gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #9 · Which Fuji X Body from Nikon? | |
When comparing the XT5 and the XH2, there are some functional differences. The XH2 is more optimized for video, and its deeper buffer could be advantageous for some photographs who rely on long bursts. If those are critical to you, take a look at it.
The interface difference is a matter of preference, as I’ve learned here in some discussions with people whose opinions I respect but who feel differently about it than I do. The XH uses the PASM interface, which is more like typical DSLR and mirrorless cameras from other manufacturers. If you like that interface you may prefer the XH on that basis alone.
On the other hand, many who have been attracted to Fujifilm still cameras came to this gear in large part because we like the so-called “retro” controls — separate dedicated manual controls for things like aperture, shutter speed, EC, ISO. If that interests you, of the three models (XE5, XT, and XH2), the XT5 may appeal to you. (As it does to me.)
The chief plus of the XE5 that almost everyone agrees on is its small size — the smallest of the serious Fujifilm APS-C cameras. It also has the “retro” controls, though without quite as many of them. It appeals a lot to people looking for a travel camera or similar and to some street photographs. It also adds some unusual controls for choosing image style presets and for cropping that may or may not be attractive.
when it comes to pure image quality, the three cameras use the same 40MP sensor so they are arguably capable of producing images of identical quality.
Noise is actually quite well controlled on the 40MP sensor. I’ve used Fujifilm 16MP, 24MP, 26MP, and 40MP cameras, and they have managed to increase the number of photo sites while maintaining good noise performance.
Fujifilm lenses resolve sufficiently for the 40MP sensor, and not just the lenses on the old Fujifilm list of supposed “40MP ready” lenses. Virtually all of the Fujifilm lenses are excellent, and some are standouts. Some excellent lenses that I use include the 14mm f/2.8, 23mm f/1.4, 27mm f/2.8 pancake, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/2, 80mm f/2.8 macro, and 90mm f/2. Those last two are truly excellent, as is the 14mm and the 50mm f/2. I have three of their zoom lenses: 16-55mm f/2.8, 50-140mm
f/2.8, and the variable aperture 100-400. The 50-140mm is really top notch, in the same category as the 24-70mm high end lenses from Sony, Nikon, and Canon. The 16-55 is a fine performer too, though my copy of the original version can be a bit touchy. The 100-400 is sort of complicated to describe. Used on the tripod and carefully focused on landscape subjects it produces excellent detail. But when I use it to photograph birds I’m less successful than with my 100-400mm Canon FF lens.
There aren’t really any bad Fujifilm lenses in my experience. There are a few oddball lenses though. For example, the 60mm f/2.4 macro: It can be very sharp, but it is also slow focusing… and comes with a comically large hood.
You might want to look at spec sheets for the three cameras side by side to see how similar their performance is in many ways… and where the difference lie.
I’ve been using Fujifilm x-trans cameras alongside my Canon FF system for over a dozen years.
EB-1 wrote:
Just from the images online the H look better to use. They have a normal top display and handgrip instead of that archaic retroactive 70s dials.  Is there any disadvantage to the H for lenses like the 100-400? Ideally you would want to pick up that combo with one hand on the grip. I just assume the higher price is indicative of better everything unless the sensor or the ARM SoC is older and worse in some other ways. Fuji makes so many models it is confusing. 
Is there any significant difference in noise between the 26/40 MP when normalized to the same size? I have plenty of CFe cards so starge not really a problem either way. I do have some concerns if the lenses can well resolve the 40MP or if they are hardly any better than 26MP.
EBH...Show more →
|
