X-S10 16-80 F4 vs A6600 17-70 2.8 initial handling observations

The a6600 and 17-70 are a little bigger than the x-s10 and 16-80, not monstrously bigger but bigger, hard to explain but the Sony feels more solid in a good way around the grip.

The l-plate really adds substance to the a6600 to make it a much more solid camera, far better to hold than the a7r3/r4 were, the r3 has a really small gap between lens and grip and could nip your knuckles. I didn't enjoy either the handling or feel of the 24-105 or 28-200 on either the a7r3/4. Honestly both were a huge let-down considering they were FF and sporting two well regarded lenses, I wouldn't own the 28-200, a nice enough lens but 28 on the wide end is so dated and the long end of the 24-105, seriously. But, I digress.

So, main things that really stand-out, the ibis/ois of the Sony is not as good as that of the Fuji, the Fuji is floating the Sony is steady-ish, but then my experience of the 28-200 was worse still, so not sure what really is going on inside these Sony bodies, not as much as others it seems from an ibis perspective.

The Fuji despite being F4 is also surprisingly around 1 stop slower for equivalent exposure, so f4 1/60 at iso 12.8k will be 2.8 1/125 at 6.4k, so that's a big bonus if it really works out like that, but will test this some more.

The evf on the a6600 shows noticeable moiré/aliasing due to the sharpness of the 2.8 lens and the bayer sensor, the Fuji has none!

Despite all the complaints about the thumb operation and 2 dials of the a6600 it seems to work really well, I don't miss the front wheel, on the X-S10 it doesn't do anything anyway. I shoot auto iso most of the time, so the I don't know what all the complaints are about handling.

Overall, much of a muchness, The joystick is nice on the Fuji but the rear wheel and all the functionality of that is just as nice too imo, especially out of the box with single press to free the af and move up-down, don't need to use the touch-screen at all.

I already prefer shooting at 2.8 constant over f4, who wouldn't!

The efcs or rather lack of on the Fuji is concerning if you need to resort to mechanical shutter, but the extra e-shutter speed upto 1/32000 is very nice, the Sony tops out at 1/4000, even in e-shutter.

So for me the driver is the constant 2.8, efcs, better battery and bayer sensor, so far it ticks those main objectives looking forward to shooting with it

Congrats on your new kit.

Enjoy reading your comparisons from previous experience... pro and con.

[No message]

It is a much more expensive option a6600+17-70 2.8, £1900 as Fuji bundle the lens with the X-S10 for £1349 currently, so £550 premium!

But, the a6600 is weather sealed the x-s10 is not, the battery is monstrous the x-s10 is not, You need 3 batteries pf Fuji, the buffer is deeper and the bayer sensor is appealing along with a constant 2.8 to 105mm. To do that on Fuji you need 2x lenses, the only options are 24-105 FF lenses and they are all much more expensive routes too. a6600 and 17-70 2.8 pretty unique proposition in the market!

And-roid said:

It is a much more expensive option a6600+17-70 2.8, £1900 as Fuji bundle the lens with the X-S10 for £1349 currently, so £550 premium!

But, the a6600 is weather sealed the x-s10 is not, the battery is monstrous the x-s10 is not, You need 3 batteries pf Fuji, the buffer is deeper and the bayer sensor is appealing along with a constant 2.8 to 105mm. To do that on Fuji you need 2x lenses, the only options are 24-105 FF lenses and they are all much more expensive routes too. a6600 and 17-70 2.8 pretty unique proposition in the market!

Click to expand...

Well that will get the guys at my local camera shop arguing (a constant 2.8 to 105mm). It's either a constant 2.8 to 70 or a constant 4.x to 105 they'll say.

But those points make sense. I can see why you like the camera and lens, and made the choice.

Ran Ridley said:

And-roid said:

It is a much more expensive option a6600+17-70 2.8, £1900 as Fuji bundle the lens with the X-S10 for £1349 currently, so £550 premium!

But, the a6600 is weather sealed the x-s10 is not, the battery is monstrous the x-s10 is not, You need 3 batteries pf Fuji, the buffer is deeper and the bayer sensor is appealing along with a constant 2.8 to 105mm. To do that on Fuji you need 2x lenses, the only options are 24-105 FF lenses and they are all much more expensive routes too. a6600 and 17-70 2.8 pretty unique proposition in the market!

Click to expand...

Well that will get the guys at my local camera shop arguing (a constant 2.8 to 105mm). It's either a constant 2.8 to 70 or a constant 4.x to 105 they'll say.

Click to expand...

Member said:

But those points make sense. I can see why you like the camera and lens, and made the choice.

Click to expand...

Yes, all I want for 90% of the time is a 24-105 at f4, FF. In all honesty I didn't like any of the FF mirrorless options, some dont exist eg Nikon Z, others are very very large, Canon especially when you add the body. The a7c is closest to what I wanted but I wouldn't touch it or the Sony 24-105. Likewise the 28-200 didn't do it for me either. I cant quite believe Tamron made this lens, shame its not 16 but 17's doable, just. A6600 isnt perfect either, ibis is like other Sony's, just ok but the 2.8 constant and efcs is already doing it for me, and its smaller than FF and with a prime can become tiny and with the l-plate can become large enough for bigger lenses.

And-roid said:

The Fuji despite being F4 is also surprisingly around 1 stop slower for equivalent exposure, so f4 1/60 at iso 12.8k will be 2.8 1/125 at 6.4k, so that's a big bonus if it really works out like that, but will test this some more.

Click to expand...

Fuji has a different ISO implementation standard than everyone else. This gives the illusion of cleaner high ISO performance, when really they are just boosting the ISO quicker than the competition. There may be some better high ISO performance in there as well, but it's an apples to oranges comparison from Fuji to Sony at the same ISO.

If you search around, you'll see that some folks have written at length about this. I've only read about it a bit.

I have decided to return the 17-70 and the a6600, it's amazing how reality kicks-in and what I thought would be a dream combination is nothing of the sort!

As a landscape-travel-general lens, the Fuji 16-80 is better overall, partly its focal range, 24-120 vs 25-105 and partly the combination with the body and the af options.

The first thing that I will say is that evf is sharper on the x-s10, probably similar size but x-s10 has no aliasing or morie due to xtrans and is just a better evf to look through, despite it's size it remains a phenomenal evf, probably the best evf even compared with the a7r3/4,z7.

The ibis is probably still first generation in the a6600, we are talking Olympus first generation, it's probably as much as 2 or 3 stops behind Fuji, at least, in fact I wonder what it's doing-adding, does it do anything?

The af systems are very different, the small af box of Fuji is possibly the best of it's kind currently, I know of no other system with such a pin-point af system without needing to resort to mag modes, added together with the sharper evf, no aliasing-moire, the experience is superior. The small box on Sony is at least 2 sizes larger than Fuji's smallest. The eye-af is comparable, I might even say the x-s10 is better but both are such a high standard it's hard to argue with either.

In the flesh the a6600 sensor shows it's age and is possibly a stop or more behind, but Fuji is not genuine with its iso, I'd say iso160 Fuji and iso100 of Sony is similar if not the same, therefore most iso's could be upto 2/3 of a stop shifted, wouldn't surprise me!

The a6600 lcd is tiny

The a6600-grip-battery are superb, can't fault them

I like the a6600 buttons and dials probably better but the joystick of the x-s10 adds to the speed of moving af around I guess.

Overall for me, the x-s10 is a superior package with the 16-80, considering how many complain about it, I amazed how it stacks up against the 17-70

And-roid said:

I have decided to return the 17-70 and the a6600, it's amazing how reality kicks-in and what I thought would be a dream combination is nothing of the sort!

As a landscape-travel-general lens, the Fuji 16-80 is better overall, partly its focal range, 24-120 vs 25-105 and partly the combination with the body and the af options.

The first thing that I will say is that evf is sharper on the x-s10, probably similar size but x-s10 has no aliasing or morie due to xtrans and is just a better evf to look through, despite it's size it remains a phenomenal evf, probably the best evf even compared with the a7r3/4,z7.

The ibis is probably still first generation in the a6600, we are talking Olympus first generation, it's probably as much as 2 or 3 stops behind Fuji, at least, in fact I wonder what it's doing-adding, does it do anything?

The af systems are very different, the small af box of Fuji is possibly the best of it's kind currently, I know of no other system with such a pin-point af system without needing to resort to mag modes, added together with the sharper evf, no aliasing-moire, the experience is superior. The small box on Sony is at least 2 sizes larger than Fuji's smallest. The eye-af is comparable, I might even say the x-s10 is better but both are such a high standard it's hard to argue with either.

In the flesh the a6600 sensor shows it's age and is possibly a stop or more behind, but Fuji is not genuine with its iso, I'd say iso160 Fuji and iso100 of Sony is similar if not the same, therefore most iso's could be upto 2/3 of a stop shifted, wouldn't surprise me!

The a6600 lcd is tiny

The a6600-grip-battery are superb, can't fault them

I like the a6600 buttons and dials probably better but the joystick of the x-s10 adds to the speed of moving af around I guess.

Overall for me, the x-s10 is a superior package with the 16-80, considering how many complain about it, I amazed how it stacks up against the 17-70

Click to expand...

I know some won't like it but to ME the A6600 seems dated. It also costs more than S10 which does a lot more of what I want.

I just picked up an X-S10 yesterday. It's an amazing little camera. I hope you enjoy yours too.

Ran Ridley said:

And-roid said:

I have decided to return the 17-70 and the a6600, it's amazing how reality kicks-in and what I thought would be a dream combination is nothing of the sort!

As a landscape-travel-general lens, the Fuji 16-80 is better overall, partly its focal range, 24-120 vs 25-105 and partly the combination with the body and the af options.

The first thing that I will say is that evf is sharper on the x-s10, probably similar size but x-s10 has no aliasing or morie due to xtrans and is just a better evf to look through, despite it's size it remains a phenomenal evf, probably the best evf even compared with the a7r3/4,z7.

The ibis is probably still first generation in the a6600, we are talking Olympus first generation, it's probably as much as 2 or 3 stops behind Fuji, at least, in fact I wonder what it's doing-adding, does it do anything?

The af systems are very different, the small af box of Fuji is possibly the best of it's kind currently, I know of no other system with such a pin-point af system without needing to resort to mag modes, added together with the sharper evf, no aliasing-moire, the experience is superior. The small box on Sony is at least 2 sizes larger than Fuji's smallest. The eye-af is comparable, I might even say the x-s10 is better but both are such a high standard it's hard to argue with either.

In the flesh the a6600 sensor shows it's age and is possibly a stop or more behind, but Fuji is not genuine with its iso, I'd say iso160 Fuji and iso100 of Sony is similar if not the same, therefore most iso's could be upto 2/3 of a stop shifted, wouldn't surprise me!

The a6600 lcd is tiny

The a6600-grip-battery are superb, can't fault them

I like the a6600 buttons and dials probably better but the joystick of the x-s10 adds to the speed of moving af around I guess.

Overall for me, the x-s10 is a superior package with the 16-80, considering how many complain about it, I amazed how it stacks up against the 17-70

Click to expand...

I know some won't like it but to ME the A6600 seems dated. It also costs more than S10 which does a lot more of what I want.

I just picked up an X-S10 yesterday. It's an amazing little camera. I hope you enjoy yours too.

Click to expand...

Yes, thanks, great shot

There's no doubting the 17-70 is a great lens, but Sony's ibis and the reduced focal range of 17-70 vs 16-80 is a backwards step for me and Sony's small af box is rather big too!. In fact Fuji is so far ahead of Sony as a complete package for aps-c its scary that Sony has fallen so far behind, I wasn't impressed with the a7r3/4 either, but, I was willing to overlook this if the 17-70 and a6600 delivered. In fact, again, I am surprised how well f4 stacks up against f2.8 on aps-c and it feels as if Fuji is more than capable in bridging the extra stop in iso, if speed is required or ibis if stability is required. It's good to try other stuff, at least you know for yourself then what the differences are.

Happy shooting, x-s10 is truly impressive, just wish they had put efcs in it too, but e-shutter works well enough