used the 9-point setting.

This camera/lens combination was heavier and not as easy to handhold as was the Olympus. The sensor is larger and the 100-400mm lens is larger to project an image circle required to cover the entire sensor.

A couple of comments about the Olympus gear:

I had the "stickiness" setting for AF-C set to +2 as recommended by Scott Bourne, who is one of the best bird photographers in the country.  I didn't try any other setting, but in hindsight, I should have tried "0" and "-2" as well.

I shot on Continuous Low FPS so it would continually focus while tracking, at 8 FPS (I had forgotten to turn it up to 10 FPS), Mechanical shutter

AF-C seemed to work better than AF-C + Tracking.

I used both the 9-AF points and the 5-AF points settings almost always trying to determine which worked better.  My tracking skills are certainly not the best so the 9-AF points worked better for me as it gave me a slightly larger target to place over the flying birds.

Here are some of the images I made. 

E-M1 Mark II

E-M1 Mark II

X-T3

X-T3

X-T3

E-M1 Mark II
These Buffleheads certainly were skiddish.  I couldn't get within 50 ft. of them without them flying away or scooting
across the water, even if I stayed in my vehicle.

X-T3
Notice this egret is missing a toe from its right foot.  Also, two claws are missing as well.  Interesting.

X-T3

X-T3
These Tundra Swans were about 300 yards away, way too far to really photograph them adequately.  They also kept their
backs to where we were watching.  This is an 840mm (FF field of view) cropped to almost 100%.  I liked the detail in the
features of the swan on the left in this early morning image.

X-T3
This little sandpiper (?) flitted around very quickly as was quite the moving target.  I like images which show some
sort of "action" from the birds instead of just sitting there when I can find it.  His bill is open as he must have found
something good to eat!

X-T3
I find Great Blue Herons are also nervous when it comes to anyone or anything getting near them.  As I pulled over
to try to photograph this one, he/she quickly spread its wings and left.  I was only able to manage one image where I
captured the entire bird in the frame before it flew behind some trees.

These gulls were plentiful and were often flying by.  They made good "practice" subjects while sitting and waiting
for the Snow Geese to alight en masse.

Olympus
Even though the wind was at our backs, we found that the snow geese often took off "with" the wind instead of against it,
contrary to what you would think.  They then would circle around and land in the same spots they left.

X-T3
A marching Great Blue Heron?  Maybe practicing for the annual spring parade!  Lol.

X-T3
The sun had just risen and the warmth of the sunlight makes the white feathers of the Tundra Swans look orange.
Again, these swans were very far away.  This is another 840mm (FF field of view) image cropped to almost 100%

X-T3

X-T3

X-T3
The sun had just come up over the ocean and these Tundra Swans decided not to show us their faces but fly toward the
ocean, finally circling back around to land once again in the pond between the beach and the roadway.

E-M1 Mark II

X-T3

E-M1 Mark II
I only included this three image sequence for its interest.  The last two images of the sequence are not sharp but show what happened to the piece of food in the gull's mouth.  Interesting how the Olympus did not retain focus on the single target.
These are about 100% crops.  The gull was a small target but it was the only thing in the sky, which I would have
thought, would be an easy target for focus.

E-M1 Mark II

E-M1 Mark II

E-M1 Mark II

Lastly, I only include this because the image somewhat amazed me.  This Bald Eagle was at least 1000 yards away.  My friend spotted a little "lump" in the top of a dead tree among a stand of dead trees far across a pond.  I took out my X-T3, attached the 1.4x tele-converter to it, attached it to my large tripod equipped with a gimbal head, turned off the image stabilization, manually focused on the eagle using both magnification and focus peaking, and made several images of the raptor.  The image below is a 100% crop of my efforts.  Certainly not really high quality but I'm rather amazed, as dark as the feathers are of a Bald Eagle, that I was able to bring out some detail under those circumstance!

X-T3; 1/480th sec. @ f/11; ISO 160
100% crop of an 840mm (FF field of view) from about 500 yards (457m) at about an hour before sunset.

I have many, many more but these examples are more than enough to show the types of subjects and conditions I found when using these two camera systems.

I photographed some other non-wildlife things while on the island.  I'll post those on Monday with more comments on the cameras and lenses I used.

Join me over at Instagram @dennisamook or my website, www.dennismook.com. 

Thanks for looking. Enjoy! 

Dennis A. Mook 

All content on this blog is © 2013-2019 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.