Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2016 · A or X?
  
 
nandadevieast
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · A or X?


Hi guys,
Want to keep it brief.
Have been smitten by Fuji X bug, while waiting for the coming A7III or A9 or whatever comes soon enough...
X T2 looks good, lenses too. Everything is small.

Can you ell me if it will be a wise decision?

Reason:
I feel i get a small, sexy looking, well built and quality system with Fuji X. Full frame advantage goes to Sony only with much bigger glass. If i put slower glass, i will as well put faster glass on Fuji (comparable to slower glass on Sony).




Oct 04, 2016 at 10:05 PM
DavidBM
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · A or X?


Faster glass on Fuji gives the same look as 1 stop slower glass on FF; so an F2 lens on FF needs f1.4 for equivalent DOF on Fuji. And that Fuji 1.4 is no smaller.
That's the look; then there is the DR and resolution at base ISO which is much greater on the Sony, and resolution everywhere. So when you are not light limited (good light, or tripod or flash) the Sony will be way ahead. When you are light limited, you need to shoot a lens a full stop faster on Fuji to get equivalent noise performance, though with less resolution.
So the Fuji will give worse output in most conditions, and in some (rare at least how I use it) conditions equivalent noise and DOF. With very little saving in weight, and without the ability to put on fast glass for thin DOF (need a 32 f0.5 to match the Mitakon 50 on Sony, and a 25 f1.1 to match 35 1.4)

Some prefer the Fuji ergonomics and the look of the body. Haptics and system price might be a reason to go Fuji. You could keep system size down too, but only by going with slower lenses that are equivalent slower than the slowest Sonys. I wish that there were more slow lenses for Sony though - the 35 2.8 for Sony is lighter than the equivalent (is it 24/2?) Fuji...



Oct 04, 2016 at 10:30 PM
HiredArm
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · A or X?


Both are great systems. Use what you like/prefer. There are subjective factors which may swing you one way or another but there really aren't many bad cameras these days. I own and use Sony FE series personally but I imagine that I could be happy with Fuji X as well if that was the option I chose. Both brands make great cameras and lenses so my advice would be to try them both and see which one you get along with the best.


Oct 04, 2016 at 11:21 PM
matthewm
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · A or X?


I've owned both... here are my brief thoughts:

Fuji:
- Smaller than Sony FF
- Gorgeous Lenses that are as small as or smaller than Sony (and typically a little cheaper) For instance, the little 35/2 is a,bsolutely amazing, weather sealed and tiny
- Great external controls
- Lots of weather sealed options if that's important to you
- Video sucks (granted, the last Fuji I owned was the XT1 but video hasn't even been on Fuji's radar for the most part and they're not exactly known for this feature)

Sony
- Some smaller lenses, but many are large and negate size benefits of the bodies
- Amazing video capabilities
- Less external controls than Fuji (typically)
- APS-C lenses are really small and punch well above their price points and work beautifully on FF bodies for "Super 35" video

I loved Fuji for stills and the nostalgia of external controls and aperture rings. My need for video required the change to Sony. If it weren't for that need, I'd have stuck with Fuji as I feel their sensors create a really unique image quality, their bodies are really nice and intuitive and their lenses are excellent and fairly small.



Oct 05, 2016 at 02:22 AM
justruss
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · A or X?


I've also had both and Canon, even all at the same time: 5D2, X-E1, A7rII.

Agree with all the above posts.

I actually prefer the Fuji X-E(x) body type, aperture rings, and general control layout. Fuji colors didn't blow my mind for daytime shooting, but were delicious at night, for street, and for portraits under just the right light. Colors were far from accurate, but pleasing and accurate are often not the same. The lenses were nice, but see what has been written above about DOF (and I actually like to stop down a bit), noise; much like the Sony ecosystem, the Fuji ecosystem started small and cheap, grew massive (from my perspective for APS-C) and more expensive, and now has turned back towards some smaller options again.

The Sony system is in just about all ways a big step up in IQ. The lenses (notably including Zeiss Batis/Loxia lines, and other native FE), save a few, are superior to the Fuji lenses. But many are larger and more expensive. Not all, though: the FE 28 f/2 is cheaper/same as the Fuji 18mm f/2, and while a little bigger it is also much better optically; the FE 50 f/1.8 is optically as good or better than the fuji 35mm f/1.4 and about the same size though 1/3 the price-- it's only major fault (significantly improved by firmware) is the atrocious AF speed; etc.

It really depends on your needed lenses, shooting style, and subjects. And, of course, budget.

I did enjoy shooting the Fuji, and I liked the ergonomics and style. But it always felt like much more of a toy to me than my Sony-- at first I clashed with the Sony (decade as a Canon shooter), but eventually it fell into the background more completely than any camera I have owned. It wasn't present... only I was, and my subject and scene. And the results-- are mind-blowingly good (although, keep in mind I have an A7rII; the resolution and DR and tonal response are top).




Oct 05, 2016 at 06:34 AM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · A or X?


The main thing you gain from a larger format size is sharpness/detail. If you have the option of maintaining the same f-stop then you also get more DOF control and optionally more blurred backgrounds/subject separation.

The first point will be relevant to you only if you print large, the second wont be relevant if you are looking for compactness (except maybe the 55mm f/1.8, which is relatively light/compact and has no equivalent in the X system).

The Fuji system looks very nice and well thought out. Aesthetically the camera bodies score highly and they have a nice selection of purpose made APS-C lenses. However I feel that the X-trans sensor has no real benefits and is just a recipe for artifacts and workflow headaches.



Oct 05, 2016 at 11:29 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · A or X?


I've used both systems as well and while the Fuji systems are fun to use...it's the results that count higher in my books and this is where the Sony system wins. I travel since retirement and when I'm in a foreign land I want to ensure the images I bring back are as good as I can obtain. The Sony system is the perfect size / image quality setup that allows me to travel lightly and still come back with images I can print very large.


Oct 05, 2016 at 12:47 PM
retrofocus
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · A or X?


To me it all comes down if you can live with a smaller APS-C sensor camera or if you prefer full frame. I certainly belong to the latter group which made me not look further into current Fuji cameras (and likely also for the future since Fuji seems decided to focus on APS-C and medium format sensor based cameras).

Regarding lenses, yes, the Sony FE mount lenses often are bigger if AF is desired or a must have. If you can live (or prefer) manual focus lenses, there are very good smaller options around now from different brands like Sony, Zeiss, Voigtlander, and Leica. Especially if you often shoot wide or ultra-wide, Voigtlander has now excellent small E-mount lens options.

The A9 or A7III rumor might have some truth in it, but I am skeptic if this is a camera I want to upgrade to. I certainly don't want to have a bigger mirrorless FF camera as my A7R or the bit bigger A7R II. I also don't need better AF performance or faster fps. All depends on your photographic preferences which camera is the best choice for you.

Main point for my digital camera selection as upgrade is always the sensor. And here I wouldn't be surprised to see another step-ahead from Sony with the rumored A9. But I am afraid the price tag of it will be shocking, and it would bundle up with other camera features to pay for which I don't need.



Oct 05, 2016 at 02:07 PM
TheEmrys
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · A or X?


I switched from being a Sony shooter for 7 years to Fuji. I have a couple regrets, but not many. Here are some bullet points that may help you.

- I really miss a couple of lenses. 55/1.8 was glued to my a7/II. There just isn't anything like it made today. After accepting for a couple of years that it was a lens that lacked something to it's images, I find that that it's own look was unique, minor LoCa issues and all.

- I really, really miss my Minolta 100/2. It had the Minolta colors, but had both lovely sharpness and gorgeous bokeh. Minolta didn't chase the strong micro-contrast that typifies Zeiss. They did, however, seem to want to go after a more Leica approach to color and sharpness. And this lens in particular was one that had amazing rendering.

- Fuji really, really understands color interpretation. I have never spent as little time processing RAW files since I moved to Fuji. Straight out of camera is often enough amazing.

- I miss being able to adapt anything and not have a crop factor. I ended up buying a Metabones Speedbooster for Minolta MD to Fuji. It helps.

- I always owned the LA-EA4 adapter, so I miss having the option of buying very good, super cheap Minolta A mount glass. Stuff like the 50/1.4, the Beercan, 135/2.8, etc.

- I LOVE the reach I get with APS-C. Its a 1.5x teleconverter with no image degradation. Sure makes my Minolta MD 300/4.5 useful for wildlife.

- Fuji film emulations > Sony Creative Styles. I used the Creative Styles (CS) to help get the look I wanted. And for some reason, those changes automatically transferred to Lightroom when I imported them. Now with Fuji, I get the same advantages, but they just look better. I started only wanting to use Provia, Velvia, and Acros. Now I am shooting Astia and Classic Chrome, too. Really gives me more creativity when I shoot Raw+Jpeg for portrait sessions. And they all seem to have strengths and weaknesses depending on the light. If it is golden hour or not, if there is direct, diffused, or indirect light.... they all react differently. I am starting to just "know" which works best and where, but I love when I can take a boring senior portrait session and feel creative with it.

- Fuji has some top-notch glass. Everyone does. But Fuji truly understands and doesn't make many bad choices. Really, the only lens choice they have made that I don't understand is with the 90/2. It doesn't accept the teleconverters. Even the "lowly kit lens", the 18-55/2.8-4 is a great lens with numerous advantages. Its tiny and fast. When is the last time a lens like that was made?

- Fuji's primes are amazing from wide open on. I shoot the 16/1.4, 23/1.4, and 56/1.2. They af pretty quickly, but not as quickly or as quietly as the 55/1.8. That lens was silent and fast. But the trio I shoot are all quick enough.

- My Xpro2 would often give up trying to af. This is weird, but it would just turn the af box red and a red AF! would appear. I hate a quitter. I found this frustrating. My XT2 doesn't do it.

- The xpro2 was significantly larger than my a7II. That was silly to me.

- I do not miss any of the advantages of the full frame sensor. Now, I do not shoot landscapes for anything other than my own enjoyment. I just haven't had the time to devote to really work on the craft of landscapes. So, for my own purposes, the aps-c sensor is fine.

- I absolutely love the advantage aps-c has in terms of light gathering and deeper dof. In some poorly lit events, I would want to shoot at f/1.4, but the dof was just a bit too shallow. It has hit a sweet spot for me.

- I cannot wait to get the 100-400 and the 1.4x teleconverter.

- AF-C on the XT2 is awesome. It was not on the a7's.

- ISO200 is a bit frustrating. Why not call it 100 like the rest of the FF and aps-c world?

- While Fuji glass isn't cheap, it sure isn't as expensive as the Sony stuff. This was my major reason for switching. I wanted the 24-70GM and the 85GM. Sure wasn't in the budget, though.

- Fuji's flash system is far worse than Sony's. It is a bit depressing. Cannot wait for the x500 flash to come out. But its overpriced. And some radio triggers would be nice. Would prefer for Phottix to make their Mitros+ and Odin to be compatible with Fuji.



Oct 05, 2016 at 04:15 PM
tylerdurden801
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · A or X?


I bought a small XT1 kit before I went Sony (was shooting Canon for a long time) and rented an A7R at the same time. The reason I bought the Fuji and rented the Sony was because I was pretty sure I was going to choose the Fuji. I was wrong. I found critical focus checks were easier in the Sony EVF (seemed to "pop" better) and it bothers me that a lot of the fast primes in Fuji's line use a focus clutch to go from AF to MF, which means there's no full time manual or DMF type function for those lenses. That was a deal breaker. I also found the difference between 16MP and 36MP to be about as big as you'd imagine. Never understood the praise for the Fuji colors either.


Oct 05, 2016 at 05:03 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



TMaG82
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · A or X?


I've shot with both systems including the a7rII and the X-Pro 2 and X-T2. You can't go wrong with any camera these days, they are all fantastic pieces of equipment, you just have to find which one highlights your needs and minimizes its flaws.

- obvious advantage to the Sony is high ISO performance. Fuji does have the ability to shoot high ISO well, but not as nice as Sony. I shoot indoors without flash a ton because of my kids and I have a7rII shots at iso6400-8000 that look clean, some as high as 12,800. With the Fuji shooting at 6400 I lose a lot of detail in the blacks, whereas with the Sony detail still remains in my kids hair for example.

- Much easier changing AF points on the newer Fuji bodies. I don't think I could go back to having no joystick or touchscreen. Having to press a center button, toggle around using the directional pad is just clumsy to me.

- Eye AF works better on the Sony. Could be because Sony still uses PDAF for Eye AF, whereas Fuji uses Contrast for Face detect and eye detect.

- Fuji lenses are more affordable. You have the newer f2 primes and the combination between the used market and the constant Fuji sales means you can snag the glass for 20-40% off MSRP. Try building the GM set and see how many eye rolls your wife gives you.

- Fuji with their current generation of bodies just does it right with dual card slots, AF joystick, UHS-II (Sony is a joke for buffer performance), faster processor overall (the dreaded Sony take three shots then get the Unable to Perform when trying to review).



Oct 06, 2016 at 10:30 AM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · A or X?


TheEmrys wrote:
- ISO200 is a bit frustrating. Why not call it 100 like the rest of the FF and aps-c world?


Because ISO numbers are not arbitrary, but a measure of the sensitivity of the sensor. There are different ways of measuring sensitivity, hence the numbers aren't always comparable between manufacturers, however for the same manufacturer the numbers are obtained in a scientific manner.



Oct 06, 2016 at 10:44 AM
BlueBomberTurbo
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · A or X?


Matt Grum wrote:
Because ISO numbers are not arbitrary, but a measure of the sensitivity of the sensor. There are different ways of measuring sensitivity, hence the numbers aren't always comparable between manufacturers, however for the same manufacturer the numbers are obtained in a scientific manner.


Thing is, they're using Sony sensors. First the 16MP NEX sensor, and now the 24MP A6300 sensor. Just with a different color-patterened CFA on top. In testing, it's readily apparent that the A6300 and X-Pro2/X-T2 use the same sensor, based on the DR curve. And it's painfully apparent in video, where the difference results in roughly 1 stop darker video at the same ISO.



Oct 06, 2016 at 11:41 AM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · A or X?


BlueBomberTurbo wrote:
Thing is, they're using Sony sensors. First the 16MP NEX sensor, and now the 24MP A6300 sensor. Just with a different color-patterened CFA on top. In testing, it's readily apparent that the A6300 and X-Pro2/X-T2 use the same sensor, based on the DR curve. And it's painfully apparent in video, where the difference results in roughly 1 stop darker video at the same ISO.


They have their way of measuring ISO, why would they change it just because another manufacturer happens to measure it differently. Also if they did change it for subsequent models it would confuse existing users who would suddenly find their images a stop noisier than they expected after upgrading, which would create bad PR for the new model.



Oct 06, 2016 at 12:02 PM
TheEmrys
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · A or X?


Matt Grum wrote:
They have their way of measuring ISO, why would they change it just because another manufacturer happens to measure it differently. Also if they did change it for subsequent models it would confuse existing users who would suddenly find their images a stop noisier than they expected after upgrading, which would create bad PR for the new model.


Then they can do what everyone else does: call it a feature. Then the new extended ISO becomes 50 for Low, 12800 or 25600 for High. Shoot, they could probably do it in Firmware and roll it out to every model. "Features" for everyone!



Oct 07, 2016 at 11:04 PM
philip_pj
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · A or X?


What do you shoot, ND, what are the priorities? (nice mountain btw, I see if from the north quite often)

You can answer your own question easily, by answering this one. If the subject matter is benefited by detail, seemingly endless and satisfying detail, and/or you need low light excellence, that indicates one way to go. If you value Fuji OOC color/ergo above all, and good enough output is good enough, go the other way.

Alt lenses; these are given a huge boost by Sony sensor tech. Last two pages of Fuji images thread revealed *not one non-Fuji lens*, so people operate inside the lens ring fence. Landscapes all lack bite, even web jpgs. Edges are mushy, actually hurt the eyes to view many of them, much like 35mm film prints. Individual hairs do not seem to exist in portraits with subjects further than very close distance.

Sony color is easily managed in RAW to reproduce what Fuji gives you. Fuji APS-C appears to be quite good for low intensity, easy use (AF) needs, where real effort need not be put into output. An everyday shoot camera series, a task at which it excels. But - you can never use 33% of a full frame lens, and you get 370 sq mm versus 864 sq mm of image real estate. To a Fuji crop user, Sony FF is medium format, with commensurate unobtainable image quality. My advice: choose what your wants and needs demand.



Oct 08, 2016 at 12:01 AM
charles.K
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · A or X?


The A7rII/A7s and XT2 are truly superb cameras. I have moved from the A7rII to the XT2 for the size/weight and cost factor in Australia with the superb colors that Fuji seems emulate in their RAW files.

I have still the A7s and FE 55 and FE 35/2.8 for a light, low light system. There is a special quality with the RAW files with the A7s.

At this stage I have no intent of using FF, unless I have a specific function or wedding where I can rent a Nikon/Canon system very cheaply. I am intending to move to the GFX for when I need very high IQ rather than opt for FF.

I have yet to fully test the video on the XT2. So far it has been excellent.

The XT2 RAW files are quite amazing, and I have been using the 25,600 ISO with no issues. I am still learning just how to fully post process the images and this will be ongoing.

The strength of Fuji system are the lenses and ergonomics and Fuji truly understands photographers. The final synopsis is I love picking up the XT2 as it feels like size and weight of film cameras and lenses.




Oct 08, 2016 at 12:01 AM
itai195
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · A or X?


I haven't used the XT2 but have shot extensively with the XT1 and the A7/A7R2. In a nutshell, the Fuji cameras are much more pleasant to shoot with, while the Sonys often feel slow and sometimes frustrating. Case in point - I've never met a Sony camera where the EVF eye sensor wasn't extremely sensitive and a constant irritant. In fact, I think the one on my A7R2 is faulty. If you must eke out every last bit of IQ, the full frame sensors will win out at higher ISOs and with more resolution. But in color, Fuji easily has Sony's number.

For what it's worth, I decided to stop shooting Fuji because I felt the resolution gains in the A7R2 outweighed the fact that I find the camera unpleasant to use for some of my shooting. I don't use it for most of what I shoot, though, particularly when the subject matter doesn't demand the resolution and/or demands a bit more of a nimble camera.



Oct 08, 2016 at 04:39 AM
nandadevieast
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · A or X?


Thanks guys. Excellent points all.
Your inputs backed by A6500 launch has stopped ne from making any hasty purchase. Will wait for the new FF before making a decision.



Oct 08, 2016 at 07:21 AM
nandadevieast
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · A or X?


@Charles.k
I suspect Sony will launch a MF camera before long, but with a better sensor than Fuji and Hassy.
These new small sized MFs will theeaten Sony's FF train, which they wont let happen, especially amongst enthusiasts.
They may come up with a RX1 styled body first.
OTOH, soon enough we will have a FF camera far exceeding 50mp MFs, so that will be a new twist in the tale.



Oct 08, 2016 at 07:28 AM







FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password