New DSLR or Fuji XT1 mirrorless

[cameragirl426]

I have a D5000 Nikon that is about 5 years old and want to go to a fullframe but can only afford the Nikon D610 at the moment.

I have researched the Fuji XT1 and it looks amazing and easy to use and is in the same price range.

Please give me your thoughts. I have two wedding to shoot in the next couple of months and need to make a decision as to which to purchase.

 

[Mr Gadget]

Well then the MOD of the DX forum making the case that we need to move to FX. I guess that the Nikon strategy of pushing FX over DX is working. I wish Nikon had been more honest back in 2005 before I invested heavily in DX... sigh.

 

[Mako2011]

Well then the MOD of the DX forum making the case that we need to move to FX. I guess that the Nikon strategy of pushing FX over DX is working. I wish Nikon had been more honest back in 2005 before I invested heavily in DX... sigh.

Just plan to shoot both (I mod in Both APS-C and FF after all )...There really is pros and cons to each. I don't really have DX glass so it matters not so much. In any case...DX bodies are still the primary concentration for Nikon...in terms of numbers.

--
Conrad
---------------------------------------------------
Show Low, Arizona

--
My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

 

[wombat661]

I was thinking of "upgrading" to full frame and studied the matter quite a bit as it's not small expense.

I did a bit of studying and it turns out the issue is not that clear..

I found this video very helpful to me and I am posting it here for others to look at as well ...Everyone has their own ideas but this helped me decide against ff and avoid a costly mistake. Thought maybe you might find it helpful in making your decision.

The guy kept saying "not that much". Depends on what you call "not that much". From an ISO point of view, the area of a full frame sensor is 234% larger than APS-C. Because area is the square of the lengths. The increase in area is exponential.

ISO performance is proportional to the area of the sensor. Therefore, you gain 234% also in ISO performance. That is little over one stop going from APS-C to full frame if both cameras had the same resolution. Guess that to him is "not that much".

He is also kept comparing digital sensor with film. They are not 1:1 comparison. 35mm film at ISO 100 is only about 8MP of digital resolution. That is why you have to go up a lot in film to gain resolution, but with digital, you are already at 36MP for the D810. Digital camera sensors are greatly magnified compared to film. Misleading to use film size.

 

[stuntmonkey]

...

ISO performance is proportional to the area of the sensor. Therefore, you gain 234% also in ISO performance. That is little over one stop going from APS-C to full frame if both cameras had the same resolution. Guess that to him is "not that much".

Semantics: The gain is properly expressed as 134%, not 234%. However, everybody knows what everybody is talking about. Yes, 1-stop gain from DX to FX is not much today. It was back when ISO levels were lower and the prevalence of fast aperture and/or stabilized lenses weren't as pervasive. Or to put another way, back in the era of the D70, 1-EV gain was a big thing when you didn't push the camera past ISO 800, but now that the comfort point of DX is around ISO 1600 to 3200 (depending on preference)... and your lens is stabilizer or is a fast aperture... then the 1 extra stop makes proportionally less of a difference than it did in the past.

 

[stuntmonkey]

I have a D5000 Nikon that is about 5 years old and want to go to a fullframe but can only afford the Nikon D610 at the moment.

I have researched the Fuji XT1 and it looks amazing and easy to use and is in the same price range.

Please give me your thoughts. I have two wedding to shoot in the next couple of months and need to make a decision as to which to purchase.

Having tolled around with both the X-T1 and the OM-D E-M1, I would say that they are great cameras in their own right, but in key areas they fall short of a DSLR in fluid mission-critical shooting situations. Single-shot slow-moving subjects are okay, but the X-T1 is behind a DSLR when it comes to moving subjects. The ergonomics of the X-T1 are okay if you set it up to the way that you like it, but it's film-era style of manual controls is clunky to switch camera behaviour on the fly. Also be aware that there is no equivalent of the workhorse 70-200mm type of lens currently in Fuji's lineup. An X-T1 makes for a great secondary camera, but you will likely need something more spot-on if there's a lot of movement and if the environment is dynamic. For similar money, a D7100 is closer to the task at hand.

 

[Peter Jonas]

Well then the MOD of the DX forum making the case that we need to move to FX.

Unless I am seriously mistaken he is not making the case for the need to move to FX.

What he is saying that there are applications for which FX is inherently better suited.

If that applies to you is for you to consider. But even if it does, DX may still give you perfectly satisfying results.

I guess that the Nikon strategy of pushing FX over DX is working.

I also sense such efforts, but ever so slightly suttle. And I don't know it it's working, not for me anyway.

I wish Nikon had been more honest back in 2005 before I invested heavily in DX... sigh.

I don't think they could see that in their christal ball at the time. Thus it's not a matter of honesty at all.

I still firmly believe that DX is and will be good enough for about 80 percent of users. It is good enough for me as a hobbyist. I can definitely see better performancy by FX in certain conditions, but for now, I am happy to stay with DX.

 

[BirgerH]

First you do not consider another Nikon APS-C as an desirable upgrade, only a FX would be - then you are talking about the Fuji XT-1 - which is an APS-C.

Sorry that you found it confusing. My point was that after spending a long time in Nikon APS-C land, had I decided to stick to using a DSLR, the logical upgrade path would have been FX.

However, I mentioned that the size and weight constraint for DSLR (FX/DX) was something that made me take a step back and I came to the conclusion that a mirrorless ILC would be a natural choice going forwards and the Fuji XT-1, a good choice.

Hope that clarifies it

No - "taking a step back" and "going forward" - no I'm still confused

I can see, that mirrorless APS-C can be a (good) choise for some, but not in the same context as "a desirable upgrade has to be FX".

In my brain it made a Picture of bad advertisement.

BirgerH.

 

[BirgerH]

I guess I better watch the video again because about all I remember him demonstrating is there are different sized cameras and he knows how to hit things with a long thin stick.

Yeah - my thoughts too. I never got the idea with that video - except he showed the effect of enjoying rearly good Tobacco. That's not negligible

BirgerH.

 

[JohnNewman]

I have a D5000 Nikon that is about 5 years old and want to go to a fullframe but can only afford the Nikon D610 at the moment.

I have researched the Fuji XT1 and it looks amazing and easy to use and is in the same price range.

Please give me your thoughts. I have two wedding to shoot in the next couple of months and need to make a decision as to which to purchase.

Are you shooting these weddings as a professional and/or getting paid? If so, and you don't know the difference between a full frame dslr (of any brand) and an aps-c mirrorless camera, then I would be very worried if I was one of your clients.

If, however, you're a friend taking extra snaps, your D5000 will do a great job, especially with the right lenses and maybe a flash that you know how to use. The Fuji is an amazing camera although not for me as I have experience of the X-E1 and although I loved a lot about it I grew to dislike the X-trans sensor and EVF.

Assuming you have appropriate lenses already, I'd suggest looking at the D5300 as an upgrade (also assuming you're an amateur) or the D7100 which has more long term potential. If OTOH you are a professional, then I don't know what to say apart from learn the tools of your trade.

Good luck either way

John

 

[wombat661]

...

ISO performance is proportional to the area of the sensor. Therefore, you gain 234% also in ISO performance. That is little over one stop going from APS-C to full frame if both cameras had the same resolution. Guess that to him is "not that much".

Semantics: The gain is properly expressed as 134%, not 234%. However, everybody knows what everybody is talking about. Yes, 1-stop gain from DX to FX is not much today. It was back when ISO levels were lower and the prevalence of fast aperture and/or stabilized lenses weren't as pervasive. Or to put another way, back in the era of the D70, 1-EV gain was a big thing when you didn't push the camera past ISO 800, but now that the comfort point of DX is around ISO 1600 to 3200 (depending on preference)... and your lens is stabilizer or is a fast aperture... then the 1 extra stop makes proportionally less of a difference than it did in the past.

 

[Westmill]

I would get neither the D610 or XT1... I would buy the D7100

The XT1 would make a nice aswell