Fuji instead of Sony?

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
shakenmartini Regular Member • Posts: 332
Re: Fuji instead of Sony?
4

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?

While I have not used the X-T3 extensively, I still own a X-T2 and lenses (and am in the process of selling off an X-T20 and prime lenses).

You can look at my post history for a more thorough run down of my experience switching.

Overall, I prefer how the X-T series handles over Sony, but Sony is no slouch. It gets a bad rap on handling.

Sony Image quality is superior on all fronts, especially at high ISO. The X-T3 has not improved on high ISO performance that much, so you are basically limited to ISO 6400. Do note that Fuji uses a different ISO system so both the base ISO and high ISO are different when comparing directly to Sony.

IBIS is a big deal, It makes a huge difference in shooting slow moving things in low light.

If you are looking at the X-T2 or older cameras, the AF systems are good, but not amazing. The X-T3 is much better than the X-T2 and far superior to the Nikon Z7, which I own and am returning (I haven't tried the EOS-R). If you have never used a Sony A7 or A9 you would likely think that the X-T3 AF and eye/face detect is better than most DSLRs for face detection.The Sony A7III AF system if phenomenal on all fronts. It locks on to focus effortless and quickly. It is much better than DSLR autofocus, especially in AF-C. I realize that DSLRs are slightly faster at AF, but the grabs onto faces much faster than DSLRs, and lock onto eyes when you push the EyeAF button much better. If you are shooting moving people, or kids, nothing beats Sony AF especially since it works so well in AFC at high burst rates. Given that you get all this in the A7III for $2k, it is truly amazing that you can rattle off a high burst rate, shooting RAW and get all of the pictures of a fast moving subject nailed perfectly on their eye wide open without fiddling with moving AF points around the screen.

Lenses are expensive on Fuji, and even more expensive on Sony. Fuji lenses are likely some of the best lenses across the board. Nikon has a habit of selling crappy entry level lenses, whereas ALL of Fuji's lenses are good if not excellent. Even Fuji's kit lenses are good to phenomenal. The red badge lenses are some of the best in the industry as are the f/1.2 and f/1.4 lenses.

Newer Sony lenses, especially the G-master lenses are amazing. Very expensive. The f/4 lenses are excellent too. Sony does have a few more stinker lenses than Fuji does, but these are mostly the kit zooms and some older designs from when E-mount was first growing. All recent Sony lenses are at least as good as Fuji, if not better. G-master lenses are some of the best in the industry. I have been dabbling with switching to Sony since E-mount was first introduced. Initially I was not super impressed with the lenses, but all the recent lenses are absolutely stunning.

Because E-mount is available to 3rd parties, there are a lot of options across the board. This was a major driving force in my switch is that Fuji doesn't have a few lens designs that I have been waiting for.

Fuji does firmware updates that give you new features, Sony doesn't do this. Both cameras have complex menu systems that are much different than Canon or Nikon. Canikon users complain about Sony complex menus, but all cameras have complex menus. Fuji is probably more complex than Sony, but Fuji manuals are better written so you can understand the menus better. Either way, cameras with complex AF systems and face detection are complex computers hooked up to an imaging system. They require configuration and customization to work to your taste.

Honestly, you cannot go wrong with either. IBIS, lenses and AF were what drove me to Sony even though I still have an X-T2. I think long term I am going to move full into Sony as IBIS makes such a big difference. The X-T3, even as an APSC camera, is far superior to the Nikon Z7. I honestly can't believe I paid $3400 for the Z7 when a X-T3 is so much better for half the cost. I also cannot believe how far ahead Sony and Fuji are compared to Nikon mirrorless (again, I haven't used the EOS-R), even with the A7III. I'm going to be using my return money from the Z7 to buy some G-master glass. No more reason to fool around

 shakenmartini's gear list:shakenmartini's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D750 Nikon D7200 Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T20 +15 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