Canon M200 vs. Fujifilm X-A7

Do you think Canon M200 would have a better quality of the photos than Fujifilm X-A7?

86zzx wrote:

Do you think Canon M200 would have a better quality of the photos than Fujifilm X-A7?

Yes

@Dareshooter : can you please try to detail on that?

Depends upon what you are going to do with them. Put them on facebook, send them to friends by e-mail, look at them on a computer screen, make A4 prints, make poster size prints.

Let's take for example... putting them on Facebook. Is it a worth to upgrade to either of these from a Samsung Galaxy S10 for this scope?

They look to be pretty similar cameras. The sensors will be comparable. Picture quality will depend on the lens. The Canon appears to be cheaper, leaving you more money to buy a good lens.

You're more than welcome to contribute with any ideas or opinions.

...and for the following reasons. Now IQ-wise, their results should be similar, with the exception of the following:

1. Color tonality - every camera brand (to a certain degree) renders colors slightly different. Some brands may register a cooler photo result, while other brands will render colors with more warmth. In addition, some brands (shooting in JPG mode) will render reds with more of a orange look to it than pure red. Now if you shoot RAW, then it becomes a different scenario.

2. The Fuji line of cameras have exceptional dynamic range capabilities and have superb (clean) higher ISO capabilities. As much as I like the EOS M line of cameras, when it comes to scenarios requiring good DR capabilities, or darker scenarios where higher ISO's become important, then I always reach for my Fuji cameras - period...

On another front, the M200 does not have a hot shoe, meaning if you wanted more flash lighting capabilities, you will not be able to attach an external flash unit. The X-A series of Fuji cameras have the hot shoe, thus you'll be able to attach an external flash unit.

Look - my aforementioned comments are not a slight against the M200 at all. But as an avid user of both Canon EOS M and various Fujifilm cameras, the biggest differences between the two are the ones I alluded to above.

Now I don't have the X-A7 because I have the X-A5, but look at the following images taken with the X-A5 - the first one with an external flash, and the following two at ISO 12,800 and 6400 in JPG mode.

Now do note that these photos were taken in the expanded Adobe RGB 1992 color palette and depending on your monitor or browser, may look great - or in some cases, the colors may appear actually muted a bit.  This is the result you sometimes get with expanded color palettes/profiles.  On calibrated monitors with browsers capable of showcasing expanded color palettes, you'll love the colors.

Fuji X-A5 with kit 15-45 F3.5-5.6 IS PZ lens. Flash used was the Godox 860 Li-ion dedicated for Fuji in bounce mode, using the Gary Fong Lightsphere for balanced lighting. RAW, AWB, Aperture Priority Mode at ISO 800, F8 and 1/125 sec.

Don't let this bright lighting fool you as the actual conditions were very, very dim with the overhead lights turned down as in ballroom style. I had the X-A5 on Auto ISO (JPG mode) and it chose ISO 12,800, Aperture Priority Mode at F6.3 and 1/20 of a second. The photos surprised me because the conditions were quite dark.

Here's a scene before the banquet hall was filled and it was taken at ISO 6400 (JPG mode), Aperture Priority Mode at F6.3 and 1/40 of a second.

Ben, thank you very much for the details you shared.

One of my concerns is autofocus on X-A7. I see people complaining about that, and it's strange that regardless it has way more focus points than the M200, it seems that the Canon M200 has a very good autofocus in comparison with the Fujifilm X-A7.

Maybe people are wrong or maybe there's a need of a firmware update from Fujifilm, but this is what I see in other discussions/reviews.

Any of your thoughts/opinions would be very welcomed.

As a note, I'm far from an experienced photographer. I just want to upgrade from a Samsung Galaxy S10 smartphone to a cheap entry-level mirrorless camera(and stick with the kit lens, at least for some time). Hope that one of these cameras would be an upgrade though (and also the spent money would worth)

It all depends on what and how you judge AF on.  Now if you're into fast moving scenarios such as racing, sports, or animals moving quickly, then some of the older Fuji cameras aren't up to that task very well.  But they've gotten better to be sure and the X-A7 is a big step up.  I've always been enamored with the X-A series of cameras - ever since first obtained the X-A1, a 16 MP little wonder.  I think that Fuji does the bayer sensor quite well.

For general photography I find them to be superb for a number of reasons.  The X-A5, which I have, is a huge step up from the previous models (X-A1, X-A2, and X-A3).  The X-A7 is an improvement in a number of areas over the X-A5 from what I hear and read.  But since I'm not into video (as of yet), there's no need for me to acquire an X-A7.

And something that I didn't mention is the fact that Fuji is outstanding with regards to firmware updates.  They won't hesitate to release FW updates to both fix things and to also add more features.  I've seen them release FW updates for some cameras already 4-5 years out of production and that was to add some features - now go figure?

But the bottom line is that all camera brands make various models capable of netting you superb imagery.  Just settle on one and then focus on that brand and build your system.

Also - I should have spent a bit more time talking about the kit lens - XC 15-45 F3.5-5.6 IS PZ.  This is one of the lightest lenses I've ever seen and felt.  At first, you'd be thinking to yourself, "What in the hell is this cheap lens good for?"  Yes, it's all plastic to be sure.  Once you attach it to the camera and begin taking photos, you'll be shocked at the superb IQ levels this optic is capable of achieving.  More so, because of the 1.5x focal factor with Fuji APS-C cameras (as opposed to the 1.6x focal factor with Canon), that 15 MM is equivalent to 22.5 MM, which is substantial on the wide end.  I've never felt the need to attach a wide angle zoom while using the 15-45 - it's that good.  Yes, it's a power zoom lens (extends and closes upon turning the camera on and off), but hey...it's a kit lens. One good thing is that in the case of Fuji's entry level kit lenses (which begin with the XC designation), they are pretty good with copy to copy consistency.  I have two of the 15-45's and both are tack sharp from corner to corner.

Here are a few Fuji XC 15-45 F3.5-5.6 IS PZ images - taken with the X-A3, X-A5, and X-T100.

RAW, AWB, Aperture Priority mode, ISO 200, F6.3 at 1/300 sec.

RAW, AWB, Aperture Priority mode, ISO 200, F7.1 at 1/250 sec.

RAW, AWB, ISO 12,800, Aperture Priority Mode, F4.5 at 1/45 sec.  Note - what looks like noise in the shadows is snow (it was snowing light that evening).

RAW, AWB, ISO 800, Manual Mode, F4.5 at 1/60 sec.  External flash used was a Fuji EF-42 in bounce mode.

RAW, AWB, ISO 12,800, Aperture Priority Mode at F5.6 at 1/40th of a second.  The lighting was bad aboard this steam paddler river boat in Nashville, Tenn.  The show as great, but trying to capture the country/western performers as they were moving quickly was tough.

RAW, AWB, ISO 12,800, Aperture Priority Mode at F3.5 and 1/10 of a second.

86zzx wrote:

Do you think Canon M200 would have a better quality of the photos than Fujifilm X-A7?

No way José. Fuji kit lens & image management is something else

What about the autofocus? Would it be an advantage for the M200 the Digic 8 and the Dual Pixel Auto Focus?

Do you use Fuji? I doubt it, and if you do - tell me more. I don't talk about gear that I don't own - never have. I find the Fuji kit lenses superior, so I don't know what your very terse statement about kit lenses is all about.  It's so simple and quite half-assed to throw out comments about gear you've never owned.

No text.