Fuji X-T2 & X-T20 vs Sony RX10 IV for safari

I'm going on a Safari in Kenya this summer and am trying to decide what gear to bring. My main cameras are my Fuji X-T2 and X-T20. I had planned to bring those two bodies with the 16-55mm f/2.8 lens and perhaps buy the 100-400mm for the other body. This would give me a wide rage of focal lengths and overall very good image quality. I don't want to have to do a lot of lens swapping in dusty environments but may also bring the Fuji 10-24mm lens. However, I'm worried about the weight and annoyance of having two carry two bodies and the very very large 100-400mm lens.

My other option is to buy the Sony RX10 IV instead of the Fuji 100-400mm lens (they're priced similarly) and simply take that one camera. I would have a similar focal range covered but in one smaller package. The trade-off is I would likely be sacrificing a bit of image quality, focus speed, and low-light capability on the wider end. I've used the RX10 III quite a bit and like the overall function - it's a lot of power in one package...

Thoughts?

How does the image quality of the Fuji 100-400 compare with the lens in the RX10 IV? I've heard the Fuji 100-400 is a bit soft from 300-400mm. ?

*I'm choosing not to place this question in the Fuji or Sony forums as I want to get opinions from a larger group of folks instead of just the fanboys for each faction..

I like Fuji cameras and lenses but the RX10 IV has a lot going for it and if most of your pictures are going to be taken outdoors, in fairly good light, I think the Sony may be your best choice.

That one-inch sensor is better than most people think and the Sony also has weather sealing which could be beneficial.

In the long run the Fuji lens would be a better investment simply because it will retain most of its value for many years but if I was going on a safari I'm almost positive I'd take the RX10 IV.

Naturally, that's just an opinion.

I don't own the Sony but one of the cameras I do own is a Panasonic FZ1000 and it's an excellent fixed zoom lens camera but the RX10 IV is rated higher and that's saying a lot.

It must be a great camera provided it's not being used for indoor, low light photography.

Good luck.

well the sony has a much improved AF over the mk3 , possibly as quick as the Fuji even .

Its complete all in one so less chance of leaving a lens somewhere etc.

In saying that tho taking 2 Fuji`s gives you some back up in the event something goes wrong.

I think the Sony is a great all around travel camera and it is very popular with amateur bird enthusiast; but I think the Fuji would give you more professional like results.

If you want easy and convenient, then get the Sony.

If you want to give yourself a chance to take great pictures, get the Fuji lens.

I would get the lens for better pictures; for me the Sony is a luxury item.

--
Common sense is common knowledge; not everyone's common knowledge is the same.

Labe said:

well the sony has a much improved AF over the mk3 , possibly as quick as the Fuji even .

Its complete all in one so less chance of leaving a lens somewhere etc.

In saying that tho taking 2 Fuji`s gives you some back up in the event something goes wrong.

Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that the new Sony had much better AF than the Mk3 - that was my big challenge when using that one.

Cameron Swinton said:

Labe said:

well the sony has a much improved AF over the mk3 , possibly as quick as the Fuji even .

Its complete all in one so less chance of leaving a lens somewhere etc.

In saying that tho taking 2 Fuji`s gives you some back up in the event something goes wrong.

Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that the new Sony had much better AF than the Mk3 - that was my big challenge when using that one.

--
http://www.cameronswinton.com

Click to expand...

Yes now phase detect have a read of the review here

Dear Hidden Signature -

I could have written the message that you did. I am also going to Africa this Spring and I too have the Fuji X-T20 and 18-55mm and 50-230mm lenses. I also wondered about bring along an interchangeable system. If I took my Fuji camera to Africa, I would also want to bring along a dedicated wide-angle lens for street photography. That makes three lenses and camera body - a lot of baggage. My concern is that no matter which lens you have on the Fuji, at times it's going to be the wrong lens. Switching over to another lens is quick, but maybe not quick enough to prevent losing a treasured shot.

So, I bought the Sony RX10 iv and have been trying it out since early December. First of all, the RX10 iv is NOT like other 1-inch sensor cameras - it produces much better images. At times, the images rival those of the X-T20! Even at 600mm, animal photos are crisp, with good edge definition and eye sharpness. Secondly, I have taken the camera to festivals and concerts, and love that I can zoom from wide angle to telephoto almost instantaneously. Third, the camera can be customized to whatever you want. Fourth, I don't normally shoot video but the Sony is very good - perhaps the leader in this class.

There are downsides, but not deal breakers by any means: (1) camera is larger and heavier than other bridge cameras you may have used in the past (2) the menu was thrown together by a madman, and (3) do not rely on AUTO FLASH - use FORCED FLASH instead. The camera tends to avoid using flash by pumping up the ISO, which is not what you want. It's better that you decide when flash is needed.

I decided to go the SONY RX10 route and you might be persuaded to go the same way. If you do, get the camera now so you can practice using it long before Kenya comes.

I also own the Fuji 100-400mm lens. Although it is a worthy lens, it is brutally heavy. On paper, 3 pounds may not seem like a lot, but after wearing this sucker around your neck for a 1/2 hour, you'll be begging for mercy. That is, if your wrist doesn't succumb to carpal tunnel syndrome first. More importantly, when photographing a rare goose in our area, the SONY RX10 iv out -performed the Fuji 100-400mm when both were zoomed to 600mm. Lighting was poor that day, but Sony handled it better, for reasons I cannot explain.

Good luck with your decision.

The big advantage of the RX10 is it is ONE camera and less than half the weight of my usual two bodies and assorted lenses. The RX10 IV is a huge improvement in autofocus over the III. It is a terrific camera and a great travel solution. I use the silent electronic shutter a lot.

I also shoot an A9, A7R2, and OMD Mk2 with PL 100-400 for birding. Going light on a recent birding trip, I took only the RX10 IV and got some of my best ever travel shots ranging from low light indoor people (no flash) to birds in flight. Yes, I’ve been shooting for about 50 years, and I’m pretty skillful in post processing but for me the RX10 IV delivered the goods. I was always ready with a focal range of 24-600mm equiv. and was very pleased with image quality. There were only a few times when the extra reach of the PL 100-400, better autofocus, better stabilization, and faster operation of the OMD were missed for birding.

If you get a new camera or lens, be sure and practice before your trip.

Interesting to me that the Sony can hold its own so well when compared to the other cameras you shoot with. That says a lot about Sony's sensors and the lens they put on the the RX10 IV.

Thanks for the detailed reply. So, in your experience, the Sony was a good match for the Fuji 100-400 on the long end with regards to image quality? I know that people have said the 400mm end of the Fuji is the softest but that it's quite good stopped-down.

My ego wants to take my two Fuji bodies and the bit lens... the practical side of me is screaming for the practical and lighter option as long as it doesn't sacrifice a lot in image quality.

I would not go on a trip like that with only one camera, so I would take the 2 Fuji's. You never know when one might fail.

<< So, in your experience, the Sony was a good match for the Fuji 100-400 on the long end with regards to image quality? >>

Yes - the Image Quality (IQ) at 600mm is surprisingly excellent on the RX10 iv. With other cameras I have owned, IQ dropped off noticeably both (1) when you zoom out the maximum focal length and again (2) as the subject gets farther away from the camera. Somehow, Sony keeps a darn good image.







I like the RX10 so much that I am on the verge of ordering the Sony A7R iii, but caution tells me to wait until after I return from my trip.



Attached photo was taken this afternoon with the Sony Rx iv. The deer running directly toward me.



--
- FrogMouth

By the way, here is an article of someone who took the earlier RX10 iii model on safari and liked it:


I agree with the person who advised you to take a back-up camera, but bringing one of your Fuji cameras, and assorted lenses, puts back where you started. My back-up camera for my Africa trip will be the Panasonic ZS50. Even though it is small sensor camera, it takes up almost no room and still takes excellent daytime photos and flawless macros.

If you go this route, stay away from the Panasonic ZS60, ZS70, or higher models - IQ is inexplicably terrible on the newer models.

Good luck!

FrogMouth

It really depends on your priority and your physical condition. Nobody but yourself can make decision for you.

To me IQ and hit rate (opportunity in capturing photos) are the top priority at least still at this moment. So I carried 3 sets of heavy camera gear in my 2013 Masai Mara trip .

Canon 500L/4.0 IS (8.5 lb alone) on 5D III (set 1)

Canon EF 70-200L/2.8 IS II on 1D III (set 2)

Canon EF 24-70L/2.8 II on 5D II (set 3) to take landscape and snapshots from safari truck.

I am planning another safari trip in coming June to Botswana and Namibia likely will with such gear,

Canon 500L/4.0 IS on 5D IV (set 1) - either buy or rent a 5D IV

Sony FE 70-200 GM (will acquire) and/or FE 100-400 GM on A9

Sony FE 16-35 GM (will acquire) or still with EF 16-35L/4.0 IS or EF 24-70L/2.8 II on A7r II (set 3) for landscape and snapshot. Sure wife will help to hold set 3 as last time.

So if you can lug around, take Fuji X-T2 or X-T20 with Fuji 100-400. If you cannot, take RV10 IV which is good in good light and one camera for all distance, but IQ will get hit significantly in low light. Usually game rides will happen in early morning and later afternoon.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com

PWPhotography said:

It really depends on your priority and your physical condition. Nobody but yourself can make decision for you.

Click to expand...

I've never been to a safari, but I've had periods with lots of travel and I believe PWPhotography has many good points in his post.

It's always a hassle to travel with lots of equipment, but if the photos are really important to you, and you don't have any physical problems with carrying your Fuji setup then it's probably worth it. I'd expect that you'll get better pictures, particularly in difficult conditions (low light or high contrast) with the sensors in your Xt2 and Xt20.

If you travel with both bodies and a telezoom on one and a allround lens on the other then you basically can avoid the time (and possibly dust) problems with switching lenses. Also, the Xt20 with a kit lens or a small prime actually is smaller and lighter than the RX10 IV for use in the cities or around camp. So while you travel with more, maybe twice the weight - you'll still have a lighter camera except when you use the 100-400.

Personally I think RX10 IV is the best all round superzoom/bridge/all in one/travel camera at the moment, but it still has only a one inch sensor and a 25x zoom can never be perfect. I know RX10 IV get excellent reviews, but the one inch sensor just can't handle high ISO like the best APS-C-sensors. Btw, I tested and almost bought the first generation RX10, and have just bought the RX10 IV, but I don't expect it to be competitive with my main system for the most difficult conditions.

Cameron -

You wrote: <<So, in your experience, the Sony was a good match for the Fuji 100-400 on the long end with regards to image quality? I know that people have said the 400mm end of the Fuji is the softest >>

Yesterday (February 02) I took a shot of the super moon, HAND-HELD, with my Sony and compared it with a shot of the moon I took in December with my Fuji 100-400mm lens, set on a TRIPOD. Both lenses were zoomed out to 600mm. The Sony photo is sharper!

The first photo is from December 2017 - it was cropped differently and appears larger.











--
- FrogMouth

Another advantage of the Sony RX10 iv over Fuji is the possibility of digital zoom. I know that digital zoom is dirty phrase among photographers, and normally one should never use it. However, in a pinch, you might be tempted. Sony does a good job of correcting images that have been digitally enlarged.

Attached is an example of a Mallard taken at 2X digital zoom, or 1200mm. Fuji, and most other interchangeable lens cameras, wouldn't be able to get this long a reach.

Incidentally, for some reason, the EXIF data will show this photo at to be shot at 220mm, or 600mm factoring the crop factor. EXIF totally ignores the 2X digital enlargement.


Mallard at 2X digital zoom on RX10 iv

--
- FrogMouth

This is a great thread. No safaris coming up but I'm travelling with the family right now visiting relatives. I usually bring my XPro2 with the 18-135 mm for general shots, the 23 f1.4 for low light scenes, and I toss in a small flash and tripod. This time, I have the opportunity to do some environmental portraits so I hauled a ThinkTank backpack with my XT2, XPro2, 4 lenses, and some flashes along. I've done it before.

Fuji is a great system for performance-to-bulk/weight (especially compared to my Nikon FX gear), but frankly, it's still a hassle on planes: the camera gear takes up one bag's worth of space that I could be carrying clothes or other travel gear. It's more pronounced now that I have two kids - what was I thinking of when I thought I could actually do some portfolio shots? LOL! So, I was thinking that the next time I would not bother with any portraiture and just restrict myself to family snapshots and bring "one camera".

Except I'm a perfectionist like I suspect most forum members are, and even for casual photos, you want the best! I still appreciate the Fuji's versatility when chasing my kids with their cousins running around.

I was thinking of getting the 12-100 superzoom for an older Olympus EM5Mk2 I have... except that camera was not the fastest for focusing. I have an even older Canon G1XMk2 but again, it does not have very fast focus.

The irony is that two of the best photojournalists I know in my city only shoot with their iPhone when they travel! They do this for a living, and couldn't be bothered with a full camera when not working. Go figure...

You have taken some great photographs ! Your album endorses your skills with the cameras you have and photography. Thanks for sharing.

Liked the Beijing olympics and Masai Mara. yet to go thru others.

madhav56 said:

You have taken some great photographs ! Your album endorses your skills with the cameras you have and photography. Thanks for sharing.

Liked the Beijing olympics and Masai Mara. yet to go thru others.

--
Madhav Bodas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/151152724@N03/albums

Click to expand...

Thanks for your kind words.

Three months later, I have also owned FE 70-200 GM and FE 16-35 GM from my last post, both terrific lenses. Previously I was planning another safari in this summer but seem have to postpone to next year as my wife cannot commit to the schedule. Likely I will sell the legacy Canon 500L/4.0 IS so will be pure Sony gear in next trip. Meanwhile wait and see rumored FE 200-600 (hope is good and not very expensive) or future Sigma e-mount 500G/4.0 OSS. Otherwise FE 100-400 GM should be OK and much lighter and smaller but just not long nor fast enough but I will replace A7r II with A7r III (faster AF, much deeper buffer and much more powerful battery) and hope 42mp has room to crop to 500mm.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums