Fujifilm X-H1 + XF 16-55mm f/2.8 advantages over A7iii + FE 24-105mm f 4

Crgln wrote:

(I've posted a similar question on the Sony forum, but expecting it is more likely to get responses from Fujifilm owners here):

fair point. Smart to get both sides of the debate too.

For what objective reasons (i.e. beyond personal preference or lack of experience with Sony) would you recommend a budding photographer to buy an X-H1 + XF 16-55mm f/2.8 camera+lens combo rather than a Sony A7iii + FE 24-105mm lens combo?

I'm looking in the $3k-ish range for me son, a photography student. He is most motivated by outdoor photography, creative studio sets, and finding unique shots. He's also looking at paying gigs of people shoots and weddings (1 wedding down). He edits currently with Lightroom.

For Outdoor i'd probably go with the Fuji. It seems Fuji sealed bodies tend to be more moisture resistant compared to the Sony A7 models. For weddings the Sony because it has better battery life and the fullframe sensor may help with the terrible lighting. Also i don't like the Fujifilms with lightroom. Capture One for me gives me much more control and better output. At the cost of longer development time. I don't know how Sony works with lightroom go to the Sony forums for that.

I love Fuji's direct control over shutterspeed and aperture on the lens in a studio setting. The Aperture gives me more flash while the shutterspeed allows me to control ambient light. It's just more natural to me then the regular PASM layout.

Love to hear why you might recommend the Fuji combo over the Sony combo.

Straight out of camera output for sure. The Built-in jpeg engine with the film simulations yield great results straight out of camera. The X-H1 seems to be the sturdier body out of the 2. The ability to get a cheaper back-up body getting the most out of the same lenses could be another reason. An seperate X-E3 or X-T20 will have similar capability in a cheap affordable package. Yes an A6300 would be similar but i'd rather use Fuji's APSC optimized lenses compared to fullframe lenses on a crop body.

Also, if anyone can help me understand:

How does one compare the specs on a Full frame lens with an APC-S lens; specifically how these two line up (at similar price points) for actual zoom, depth of field, and low-light effectiveness?

The fullframe sensor is 2.25x larger. So you'd need a lens roughly twice as bright to compensate and get more or less similar depth of field and low light effectiveness. Just use a faster aperture and lower ISO compared to the fullframe.

That would make the 16-55mm compareable to the Sony in terms of depth of field and light gathering. (probably slight edge Sony because that dual gain BSI sensor is just fantastic)

That being said the Sony lens has more range making it more flexible in regards to composition. Then the Sony can be upgraded with a 24-70mm F2.8 GM while the Fuji can't go beyond F2.8 zooms.

Thanks so much!

Your welcome.

Honestly as a Fuji user i'd pick the A7 III over the X-H1. That being said i'd pick any other Fujifilm over their Sony Alpha APSC counterpart.

Edit: like the guy above me said. 23 august Nikon will anounce their fullframe mirrorless plans. Which is a good reason to wait just a bit. Especially with an investment like this.