Been both a Fuji shooter in the past and now a Sony full frame shooter. The last Fuji cameras I owned were the X-E3 and X-T4. I’m been interested in considering adding the new X-E5 and have even gone so far as to place a pre-order for it and the new XF 23mm f2.8 pancake lens since I sold all my previous lenses.
For a short while I owned the Sony A6700 to try Sony’s APS-C and own a smaller body. I enjoyed it but then Sony released the A7CII and A7CR and decided to moved to their compact bodies even though Sony still doesn’t have any really small pancake lenses. Sony with Sigma’s I-series help came out with a lot of smaller lenses.
Now the dust has settled of course I’m thinking daily about which is the betters small system.I have arguments for both and noodling it around. The Sony is cheaper, may have better AF, is only 27 Mpixels, and really no film simulation capability but price is at least $300-$400 cheaper and is more weather resistant. The Fuji X-E5 is smaller, and lighter, has several pancake lenses for the system, has film simulations, and offers a higher resolution sensor but it’s EVF is smaller with lower magnification.
So I know this the Fuji forum but do people think? I don’t own any other APS-C cameras but it’s always nice to have one.
Sure this is a first world problem but what do people think? Also FYI I’m not interested in an X-T5 since I want the smaller size of a rangefinder style body. Thanks for your time and share your thoughts. Take care.
I try not to criticize brands, people get defensive. I prefer the look of Fuji images and the feel of the cameras. I think choosing bodies is very personal and its hard to go wrong. I think to really look at size, you need to consider the lenses you plan to use. I would go X-T5 just for the better EVF.
As a Sony shooter the Fuji seems smaller, has better IBIS and resolution. The Sony might have superior focus from what I read. I am in the same boat and the Fuji wins for me.
My .02. A camera is a tool like a hammer or screwdriver. Some feel better in the hand than others, and some become favored for unknown reasons while supposed superior ones sit in the tool chest unused. At least this has been my experience.
There is a “je ne sais quoi” to the Fuji ethos for me. I like the feel in my hands of my XH2’s and love the files they produce. While I’m not overly enamored with the XT4 or 5 hand feel, I again love the files from even the 26mp sensor. There is something special about Fuji files, at least to my eyes. The lenses are a fairly obvious step below the Nikon Z glass I used to shoot with; but in the same breath they’re also significantly tinier and more than adequate for my imaging needs. And because of their relatively smaller sizes, they’re in my bag when I need them. (I could not make that claim when I shot Nikon. Or Canon. Or even during a very brief stint with Sony.)
The whole point here is what works for me may not be what works for you. In the end it’s not bad, and actually fun to try different systems until you find one that “fits your hands” better than anything else. Caveat is, if I ever decide to get back into action, wildlife or bird photography, I will re-purchase top tier Nikon Z gear — it’s clearly my favorite tool for that job.
Jack Flesher wrote:
My .02. A camera is a tool like a hammer or screwdriver. Some feel better in the hand than others, and some become favored for unknown reasons while supposed superior ones sit in the tool chest unused. At least this has been my experience.
There is a “je ne sais quoi” to the Fuji ethos for me. I like the feel in my hands of my XH2’s and love the files they produce. While I’m not overly enamored with the XT4 or 5 hand feel, I again love the files from even the 26mp sensor. There is something special about Fuji files, at least to my eyes. The lenses are a fairly obvious step below the Nikon Z glass I used to shoot with; but in the same breath they’re also significantly tinier and more than adequate for my imaging needs. And because of their relatively smaller sizes, they’re in my bag when I need them. (I could not make that claim when I shot Nikon. Or Canon. Or even during a very brief stint with Sony.)
The whole point here is what works for me may not be what works for you. In the end it’s not bad, and actually fun to try different systems until you find one that “fits your hands” better than anything else. Caveat is, if I ever decide to get back into action, wildlife or bird photography, I will re-purchase top tier Nikon Z gear — it’s clearly my favorite tool for that job.
In many important ways, I strongly agree with you about: Cameras and lenses are tools. They are more or less fit for various purposes, and the criteria for assessing this fitness are diverse and often quite subjective.
I’m not quite with you about the “something special about Fuji files.” I think they are often very good, and they are good enough to justify my other reasons for liking the Fujifilm cameras I have used and use today. But are they better than the files from, say, Canon or Nikon, or Sony or someone else? I do not believe that to be true.
Are they different? Perhaps. But not every difference can be reduced to a better/worse than relationship. (Ask truck fans about which brand is best some time. The only agreement you’ll get is that Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Toyota, et al are not the ame.)
Fortunately, that means we both arrive at the same point that you describe in your last paragraph — “what works for me may not be what works (best) for you.”
I return regularly to the observations hat excellent photographers make wonderful photographs using every kind and brand of gear imaginable — suggesting that “choosing hte right brand” is of little importance compared to so may other things.
This is why I like that Fuji makes very similar cameras with different ergos. Jack likes X-H2 and I prefer X-T5. Of course he is wrong but he is still a camera buyer (lol, I'm kidding). From a manufacturing perspective, I'm sure they would rather be making twice as much of one and discontinue the other.
SGinNorcal wrote:
This is why I like that Fuji makes very similar cameras with different ergos. Jack likes X-H2 and I prefer X-T5. Of course he is wrong but he is still a camera buyer (lol, I'm kidding). From a manufacturing perspective, I'm sure they would rather be making twice as much of one and discontinue the other.
Yeah, Jack is wrong, and you and I are right. ;-)
Seriously, though, I’ve been fascinated for more than a decade by how Fujifilm differentiates most of their cameras and how it is different from what the other companies do, with few exceptions.
If you look at Canon, for example, where you might get a 24MP body, a 32MP body, a 4MP body, or even something else. With Fujifilm, among (almost) all cameras of a sensor generation you get the very same sensor — today that means a 40MP sensor,
In our traditionally (if “traditionally can refer to about two decades) camera world, it was all about sensor. With Fujifilm (at least among models using the same format) it is more about functional features and the ergonomics: how many card slots do you need, fixed lens or ILC, how large, where do you want the viewfinder to be positioned, are you a fan of PASM interfaces or do you prefer dedicated hardware knobs/dials, etc.?
Perhaps there is a small danger n this for Fujifilm. With this tradition of differentiating by (what I’ll cryptically refer to as) interface design, they may occasionally fall into a trap of trying to push some oddball interface “innovations” that seem a bit… gimmicky. (XPro3 rear screen, X-Half vertical orientation, hardware controls for sims, cropping knobs, etc. I know these things get the press, but I think Fujifilm is at their best when they simply go for good, straightforward design.
I would make a list of what you want from the camera, then give points to each the Sony and the Fuji for each category they hit. Maybe weigh the points to give more weight to what is really important.
When I was looking for a reasonably small walk-around camera I picked the X-S20 over the Sony. The main reason was the lens selection. AF on the Fujis is more than good enough for what I do (but maybe not for you).
I've come to view my Fuji and Sony use as completely different things.
I really enjoy the small "character" primes like the 18 F2 and 35 1.4 as casual walkabout slow shooting with all the physical controls like aperture rings and shutter speed / ISO / EC dials.
For anything requiring zooms, speed and autofocus - it's A1 MK II all the way.
If I didn't have an X-T5 already I'd definitely be giving the X-E5 a look. It's a beauty, IMO.
Not really a fan of the compact Sony form factor/aesthetics at all.
I looked at getting a Fuji, the SOOC colors are supposed to be better, film sims interesting, and I've shot lots of jpegs over the last few years. I'm so sick of hearing about Sony I dont want one
Both are good cameras, with the a6700 having the much better AF system. That alone would sway me to the a6700 if I only wanted to have one system. The X-E5 looks and feels much better, and the Sony APS-C system has been sidelined by Sony long ago for still photography.
The number of pancake lenses is limited in both systems. The XC15-45 is something good hat can't be matched by Sony's 16-50.
Go with your gut. You can't really go wrong with either camera for daily use. If you don't like it, you can always sell it, or maybe even return it if you are able to.
For me, the film sims and the experience of using the camera keeps me with Fuji. The ergonomics of the A7C and the A6700, the clutter of the buttons and the menus just does not appeal to me. The AF advantages present in the Sony firmware, over Fuji, probably do not matter much (if at all) for casual use.
One thing I will say is that Fuji's pancake lenses are not cheap and they are often out of stock at a lot of retailers. But if you primarily buy your lenses in the secondary market, then it probably won't matter to you.
I am like the OP of this thread.
I find the Sony A7RV that I have to be large, and I want something smaller.
I preordered the X-E5 but I am now thinking about the Sony A7cii or A7cv. Those two are nearly identical in size to the X-E5, but the X-E5 is not as deep. The Sony are deeper because of the grip, and the X-E5 may need a small grip before all is said and done.
But then we get to the lenses. There is no equivalent to the Fuji 23 or 27 mm pancakes for the Sony.
I am also thinking about the X-T50. It is a little deeper (11 mm) than the X-E5 but that's mostly because of the eyecup I think. Of course it is made to look like an slr, unlike the X-E5. But it's available now, and for a bit less!
For me, the reasons to choose Fuji are the film sims, jpeg rendering, the ergonomics (shutter dial, and aperture rings) and some of the lenses I like to shoot with. Particularly, the 35mm f1.4 and 18-55 f2.8-4 and some of Fuji's pancakes. If these are not important to you, Sony might be a better choice for its AF and cheaper price.
Well thank you all that have contributed to this thread. Been looking at a lot of threads and also rethinking it over and over. I’ve decided that the Sony A6700, while very good, only gives me more of what I already own with my A7CII and A7CR for a small camera even though they are full frame.
I’m keeping my pre-order for the X-E5 and XF 23/2.8 but have been looking at what other lenses to take advantage of it with. That’s also made me take a look at the other Fuji bodies with the same 40 Mpixel sensor and similar features to understand the updates Fuji has made to their XF lens family.
So as someone who suffers GAS and just love cameras in general I’ve decided to for a short time get my hands on an X-T5 and see how the XF 16-50mm f/2.8-4.8 works and also the XF 27mm f/2.8 which appear to be the other lenses that work well with the X-E5 given their small size and weight. The X-T5 appears to be smaller than the X-T4 I used to own so we will see what kind of images I can get with it and the other small lenses I’m considering.
I went with the A7CR and Sigma’s small 90mm & 17mm, Sony’s 40mm G & 24mm GM. Just came back from Japan and my wife used the A7CR & 40mm G. It was her first time using any camera. I used an X2D. Many of her images were amazing. She complained of not being able to get back far enough in many venues, so picked up the Sony 24-50mm.
Next, I was looking for a small first time camera for my daughter’s 21st. She wants a small camera. We still aren’t sure of her definition of small. All of her friends have cameras, such as the X-S20. I put a pre-order on the Fuji X-E5 & 23mm pancake. Then I looked at an old Sony that I have at home. It is an A7Rii. EVF/LCD/Resolution/IBIS all match the X-E5. I doubt that the IBIS is of the same effectiveness given the ten year old design of the Sony and refresh rate of EVF probably is less with the A7Rii. The size is very close. Fuji’s biggest downside is that it is APS-c and they use scarcity to justify price. Why get involved with a brand that doesn’t supply product in a timely way? So will cancel Fuji and if the A7Rii is too large, will get the Ricoh GRiv late fall.
So, here is what I’m doing for my daughter. A7Rii, Viltrox 23mm f/4.5, Viltrox 40mm f/2.5 & Godox it30 Pro flash to use for fill flash.
Weather sealing is also an issue. My primary camera is an M11 Monochrom, but when it rains, the A7CR, or Hasselblad come out, but they might better the Leica regarding weather sealing, but the aren’t impervious to a tropical shower and neither will the Ricoh, or Fuji be weather sealed. This is where the OM system might be worth considering.
Not here to disparage Fuji. I owned three iterations of the X100. If I were purely a jpg shooter, I would pick up a Fuji for myself, but for a film look, I use film, or for B&W..my M11Monochrom… what a concept? BTW.. the M11M is the most amazing camera that I have ever used. It is about to become more affordable with the introduction of the Q3 Monochrom.
Try the 16-25mm f/2.8 G to get wider and the Viltrox 50mm f/2 Air is a great full-frame lens. Viltrox air based full frame look like great pairing for Sony and their APS-C lenses are also available for the Fuji X mount.
Would really like a camera with a great monochrome sensor but admittedly these days I really enjoy AF and the ability change lenses.
bwcolor wrote:
I went with the A7CR and Sigma’s small 90mm & 17mm, Sony’s 40mm G & 24mm GM. Just came back from Japan and my wife used the A7CR & 40mm G. It was her first time using any camera. I used an X2D. Many of her images were amazing. She complained of not being able to get back far enough in many venues, so picked up the Sony 24-50mm.
Next, I was looking for a small first time camera for my daughter’s 21st. She wants a small camera. We still aren’t sure of her definition of small. All of her friends have cameras, such as the X-S20. I put a pre-order on the Fuji X-E5 & 23mm pancake. Then I looked at an old Sony that I have at home. It is an A7Rii. EVF/LCD/Resolution/IBIS all match the X-E5. I doubt that the IBIS is of the same effectiveness given the ten year old design of the Sony and refresh rate of EVF probably is less with the A7Rii. The size is very close. Fuji’s biggest downside is that it is APS-c and they use scarcity to justify price. Why get involved with a brand that doesn’t supply product in a timely way? So will cancel Fuji and if the A7Rii is too large, will get the Ricoh GRiv late fall.
So, here is what I’m doing for my daughter. A7Rii, Viltrox 23mm f/4.5, Viltrox 40mm f/2.5 & Godox it30 Pro flash to use for fill flash.
Weather sealing is also an issue. My primary camera is an M11 Monochrom, but when it rains, the A7CR, or Hasselblad come out, but they might better the Leica regarding weather sealing, but the aren’t impervious to a tropical shower and neither will the Ricoh, or Fuji be weather sealed. This is where the OM system might be worth considering.
Not here to disparage Fuji. I owned three iterations of the X100. If I were purely a jpg shooter, I would pick up a Fuji for myself, but for a film look, I use film, or for B&W..my M11Monochrom… what a concept? BTW.. the M11M is the most amazing camera that I have ever used. It is about to become more affordable with the introduction of the Q3 Monochrom....Show more →
swldstn wrote:
Try the 16-25mm f/2.8 G to get wider and the Viltrox 50mm f/2 Air is a great full-frame lens. Viltrox air based full frame look like great pairing for Sony and their APS-C lenses are also available for the Fuji X mount.
Would really like a camera with a great monochrome sensor but admittedly these days I really enjoy AF and the ability change lenses.
I’ll take a look.
It all depends on what you shoot and also what you are use to. My primary Monochrom lenses are my 21mm and 35mm with a recent preference for 21mm. With these focal lengths zone focusing is even faster than autofocus. That said, I’m about to give 35mm f/1.4 a try. Zone won’t work here and focusing will take some expertise, which I must acquire. I just picked up a forty year old Fuji GS645W which only has zone focusing as an option…should be interesting.
bwcolor wrote:
I’ll take a look.
It all depends on what you shoot and also what you are use to. My primary Monochrom lenses are my 21mm and 35mm with a recent preference for 21mm. With these focal lengths zone focusing is even faster than autofocus. That said, I’m about to give 35mm f/1.4 a try. Zone won’t work here and focusing will take some expertise, which I must acquire. I just picked up a forty year old Fuji GS645W which only has zone focusing as an option…should be interesting.
Still own three Zeiss Loxia lenses that can be used on any of my full frame Sony bodies, the 21/2.8, 35/2, and 50/2. I bet those are good for just about anything.
