Fuji instead of Sony?

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
Zefah Regular Member • Posts: 327
Re: Fuji instead of Sony?
9

Joe Tam wrote:

Hi,

I was very interested in switching to Sony but the XT-3 has me taking another look at Fuji.

I used to use Nikon for stills and Panasonic(for stills and video where size, discretion, and silent shutter is required).

Why I want Fuji over Sony:

The smaller lenses and cheaper prices across the board end up saving a lot of money when it comes to 2 bodies, 3-4 lenses and some accessories. i can get 2 xt-3 for $3k vs. $6k for a7riii or $8k for a9.

fuji 50-140/2.8 for $1400) is lighter (2.19 lb / 995 g) vs. Sony 70-200/2.8(ignoring equivalence) at 3.26 lb / 1480 g at $2600

very compact 24-80/2.8 equivalent that is $1000 vs. sony which is over $2000.

won't have to pay $4000 for distortion free electronic shutter. while there is 1.25x crop at 30fps at 16megapixel that is not an issue for me. also heard some lenses are not compatible with electronic shutter on a9. this is not an issue with fuji.

Why I want Sony over fuji:

higher sensitivity in extreme situations due to "full frame" sensor

ability to mount many third-party lenses with adapter.

higher megapixel full-frame bodies(a7riii)

eye-af

reportedly better tracking in low light

a9 is one sick puppy but very expensive.

IBIS!

For those who may have switched from Sony to Fuji: are there extreme situations where the fuji xt-3 fall apart and you wish you had sony. Heard low light tracking on Fuji xt-3 might be an issue.

Is Fuji good enough for most situations?

You can get an A9 for under $4,000 if you look and are willing to buy used (you should be). It's the only camera on the market that offers a distortion free shutter. I think its readout speed is pegged around 1/160. It looks like the X-T3's electronic shutter is closer to 1/60. It's still prone to distortion and banding, although it's improved over the X-T2. It does not have the stacked sensor tech that allows for the fast readout speeds that eliminate distortion and banding.

The Fujifilm XF 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR Lens is not a 24-80/2.8 equivalent. It's a 24-82.5/4.2 equivalent. You need to apply crop factor to aperture, too, to get an equivalency. The 24-105mm f/4 G Sony lens is in a comparable price bracket and it also has stabilization which the Fuji lens lacks. The Fuji body also lacks stabilization.

Now, I don't say any of this to push you away from Fuji, but you should have the facts straight. I think Fuji cameras are pretty great and would totally recommend them to anyone looking to invest in an APS-C system. They make great cameras and great lenses and it's all very reasonably priced. With that said, you should really know what you're getting into and how it compares to full frame alternatives.

 Zefah's gear list:Zefah's gear list
Sony RX100 V Fujifilm X100F Sony a9 Sony FE 35mm F1.4 Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow