Fuji instead of Sony?

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
knoxphoto Regular Member • Posts: 190
Re: Fuji instead of Sony?
3

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?

I've owned and used both extensively, here's what I can tell you.

If you need battery life, advanced color grading options (cine-profiles), and the FF DOF then you want the Sony. Those are the "real life" advantages of the system.

If you want lightweight bodies and lenses, excellent color without grading, and easy to use controls and menus, you want the Fuji system.

Both systems have excellent autofocus, are easy to adapt almost any lens to and offer output that is exceptional, especially when using an external recorder/monitor like an Atomos.

The Sony is a little bit better with AF, but honestly, with both cameras, I prefer to MF in low-light situations for accuracy. IBIS benefits are minimal unless you are using the native lenses for both systems.

I would say the Fuji can do 94% of what the Sony can do IRL situations. If you need that extra 6%, go with the Sony.

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