The camera to beat:

Started Apr 25, 2014 | Discussions thread
blue_skies Forum Pro • Posts: 11,453
Re: The camera to beat:

1prime wrote:

blue_skies wrote:

1prime wrote:

I quote from DPR: "The X-T1 is probably Fujifilm's best camera to date, offering a compelling combination of intuitive handling, excellent image quality, and one of best electronic viewfinders we've seen. It also features one of the most impressive autofocus systems on any camera at this price level, both in terms of accuracy with fast lenses and tracking moving subjects. Over all it's a hugely engaging and capable camera, and one that's fundamentally a joy to use."

Ok, Sony, your target has been set up, now take aim and fire! I'm tired of continually seeing a Fuji product with an 84% rating. By about this time you should be able to muster a competitor APS-C camera that will outscore the X-T1's 84%. Yes, the well price positioned A6000 is doing well for you with a better than 10% market position. But I hope you've got an A7000 on your drawing board to overcome the X-T1. I expect your A7K to attend to those pesky details you sometimes say will be fixed on later models. And while you're at it, why don't you fool all of us and bring an A7K in at an attractive price much closer to the A6K than the X-T1? This is your chance to attain an extremely high DPR score and keep us NEX-7ers in your stable.

-- hide signature --


I don't know, Don.

  • Fuji X-T1 + 'kit' lens: $1,699
  • Sony A6000 + 'kit' lens: $800

Sure, the X-T1 scores higher, but it should be compared with the A7, not the A6000.

Kudos to Sony for bringing a full-feature top-of-line spec APS-C camera out for $650 (body only).

  • In terms of market share: Sony 1 - Fuji 0
  • In terms of bragging rights: Sony 0 - Fuji 1

Pick your horses...

And there is room between the A6000 and A7 for either/both an A7000 and A6...

-- hide signature --


Henry, Thanks for your reply. I tend to agree with your conclusion that there is room for something along the lines of an A7000 without or with hump. My point is "wouldn't it be lovely" if Sony achieved the the bragging rights to go along with their increasing market share. Implicit in this accomplishment would be a solid APS-C camera with all its bells and whistles well fastened. That is, enhance the room for improvement on the A6000. And l think Sony can do that at a price between the 2 comparative cameras you mention. Don

-- hide signature --


For Sony products: yes.

To compete with Fuji: no.

Fuji is really a very niche-oriented camera manufacturer. They consider themselves as the digital replacement for Leica users. In their portfolio, camera and lens positions, they are keen to target the 'pro' user (more UI buttons) and their lenses are 'one-up' to Sony's lenses. I believe that they consciously aim to 'better' the Sony lenses by allowing R&D higher budgets (cost) which satisfies their target market (the product is now better).

The X-trans sensor has been very confusing. It seems unnecessary - I think that Fuji would have gotten to where they are now by simply following the above strategy to the tee. I think that the X-trans sensor has hurt them more then helped them in the end. But, purist believe that X-trans is ahead of equivalent Mp bayer sensors (I think it is lack of AA filter with sharp lens).

Sony can target Fuji, but it is the small (but expensive) volume. They seem to do better by following the A7/r targets: same $$$s, different users.

Sony is much more consumer oriented - for every Fuji camera that ships, Sony sells ten more. Sony deals in quantity, and products have to fit certain budget constraints.

I think that Sony got pushed 'higher end' by its own customers. Many left Sony to go to Fuji (even many forum users here) out of frustration with roadmaps, product maturity, lack of choices - only to learn Fuji frustrations afterwards. But the ones that stayed, and the ones that came in, have certainly justified the current mix of (expensive) cameras and lenses for E and FE mounts.

Many still believe that APS-C is not for consumers - only for prosumers and hobbyists, even some professionals. Stick to P&S or m43 if a consumer. Canon and Nikon (and Sony SLT) proved them wrong with their 'easy-to-use', but bulky, APS-C mirror based cameras - on which many use with the kit-lens only

Fuji went on a limp - believing that a high-end APS-C mirror less market can be realized, and so far they seem to be correct.

Sony did the unthinkable: they made the APS-C market a consumer market. I would argue that, up until the A6000 and X-T1, the APS-C mirror less cameras has had a very steep learning curve and its products are rather hard to use, making the experience not that much better than dabbling in FF camera/lenses.

Sony has been plowing forward - with incredibly cheap cameras (their 3 and 5 series top in volume way above the 6 and 7 series), and customers have been dealing with their low keeper rates just because when you do have a keeper, it is an impressive one!

It is funny, Sony is covering everything from cell phone cameras to all size still cameras, as well as video. They have a better perspective on how (photographic) products compare than any of us. But they are a consumer (electronics) oriented company, and they think in (annual) products, not systems... Fuji is far more traditional in comparison.

My guess

Oh, and a good thing: I don't see many Sony users purchasing Sony products for bragging rights

-- hide signature --


 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a6000 Sony a5100 Sony Alpha a7 II Sony Alpha a7R II +36 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow