Fuji instead of Sony?

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
liopleurodon Contributing Member • Posts: 998
Re: Fuji instead of Sony?
2

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.

A7III is $2k.  Virtually same resolution as XT3.

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.

Tamron 28-75/2.8 for $800. I have this lens and it is outstanding. It's light, compact, has stellar IQ (compare online samples to the 24-70 GM or the Canon EF 24-70 L II, you need to really pixel peep to see the difference and even then its marginal).

Also in terms of light gathered and depth of field the Fuji 16-50/2.8 is a 24-80/4.5 equivalent. An FE 24-105/4 collects more total light. Or to go in the other direction the Tamron is equivalent to 18-50/1.7 on APS-C in terms of light collection.

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.

Used a9s are available under $3k if you're patient.

Why I want Sony over fuji:

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

You'll likely find this isn't as big of an advantage as you think in most scenarios. The increased dynamic range is a bigger deal.

ability to mount many third-party lenses with adapter.

If you're interested in vintage lenses you can do this pretty easily on x-mount as well. FE's biggest advantage is being able to mount A-mount lenses (which can be a bargain) with support from Sony, and use MC11 or Metabones to mount Canon EF lenses.  Sigma also supports using a subset of their EF selection on the MC11.

higher megapixel full-frame bodies(a7riii)

eye-af

Works like magic on my A7iii, unless the subject has glasses, then it fall back to face detect or just doesn't work at all.

reportedly better tracking in low light

a9 is one sick puppy but very expensive.

IBIS!

The XT3 is intriguing but I'll never go back to not having IBIS. Fuji's x-mount primes aren't stabilized. IBIS is amazing for handheld video and Sony's implementation is pretty effective.  The difference is staggering.  Of course some external stabilizer would be better, but IBIS has become basic requirement for me now for a hybrid camera.

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?

If you don't use gimbals or steadicams I'd have a very hard time passing on IBIS.

 liopleurodon's gear list:liopleurodon's gear list
Sony a7 III Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 III Google Pixel 3 +3 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