Why did you decide to buy Fuji apsc over micro 4/3?

[Last Mango]

Perhaps. But overall, the brand and format awareness seems to be in the toilet. M43 has to get back in the conversation in order to survive or make people choose them. The already-converted will not save the format. So, Fuji and APS-C, right now, seem to be healthy, exciting, and certainly providing an upgrade path. M43? Not so much.

Hm, it depends.

I have been using fujifilm APS-C for years, and only recently got into MFT. The reason? I was frustrated by the direction that Fujifilm has gone down in the recent years.

They used to be a staple of street photography cameras with a smaller package, and smaller lenses than full frame / DSLR systems. Nowadays, this doesn't hold true. All the recent Fujifilm lenses that have been released are either big and large (for what they are) or smaller but niche (like the 8mm f/3.5 or the 30mm macro).

If you want a pancake lens, you only have one option in the 27mm f/2.8, which is now overpriced everywhere you look at. The 18mm f/2 could do, but it's much larger, and just as expensive.

Recent camera releases aren't too exciting either, last one that gave me a little bit of interest was the X-T5, and even that one I fould was substantially deeper and harder to pack than my old X-T2.

I own(ed) both the X-T2 and X-T5, and never once thought that the X-T5 was substantially deeper…you made me check, yes the grip is a about a 1/2 inch deeper, but still very small footprint…I guess that I am used to full frame and medium format where the size differences are dramatic, especially the lenses. You must really be packing tight!

 

[MJ_Photo38]

Perhaps. But overall, the brand and format awareness seems to be in the toilet. M43 has to get back in the conversation in order to survive or make people choose them. The already-converted will not save the format. So, Fuji and APS-C, right now, seem to be healthy, exciting, and certainly providing an upgrade path. M43? Not so much.

Hm, it depends.

I have been using fujifilm APS-C for years, and only recently got into MFT. The reason? I was frustrated by the direction that Fujifilm has gone down in the recent years.

They used to be a staple of street photography cameras with a smaller package, and smaller lenses than full frame / DSLR systems. Nowadays, this doesn't hold true. All the recent Fujifilm lenses that have been released are either big and large (for what they are) or smaller but niche (like the 8mm f/3.5 or the 30mm macro).

If you want a pancake lens, you only have one option in the 27mm f/2.8, which is now overpriced everywhere you look at. The 18mm f/2 could do, but it's much larger, and just as expensive.

Recent camera releases aren't too exciting either, last one that gave me a little bit of interest was the X-T5, and even that one I fould was substantially deeper and harder to pack than my old X-T2.

I own(ed) both the X-T2 and X-T5, and never once thought that the X-T5 was substantially deeper…you made me check, yes the grip is a about a 1/2 inch deeper, but still very small footprint…I guess that I am used to full frame and medium format where the size differences are dramatic, especially the lenses. You must really be packing tight!

As it happens... yes.

When moving around I either have a backpack or a sling bag. If I have a backpack, that means I'm backpacking somewhere, and the bag will be filled with clothing, some food, water ect and the volume allocated to cameras is generally limited

Same goes for a sling bag on a more casual trip, I generally wander around with a 6L bag, which hold my camera, lenses and spare batteries, but also water bottle, glasses, phone, wallet. The X-T2 fits, the X-T5 didn't when I tried it in a store, so that was a deal breaker. Not saying the X-T2 is a comfortable fit though. It's pretty damn snug in there, sometimes too close for comfort.

Now my travel cam is an Olympus E-M5 II, which not only leaves a lot more room, but allows me to carry one more lens (which are also smaller)

 

[Stan Powers]

I like and use both. Cameras are cheap. Life is short. Why limit the fun?

 

[Leicalika]

Caution; Olympus has convoluted menu.

 

[mahidoes]

Sensor size.

when i was doing research MFT wasn't giving neither cost or size advantage compared to APS-C

This can become true in some time when comparing APS-C and full frame.

 

[MJ_Photo38]

Sensor size.

when i was doing research MFT wasn't giving neither cost or size advantage compared to APS-C

This can become true in some time when comparing APS-C and full frame.

Looking at camera bodies, yes. Most of the smaller-ish MFT bodies are in the same kind of size category as Fujifilm mid range cameras like the X-Tx0 and X-E series.

However, I would argue that the difference becomes a LOT bigger when looking at lenses.

There are some really compact and small lenses in MFT mount, lenses we simply have no equivalents of in Fuji X mount (like the 35-100 which is approx the size of a 35mm f/2 on Fuji, the 12-32 or 14-42 pancake zooms that are about teh same size as the 27 f/2.8. Also if you do a size normalized comparison, you generally get more in the same package on MFT : a 40-150 f/2.8 Pro Olympus lens is about the size of a Fuji 55-200, the Panasonic Lumix 35-100 f/2.8 is about the same size as the Fuji 18-55)

There's a lot of small pancake prime lenses as well : 14mm f/2.5, 17mm f/2.8, 20mm f/1.7, the two f/8 body cap lenses (9mm and 15mm)... whereas Fujifilm only has the 27mm f/2.8 and that's about it (even the 18mm f/2 is considerably larger and on the verge of not being considered a pancake lens anymore).

Even going outside of straight up "pancakes", you can get very compact lenses relative to their equivalent focal length, like the 12mm f/2, 17mm f/1.8, 45mm f/1.8, 42.5mm f/1.7, 75mm f/1.8 etc.

And on top of that, even if they're older bodies, you can get a substantilly smaller package by going with a small MFT body like an Olympus PEN E-PL or PM series, Lumix GF1 to 7, GM1 or GM5 or GX850/880.

I can understand the cost complaint... but even then, coming from a Fujifilm system this is pretty funny as Fujifilm lenses are notoriously expensive compared to most MFT equivalents, and the same goes for cameras (short of a few super-hyped products like the GM5)

I found that there was way less of a size differnece between my Nikon Z6 and Fuji X-T2 than there was between my X-T2 and Olympus E-M5 mark II.

I love (and use) all 3 cameras for different reasons.

 

[Mr Bolton]

@Mr Bolton - if you truly believed that the ZF autofocus is "equal to any Sony" than you haven't shot the right Sonys.

It might be equal to Sony bodies of perhaps 4+ years ago.

Zero percent chance it could be the equal of an A9III. Much more attractive to be sure but not in the same league AF wise.

So you're saying that a $2000 enthusiast level cam doesn't have as fast of AF as a $6,500 flagship? Wow, gee, the Zf must be trash then... /s

You're being delusional if you think the Zf is only as good as an A7III / A7RIII.

AF wise, it's at least as good as the A7C/ A7RIV / A7IV. Which itself isn't that far from the newest bodies with the AI chip.

At any case, the difference is minor.

The A9 is from 2017!

Used they are barely over $1K. Insanely good deal for a high performance former flagship.

I have been known to be delusional but thinking a Zf could keep pace with an A9III would truly be delusional.

You're right though - it's just the A9 that would be better than the Zf, not the A7 bodies of that era.

Not to dis the A9.. but come on. 2017 vs 2022-that's a big jump in CPU power for every make of camera. The EVF is the same resolution, the A9 rear panel has 1.44m dots versus Zf 2.1m dots; the A9 doesn't have subject detect (cars, animals, etc) and that 20fps is throttled to 10fps with adapted lenses, if you want autofocus. At least the Zf's top speed can still deliver full RAW files, not the noisy compressed RAWs that Sony insists upon for fast bursts from cameras of the A9's era.

You're right-the Zf isn't quite as fast as Sony's pro level A9 body-$4500USD when introduced-or nearly as fast as a $6,500 A9III. For a third of the price, you do however get a full stop more dynamic range. Which for most of us is a lot more useful than being able to sync a flash to 1/80,000sec. (That is an amazing feature, don't get me wrong).

Nikon's 3D tracking (which the Zf gets thanks to its new processor) has been around since before Sony was widely known for its AF prowess; and Nikon still has better colors, ergos, and menus. Especially when comparing new Nikon to Sony of the past.

If you need cheap speed then the A9 is a good option, but if not then the Zf is a better option. BONUS: You can adapt all those Sony lenses to it, also. And Nikon doesn't throttle the AF speed when you do.

I might add that the A9 is great if you *need* 20fps... but as someone that shoots sports, I find the 12fps in my Z6 to be plenty fast already, nt to mention the fact that the Zf does 14.... which is the same as a Canon 1DX mark II ! That was bloody fast when it was released, and in my opinion it still is today, no matter how that burs rate arm's race goes.

Agreed. My X-H1 tops out at 11fps mechanical, and I've used that maybe a half a dozen times. You end up spending far too much time separating the wheat from the chaff. It will do 14fps in e-shutter but I've never tried it.

I think a lot of the super high speed burst stuff is mostly just to look good on paper. I'm not saying it isn't useful to a subset of shooters, because it is. However I think it sells cameras to people who won't really ever need/use it.

I'm impressed by the latest gen subject recognition of pretty much all the makers.

My circle of friends is a diverse group - Nikon, Canon, Leica and me mostly shooting Sony. When we shoot the Blues - the speed difference is evident.

The AF of the A9 series - even as old as it is works better than most and the stacked sensor benefits are real if you shoot anything that moves or moves fast in particular. There are certainly exceptions to the rule. I'm a mediocre photographer so I'll take all the help I can get.

Somebody like Morris can probably take great BIF shots with a pinhole camera.

I've got fun shots of the Blue Angels with the X-T1 and 2 so they are fully capable but never got shots like this at the exact crossing moment by getting 20-30 FPS.

Not everyone needs it but I use it all the time for dogs too. Getting that moment when all four paws are off the ground is super easy with a high frame rate camera.

I volunteer shoot for a dog rescue group and it's nice to almost never miss a shot.

Your money statements are confusing me. I offer the A9 as a cheap and capable option at $1K with better AF than the Zf. AI subject recognition is fine - the A7RV has the latest AI trained recognition but that doesn't make it superior in AF.

The A7RV is also a.. $3898 camera.. Just short of two Zfs.

You can get a clean used OM-1 with subject recognition for about $1K now which is pretty impressive with the right glass.

I already have some M43 gear and I quite enjoy it. Have shot it since 2011, so I am familiar with its good and bad points.

Your claim of the Zf being equal to any Sony is just not 100% true and you didn't stipulate anything regarding price.

Except for the part where I specifically mentioned a $2k Zf maybe not being as good as an A9III. I'm talking $2k Zf or $2500 Z6III. Yeah: The $6500 Sony A9III is probably going to have better autofocus. Granted. I mean.. I sure would hope so for three times the asking price of the Zf, right?

Conveniently for the sake of our little discussion the folks at Photography Life recently published this piece.

https://photographylife.com/comparison/sony-a9-vs-nikon-zf

The TL;DR summary:

You say my money statements are confusing, then bring in the A9III and A7RV-both far more expensive than the Zf.

<Summary and Recommendations

On paper, these two cameras are fairly similar in a lot of ways. They’ve got about the same resolution of 24MP, and they’re both higher-end cameras. But they have quite a few differences two. Although the Nikon Zf certainly has capable autofocus, it doesn’t have the a9’s stacked sensor. So while the Zf incorporates some of the newer autofocus developments from the newer Nikon Z9 and Z8, it will not be as fast as the a9. In terms of pure autofocus capabilities, I would still trust the a9 over the Zf.>

Those are great pics, BTW. However I've seen pics like these from a variety of systems dating back well into the mirrored DSLR era. I just don't think a guy can only get them with Sony AF.

I'm kinda over the whole "Sony AF. Buy a Sony because nothing else has as good of AF." business. Three years ago, yes. Today? Sorry, not buying it anymore. I don't think I'm the only Fujian who's also kinda sick of it.

Maybe I don't want to shoot a Sony. That might be why I've had Fuji for a decade. Also, the A9 is more like $12-1400 on eBay right now, for a used six year old A9 with no warranty beyond the return period provided by the seller.

I just bought a used Zf for $1630 and if I want more lenses (than already available in native Z, of which there are quite a few), I'll adapt from Sony. I've had a difficult time forcing an out of focus shot on a Zf in the times I've used one, while friend's A7C hunted notably. It got the shot after a couple tries, but it wasn't the flawless experience we're told is 100 percent of the Sony AF situation.

TL;DR: Thanks, but no thanks. I don't want to buy a Sony.

 

[Mr Bolton]

A9 mechanical: 5fps

Zf mechanical:14fps

Zf has 10 bit video, deep learning AF; non-compressed NEFs at its maximum shooting speed, which is just 6fps slower than an A9. And at that faster speed you get noisy compressed RAWs.

I never shoot e-shutter but occasionally do bursts. I think 14fps is faster than 5fps, and 2023 facial recognition AF might be better than 2017.

Also regarding the Photography Life review.. yeah, a Sony shooter from the place where Sony is the cheapest (often by like $1000 in his local currency) versus just about any other camera.. might recommend Sony over others. His spec chart however, sure does have a whole lot more green segments in favor of the newer camera though.

Like I said before: if you need cheap speed, the A9 is a good option. If you want a more versatile camera with newer tech all around, the Zf is a better option.

Spend your money in the right place, in the first place. That's not necessarily on a camera at the end of its service/firmware update life from its manufacturer.

 

[Miles_H]

Film Simulation.

 

[Miles_H]

Sensor size.

when i was doing research MFT wasn't giving neither cost or size advantage compared to APS-C

This can become true in some time when comparing APS-C and full frame.

Looking at camera bodies, yes. Most of the smaller-ish MFT bodies are in the same kind of size category as Fujifilm mid range cameras like the X-Tx0 and X-E series.

However, I would argue that the difference becomes a LOT bigger when looking at lenses.

There are some really compact and small lenses in MFT mount, lenses we simply have no equivalents of in Fuji X mount (like the 35-100 which is approx the size of a 35mm f/2 on Fuji, the 12-32 or 14-42 pancake zooms that are about teh same size as the 27 f/2.8. Also if you do a size normalized comparison, you generally get more in the same package on MFT : a 40-150 f/2.8 Pro Olympus lens is about the size of a Fuji 55-200, the Panasonic Lumix 35-100 f/2.8 is about the same size as the Fuji 18-55)

There's a lot of small pancake prime lenses as well : 14mm f/2.5, 17mm f/2.8, 20mm f/1.7, the two f/8 body cap lenses (9mm and 15mm)... whereas Fujifilm only has the 27mm f/2.8 and that's about it (even the 18mm f/2 is considerably larger and on the verge of not being considered a pancake lens anymore).

Even going outside of straight up "pancakes", you can get very compact lenses relative to their equivalent focal length, like the 12mm f/2, 17mm f/1.8, 45mm f/1.8, 42.5mm f/1.7, 75mm f/1.8 etc.

And on top of that, even if they're older bodies, you can get a substantilly smaller package by going with a small MFT body like an Olympus PEN E-PL or PM series, Lumix GF1 to 7, GM1 or GM5 or GX850/880.

I can understand the cost complaint... but even then, coming from a Fujifilm system this is pretty funny as Fujifilm lenses are notoriously expensive compared to most MFT equivalents, and the same goes for cameras (short of a few super-hyped products like the GM5)

I found that there was way less of a size differnece between my Nikon Z6 and Fuji X-T2 than there was between my X-T2 and Olympus E-M5 mark II.

I love (and use) all 3 cameras for different reasons.

 

[MJ_Photo38]

I wish I could disagree. To be fair, I haven't hugely participated in the M43 scene lately, as in the forums, so I can't really gauge the overall level of enthusiasm. But at least my local bricks and mortar stores still have them.

I think the mian problem with micro four thirds nowadays is that they really only focus on the high end, and somewhat niche segments.

All the recent and modern MFT cameras are basically full frame mirrorless sized (G9ii, GH7, OM-1), and the few models that are not are basically last gen tech (OM-5, E-P7, G100, G90...), and the new models are pretty much all niche cameras where the smaller sensor makes sense even if the package size doesn't shrink (high end video, sports / wildlife or bit of both).

To me the real advantage of MFT cameras is really the small footprint of their small camera bodies paired with their small lenses (primes or zooms). The market has shown that there is a demand for smaller cameras, but the fact is that neither brands invested in MFT cameras at the moment have those on their catalogue.

Even decently recent MFT cameras like the GX9 are not sold anymore, and all recent micro 4/3 lens release has been super telephotos, sometimes even full frame lenses with a rebadge on it.

To me, neither brand has been able to read the room correctly. There is a market for MFT cameras, but no one is filling it. Wildlife shooters are super happy, so are high end video enthusiasts. Everyone else goes to other systems it feels like.

I also really enjoy the Micro Four Nerds channel on YouTube she's adorable.

I will admit, her youtube channel is part of the reason why I picked up an Oly E-M5ii recently !

But her channel also made me realize the potential in MFT : they used to have so many small tiny cameras ! Today it feels like you can choose your sensor size, but it has no impact on the actual size of the camera...

 

[Marko_Stu]

I was using Panasonic mft cameras, starting with the LX100 and then moving to separate bodies and lenses. In the end the low low light performance was not sufficient for moving objects when the light is not that great. IBIS does not help in this case and I had too many blurry images.

FF would be to large, heavy and expensive, thus i chose Fujifilm. After managing shooting my X-T3 without IBIS and mostly using primes (without OIS) I will soon check out Fuji combined with IBIS in form of my soon to arrive X-T5.

Also I did enjoy the aperture rings on my Panas, thus Sony (FF or APS-C) and suchlike was out of the question.

EDIT: I just looked it up and I have been using my X-T3 since beginning of 2019, i.e., for 5 1/2 years. I had an X100f, an X-E3 and briefly also an X-H1 as secondary bodies for special vacations but the X-T3 always was my main camera.

Before that I bought my first interchangeable camera by Panasonic End of 2017, so it took about 1 1/2 years to switch to Fuji (using various Panasonic bodies and lenses). Even before that I bought the my LX100 in mid 2015, thus 2 1/2 years to change to an interchangeable lens camera. And even before that I bought an LX3 in 2011, which was flattened by a weight being dropped on about 2013/2014.

 

[Sam in Hawaii]

I wish I could disagree. To be fair, I haven't hugely participated in the M43 scene lately, as in the forums, so I can't really gauge the overall level of enthusiasm. But at least my local bricks and mortar stores still have them.

I think the mian problem with micro four thirds nowadays is that they really only focus on the high end, and somewhat niche segments.

All the recent and modern MFT cameras are basically full frame mirrorless sized (G9ii, GH7, OM-1), and the few models that are not are basically last gen tech (OM-5, E-P7, G100, G90...), and the new models are pretty much all niche cameras where the smaller sensor makes sense even if the package size doesn't shrink (high end video, sports / wildlife or bit of both).

To me the real advantage of MFT cameras is really the small footprint of their small camera bodies paired with their small lenses (primes or zooms). The market has shown that there is a demand for smaller cameras, but the fact is that neither brands invested in MFT cameras at the moment have those on their catalogue.

Even decently recent MFT cameras like the GX9 are not sold anymore, and all recent micro 4/3 lens release has been super telephotos, sometimes even full frame lenses with a rebadge on it.

To me, neither brand has been able to read the room correctly. There is a market for MFT cameras, but no one is filling it. Wildlife shooters are super happy, so are high end video enthusiasts. Everyone else goes to other systems it feels like.

I also really enjoy the Micro Four Nerds channel on YouTube she's adorable.

I will admit, her youtube channel is part of the reason why I picked up an Oly E-M5ii recently !

But her channel also made me realize the potential in MFT : they used to have so many small tiny cameras ! Today it feels like you can choose your sensor size, but it has no impact on the actual size of the camera...

I totally agree with this. The real charm is in the small, full-featured, rugged, affordable cameras Olympus used to make.

 

[liggy]

Regarding the potential move to Nikon, I am considering it as well. The Zf is fast enough for anything I'll ever do, even professionally, and its AF goes toe to toe with anything Sony ever made.

This was your reference to AF. Nothing regarding price.

If you don’t want to shoot Sony - bully for you. I’d be interested in a Z9 or Z9 but they are both too big for my tastes. Nikon has things Fuji could really use in their tele lens lineup that in the tele range but I don’t think Fuji is really going to go hard after that segment of the market.

And for the record - the A7RV is easily available under $3K new from Greentoe. US models w Full warranty from authorized dealers.

I’m not even sure why you are listing the mechanical shutter speed of the A9. I and most stacked sensor shooters rarely use MS. I’ve probably got 100,000 shots on my A1 and 1,200 of them are MS. Most of those were just accidents.

Thanks for the kind words on my pic - tbh I’m sure anyone with skill could get better results. It’s the ease of getting shots like that with a superior af/fps kit is really nice if that is the kind of thing you want to shoot so even a non-pro shooter such as myself can easily get cool shots at just the right moment,

To get back on topic:

OP - I chose Fuji over m4/3 for the dials and the retro aesthetic and disliked the menus and controls of the Oly cameras when I started the mirrorless journey. They just felt better and were more engaging than anything else.

The killer film sims are a nice bonus too.

 

[Owlsfan]

I chose m43 over Fuji although I am looking at fuji because I don't have an aps-c camera and would like one.

M43 always had the draw for me mostly because of the Olympus pro lenses that nobody had a bad word to say about and that were relatively affordable.

Fuji has always been a mystery to me. I know a lot about M43, Sony and Nikon bodies and lenses.

I know a little bit about Canon. But when I look at fuji bodies and lenses on sites like mpb I just have no idea what I'm looking at or for.

M43 and Nikon full frame and aps-c just seemed to have lenses that jumped out at me and it was easy to find out if they were sharp or not.

But I just have never got familiar with Fuji for some reason.

 

[Maoby]

It's never too late to do the right thing :-D

 

[Mr Bolton]

Regarding the potential move to Nikon, I am considering it as well. The Zf is fast enough for anything I'll ever do, even professionally, and its AF goes toe to toe with anything Sony ever made.

This was your reference to AF. Nothing regarding price.

Excepting the A9III, which I should have noted so you got me there-I stand behind what I said. This isn't 2019 anymore, and the rest of the camera world has largely caught up to Sony in the AF department.

BTW: per the Photography Life article you mention.. A9 AF -3.5EV; Zf -8EV. So the Zf (and any other new Nikon) is going to focus better than your A9. Especially in the low light concerts that are my bread and butter.

If you don’t want to shoot Sony - bully for you. I’d be interested in a Z9 or Z9 but they are both too big for my tastes. Nikon has things Fuji could really use in their tele lens lineup that in the tele range but I don’t think Fuji is really going to go hard after that segment of the market.

And for the record - the A7RV is easily available under $3K new from Greentoe. US models w Full warranty from authorized dealers.

I’m not even sure why you are listing the mechanical shutter speed of the A9. I and most stacked sensor shooters rarely use MS. I’ve probably got 100,000 shots on my A1 and 1,200 of them are MS. Most of those were just accidents.

Mechanical shutter is a boon when you're shooting in flickery, low quality LED lighting. Which I very often am. So that's why I mention it.

Thanks for the kind words on my pic - tbh I’m sure anyone with skill could get better results. It’s the ease of getting shots like that with a superior af/fps kit is really nice if that is the kind of thing you want to shoot so even a non-pro shooter such as myself can easily get cool shots at just the right moment,

To get back on topic:

OP - I chose Fuji over m4/3 for the dials and the retro aesthetic and disliked the menus and controls of the Oly cameras when I started the mirrorless journey. They just felt better and were more engaging than anything else.

The killer film sims are a nice bonus.

Agreed, the film sims and analog controls are why I chose Fuji. The only real reason I'm even upgrading is that I'm weary of having to work around the greybeard's mid-pack 2018 autofocus. The X-H1's ergos are still superior to the new Nikon Zf that made it into my hands just this morning.

Now I have to learn a whole new language.

 

[Mr Bolton]

I wish I could disagree. To be fair, I haven't hugely participated in the M43 scene lately, as in the forums, so I can't really gauge the overall level of enthusiasm. But at least my local bricks and mortar stores still have them.

I think the mian problem with micro four thirds nowadays is that they really only focus on the high end, and somewhat niche segments.

All the recent and modern MFT cameras are basically full frame mirrorless sized (G9ii, GH7, OM-1), and the few models that are not are basically last gen tech (OM-5, E-P7, G100, G90...), and the new models are pretty much all niche cameras where the smaller sensor makes sense even if the package size doesn't shrink (high end video, sports / wildlife or bit of both).

To me the real advantage of MFT cameras is really the small footprint of their small camera bodies paired with their small lenses (primes or zooms). The market has shown that there is a demand for smaller cameras, but the fact is that neither brands invested in MFT cameras at the moment have those on their catalogue.

Even decently recent MFT cameras like the GX9 are not sold anymore, and all recent micro 4/3 lens release has been super telephotos, sometimes even full frame lenses with a rebadge on it.

To me, neither brand has been able to read the room correctly. There is a market for MFT cameras, but no one is filling it. Wildlife shooters are super happy, so are high end video enthusiasts. Everyone else goes to other systems it feels like.

I also really enjoy the Micro Four Nerds channel on YouTube she's adorable.

I will admit, her youtube channel is part of the reason why I picked up an Oly E-M5ii recently !

But her channel also made me realize the potential in MFT : they used to have so many small tiny cameras ! Today it feels like you can choose your sensor size, but it has no impact on the actual size of the camera...

Agreed. Why have they stopped leveraging the smaller sensor size and optics to go with it? A new Pen F with WR would sell like hotcakes in a world where you can't even get an X-100VI due to its popularity. Also yes, our Micro Four Nerds gal has definitely motivated me to shoot M43 more, lately.

As an aside, the size and JPEG output of my Olympus E-M5 make it perfect for SOOC JPEG shooting of bicycles, parts, and items for sale on eBay. It's small, light, and far better than a phone. Plus it makes shooting eBay auction items fun

 

[liggy]

Regarding the potential move to Nikon, I am considering it as well. The Zf is fast enough for anything I'll ever do, even professionally, and its AF goes toe to toe with anything Sony ever made.

This was your reference to AF. Nothing regarding price.

Excepting the A9III, which I should have noted so you got me there-I stand behind what I said. This isn't 2019 anymore, and the rest of the camera world has largely caught up to Sony in the AF department.

BTW: per the Photography Life article you mention.. A9 AF -3.5EV; Zf -8EV. So the Zf (and any other new Nikon) is going to focus better than your A9. Especially in the low light concerts that are my bread and butter.

If you don’t want to shoot Sony - bully for you. I’d be interested in a Z9 or Z9 but they are both too big for my tastes. Nikon has things Fuji could really use in their tele lens lineup that in the tele range but I don’t think Fuji is really going to go hard after that segment of the market.

And for the record - the A7RV is easily available under $3K new from Greentoe. US models w Full warranty from authorized dealers.

I’m not even sure why you are listing the mechanical shutter speed of the A9. I and most stacked sensor shooters rarely use MS. I’ve probably got 100,000 shots on my A1 and 1,200 of them are MS. Most of those were just accidents.

Mechanical shutter is a boon when you're shooting in flickery, low quality LED lighting. Which I very often am. So that's why I mention it.

A1 and A9II have anti flicker ES and you can very the shutter speed very subtly to avoid flicker. Unsure if the A9 does or not.

https://petapixel.com/2020/04/13/so...uning-feature-totally-eliminates-led-flicker/

Thanks for the kind words on my pic - tbh I’m sure anyone with skill could get better results. It’s the ease of getting shots like that with a superior af/fps kit is really nice if that is the kind of thing you want to shoot so even a non-pro shooter such as myself can easily get cool shots at just the right moment,

To get back on topic:

OP - I chose Fuji over m4/3 for the dials and the retro aesthetic and disliked the menus and controls of the Oly cameras when I started the mirrorless journey. They just felt better and were more engaging than anything else.

The killer film sims are a nice bonus.

Agreed, the film sims and analog controls are why I chose Fuji. The only real reason I'm even upgrading is that I'm weary of having to work around the greybeard's mid-pack 2018 autofocus. The X-H1's ergos are still superior to the new Nikon Zf that made it into my hands just this morning.

Now I have to learn a whole new language.

Congrats on the new toy. Great looking body for sure. I hope they launch more lenses with aperture rings - nice small primes a la Fuji.

X-H1 still has the best of all Fuji shutters imo and honestly the build quality feels better than my GFX100S.

 

[Mr Bolton]

Regarding the potential move to Nikon, I am considering it as well. The Zf is fast enough for anything I'll ever do, even professionally, and its AF goes toe to toe with anything Sony ever made.

This was your reference to AF. Nothing regarding price.

Excepting the A9III, which I should have noted so you got me there-I stand behind what I said. This isn't 2019 anymore, and the rest of the camera world has largely caught up to Sony in the AF department.

BTW: per the Photography Life article you mention.. A9 AF -3.5EV; Zf -8EV. So the Zf (and any other new Nikon) is going to focus better than your A9. Especially in the low light concerts that are my bread and butter.

If you don’t want to shoot Sony - bully for you. I’d be interested in a Z9 or Z9 but they are both too big for my tastes. Nikon has things Fuji could really use in their tele lens lineup that in the tele range but I don’t think Fuji is really going to go hard after that segment of the market.

And for the record - the A7RV is easily available under $3K new from Greentoe. US models w Full warranty from authorized dealers.

I’m not even sure why you are listing the mechanical shutter speed of the A9. I and most stacked sensor shooters rarely use MS. I’ve probably got 100,000 shots on my A1 and 1,200 of them are MS. Most of those were just accidents.

Mechanical shutter is a boon when you're shooting in flickery, low quality LED lighting. Which I very often am. So that's why I mention it.

A1 and A9II have anti flicker ES and you can very the shutter speed very subtly to avoid flicker. Unsure if the A9 does or not.

https://petapixel.com/2020/04/13/so...uning-feature-totally-eliminates-led-flicker/

Thanks for the kind words on my pic - tbh I’m sure anyone with skill could get better results. It’s the ease of getting shots like that with a superior af/fps kit is really nice if that is the kind of thing you want to shoot so even a non-pro shooter such as myself can easily get cool shots at just the right moment,

To get back on topic:

OP - I chose Fuji over m4/3 for the dials and the retro aesthetic and disliked the menus and controls of the Oly cameras when I started the mirrorless journey. They just felt better and were more engaging than anything else.

The killer film sims are a nice bonus.

Agreed, the film sims and analog controls are why I chose Fuji. The only real reason I'm even upgrading is that I'm weary of having to work around the greybeard's mid-pack 2018 autofocus. The X-H1's ergos are still superior to the new Nikon Zf that made it into my hands just this morning.

Now I have to learn a whole new language.

Congrats on the new toy. Great looking body for sure. I hope they launch more lenses with aperture rings - nice small primes a la Fuji.

X-H1 still has the best of all Fuji shutters imo and honestly the build quality feels better than my GFX100S.

The X-H1 allows to short step the shutter in 1/3 EV increments to combat flicker; there is also an 'anti-flicker' setting which I have turned on. Between that and mechanical shutter I get no flickering LED issues.