Looking for a more versatile kit - Fuji x Switch to Sony

GabrielFFontes wrote:

I've noticed that, as time passes, I need a very versatile kit to be inspire me to actually go out and take pictures. That's why I sold many primes, including the 16 1.4 and 56 1.2. To me, a versatile kit means a good versatile zoom.

I can understand that. I've shot various kits (from film to digital, ILCs and digicams) and different subjects (from nature to family/kids to events) as a dedicated hobbyist over the last 40ish years and, at least at this stage in my "evolution" (devolution?) I've come to the conclusion that I dislike having to change lenses while out and about shooting. It's fine to switch from one lens to another for a while (like late in the day, when light levels drop), but I don't want to have to switch for framing if I can avoid it.

I've spent a lot of time going through EXIF data and have come to the conclusion that I could be happy with a 24-120 equivalent; happier still with more reach on the tele end.

Fuji's 16-80 has a mediocre-lousy reputation and this is the one lens I'd consider the "foundation" of my kit. (Right now, it's a Nikon 16-80/2.8-4 but will need to change if I go completely mirrorless). Nikon is a natural switch for me, since most of my kit is F mount (with only a couple lenses for my X-S10) and fortunately, they're making some great Z lenses - the 24-120/4 and 24-200 give me excellent options. As appealing as the higher quality, fixed f/4, 24-120 is, I have no doubt, from the reviews I've read and samples I've seen, that the 24-200 on a 24MP body would give me all I need for prints as big as I'd make (and better than anything I'd get with any of the 16-80/16-70 type lenses available for APS-C, including the Nikon I'm using now).

I considered Sony and Canon, but their 24-105/24-240 lenses offer nothing over Nikons. That Tamron 28-200 looks like the best option. It tests very well (despite AyoYo's claim that it's "garbage") and samples on flickr look great. But I'd rather 24mm at the wide end. The other thing I prefer about Nikon is I can pick up a z50 to have a small, inexpensive camera that works like a bigger z5/z6. I had an A6000 and then an A6500 for several years and grew to dislike the design of those cameras. (Then again, I could skip the A6xxx and upgrade my RX100 and have a compact camera with similar menus/interface so maybe it's even on that score).

Maybe Fuji will come out with a better zoom before I make up my mind (though I doubt it since the 18-120/4 was just announced recently and they seem to be pushing video more these days).

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this possible switch, if anyone tried the Sony + 28-200 combo, etc.

The IV looks like a really nice, solid camera. Of course, Sony's AF is legendary these days (not a big concern for me - I don't track moving subjects and haven't had a problem with AF in 10 years or more). The 28-200 looks like a great lens capable of big prints if you need them, so long as the range is good for you. And, of course, you can buy any of a bazillion lenses for e mount, with all the third party options, should you want to expand that kit.

Fuji offers some great products (and as an X-S10 user, I like the looks of the X-H2, though I definitely don't need 40mp for anything) but their greater-than-3X zooms are lacking. For now, my X-S10 and two small lenses serve my needs as my portable carry-everywhere camera, but based on my preference for a 24-120/200 equivalent as my primary lens, I think Nikon is likely going to be my long term kit when I sell my DSLR gear.

- Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com