Your precious and honest opinions about differences between Fujifilm and others (Sony, Canon, Nikon)

[unceunce]

I am not a professional just a hobby street shooter. A couple of thoughts.

1) why not rent some gear out to try it out, if you are so curious you should really try it or borrow from one of your friends

2) I have seen people use two systems - FF for their pro work, and then Fuji for fun. This can of course can get expensive. I prefer to keep things simple.

3) Fujifilm cameras can absolutely do professional work. Before I jumped into Fujifilm I seriously considered Sony Axxx. I was Canon DSLR and looking for something compact and mirrorless at the time was really starting to take off so I wanted to renew my love for photography again. I was ready to jump into Sony but then I decided, hey doesn't Fuji make cameras and looked them up. One of the biggest reasons I went with them is because I stumbled onto the Fuji X ambassadors who shoot professionally with Fuji and I was blown away by their results. That convinced me. my first Fujifilm camera was X-T2. I tried XT3 , GFX 50R and now i have X-E4 and X100V.

4) in the end, it's you as an individual to be comfortable with whatever tool you work with, and the photographer is the one that produces the work with their vision and skills and ability to take good photos.

That's my take on it!

 

[georgehudetz]

I was a long-time Fuji X shooter. Had the original X-Pro1 & X100. Then went through a X-T1/X-T2/X-H1 progression. Had many lenses.

I'm also a passionate (but not pro) Landscape photographer, and, more recently, astro.

About 2.5 years ago I switched from Fuji X to Panasonic FF (L-mount). S1R, S5, and more lenses than I like to admit.

I will say - the files I get from the S1R & associated lenses are in another class, from a detail perspective. Colors are great too (I was always a raw shooter and didn't use the OOC JPEGs, even when I was shooting Fuji).

And the lens selection, is, IMO, a better match for what I do. For me, there wasn't much in it from a weight perspective given that I was using the 8-16/16-55/50-140 lens trio with Fuji. Yes, the Panny "Pro" lenses are significantly heavier, but their non-pro lenses compare very well to the Fuji red-dot lenses from both a weight and an IQ perspective. But yet if I want even better IQ, it's there waiting for me, if I can accept the weight (and sometimes I do). Also, if I want to cut back on weight, I carry the S5/20-60/70-300. Still not nearly as light as a minimalistic Fuji X system, but it's light enough for me and still has very good IQ.

And yes, I like PASM. Works better for me.

So overall I'm super happy I switched. Even though I loved Fuji X.

Note that I'm not looking to pick a fight with Fuji X landscape shooters. It's mostly about composition and timing, anyway.

Cheers!

--
http://georgehudetzphotography.smugmug.com/
Capture One LUMIX FF feature request thread: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4658107#forum-post-66298057

 

[Jerry-astro]

Nice to see your post, George... wondered where you'd gone off to. Glad you've found a system that you like and that's working well for you. Cheers!

 

[georgehudetz]

Nice to see your post, George... wondered where you'd gone off to. Glad you've found a system that you like and that's working well for you. Cheers!

Thanks Jerry!

 

[GreatOceanSoftware]

The difference between a professional photographer and a photography enthusiast is how they make there living, not the equipment they use. Some professionals use very expensive equipment while others have more moderate equipment. You will find professional photographers using every brand. Some decided on the brad they use many years ago and as you have discovered once you have a lens collection, it becomes expensive to change so they stick with the brand also because they are facular with the cameras.

You will find Professional photographers posting on this forum that switched to Fuji for various reasons. There work is top notch and they are making a living and published regularly. My work has been published and I've won many contests. Photography has never been my primary income yet I've had offers that would have made my primary income photography. I've been using Fuji for 3 years after switching from Nikon to reduce the weight of my equipment after an injury. That has worked well for me. I shot film before digital and when digital SLRs came out they were all APS-C bodies. I liked the fact that my lenses got longer as I do a lot of wildlife work. I've tried full frame cameras and there is nothing magical about them. It is the person behind the camera that makes the biggest difference regarding photo quality.

You have been using Fuji gear and producing images that people like. How will changing your equipment change this?

Morris

I am happy with my equipments and Fujifilm brand in fact I just don't get it that photographers told people something but done another. If they love Fujifilm so much or if they think that nowadays aps-c cameras really close to ff cameras, why are

I don't see any problems about my photos but I am just really curious that if they keep having ff, is there a something that I am not seeing? that's why I wanted to ask you as you said, maybe they couldn't change their entire system as well. But I already hate hearing 'ff for work, Fujifilm for personal life'

I was a working aerial mapper/photographer for 22 years. If I was choosing equipment today, it would be Fujifilm GFX for work and X for personal use.

 

[JSalk53]

i have been using Sony since the A7R was introduced. I am now using the A7RIII and the A7R IV.
The A7RIII is probably my favorite camera of all time, but slow sensor readout and questionable weather sealing made me look elsewhere.

I purchased the X-H1 in 2019. I loved the colors right out of the camera. Fujifilm got the film simulations right. But the cost and the logistics of working with 2 camera systems was getting challenging and I reluctantly sold my Fujifilm system 3 months ago.

I just realized 3 weeks ago that my favorite pictures and colors came out of my long gone Fujifilm system.

This made me look at Fujifilm’s latest offering and realized that the X-H2S is the dream camera I was looking for all this time. With a stacked sensor, reasonable resolution and weather sealed body.

So, I now have the X-H2S with a 23mm 1.4 WR and a 56mm 1.2 WR.

I am not sold on the perceived advantages of full frame sensors. I tend to try to get my exposure right to begin with. Even if I want to lift shadows or highlights, I don’t need to push it too far.

I am actually in the process of selling a bunch of my full frame lenses and deciding on X plus GFX system. I am looking at the GFX100S as my landscape/portrait system, but haven’t made up my mind as yet.

This is not a Sony vs Fujifilm as I have been using Sony from 2014. I think Sony is great. It’s just my personal preferences have changed after all these years.

The X-H2S is a game changer for me.

 

[Canadianguy]

Why nobody speaks about one of most important thing, what makes Fuji system unique: color science, (skin tones) , film simulations +recipes

But then again.. I recently "discovered" Nikkor 58/1.4 G and I simply fall in love instantly. Rendering from this prime is most pleasing to my eyes, I've ever seen so far (and I've seen quite a lot). This lens is what starts me thinking about switching to Nikon for real.

So yeah, here You go: Fuji with superb color science, relatively small and light gear, unrealible AF (compared to Sony and Canon). Nikon with unique Nikkor 58/1.4 that is my top wanted lens right now Nice colors, small lens selection, good AF etc. Sony with crappy color science, but superior AF and absolutely domination in lens selection. Canon with very good color science, top notch AF, small lens selection (closed bayonet), and absurd prices. Panasonic? Not sure in terms of their future (same as Olympus, sorry OM Systems)

Superb colour science if you are a jpg shooter.

If you are a raw shooter - its all about the software you use.

For me - I am a multiple system user and raw shooter. Yes - there is a difference in the initial rendering by the software but I blame that on Adobe. You switch to Capture One - you will get a different look and another look if you go to another companies raw converter.

Here is my take - I use Fuji when I want small and light - pick a prime and be a hipster for a day. If the camera freezes up - no problem, take the battery out and reset it. If AF doesn't track - no problem, do some zone focusing. Have some fun with those retro dials.

When I am on a paid job - Nikon comes out with me - big heavy camera with the big zooms. I got no time for retro ISO dials and little shutter dials when I am working. I need all the controls at my thumb and finger tips without removing my eye from the viewfinder. I need speed and low light AF tracking.

Can I do paid jobs with the Fuji - sure - I just have to work twice as hard to get the same results.

Can I be a hipster with the Nikon - sure - if I switch to primes and work twice as hard to be a hipster.

Horses for courses.

 

[BeatX]

Why nobody speaks about one of most important thing, what makes Fuji system unique: color science, (skin tones) , film simulations +recipes

But then again.. I recently "discovered" Nikkor 58/1.4 G and I simply fall in love instantly. Rendering from this prime is most pleasing to my eyes, I've ever seen so far (and I've seen quite a lot). This lens is what starts me thinking about switching to Nikon for real.

So yeah, here You go: Fuji with superb color science, relatively small and light gear, unrealible AF (compared to Sony and Canon). Nikon with unique Nikkor 58/1.4 that is my top wanted lens right now Nice colors, small lens selection, good AF etc. Sony with crappy color science, but superior AF and absolutely domination in lens selection. Canon with very good color science, top notch AF, small lens selection (closed bayonet), and absurd prices. Panasonic? Not sure in terms of their future (same as Olympus, sorry OM Systems)

Superb colour science if you are a jpg shooter.

If you are a raw shooter - its all about the software you use.

For me - I am a multiple system user and raw shooter. Yes - there is a difference in the initial rendering by the software but I blame that on Adobe. You switch to Capture One - you will get a different look and another look if you go to another companies raw converter.

Here is my take - I use Fuji when I want small and light - pick a prime and be a hipster for a day. If the camera freezes up - no problem, take the battery out and reset it. If AF doesn't track - no problem, do some zone focusing. Have some fun with those retro dials.

When I am on a paid job - Nikon comes out with me - big heavy camera with the big zooms. I got no time for retro ISO dials and little shutter dials when I am working. I need all the controls at my thumb and finger tips without removing my eye from the viewfinder. I need speed and low light AF tracking.

Can I do paid jobs with the Fuji - sure - I just have to work twice as hard to get the same results.

Can I be a hipster with the Nikon - sure - if I switch to primes and work twice as hard to be a hipster.

Horses for courses.

Very well said Could not agree more. Your post is basically summary, what is Fujifilm APSC system, compared to top dogs like Sony/Canon/Nikon.

PS. Sony A7III skin tones sux, no matter how hard I was trying edit RAW in C1 to get them look at least somewhat close to Fuji or Canon I heard, that finally in A7IV Sony fix color science, but I heard also that someone have seen living myrmind in open sea..

 

[ntrongd]

Many people I know say that they have difficulties processing Fuji's RAW file, so they don't use it for works. Don't know what difficulties in detail though.

 

[nemendes]

Many people I know say that they have difficulties processing Fuji's RAW file, so they don't use it for works. Don't know what difficulties in detail though.

I heard it from some photographers as well and dont know why too. I was curious about myth that everyone loves fujifilm but beside gfx system, very very few people use aps-c system of fujifilm for professional work

As precious opinions were written here, maybe that myth is because of having other system long before and changing is costly and harder, or because of raw files or smth else.

Thanks to all you, i made my mind up i will keep my fujifilm system and if i wanna go to higher levels, i think i ll keep having fuji as well like wonderful gfx system

 

[a_c_skinner]

Higher levels are about the one thing that it is cheap but difficult to upgrade - the photographer.

 

[PROval]

7 year ago I switched from Canon FF to Fuji X-T10, then to X-T2 because I wanna more compact solution. 5DIII was very easy to live with it camera except it was bulky and heavy. Good colors, minimal postprocessing, no problems with lightroom..After switching to Fuji it was struggling - more compact and easy to grab, but to much compromises - 18-55 kit lens has optical problems, colors looks strange after Canon (RAW only, no jpeg), worms issue which forced to switch from LR to C1, poor battery life. Year ago I changed 18-55 to 16-80 and again - not perfect at all. Week ago I have bought Sony AIV with 24-105 and felt like in old good days again, felt like a cheater - you have very good colors and sharpness straight from the camera, little to no adjustments in LR, easy to export form LR to PS or DxO, perfect autofocus, good low light performance - no headache. Yes, Sony a little bigger than Fuji, but total difference in weight for camera and two comparable lenses is like 200 gr..So at the moment I can't see to much reasons to go with APS-C camera..

 

[Jose Rocha]

But then again.. I recently "discovered" Nikkor 58/1.4 G and I simply fall in love instantly. Rendering from this prime is most pleasing to my eyes, I've ever seen so far (and I've seen quite a lot). This lens is what starts me thinking about switching to Nikon for real.

That is my favourite lens ever. I used it on a D700. I had ready a whole thread about it on FredMiranda forum and Photography Life's review, and fell in love as well. Sold 2 lenses to get that one.

Unfortunately I sold it later to fund my entry into the Sony mirrorless system, which I deeply regret. I could be using Nikon Z right now if I kept that lens with me. I made incredible photos of my baby son back then, with a look that I haven't been able to re-create ever since with any other lens.

 

[a_c_skinner]

You have highlighted what I think is Fuji's most trying problem with is a "standard" zoom. Some people report both those lenses as excellent, others repeat your experience. Some examples of the 18-55 are reported as not very good at all, but many early reviews said as a kit zoom it was peerless.

 

[RobertLysakowski]

I am sure all brands can do now the same things. What attracts me to Fuji is retro style with dials available (XT and XPRO line) and value for money. Film simulations are another thing which sets Fuji apart, if you're into this kind of things.

 

[Jose Rocha]

I came to a Canon R6 after having a X-T3 for about a year and half. I used the X-T3 as a JPEG shooter, and this is where Fuji shines the most.

But I was never impressed with the AF accuracy even with static subjects, much less with moving ones. I'm very curious to try an X-T5, I'd love to have one if the AF improves considerably. If that happens maybe I'll be back to Fuji.

Things that I miss on Fujifilm: JPEG simulations, form factor, all the dials, the build quality of body and lenses, those tiny f/2 lenses, the flip screen.

Things that I will miss if I sell my Canon: the superlative AF accuracy, the speed and quietness of the nano-USM lenses, JPEG quality even at very high ISO, JPEG rendering of fine details, the ergonomics, seamless shooting with cheap EF lenses, the image stabilization.

Things that I don't miss on Fujifilm: the AF false positives, the ergonomics, the "clunk" that is heard when switching between shooting and playback modes with certain lenses.

Things that I will not miss if I sell my Canon: build quality of the cheaper lenses, the continuous release of slow lenses both in AF speed and aperture, the continuous release of optically very underdesigned lenses at the price of well corrected lenses (except maybe the 16mm which is very cheap), the sky-high price of L lenses. My RF 24-70 L is a superb lens and I bought it because I use it 90% of the time, but I cannot even dream of getting that new RF 135mm (for me the difference in price between this and its EF antecessor doesn't make any sense). Also the lack of third-party options that amateurs like me can buy.

All in all, I think it makes most sense to me to come back to Fujifilm, but I have high expectations regarding AF after using the R6. I will wait until the moment is right.

 

[Dennis]

I am happy with my equipments and Fujifilm brand in fact I just don't get it that photographers told people something but done another. If they love Fujifilm so much or if they think that nowadays aps-c cameras really close to ff cameras, why are they saying every time that 'for professional work ff, for myself fujifilm'?

I'm not sure who is supposedly saying what, exactly. If you're talking about so-called "influencers" on youtube, they're trying to make a buck drawing views to their videos, so who cares what they say ? To the extent one of them is competent and honest, it could very well be that they use and like one FF brand, but acknowledge that Fuji is excellent, too. Just because they review a camera they like doesn't mean they should go out and switch brands.

And maybe that's what your friends are trying to tell you: they like things about FF systems better, but that doesn't mean you should go out and switch.

I just switched from APS-C to FF. Why ? Not for IQ (I used an XS10 for over a year and the IQ was all I'd ever need). But because I like carrying as few lenses as possible and Nikon's 24-200 is an excellent compromise that covers the range used in 90% of my photos. Does that mean anything to you ? No! It shouldn't. I don't shoot anything for money and you wouldn't use a 24-200 for your pro work. My point is: stop worrying about what anyone else uses.

A lot of pros appreciate f/2.8 zooms on FF bodies and what those lenses can do. If you're not finding any shortcomings with your kit, who cares what they use.

 

[BeatX]

But then again.. I recently "discovered" Nikkor 58/1.4 G and I simply fall in love instantly. Rendering from this prime is most pleasing to my eyes, I've ever seen so far (and I've seen quite a lot). This lens is what starts me thinking about switching to Nikon for real.

That is my favourite lens ever. I used it on a D700. I had ready a whole thread about it on FredMiranda forum and Photography Life's review, and fell in love as well. Sold 2 lenses to get that one.

Unfortunately I sold it later to fund my entry into the Sony mirrorless system, which I deeply regret. I could be using Nikon Z right now if I kept that lens with me. I made incredible photos of my baby son back then, with a look that I haven't been able to re-create ever since with any other lens.

 

[Canadianguy]

You have highlighted what I think is Fuji's most trying problem with is a "standard" zoom. Some people report both those lenses as excellent, others repeat your experience. Some examples of the 18-55 are reported as not very good at all, but many early reviews said as a kit zoom it was peerless.

Compared to other kit zooms - it was peerless.

Compared to other pro grade zoom lenses - it was wanting.

 

[PROval]

Fuji has it's own vision and own measurements. If you shot with the same settings (ISO, exposure, apperture) for Sony A7IV and Fuji X-T2, image from Fuji will be a lot darker. I compared Fujinon 16-80 vs Sony 24-105, where FOV at the widest FL should be the same, but Sony at 24 wider than Fuji at 16 (and Sony IQ advantage is huge). The same with Viltrox 13mm 1.4 (19.5 FF equivalent) compare to Sony 20mm 1.8, Sony has wider FOV. Sony 20mm sharper and brighter at 1.8 with A7IV than Viltrox at 1.4 with X-T2. Of course travel zoom form Sony+wide lens combo will be more expensive, but at the same time they comparable at weight and dimensions with equal lenses from Fuji, where IQ with Sony lenses is noticeable higher.