A7CR or X100VI?

DirkPeh said:

ricktachtig said:

DirkPeh said:

Rod McD said:

Hi,

It doesn't seem that you've clearly identified your goals. The A7Cii or R can do everything the X100VI will do and some of them better (at the cost of being bigger, less pocketable and less affordable).

R

Click to expand...

The image of the Fuji as compact and small and a fixed lens distorts the reality a bit:

• The Sony a7C is 3% (4 mm) narrower and 5% (3.7 mm) shorter than FujiFilm X100VI.
• Sony a7C is 12% (6.4 mm) thicker than FujiFilm X100VI.
• Sony a7C [509 g] weights 2% (12 grams) less than FujiFilm X100VI[521 g] (*inc. batteries and memory card).
• Sony a7C dimensions: 124x71.1x59.7 mm (camera body only, excluding protrusion)
  FujiFilm X100VI dimensions: 128x74.8x53.3 mm (camera body only, excluding protrusion)

(From the camera size comparison site)

If you want small, one of the small Sony primes for example f/2.5 28/40/50 and seize and weight are nearly the same.

Click to expand...

And yet it is a completely different experience. The Sony with a lens is a lot bigger. I own both camera's and also the 40mm f2.5 G lens.

Just look at the size difference below. The Sony + lens is around 25% heavier. But most important (for me at least), you can't fit the Sony + a lens in your jacket pocket. The Fujifilm X100VI fits in my jacket with ease. For the Sony you need to bring a sling, backpack or something else.

Of course something like the Ricoh GRIII(x) is even more pocketable if you can deal with the missing EVF.

Click to expand...

Although I agree with you, but how many Fuji X100 users have a lens hood, favourably a hipster square hood one

I own a Sony A6400, a GRIII and a X100V and as I wrote before, the GR and the Fuji are my EDC's. And the A6400 is even smaller. It’s not the size or weight.

Click to expand...

Haha maybe some have that yes. I don’t have a square hood on it. And in this comparison the lens hood of the 40mm f2.5 is also missing on this. So the Sony setup is even bigger in real life.

ricktachtig said:

DirkPeh said:

Rod McD said:

Hi,

It doesn't seem that you've clearly identified your goals. The A7Cii or R can do everything the X100VI will do and some of them better (at the cost of being bigger, less pocketable and less affordable).

R

Click to expand...

The image of the Fuji as compact and small and a fixed lens distorts the reality a bit:

• The Sony a7C is 3% (4 mm) narrower and 5% (3.7 mm) shorter than FujiFilm X100VI.
• Sony a7C is 12% (6.4 mm) thicker than FujiFilm X100VI.
• Sony a7C [509 g] weights 2% (12 grams) less than FujiFilm X100VI[521 g] (*inc. batteries and memory card).
• Sony a7C dimensions: 124x71.1x59.7 mm (camera body only, excluding protrusion)
  FujiFilm X100VI dimensions: 128x74.8x53.3 mm (camera body only, excluding protrusion)

(From the camera size comparison site)

If you want small, one of the small Sony primes for example f/2.5 28/40/50 and seize and weight are nearly the same.

Click to expand...

And yet it is a completely different experience. The Sony with a lens is a lot bigger. I own both camera's and also the 40mm f2.5 G lens.

Just look at the size difference below. The Sony + lens is around 25% heavier. But most important (for me at least), you can't fit the Sony + a lens in your jacket pocket. The Fujifilm X100VI fits in my jacket with ease. For the Sony you need to bring a sling, backpack or something else.

Of course something like the Ricoh GRIII(x) is even more pocketable if you can deal with the missing EVF.

Click to expand...

That's fair, OTOH for those of us without jacket weather for most if not all the year, it's at least a sling for either, or just carrying them on a strap where the lens is irrelevant.

cortex95x said:

I have been following this thread with a confused expression on my face. The A7CR and Fuji X100vi are two entirely different cameras. The Sony is roughly twice the price of the Fuji and has a FF sensor, as opposed to the Fuji’s APSC sensor. The Sony is a full function, interchangeable lens camera while the Fuji is essentially a fixed lens point and shoot, and in that regard, a better comparison would be between the Fuji and the Leica Q3. It should be obvious to anyone who wears pants that the A7RC is not pocketable, and likely was not meant to be. If the OP wants a purely pocketable camera he/she might be better served by searching for a used Olympus Pen F. It has interchangeable lenses and is as close to a pocketable camera as I have ever seen … I happen to have one in my collection, so I have first hand experience.

I should state that—among a collection many different cameras—I own both an A7RV and an A7CR, the latter is carried in a small shoulder bag, while the former is also carried in a larger shoulder bag. I’m not convinced that carrying a camera—other than one’s smartphone—in a pocket is a good idea from the perspective of longevity. But that’s just my opinion, and others obviously feel differently, as they are surely entitled to.

Click to expand...

The PEN-F isn't any more pocketable unless you're using the 20/1.7 or 12-32... The 12/2 is the size of the Sony 24/2.8 G, a PL25 is the size of a SY 45/1.8, even UWA zooms across both formats are similarly sized... It's not until you get to superzooms or teles that M4/3 leverages much of a size advantage these days.

Impulses said:

cortex95x said:

I have been following this thread with a confused expression on my face. The A7CR and Fuji X100vi are two entirely different cameras. The Sony is roughly twice the price of the Fuji and has a FF sensor, as opposed to the Fuji’s APSC sensor. The Sony is a full function, interchangeable lens camera while the Fuji is essentially a fixed lens point and shoot, and in that regard, a better comparison would be between the Fuji and the Leica Q3. It should be obvious to anyone who wears pants that the A7RC is not pocketable, and likely was not meant to be. If the OP wants a purely pocketable camera he/she might be better served by searching for a used Olympus Pen F. It has interchangeable lenses and is as close to a pocketable camera as I have ever seen … I happen to have one in my collection, so I have first hand experience.

I should state that—among a collection many different cameras—I own both an A7RV and an A7CR, the latter is carried in a small shoulder bag, while the former is also carried in a larger shoulder bag. I’m not convinced that carrying a camera—other than one’s smartphone—in a pocket is a good idea from the perspective of longevity. But that’s just my opinion, and others obviously feel differently, as they are surely entitled to.

Click to expand...

The PEN-F isn't any more pocketable unless you're using the 20/1.7 or 12-32... The 12/2 is the size of the Sony 24/2.8 G, a PL25 is the size of a SY 45/1.8, even UWA zooms across both formats are similarly sized... It's not until you get to superzooms or teles that M4/3 leverages much of a size advantage these days.

Click to expand...

Not even all the superzooms I would say... The Tamron 28-200 is no bigger than the great 12-100 Pro and is faster on the wide end (although lacks an OIS). An A7C+28-200 combo is about the same size as the OM5+12-100!!

I thought id just mention the high megapixel count of both these cameras. They are high and produce large files and can slow down your workflow, slow down any AI processing, file transfers, fill your drives etc. Not to be over looked imo, especially if you have a slow pc.

Also i often see people say they like the high megapixel count so they can crop and have multiple lenses in one lens. Well in my experience it just doesnt work like that in the real world. Years ago i specifically bought an a7r2 and the ziess 35 f2.8 and thought id do just that and crop but its just nasty. Most normal people will want to frame their shot with the correct settings and not say thats close enough and deal with it in post, thats just poor unrewarding photography that just look weak unless you process them and seems miles away from the fuji experience people often talk about.

If you want the sony, be sure to know what lenses you will use with it. If you want the fuji be sure to know if you like 35mm and the way the camera operates. Both are great. i use GRIIIx for every day carry amongst others compacts.

Impulses said:

That's fair, OTOH for those of us without jacket weather for most if not all the year, it's at least a sling for either, or just carrying them on a strap where the lens is irrelevant.

Click to expand...

Owning both the Fuji X100V and the GRIII and despite there’s jacket weather a lot of the times I have never put the Fuji into a jacket pocket, not a single time. It’s on a strap hanging around my neck. The Ricoh is always in a pocket between, before and after shooting.

Yannis1976 said:

Impulses said:

cortex95x said:

I have been following this thread with a confused expression on my face. The A7CR and Fuji X100vi are two entirely different cameras. The Sony is roughly twice the price of the Fuji and has a FF sensor, as opposed to the Fuji’s APSC sensor. The Sony is a full function, interchangeable lens camera while the Fuji is essentially a fixed lens point and shoot, and in that regard, a better comparison would be between the Fuji and the Leica Q3. It should be obvious to anyone who wears pants that the A7RC is not pocketable, and likely was not meant to be. If the OP wants a purely pocketable camera he/she might be better served by searching for a used Olympus Pen F. It has interchangeable lenses and is as close to a pocketable camera as I have ever seen … I happen to have one in my collection, so I have first hand experience.

I should state that—among a collection many different cameras—I own both an A7RV and an A7CR, the latter is carried in a small shoulder bag, while the former is also carried in a larger shoulder bag. I’m not convinced that carrying a camera—other than one’s smartphone—in a pocket is a good idea from the perspective of longevity. But that’s just my opinion, and others obviously feel differently, as they are surely entitled to.

Click to expand...

The PEN-F isn't any more pocketable unless you're using the 20/1.7 or 12-32... The 12/2 is the size of the Sony 24/2.8 G, a PL25 is the size of a SY 45/1.8, even UWA zooms across both formats are similarly sized... It's not until you get to superzooms or teles that M4/3 leverages much of a size advantage these days.

Click to expand...

Not even all the superzooms I would say... The Tamron 28-200 is no bigger than the great 12-100 Pro and is faster on the wide end (although lacks an OIS). An A7C+28-200 combo is about the same size as the OM5+12-100!!

Click to expand...

Yeah true, I meant something more like the 14-140, or teles like the 75/1.8, 35-100, 100-300, or PL50-200. You could still rightly argue that two of those have been sorta size/weight matched on FF, just not on E mount; eg the L mount Panasonic 28-200mm f4-7.1 (plus a little cropping on any high res body, it really is very close to the 14-140 in size/weight), or the RF mount 100-400mm f5.6-8 (plus a little cropping again, not much heavier or pricier than a 100-300).

The advantages to smaller formats are dwindling, somehow I think M4/3 fell way behind when it comes to UWA zooms where it could still have an advantage, but it really doesn't. I used to love my PL8-18, superb build, it's the size/weight of a 16-35/4 G tho. The 7-14/4 isn't significantly smaller (tho wider) and the 9-18 (which I did own/like) is woefully long in the tooth for the price. Meanwhile APS-C caught up and lapped M4/3 there with zooms like the 10-20/4 G and 10-18/2.8 DN.

Then to top it all off the M4/3 manufacturers stopped making any new bodies smaller than an OM-1 or G9 II, basically as large as your average A7 (larger than an A7C)... Gone are the GX# & PENs let alone the GM/GF/GX###.

So yeah, I can see the argument for the X100 because of the short lens, but searching for a used (and probably overpriced) PEN-F? Yeah that's not gonna be any smaller than an A7C and some small FF primes, cheaper maybe, if you get a good used deal on everything. Emphasis on the maybe, after 2 zooms and like 8 or 9 primes I paid less on average per lens on FF E mount than I did on M4/3. The only one where I paid about the same was the 35/1.4 GM vs the 17/1.2, coincidentally also about the same size (GM is heavier tho).

For a few key teles I could see the argument, but it's getting less reasonable every day. Only reason I'm attached to my GX850 + 75/1.8 is because I got a great deal on the latter and the body really is smaller than anything out there.

An a6400 + 90/2.8 DN is not far off and would be more capable despite being 1/2 a stop slower by equivalence (taking cropping into account). It's a sad state of affairs, I'd say the 70-350 G was always a better deal than the PL50-200 (or any FF tele at the and price if one is serious about shooting those FLs, but those will be larger). So I've basically made the case for any/every of the few M4/3 lens options I cited still made sense size-wise.

It wouldn't be quite so grim if there were any legitimately new small bodies since 2018/2019, but the E-M5 III was the last and even that was generally agreed to be overdue. At least Fuji has kept up with the X-S even if not the X-E or X-Pro.

I hate throwing dirt on a format because I think if equally developed to their full capacity they could all have certain advantages, but yeah no M4/3's are dwindling and there's no great advantage at super long FLs either.

maltmoose said:

I thought id just mention the high megapixel count of both these cameras. They are high and produce large files and can slow down your workflow, slow down any AI processing, file transfers, fill your drives etc. Not to be over looked imo, especially if you have a slow pc.

Also i often see people say they like the high megapixel count so they can crop and have multiple lenses in one lens. Well in my experience it just doesnt work like that in the real world. Years ago i specifically bought an a7r2 and the ziess 35 f2.8 and thought id do just that and crop but its just nasty. Most normal people will want to frame their shot with the correct settings and not say thats close enough and deal with it in post, thats just poor unrewarding photography that just look weak unless you process them and seems miles away from the fuji experience people often talk about.

Click to expand...

Try it with a better lens, that hasn't been my experience at all but maybe I'm not "normal people". When I crop 1.5x into my 20G, 35GM, or even Samyang 75/1.8 I still get results that outpace what I could get out of similarly sized M4/3 lenses, and a 2x crop is absolutely not out of the question. My SY 135/1.8 will crop down like nobody's business, my 50-400 still seems awesome at 600mm equivalent, etc.

This is on an A7R IV. Some people just don't like cropping and that's fine, maybe it's unrewarding to you but to call it weak when the output is the same is a reach. Even the 35/2.8 should be about to pass off for a decent 50/4 which is not far off from f2.8 on APS-C, but I'd say something like the 40/2.5 G or Samyang 45/1.8 is more appealing these days. A lot has changed within the E mount lens lineup over the last 4 years or so.

I didn't care for it either when the only compact options were the 28/2 and the overpriced 35/2.8 & 55/1.8 ZA, we're now miles from that tho, and from the capabilities and ergonomic of an A7R II. I wouldn't blame anyone for being dissatisfied with full frame E mount circa 2015-2017, but I don't see how it's relevant. Bodies made big leaps after 2018, then got smaller again after 2020, and the lens lineup exploded after 2020 with a bevy of small 3rd party options.

maltmoose said:

If you want the sony, be sure to know what lenses you will use with it. If you want the fuji be sure to know if you like 35mm and the way the camera operates. Both are great. i use GRIIIx for every day carry amongst others compacts.

Click to expand...

The GR IIIx is definitely living in another space entirely and I can see a lot more justification for it.

jor23 said:

Hello,

Have you had experience with both? My main system is Sony A7 series, but quite tempted to add a Fuji. Looked at X-T5. But don't want to invest too much in lenses.

Had X-T2 and X100 before, but as I remembered the AF was not so good. They were fun to shoot with, but I ended up wanting more.

Maybe A7CR is a more sensible choice as a smaller setup?

I wish Sony comes out with something with a retro vibe. The Nikon Zf has also been very tempting.

Click to expand...

Why not X-T50, if the a7cr is acceptable ie evf, then the X-T50 matches the a7cr except its aps-c and not FF. Then fit the 27 2.8 to the X-T50 and maybe pocket some other interesting options, voigtlander MF 18 or 23 1.2? The thing about the X-T50 is that its basically the x100vi with a cheaper centrally mounted evf, apart from that.......... and with the 27 2.8 weighs the same and offers a neat 40mm option.

Sony RXR (II)?

jor23 said:

Hello,

Have you had experience with both? My main system is Sony A7 series, but quite tempted to add a Fuji. Looked at X-T5. But don't want to invest too much in lenses.

Had X-T2 and X100 before, but as I remembered the AF was not so good. They were fun to shoot with, but I ended up wanting more.

Maybe A7CR is a more sensible choice as a smaller setup?

I wish Sony comes out with something with a retro vibe. The Nikon Zf has also been very tempting.

Click to expand...

I got myself the A7cII it seems to have some advantages above the A7cR other than the lower megapixel count ;-) For my use video is also something the intrigues me so the 33MP seems to work better for that.

The A7c series with a lens on is bigger than the fuji. But personally I'll be carrying it on a spider holster on my belt... Don't know if the fuji fits better into my jeans pocket to be honest haha. Probably yes... but I'll have to empty at least ONE entire pocket ^.^ Might not be practical for me.

From what research I have done the fuji image quality is just significantly worse than that of the full frame sensor. Reason enough for me to go for the a7cII.

I think overall the A7c series is the more powerful camera compared to the fuji. But in order to have that tiny form factor you'll need one of the lenses that have been made for that series... I'm using the 28-60mm because I wanted a small zoom. If I'm not using it for everyday stuff I can use it as a secondary camera for evens with my other sony lenses so that's a bonus you might enjoy if you are already comitted to the sony system. In my opinion that's a point for Sony. So the only reason not to get the Sony would be size together with lens if you plan on carrying it in your pocket. I cannot think of any other reason. (Price okay... but A7cII is cheaper thatn A7cR so you might reconsider ^^)

Locutus001 said:

I think overall the A7c series is the more powerful camera compared to the fuji. But in order to have that tiny form factor you'll need one of the lenses that have been made for that series... I'm using the 28-60mm because I wanted a small zoom. If I'm not using it for everyday stuff I can use it as a secondary camera for evens with my other sony lenses so that's a bonus you might enjoy if you are already comitted to the sony system. In my opinion that's a point for Sony. So the only reason not to get the Sony would be size together with lens if you plan on carrying it in your pocket. I cannot think of any other reason. (Price okay... but A7cII is cheaper thatn A7cR so you might reconsider ^^)

Click to expand...

Over here the price of the Sony A7CII with the 28-60 kitlens is 2499 euro's and the Fujifilm X100VI 1799 euro's. That's a 600 euro difference. Not sure about other places.
But a pretty significant difference in my opinion. So I think it's safe to say that price, size & weight are a plus for the X100VI. And a way better viewfinder, built in nd-filter, built in flash and the option to use film simulations. Depending of course if you need / use those.

The huge plus for the Sony A7CII / A7CR of course are the options to switch lenses, better sensor and better autofocus.

ricktachtig said:

Locutus001 said:

I think overall the A7c series is the more powerful camera compared to the fuji. But in order to have that tiny form factor you'll need one of the lenses that have been made for that series... I'm using the 28-60mm because I wanted a small zoom. If I'm not using it for everyday stuff I can use it as a secondary camera for evens with my other sony lenses so that's a bonus you might enjoy if you are already comitted to the sony system. In my opinion that's a point for Sony. So the only reason not to get the Sony would be size together with lens if you plan on carrying it in your pocket. I cannot think of any other reason. (Price okay... but A7cII is cheaper thatn A7cR so you might reconsider ^^)

Click to expand...

Over here the price of the Sony A7CII with the 28-60 kitlens is 2499 euro's and the Fujifilm X100VI 1799 euro's. That's a 600 euro difference. Not sure about other places.
But a pretty significant difference in my opinion. So I think it's safe to say that price, size & weight are a plus for the X100VI. And a way better viewfinder, built in nd-filter, built in flash and the option to use film simulations. Depending of course if you need / use those.

The huge plus for the Sony A7CII / A7CR of course are the options to switch lenses, better sensor and better autofocus.

Click to expand...

In Germany the A7c II is 2.079,- Euros without, 2.399,- with the kit lens. If you want the X100IV you have to wait or pay astronomic prices. The optical vf on the Fuji is great, but the evf isn’t far better than the A7c II.

You would have to compare the Fuji with the APS-flagship A6700, which is 1.300,- and technical way better than the Fuji. It even has autofocus.

DirkPeh said:

ricktachtig said:

Locutus001 said:

I think overall the A7c series is the more powerful camera compared to the fuji. But in order to have that tiny form factor you'll need one of the lenses that have been made for that series... I'm using the 28-60mm because I wanted a small zoom. If I'm not using it for everyday stuff I can use it as a secondary camera for evens with my other sony lenses so that's a bonus you might enjoy if you are already comitted to the sony system. In my opinion that's a point for Sony. So the only reason not to get the Sony would be size together with lens if you plan on carrying it in your pocket. I cannot think of any other reason. (Price okay... but A7cII is cheaper thatn A7cR so you might reconsider ^^)

Click to expand...

Over here the price of the Sony A7CII with the 28-60 kitlens is 2499 euro's and the Fujifilm X100VI 1799 euro's. That's a 600 euro difference. Not sure about other places.
But a pretty significant difference in my opinion. So I think it's safe to say that price, size & weight are a plus for the X100VI. And a way better viewfinder, built in nd-filter, built in flash and the option to use film simulations. Depending of course if you need / use those.

The huge plus for the Sony A7CII / A7CR of course are the options to switch lenses, better sensor and better autofocus.

Click to expand...

In Germany the A7c II is 2.079,- Euros without, 2.399,- with the kit lens. If you want the X100IV you have to wait or pay astronomic prices. The optical vf on the Fuji is great, but the evf isn’t far better than the A7c II.

You would have to compare the Fuji with the APS-flagship A6700, which is 1.300,- and technical way better than the Fuji. It even has autofocus.

Click to expand...

I own the A7CR and the Fujifilm X100VI. The viewfinder is a night and day difference in daily use.

And I agree you can't compare them. That's what I already said earlier in the thread. I think they have totally different use cases. It's the same comparison. The one can change lenses and is big. The other is smaller but you are stuck with a 35mm f2.8 ff eq lens.

For regular use the autofocus is perfectly fine on the X100VI. Sony is of course way better if you do fast paced action. But that's not the use case for the X100 series. I've been shooting with the X100VI since launch and haven't had an out of focus shot.

DirkPeh said:

ricktachtig said:

Locutus001 said:

I think overall the A7c series is the more powerful camera compared to the fuji. But in order to have that tiny form factor you'll need one of the lenses that have been made for that series... I'm using the 28-60mm because I wanted a small zoom. If I'm not using it for everyday stuff I can use it as a secondary camera for evens with my other sony lenses so that's a bonus you might enjoy if you are already comitted to the sony system. In my opinion that's a point for Sony. So the only reason not to get the Sony would be size together with lens if you plan on carrying it in your pocket. I cannot think of any other reason. (Price okay... but A7cII is cheaper thatn A7cR so you might reconsider ^^)

Click to expand...

Over here the price of the Sony A7CII with the 28-60 kitlens is 2499 euro's and the Fujifilm X100VI 1799 euro's. That's a 600 euro difference. Not sure about other places.
But a pretty significant difference in my opinion. So I think it's safe to say that price, size & weight are a plus for the X100VI. And a way better viewfinder, built in nd-filter, built in flash and the option to use film simulations. Depending of course if you need / use those.

The huge plus for the Sony A7CII / A7CR of course are the options to switch lenses, better sensor and better autofocus.

Click to expand...

In Germany the A7c II is 2.079,- Euros without, 2.399,- with the kit lens. If you want the X100IV you have to wait or pay astronomic prices. The optical vf on the Fuji is great, but the evf isn’t far better than the A7c II.

You would have to compare the Fuji with the APS-flagship A6700, which is 1.300,- and technical way better than the Fuji. It even has autofocus.

Click to expand...

Hi,

Every Fuji X100 series camera has had autofocus, though one can debate its merits....

One is never exactly comparing apples to apples in these discussions because there have to be different lenses and processing involved....

To me the great advantage of the A7C series, or the A6700, (or indeed Fuji's own ILC cameras) over the X100VI is that they offer lens interchangeability. I guess that's not important to everyone - some folks like fixed lens cameras. I'm just not one of them - I've tried the fixed lens pathway and it isn't for me.

On the sensor, there are a number of references to sensor superiority earlier in this thread (compared to Fuji APSC). I think it's a bit overplayed. Before I bought an A7R3 a year ago, I had compared my 26mpx Fuji XT4 with the 24mpx A73, and there was insufficient difference to convince me to change platforms and buy an A73. It was the A7R3's greater 42mpx resolution that really made the difference, rather than sensor size at similar resolution. (I don't own either the A7Cii or the X100vi to compare them, but the X100vi is a 40mpx camera - it's no slouch in comparative resolution).

Of course, there are other factors too, eg AF tracking, where the Sony does have an advantage.

Regards, R

ricktachtig said:

I own the A7CR and the Fujifilm X100VI. The viewfinder is a night and day difference in daily use.

And I agree you can't compare them. That's what I already said earlier in the thread. I think they have totally different use cases. It's the same comparison. The one can change lenses and is big. The other is smaller but you are stuck with a 35mm f2.8 ff eq lens.

For regular use the autofocus is perfectly fine on the X100VI. Sony is of course way better if you do fast paced action. But that's not the use case for the X100 series. I've been shooting with the X100VI since launch and haven't had an out of focus shot.

Click to expand...

You find the VF of the X100VI night and day better than the one in the A7CR?

I just compared size/resolution and magnification and supposed with the improvements in the newer A7c cams (II and R) the difference wouldn’t matter much. I am asking because I am about to decide between the A7c II and the A7 IV - tough decision! And I love the OVF and EVF in my X100V. Didn’t have a chance to try them last times I went to photography shops. I will definitely keep my Fuji. My comments regarding AF are those of a disappointed lover and we all know, these are the meanest…

ricktachtig said:

Locutus001 said:

I think overall the A7c series is the more powerful camera compared to the fuji. But in order to have that tiny form factor you'll need one of the lenses that have been made for that series... I'm using the 28-60mm because I wanted a small zoom. If I'm not using it for everyday stuff I can use it as a secondary camera for evens with my other sony lenses so that's a bonus you might enjoy if you are already comitted to the sony system. In my opinion that's a point for Sony. So the only reason not to get the Sony would be size together with lens if you plan on carrying it in your pocket. I cannot think of any other reason. (Price okay... but A7cII is cheaper thatn A7cR so you might reconsider ^^)

Click to expand...

Over here the price of the Sony A7CII with the 28-60 kitlens is 2499 euro's and the Fujifilm X100VI 1799 euro's. That's a 600 euro difference. Not sure about other places.
But a pretty significant difference in my opinion. So I think it's safe to say that price, size & weight are a plus for the X100VI. And a way better viewfinder, built in nd-filter, built in flash and the option to use film simulations. Depending of course if you need / use those.

The huge plus for the Sony A7CII / A7CR of course are the options to switch lenses, better sensor and better autofocus.

Click to expand...

Well... coming from my perspective - (I found the A7cII + 28-60mm lens for 2399 Euro btw and doing some negotiation ended up buying it for 2200 Euro) - the 600 Euro difference is not significant. (considering we are investing around 2000 Euro here).

Of course because I got the money. Since both are being considered by OP it is only natural to assume that the 600 Euro difference are not the main deciding point. But let me maybe explain my train of thought:

If you sell the camera again you are selling a more expensive camera for more money. If you plan on using the camera - and you already own the Sony system - you are investing into the same system rather than expanding into another system. With the fuji you cannot build on anything (as it is a fixed lens if I am not mistaken). From an "investment" point that's not a positive the way I see it.

size and weight - as I already mentioned - are the only real points in favor of the camera. I wouldn't consider weight being a real life issue though.

"Fujifilm X100VI has external dimensions of 128 x 75 x 55 mm (5.04 x 2.95 x 2.17″) and weighs 521 g (1.15 lb / 18.38 oz) (including batteries). Sony A7C Mark II has external dimensions of 124 x 71 x 63 mm (4.88 x 2.8 x 2.48″) and weighs 514 g (1.13 lb / 18.13 oz) (including batteries)." I guess the fuji already includes the lens so for the Sony lens we'll have to add Weight of 167g --> 681g. To be honest I don't think that a 200g difference is anything you'd notice in real life (in that case less than 200g).

Not sure about the built in ND filter to be honest. The built in flash is nice, but also very situational. With the high ISO values you can get with the Sony camera most of the time you probably just don't need a flash. But yeah if you really need a flash on hand all of the time that is a plus. (even though it is a "in your face" kind of flash ). The option to use film simulation in my opinion doesn't matter at all. That's what photo editing is for.

From what I have seen - and that has been an important point for me - the image quality of the fuji just isn't on par with the sony. The pictures look a bit mushy.

So I'll stick with what I said: Only thing of importance in favor of the fuji is the size.

DirkPeh said:

ricktachtig said:

I own the A7CR and the Fujifilm X100VI. The viewfinder is a night and day difference in daily use.

And I agree you can't compare them. That's what I already said earlier in the thread. I think they have totally different use cases. It's the same comparison. The one can change lenses and is big. The other is smaller but you are stuck with a 35mm f2.8 ff eq lens.

For regular use the autofocus is perfectly fine on the X100VI. Sony is of course way better if you do fast paced action. But that's not the use case for the X100 series. I've been shooting with the X100VI since launch and haven't had an out of focus shot.

Click to expand...

You find the VF of the X100VI night and day better than the one in the A7CR?

I just compared size/resolution and magnification and supposed with the improvements in the newer A7c cams (II and R) the difference wouldn’t matter much. I am asking because I am about to decide between the A7c II and the A7 IV - tough decision! And I love the OVF and EVF in my X100V. Didn’t have a chance to try them last times I went to photography shops. I will definitely keep my Fuji. My comments regarding AF are those of a disappointed lover and we all know, these are the meanest…

Click to expand...

Yes. I have to really jam my eye into the small viewfinder of the A7CR to have a good view while with the X100 is just easy to look through. The X100VI viewfinder is way more pleasant and easy on the eye to use in my experience.

If you are trying to decide between the A7CII and A7IV I would really try both in a store and compare how the viewfinder feels for you. Either way you are getting a great camera.

Locutus001 said:

ricktachtig said:

Locutus001 said:

I think overall the A7c series is the more powerful camera compared to the fuji. But in order to have that tiny form factor you'll need one of the lenses that have been made for that series... I'm using the 28-60mm because I wanted a small zoom. If I'm not using it for everyday stuff I can use it as a secondary camera for evens with my other sony lenses so that's a bonus you might enjoy if you are already comitted to the sony system. In my opinion that's a point for Sony. So the only reason not to get the Sony would be size together with lens if you plan on carrying it in your pocket. I cannot think of any other reason. (Price okay... but A7cII is cheaper thatn A7cR so you might reconsider ^^)

Click to expand...

Over here the price of the Sony A7CII with the 28-60 kitlens is 2499 euro's and the Fujifilm X100VI 1799 euro's. That's a 600 euro difference. Not sure about other places.
But a pretty significant difference in my opinion. So I think it's safe to say that price, size & weight are a plus for the X100VI. And a way better viewfinder, built in nd-filter, built in flash and the option to use film simulations. Depending of course if you need / use those.

The huge plus for the Sony A7CII / A7CR of course are the options to switch lenses, better sensor and better autofocus.

Click to expand...

Well... coming from my perspective - (I found the A7cII + 28-60mm lens for 2399 Euro btw and doing some negotiation ended up buying it for 2200 Euro) - the 600 Euro difference is not significant. (considering we are investing around 2000 Euro here).

Of course because I got the money. Since both are being considered by OP it is only natural to assume that the 600 Euro difference are not the main deciding point. But let me maybe explain my train of thought:

If you sell the camera again you are selling a more expensive camera for more money. If you plan on using the camera - and you already own the Sony system - you are investing into the same system rather than expanding into another system. With the fuji you cannot build on anything (as it is a fixed lens if I am not mistaken). From an "investment" point that's not a positive the way I see it.

size and weight - as I already mentioned - are the only real points in favor of the camera. I wouldn't consider weight being a real life issue though.

"Fujifilm X100VI has external dimensions of 128 x 75 x 55 mm (5.04 x 2.95 x 2.17″) and weighs 521 g (1.15 lb / 18.38 oz) (including batteries). Sony A7C Mark II has external dimensions of 124 x 71 x 63 mm (4.88 x 2.8 x 2.48″) and weighs 514 g (1.13 lb / 18.13 oz) (including batteries)." I guess the fuji already includes the lens so for the Sony lens we'll have to add Weight of 167g --> 681g. To be honest I don't think that a 200g difference is anything you'd notice in real life (in that case less than 200g).

Not sure about the built in ND filter to be honest. The built in flash is nice, but also very situational. With the high ISO values you can get with the Sony camera most of the time you probably just don't need a flash. But yeah if you really need a flash on hand all of the time that is a plus. (even though it is a "in your face" kind of flash ). The option to use film simulation in my opinion doesn't matter at all. That's what photo editing is for.

From what I have seen - and that has been an important point for me - the image quality of the fuji just isn't on par with the sony. The pictures look a bit mushy.

So I'll stick with what I said: Only thing of importance in favor of the fuji is the size.

Click to expand...

Sure. And that’s okay as well. For some people 200 grams more is a lot. Some people don’t care. For some people 600 euros is a lot of money. For some people that amount of money doesn’t matter. All comes down to your personal situation.

Same with film simulations. Some people want to edit their photos. Some people don’t want to spend time on that for every photo and just want to share a nice photo immediately with friends / family.

I think OP can take points out of all of our experiences.

Yannis1976 said:

Rod McD said:

Hi,

It doesn't seem that you've clearly identified your goals. The A7Cii or R can do everything the X100VI will do and some of them better (at the cost of being bigger, less pocketable and less affordable). The exceptions are that they don't offer the hybrid optical EVF and the Fuji film sims, either of which may or may not be significant in your thinking about this.

On the other hand simply liking a camera can be very important and get you using it. Bear in mind that a camera is just a tool for a purpose....

R

Click to expand...

For some it’s not just a tool… it needs to inspire you using it. So no matter how technically better the A7C range is over the X100V, at the end, someone could prefer using the X100.

Click to expand...

Yup. My Sony rig great and does things the Fuji never could, but my X100V is going nowhere. Love that camera.