X-Pro2 or Sony a7x?

I recently did a hike to a wonderful scenic lookout where I took a nice mosaic with my XE1 and 18-55 lens a few years ago.

Unfortunately it wasn't a sunny day but cloudy with some sunlight. But I took the image from the same spot and both used PT Gui to stitch together the panorama.

Judge for yourself. The differences are not great but the XE1 image I recall having trouble with cyan coloured bright skies to the right of the image which I had to work hard in Photoshop to correct.

The Sony image with the Batis lens (perhaps one of the best lenses around) was very colourful and if anything I had to pull back the blue skies a bit.

I find the A7rii colour quite saturated (I like that) and it boosts very easily in post more so than A7r or XE1.

Resolution of distant trees and cracks in the cliffs are better in the Sony/Batis image ( click on original at the bottom of the image for a very large image). In fact resolution in the Sony image is the highest I have ever gotten and is typical of the high res of this camera. Its can be super resolving.

The XE1 holds up well though and is no slouch. Perhaps green foliage is its weak area but its a very pleasing image to my eye. Sharpness isn't everything although I do like it when things are sharp and detailed.

http://www.pbase.com/gregbradley/image/147901609/large XE1 18-55mm 19 image mosaic

http://www.pbase.com/gregbradley/image/162411378/large Sony A7rii Zeiss Batis 25mm 12 image mosaic

Greg.

Astrophotographer 10 said:

I recently did a hike to a wonderful scenic lookout where I took a nice mosaic with my XE1 and 18-55 lens a few years ago.

Unfortunately it wasn't a sunny day but cloudy with some sunlight. But I took the image from the same spot and both used PT Gui to stitch together the panorama.

Judge for yourself. The differences are not great but the XE1 image I recall having trouble with cyan coloured bright skies to the right of the image which I had to work hard in Photoshop to correct.

The Sony image with the Batis lens (perhaps one of the best lenses around) was very colourful and if anything I had to pull back the blue skies a bit.

I find the A7rii colour quite saturated (I like that) and it boosts very easily in post more so than A7r or XE1.

Resolution of distant trees and cracks in the cliffs are better in the Sony/Batis image ( click on original at the bottom of the image for a very large image). In fact resolution in the Sony image is the highest I have ever gotten and is typical of the high res of this camera. Its can be super resolving.

The XE1 holds up well though and is no slouch. Perhaps green foliage is its weak area but its a very pleasing image to my eye. Sharpness isn't everything although I do like it when things are sharp and detailed.

http://www.pbase.com/gregbradley/image/147901609/large XE1 18-55mm 19 image mosaic

http://www.pbase.com/gregbradley/image/162411378/large Sony A7rii Zeiss Batis 25mm 12 image mosaic

Greg.

Click to expand...

Interesting outcomes, Greg, and certainly I'd say I much prefer what the Sony can achieve. I'd also say images like this play to the strengths of the A7rii and the weaknesses of the older 16mp Fuji sensor, particularly when you bring the raw converter into the equation. I've switched to Capture One and away from Adobe for my Fuji files (turns out I like it better for other reasons beyond Adobe's handling of foliage and fine detail with Fuji files...) I don't know what you work with.

While the the Fuji primes are very good (faults for me include excessive fringing in high contrast, fast aperture scenerios), I've not doubt the Batis and Loxia lenses are another league of excellent. Combined with the A7rii sensor, well... And there are lots of other considerations beyond "best IQ" for all of us; I'm trying to figure what is the best route toward the improvement I need and whether the new Fuji keeps me in its camp. If it's closes the gap to the A7ii, that's likely good enough. More real world use will provide that information - I hope. Sticking with Fuji doesn't help with a second cam for video, however.

Per Sony A7x video, so many excellent features - no need to recount - and compromises. I need a b-camera that can reliably record 30+ minute sit-down interviews. (It would do lots of other things too but this is the benchmark.) Chronic overheating precludes the A7rii from this role (although I've not heard if this is an issue only while recording in 4k only or if it affects HD recording as well.) The color produced by the A7sii doesn't work for me either as video or a stills camera. The A7ii can match the C100 quite well (as could the A7rii), only HD but does not overheat BUT has terrible moire/aliasing and its autofocus starts to flag in low light.

So there always seems to be a tricky compromise that precludes making a sensible switch. Perhaps I'll need to pick up a used GH4 this spring for my third camera system. World of compromises.

Walter H said:

Per Sony A7x video, so many excellent features - no need to recount - and compromises. I need a b-camera that can reliably record 30+ minute sit-down interviews. (It would do lots of other things too but this is the benchmark.) Chronic overheating precludes the A7rii from this role (although I've not heard if this is an issue only while recording in 4k only or if it affects HD recording as well.) The color produced by the A7sii doesn't work for me either as video or a stills camera. The A7ii can match the C100 quite well (as could the A7rii), only HD but does not overheat BUT has terrible moire/aliasing.

Click to expand...

There was an firmware update for the a7rII that also eliminates the overhitting with 4k filming.

Seems Sony learned something from Fujifilm. They now also have firmware updates with fixes and new features. Think Fujifilm is supporting there cameras longer with updates. But ... Sony seems to see the need of listing to there users. Hope the go the same route as Fujifilm as the Firmwares.

--
http://wagner.photography --> Workshops photography in the Netherlands and Indonesia

I've had all three versions of the X100, an X-Pro1 and an X-T1. Was heavily invested in the glass, including at various times the 56mm 1.2 and the 70-200mm 2.8. Great lenses; sharp, compact (at least the primes are) and lovely to use with their aperture rings.

But I sold it all to fund the purchase of a Sony A7ii and the Sony Zeiss 55mm. I've since swapped the A7ii for an A7s (I do lots of indoor and event photography) and have also purchased a used RX1. Awaiting an order for the Batis 85mm. It happened when I was looking through some old Canon 5D mkiii files and I realised how much I missed the impressive dynamic range and deep colours.

I really wish Fuji and Sony would combine forces to create an ecosystem; Fuji with their ergonomic bodies and wonderful film-like colours and Sony with their fantastic sensors and high iso performance. Both could supplant each others' weaknesses.

Do I miss the Fujis? Absolutely. When news of the X-Pro2 came out I salivated and seriously considered stepping back in. But when I actually use my Sonys, I just know that despite some weaknesses I will miss out on that fantastic image quality.

Down the line I would love to purchase an A7Rii and benefit from the faster AF whilst maintaining the high iso performance of my A7s. Would likely use the camera in a lower megapixel output, but at least I retain the option to go 42mp when I am occasionally shooting landscapes.

I think if you can purchase an A7rii it's a no-brainer. Go for it.

But I'd still miss those Fuji colours...

I had an XT1 and XE2 and now own an A7R and IMO a lot of Sony lenses are just not up to par and certainly not up to the level of Fuji lenses. A few are but at that level, all of them should be superb. The zoom lenses are fairly ho-hum, but the bodies excellent, except they are not sealed which I cannot understand for an A7RII that cost $3200. The lenses are expensive too.

I will say if Fuji had 24mp at the time I was shopping I probably would not have moved to Sony. I will stick with Sony for now though, but I lust after Fuji IQ lenses for it.

I agree; there isn't a glut of fantastic lenses to choose from, but when I consider how far Fuji had got after a couple of years I don't think Sony are that far behind, especially with Zeiss supporting the ecosystem.

I just wish my order of a Batis would hurry up because it's been on back-order for a few months now!

It will be very slow and iffy because they have too many products and the lens dept is completely isolated from the camera body department.

Fuji is primarily committed to photography and high lens quality and photo excellence in general while Sony is more of an electronics company that has branched out into high end digital cameras.

Its obvious that Fuji had a solid very high IQ game plan from the start and I don't see that with Sony.

In the Fuji review on the DPR home page a while back the head guy, can't remember his name, but at any rate, he said that now Fuji only has one line of interchangeable camera bodies to build lenses for while Sony has four different body mounts to build lenses for, so they are probably spread too thin.

What irritates me the most is that their kit lens is basically a coke bottle at the edges and corners, and their QC is awful with huge sample to sample variation. I read of one pro that sent the 55m lens back five times to get a good one and that is the best Sony FE lens.

That and all the higher-end zoom lenses are just average build but have prices of premium lenses, although the 16-35 is better.

Also, there are no prime starter lenses and the kit lens stinks unless you get a ringer and that's probably one of the biggest issues with new people coming in. They should have something equiv to the Canon 40mm STM and 50mm STM a few others. Right now the only affordable prime they have is the 28mm F2.

And with Sony's announcement today - and we knew it was coming, well, a whole 'nother factor to consider in APS-C. No doubt the sensor will be excellent and Sony seems to be addressing quality lens offerings with the new and quite expensive G Master line. Interesting to see an aperture ring included.

Now, all of the issues between Sony and Fuji systems/experience remain but it is interesting to have the a6300 in the mix when considering price vs. performance vs. IQ vs. engagement. The quality of the latter, Fuji users are increasingly paying a premium for and it may still be worth it to me. I went from the Nex-6 to the XT-1 and was thrilled, but we are a couple years along and needs change.

Will also be curious to see if the a6300 auto-focus performs with adapted Canon lenses in video ala the A7rii and if they solved the aliasing issues of the a6000. If yes and the low-light AF is better then the A7ii, then...

The A6300 will have PDAF so it should work with a metabones EF adapter just like the A7II and A7RII.

The A6000 also has PDAF but they have not opened it up via FW yet.

You don´t need a tilt touch screen. You can use for this function the wifi and Fujifilm Camera Remote App . Its even better, because not attached to the camera.

TL;DR: Buy the system that gives you the native lenses you want. My personal opinion is Sony's cameras are far better than Fuji's, but, Sony doesn't give me the lenses I want, no other system with a large enough (for my preference) sensor does, not natively to the mount and format anyway, so I put up with what I consider to be outdated, poorly implemented camera bodies because in the end, Fuji JPEG + Fuji glass delivers.

I shot about 20-30k images on both systems over the last few years. Most recently I was using an A7 II and switched to Fuji. It was sort of an accident. You see, I was getting kind of frustrated that all the lenses available natively for the A7 system were big or smaller aperture than I wanted or just not a focal length I liked. I don't mind some lenses being big. I don't choose mirrorless for the size which I think is a farce. I choose it mainly for the high quality EVF style of shooting (and by EVF I also include LCD, point is the sensor is providing the image by which I compose my shots.) and simpler (thus longer lasting) design.

Anyway, I didn't do a ton of photography this last year or so due to time and expanding interests in other areas. So, I decided to sell off all my A7 II gear and buy a Sony RX1R II. However, during November while I was waiting for that camera to be released and my pre-order fulfilled, I got cold feet on spending $3300 on a fixed lens camera and canceled the pre-order. Xmas was coming up and I always end up shooting a number of family type situations that are important to me so I needed a good quality camera. I decided to come back to Fuji, mainly because it has a 23/1.4 which is 35/2 equivalent, same as the RX1 series, and a lens I sorely miss from the A7 kit. I was also attracted by the existence of a general purpose zoom that is not huge (18-135) and an excellent TRUE portrait length prime (90/2) as well as a few other favorites (14mm f/2.8, Rokinon 8mm fisheye, and then upcoming 100-400mm zoom with teleconverter.)

I grabbed an X-T10 and a few of the lenses including the 35/1.4 because obviously, gotta have that. And have been pretty happy for the most part. It should be obvious that the reason I ended up going with Fuji instead of back to A7 II or A7R II is because of the glass options available in native form. (Despite what people say, adapted lenses on A7 cameras don't AF nearly as fast as native ones do. It's nice to have the option but I would never buy a system based on the premise of third party adapted lenses.)

That said, I think the Fuji cameras themselves really suck compared to the competition. I hate the retro handling. I hate how bad they are at EVF implementations (For example, Sony cameras NEVER stutter, and I'm not talking about exposure time blackout, obviously this happens, I'm talking about the stutter that happens on Fuji when autofocusing and doing other similar things.) I hate how limited the autofocus system is, even after the updates, especially compared to the very latest Sony bodies with dynamic AF point resizing and such. Sony's body performance is slick as butter. Best you can get without dropping to comically small sensor sizes. So I really miss that. I put up with sub-par body design to get at the lenses I want.

Fuji always promises cool features and occasionally delivers. The huge EVF in the X-T1, for example, is beautiful, and at least on that one camera, the stuttering is less noticeable, I assume due to having a faster processor. But frankly, even Fuji's latest "X Processor Pro" is built on 4 years out of date ARM technology and it's not even operating fully on the X-Pro2. They are very behind in this area.

Other things that I miss from Sony are the near silent lenses that AF super fast without hunting all around like a DSLR in live view mode. A few of Fuji's lenses have more modern design here, but, ALL of the FE lenses have as good or better motor implementations. Their latest piezo electric designs are shockingly fast and quiet.

Also every Sony FE lens is weather sealed. Every single one. Same with the (full frame) camera bodies.

But, the cost is high, and the lens options I desire do not exist. I mean, a few do. The Sony FE 55mm f/1.8 is easily the most satisfying lens I've ever used in terms of image quality in every aspect. I miss that lens the most. But honestly I don't miss any other lens from that system. Now they are about to release some masterful zooms and portrait prime, which I'm sure will be nice but I don't really like normal range zooms, and the 70-200/2.8 doesn't even have a price. Plus it's big. Not really a lens class I tend to prefer even on DSLR. Furthermore, 35mm always ends up my preferred general use focal length and the Sony-Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 is overpriced for its performance and quite large while the 35mm f/2.8 is a great lens, and super portable, it's only f/2.8. f/2 is the smallest effective aperture I can use to get the results I want.

Almost all of this is a matter of my personal preference and expectations. I can and have made some of my all time most favorite images on Fuji cameras. I print SOOC more often with Fuji than any other system I've shot (APS-C & FF Nikon, Panasonic MFT, APS-C and FF Sony E mount, and a number of advanced compacts.) So they get the job done, it just doesn't have the fit and finish when compared directly to other offerings. In the back of my mind, I always know what I'm missing.

Honestly, for me, Fuji is appealing because of 1) lens options that I want and 2) the quality of the JPEGs at normal (18x12 to 24x18) print sizes. And in the end, what is the most important thing? Also, I like how hard Fuji seems to be trying. They are kind of an underdog, learning as they go, and I believe they have a chance at catching up someday, but things like the X-Pro2 being basically on par with Sony's years-old a6300 in most respects is disheartening. They need to jump ahead. I feel like X-T2 is their last chance to do this or be disregarded indefinitely. Sony is actually producing new lenses VERY fast and finally doing some true bare knuckle lens design R&D. Their XA element approach solves the biggest problem in modern lens design today: onion bokeh from aspherical elements. That's improvement with substance.

Right now I'm considering a mixed system, using Fuji cameras where they give the biggest advantage, mainly in long lens shooting as well as a few of the more obscure focal lengths that I enjoy (that Rokinon 8mm fisheye for example is very special, with a unique projection and the latest version is very well corrected.) And grabbing an RX1R to replace the shooting I end up doing with the 23/1.4 and 35/1.4 lenses.

I'd end up with an X-T10 (until the X-T2 comes), 8mm fish, 14/2.8, 90/2, 18-135 and 100-400 + TC and the RX1R II and know that I'll shoot with the RX1R II most often as my go-to. But, it's not decided. Having a mixed system can be a little hard, as I've tried it before, because you end up sort of wishing one camera was the other and sometimes aren't sure where to invest. At least in this setup I wouldn't have to wonder if I should buy any lenses for the RX1R II, but, it may also constantly make me think about selling off the Fuji gear and just going with an A7R II and living with the more limited lens options for the time being. Tough decisions, and a lot of money at stake.

WOW.

Why don't you give the PRO 2 a shot ... shoot a few hundred ... thousand ... picture before you make up your mind. Your comparing a camera not yet released to one you have handled. Maybe then things become clearer once you actually use the PRO 2. Maybe the camera body will get closer to what you want.

No single camera will have everything you want - you can only come close and fill the gap with something that the system is missing - be that a Sony system or FUJI system or any other system.

Mainly because the X-Pro2 will cost $500 more than the X-T2, perform more poorly, and all because of the gimmicky OVF that works well with literally 2 focal lengths while everything else is a compromise and brings no net gain due to all the downsides of shooting with it. I have had the X100T. The HVF won't be any substantial improvement over that.

And furthermore, demonstration of the camera in video reviews has been more than enough to show what has or has not been improved. I'm sure that in certain ways the camera will be the best Fuji has offered. The X-T2 will be better. I plan to get that.

Throw the new Pentax K1 in the mix too the image quality looks really good. This is going to be a really interesting year in photo gear it seems.

Alright !! My point was to test the output of the new sensor. The T2 sounds like your solution.

Wish you luck and happiness with it