Fujifilm X-T3 Review

Moving production from Japan to China and only saving 7% tells me that they increased their margin by quite a bit. Nothing to rave about.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Melchiorum

@TORN, you obviously don't understand how production works if you think manufacturing a new product in China with no sacrifice to quality is suddenly cheap. And even if it was, you do realize you can't just move the production line, right? You need to establish it anew in another country which adds more expenses.

Moving the production to China will pay off in long term, but it doesn't magically and immediately increase their margin in any significant way. I wouldn't be surprised if their margin was actually lower for this product and they were simply confident enough that it would sell well.

Oct 23, 2018*permalink

Kevin Barrett

Profitability isn't a dirty word.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

howieb101

The crop in video mode should be listed as a con. This seems an oversight as it will be a big letdown for some users who don't bother to read the entire review.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

That's probably fair. There's no crop in the 24, 25 and 30p modes offered by most cameras but there is a change of crop in the 50 and 60p modes, albeit not a large one.

I've added it so that people are aware of it.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

SmilerGrogan

Are you talking about the 1.17x crop at 60p? Or is there another one I missed?

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Foveonite

but it is considered a small crop compared to the competition no?

Oct 23, 2018permalink

there is also a 1.25x crop(aka 17mp) in the 30fps stills mode? it's listed in the specs, but I didn't see any dpr pq test results for it.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

vFunct

How is the flash system with Fuji? I love the Nikon CLS system as well as the flash color-temperature correction.. is the Fuji system comparable?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

razorfish

Get a couple of Godox AD200’s as well as the Xpro Fujifilm trigger. You’ll never look back.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

No, it is not.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

beavertown

The king of aps-c camera with the king of sensor manufacturer.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Thematic

It is very impressive indeed. So well rounded. A camera to use in many different ways for many years to come.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

De Fotoman

Dear DPReview, please review your articles before posting. Some statements are simply wrong or confusing. This does not help your credibility or anyone trying to inform his/her-self

"Some lenses can't take full advantage of X-T3's AF speeds"
Same for my D7200 (and any other camera), one lens focuses faster than the other.
My manual focus ones, are the worst.

"Very quick to drop to a slower, darker preview mode (presumably to save battery) in default mode"
Turn on boost mode. It's in the menu.

"No way to quickly toggle Face Detection"
Assign any Fn button to set this. I did on my XT-3, it works perfectly.

Please edit review.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago.

He says, showing his age.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

shoki93

Actually, the darker preview is likely due to Viewfinder display brightness to Auto and not Manual. Unless you were referring to the LCD on the back. I chose to turn up brightness and keep in manual as I did in the XT-2. Thanks Richard!

Oct 24, 2018permalink

Mr R Adams

I think this is most appealing camera on the market today, for me any way. I presently have a d750 and I love the IQ but i fancy a smaller body with compact primes. Has anyone made a similar trade, dropping down to a smaller sensor?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Many people have gone Nikon to Fuji. Use full frame if you need it. You may not need a larger sensor. Depends what you shoot.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

azinheira

I had Canon 7D and 6D. On Fuji Now XT20 and thinking XT-2 or XT-3. Just got The 16-55, also have 10-24 and 100-400 very happy so far

Oct 23, 2018permalink

sunilkumar

I did and I switched more travel photography to Fuji. At present for landscape and fast action Nikon is my choice I have D850 and D800

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Terkwoiz

Weird how so many Nikon and Canon (fanboys albeit) users criticized the A7 ergonomics (grip size too small) but you don’t see that regarding the XT series which actually has an even smaller (almost non-existent) grip.

I researched for months with the obsession of finding the highest IQ in the most portable and functional package while keeping the price reasonable (rx1 and Leica were out of reach). One of my main desires was to find the smallest prime (35-50mm range) body combo for walk around and all scenario usage. The a7iii with the Sony/Zeiss 35/2.8 has been the best solution for me. I used aps-c from Fuji and Sony as well but the IQ doesn’t compare.

Here is the body size comparison of the xt-3 with the a7iii:
https://camerasize.com/compare/#800,777

Check out all of the different views. The two bodies are very close in size - almost no advantage in choosing the Fuji for size reasons if IQ is still the highest priority. Almost the same size yet the Sony has ibis.

Oct 23, 2018*permalink

I have an issue with the Sony grips. Even more so with their APS-C offerings, but although with the A7 line. On the A7 line my knuckles rub against the wider lenses because there is so limited space between grip and camera and because the grip is slim compared to a DSLR so that the fingers do not sit tight. This is especially the case when I have the camera in my hand hanging down with like the 16-35 when walking around.

The Nikon Z is unfortunately pretty similar in that respect.

The Fuji T avoids this issue by having a smaller grip. At the same time the camera and an average 100-300g lens can be hold just fine with this smaller grip.

The R does it differently. It feels like a Canon DSLR in your hands and as the only camera in this group it has room enough for ALL my fingers on the grip. With a lighter Fuji setup a floating pinky is not that bad but when the camera and lenses get bigger...

Oct 23, 2018permalink

The Sony 35mm 2.8 is the only offering from Sony that is so small. Fuji has a well rounded setup of small lenses and the T is just a good deal lighter than the A7 and (to me) it is much better to hold because it does not hurt my fingers - not so much an issue with the 35 but surely with 16-35, which is my most important lens. The 10-24 comes in at 400g btw., a lot less compared to the Sony 16-35.

At the end of the day the Fuji can have portability advantages. The Sony has IBIS and if you can afford it higher image quality with the A7r series. Depending on your needs both are good options.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Would keep your FF with some primes for portrait and landscape. Otherwise X-T3 with zooms will give you a flexible system for everyday use or for travel.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

PeterY

With Canon, Nikon and even Panasonic jumping into the FF game along with Sony, Fuji still hits a home run with this APS-C body! That is pretty impressive!

Oct 22, 2018permalink

That's because Fuji plays it smart. They don't need to fight for scraps in the full frame space. I'm sure they will sell a lot more X-T bodies than Canon and Nikon will sell those mirrorless bodies they released.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

MyReality

@thewoz - I will take that bet.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Come on guys. Give me a break with the cons.

★ Some lenses can't take full advantage of X-T3's AF speeds: Are you crazy writing this? Every single camera manufacturer has lenses that are slower than other lenses and faster than other lenses. Some will take full advantage of the AF speed and others not so much. Talk about staying the obvious.

★ Very quick to drop to a slower, darker preview mode (presumably to save battery) in default mode: Uhh, switch is to boost...

★ No way to quickly toggle Face Detection: Are you nuts? Map it to whatever button you want and quick toggle it. On my X-T2 is the FN button on top.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Cons are factors a would-be buyer might want to be aware of: we're not saying they're problems, necessarily.

★ The difference between the best-performing and worst performing lens is wider on here than most systems. It's also a newer system than most, so people might not expect such discrepancies if all the lenses are 'modern' and designed specifically for recent cameras. As I say, it's something we feel would-be buyers should be aware of.

★ I'd given the camera credit for pretty decent battery life in the review. The drop to battery saving mode is the price you pay for that. It's something people are likely to notice if they pick it up in a shop or when they first unbox it, so I thought they should be aware of it. Again, I'm not saying it's a problem.

★ The word "toggle" describes a two-state on/off switch. Instead you have to pop up a menu and scroll through it. Not a big deal by any means but, given it over-rules the AF system, the ability to toggle would be useful.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

It's impossible to convey the nuance of a 12-page review in bullet-points.

It's easy to pick at bullet points if you're trying to point-score. All I'd ask is that you read them as they're intended: pieces of information that would-be buyers might benefit from knowing, not necessarily problems that are unique to this camera.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

★ Every single person that has tested the X-T3 says all lenses benefit from the faster AF. Maybe your findings are different, I don't know. I didn't see anything in your review that listed which lenses you tested and what these "discrepancies" are.

★ Yea. It saves battery life by going into a power saving mode. If it is listed under "con" I take it as meaning it is a problem. Maybe a mild annoyance, but it seems like listed under "con" just to fill in the "con" section. I think "Cons" should be left for more serious drawbacks.

★ The word 'toggle" describes switching something from one state to another. It doesn't mean "on/off". It CAN be on/off but I can also toggle "Face Dectection" to have eye or no eye. That also describes me "toggling" something. So if you mean to say "toggle on/off" then write "toggle on/off". Because I can quickly "toggle" face detection by assigning it a button like I said. Going through a menu and switching to the different face detection modes is toggling

Oct 30, 2018permalink

With respect, I'm not going to argue over the definition and usage of the word toggle. For that matter, it's pretty senseless to argue over the semantics of three bullet-points at the end of a twelve page review.

If you genuinely believe I've misunderstood something then by all means send me a personal message, we can discuss it and I'll revise the review if necessary. However, if you just want to try to pick-apart bullet points because, if you squint really hard and use the vaguest possible meaning of every word, you can find something to argue with, then I'm afraid that's not a good use of my time.

The 'Things we don't like/Cons' list is a series of things that would-be buyers might want to be aware of. We trust our readers to be able to weight their importance and discount them, based on their own needs and experience.

Oct 30, 2018permalink

Handiworks

Well, to be honest, most of us reading the Cons would interpret them as "problems". My thoughts in reading your con concerning face detection was that Fuji had not included a way to map it to a function button, this was misleading... a little humility would have gone a long way in your reply DPR.

Thanks for the great reviews, outstanding resource! I can only imagine how much work goes into these.

Jun 1, 2019permalink

"The X-T3's image quality is impressive, especially at low ISO"
Yes... Like most modern cameras. But what about at high ISO?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Same as X-T2. When you get to the highest ISO it is noisier.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

look at the scene comparison - in the "good light" at super high ISO's is maybe even a stop noisier then the X-T2. However in "low light" scene, at high ISO's the difference is not noticeable. And since this would be a real use of High ISO ... i would say it is rather the same as X-T2 :)

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Although FF does a better job for high ISO values, in real life there are not much situations, where you would need FF for that.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

When talking about the Sony we see the Sony has IBIS and the Fuji has smaller lenses. When we mention GH5 (GH5s has no place here really with its low MP count, just a speciality cam really) there is no remark on its IBIS nor the fact that when we factor in lenses it is substantially smaller than Fuji. Skip the GH5s remark, replace it with the GH5 and G9 and you get a much more sensible comparison.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

MikeDPR

So they've caught up to NX1 now? ;)

Oct 22, 2018permalink

2MPx short, so - almost :)

Oct 23, 2018permalink

wy2lam

nice written review. like it better than the video one and it arrived not too late.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

milkod2001

Im too spoiled by FF sensors but this camera seems quite OK for casual use, holidays etc.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

dloop

lol

Oct 22, 2018permalink

i'm not about to give up the a9 for this x-t3, but Fuji gets huge props for delivering real 4kp60.

x-t3 really shows what a fail the ff eos-r is, in particular.

it's also a big nail in the m4/3 coffin.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

cactusgeorge

“O,k, for for casual use.”
Damned with faint praise....sheesh.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

There is always a Fuji fanboy believing the X-T3 has better (or similar) IQ than full frame cameras.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Hey MILC,
If you owned an A9 you know it does NOT do 4K 60p video.
And the T3 is about 1/3rd the price.

The good news is with ML, the Canon should soon shoot full sensor readout 4K RAW video.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Rihass

Image quality isn't everything. I'd take X-T3 over A7iii any day. Menus, 4K60. 10bit. Smaller lens. Cheaper. Only thing I wish it had is IBIS.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

If image quality wasn't my top priority I would still shoot with a Leica Digilux 2...

Oct 22, 2018permalink

MILC man is right, this is another nail in the Sony coffin.
They barely held a 13% market share last year, and now are faced with 3 strong competitors in the one segment where they did well.

For the past 3 years they've lost out to Canon APSC mirrorless in their home country!!!! And last year they fell to 3rd in mirrorless camera sales with Canon expanding their lead over Sony. (Oly lead with 26.8% followed by Canon 18.6% - though Canonsays they passed Oly this year).

Now they have Fuji making great progress. I don't think M43 is a direct competitor, but if Fuji joins Canon surpassing surpassing Sony in APSC, and Nikon and Canon catch Sony in FF mirrorless, Sony is in major trouble.
Canon and Nikon have it made. They have DSLRs to their own (sorry Pentax) and DSLRs will remain 50% of ILCs for a few years. Mirrorless is getting crowded and Canon has proven they can dominate with out really trying.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

SirSeth

I came from FF and bah humbug. Casual use? Get over FF arrogance already--the 2% of to time that IQ strengths of FF best a camera this well rounded is not a complete substitute for how enjoyable significant strengths are 100% of the time for both casual and serious use.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

D_Gunman

If you can't do professional works with XT3 then it's more of you being amateur than the camera.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

@ZeBebito : "If image quality wasn't my top priority...."

If IQ was your top priority you would shoot a Hasselblad H6D or similar. As you accept the trade of in IQ for a FF camera for it's obvious advantages some would take it even further. There are a lot of "professional types" of work in photography. For some the IQ and feature set from a x-t1 or a canon 40D is much more than needed. For some you simply need custom built special cameras and lenses not available on market...

Oct 23, 2018*permalink

Fujifilm second hand cameras do not keep a high value compared to other cameras. Therefore it is a much cheaper investment to make to get into X-system, when you don't mind to buy used equipment. I have much more trust in used Fujifilm gear, than in used Sony gear.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Sony cameras depreciate fast too. I bought an MSRP $3400 Sony new for $2400 less than a year after its release.
At the time a used A6500 was considerably less than a used GH5 or used EM1/2.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Well deserved! Great camera, apart from IBIS what can someone who wants APS-c ask for? Fuji shows it knows very well what customer want and just gives them that and shows APS-c can be a very good alternative to FF.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

kewlguy

"Well deserved! Great camera, apart from IBIS what can someone who wants APS-c ask for?"

Lower noise at high iso would be nice.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

https://www.facebook.com/aleckinnear/posts/559187397853056

APS-C is no substitute for full frame. I have an X-H1, an A6300 and a 5D Mark III to prove it after an entire summer shooting almost exclusively APS-C. Even my 5D offers much better image quality than the X-H1 or A6300, particularly at ISO 1600 and up. APS-C image quality hasn't really improved since the NEX 5T (yes, I owned one and shot it as my carry camera for four years with the excellent FE 35mm f/2.8 Sonnar).

I'm giving up shooting APS-C in earnest after shooting sports for a month on all my cameras. Full frame results are in another category.

You'll be able to pick out the X-H1 pictures here without any trouble (after Iridient Developer to coax everything possible out of the RAF files). And that's at only ISO 1600 and 3200 (not 6400 and 12800). Fuji gets rid of the chroma noise by almost completely desaturating the file (with jpegs they cleverly add some colour back in but heavy electronic processing kills detail).

Oct 23, 2018permalink

W3PYF

I agree. I am sure the Fuji is a great APS-C camera. But I also have given up shooting APS-C since getting the A7III. Full frame results are in another category in more than sports.

I rented an A7RIII as a backup body this past week, and while I clearly see the difference in a cropped 42mp and a 24mp sensor image, you really need to crop tight routinely to compensate for the slower performance.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

LOL, the A7iii overheats and has numerous other issues. It is not even weather sealed.

And who wants to pay $2400 for the 70-200mm zoom. Oh, you use the F4 version? Then most APSC cameras are getting better IQ than you, LOL!!!!

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Oskar, I agree with you about the price of Sony long/exotic glass (short primes are fairly priced).

1. no need to go mirrorless for sports/action/low ISO IQ. Canon and Nikon still make DSLRs which mount affordable and fabulous telephoto lenses for a wide variety of budgets and IQ needs.
2. no need to give up your Fuji as a carry daylight camera or a video camera or a manual lenses body (the zoom in and out is brilliant with Fuji).

Just don't try to shoot a Fuji in low light where you need both high IQ AND colour (in BW Fuji X holds up in low light, the issue is missing colour information and noise both of which are much smaller issues with BW). If anyone else is shooting full frame Nikon or Canon (or Sony I guess) colour photos of the same event, those photos will be much better.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

I tried to go Fuji X full time as I've had it up to my chin with Canon crippling video in all cameras after the 5D III and making handling . When I made my psychological peace - ignore all video functions on Canon cameras, pretend they don't exist - it became much easier to enjoy the great action photo ergonomics and image quality Canon full frame offers. I'm not pro Canon: if I were a Nikon shooter I'd stay one. I don't like Sony ergonomics except on the old NEX series (I'm a weirdo that way - I prefer the Fuji X-M1 ergonomics to the X-TX or X-H1 - simpler and to the point: I also like my carry cameras compact, very light and sturdy).

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Good jpeg photos but raw are not so good. Amazing 4k video. If I shoot video I'd prefer that camera. Not for portraits.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

webber15

With raw...you can make it as good or as bad as you like!!

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Not all raws are the same

Oct 22, 2018permalink

You're joking, right?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

There are plenty of pros out there shooting portraits with Fujifilm. Perhaps you should take off the blinders. Seriously?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Benjamin Kanarek has used the X-T2/X-T3 for portraits and pro work for Vogue and Harper's Bazaar. But SETI says "no way". 🤣

Oct 22, 2018permalink

herrMartin

and at the moment a lot of commercial fashion is shoot on analog film with 120 or even 35mm and this is quality-wise super bad, just compare a 35mm iso 400 colorfilm to the worst 4/3 sensor on the market - the "superbad" 4/3 will be much cleaner. Even a iphone has today enough IQ for pro use - that is the truth... so comparing an xt3 at iso 25600 to a sony is like comparing esoteric hifi cables

Oct 22, 2018permalink

MyReality

@herrMartin - Agree. A lot of magazine inserts and covers are being done with film. Another confirmation that it is the photographer not the equipment. David Boubilet recently did a cover for Conde Naste Traveler magazine with Velvia 50. He sometimes shoots with, (of all things, a Contax T2.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

well... what a professional photographer is always aware is the destination of its files and the conditions of the shootings.
If you shoot for a magazine, web, or other relative small prints APSC and even M43 (especially if you can shoot up to ISO 1600) gives you *enough* quality. And even if you have a MF camera at home, you just don't use it for that job.

But that doesn't mean that in the same conditions the larger sensor camera would not have produced a better RAW file. But if you print in a magazine who cares that you edited a 100MPx image?

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Ideal for portrait would be Large Format. Majority shooters don't do only portraits.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

MyReality

@ozy92, @badi - A lot of portraits are now being done in studio with Canon 50S(R) and larger, because of wide tonal range due to many mpix.
Agree, badi. The same magazine I mention above has the cover and an inside article shot with the Pizel 3.

Oct 24, 2018permalink

thewoz: Benjamin Kanarek is paid ambassador of Fujifilm. Try Google search and you'll find same words about Pentax. But when Pentax stop paying Benjamin said he's so happy he part with Pentax =) So let's wait when he become sonyboy =)

Oct 25, 2018permalink

SO because you say he is a "paid ambassador" that means all the portraits he takes with his Fuji cameras don't exist?

Oct 30, 2018permalink

The bottom line is that Kanarek has shot magazine covers for Vogue using a Fujifilm APS-C camera.

Oct 30, 2018permalink

Yes, and when Pentax paid him he used even K-5 to shoot magazine covers =) I just wanna say BK don't have independent opinion. Amen

Oct 30, 2018permalink

I will clarify myself. Vogue magazine covers have been shot with an APS-C sensor. However, I frequently hear the FF fanboys blabbering about how APS-C isn't for pro work. Shooting a Vogue magazine for Vogue certainly is pro work.

Oct 30, 2018permalink

NaBalam

I'm a nikon User, D7100 with several lenses. Should I upgrade to the D750 or go with full Fuji XT3. (I already own a couple of very good FX Lenses and some DX)

Oct 22, 2018permalink

milkod2001

That depends if you plan to shoot videos, there Xt3 would suite you well or you are after better IQ (image quality) where full frame sensor of D750 will clearly give you advantage.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

elefteriadis alexandros

Stay with 7100. You can't see any improvement.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

https://www.facebook.com/aleckinnear/posts/559187397853056

Go D750 if you care about image quality at medium or high ISO. Here's a mixed gallery of 5D, 5DIII and X-H1 from this weekend.

Cloudy day but I wanted very high shutter speeds to stop motion so most shots at 1600 to 3200 ISO. The X-H1 sticks out like a sore thumb, even with my best attempts to pull its RAW files up to scratch in Iridient Developer.

This was last my attempt to shoot sports on an APS-C (Sony A6300 is no better in terms of high ISO IQ). Mirror fell out on the 5D (a pity as it was killing it with my old EF 80-200mm f/2.8) so a 6D and a 5DS R are on their way now to replace the X-H1 and the 5D (I want microfocus adjustment as my only telephoto which is accurate on the 5D is the 80-200mm which was calibrated to the body).

APS-C should be reserved for daylight birding and travel cameras for most people. The Fuji cameras are great video machines though and wonderful carry cameras.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Satyaa

I say, go to D750 for better IQ of the FF.

If you're getting into APS-C for the first time, and shoot a good amount of video that requires 4K 60fps, then this is a good choice.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

In the Raw

If video is important to you as well as portability, the Fuji would be great, though personally I'd wait and pick up a Nikon Z6. Even so, I have numerous friends who use Fuji XT gear and they are all very positive about the system.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

BlueBomberTurbo

If you want better IQ and a flippy screen, go D750, because that's all you're really getting. I went that route and wasn't impressed at all. Pretty much the last straw for me and Nikon. Went mirrorless and never needed to look back. The X-T3 certainly seems like more than enough camera for anyone using a D7100 or D750.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

De Fotoman

The real question is. Do you want mirrorless and all the advantages that come with it. If so. The Xt3 is a great choice. Especially since AF is no longer an issue.
I have a D7200 next to my Xt3 and I'm seriously considering selling it to buy more fuji glass. If you also do video, and have used eye detect AF, it's almost a no brainer. Tack sharp eyes with this much ease is just wonderful.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

ljclark

D500?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

NaBalam

hummm I guess the choice is obvious. I don't do video AT ALL. I mostly shoot street and documentary, architecture and some weddings. Would not consider myself a pro but I make some money on the side with my photography, hence the reason I'm upgrading. So far, the D750 seems to be a winner.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Mateus1

I see two very serious issues/drawbacks with XT-3:

1. Battery for video.
For full day of filming (8 hours) you need about 6 extra batteries.

2. 1.29x sensor crop for video.
Even 1080p at 120 fps!

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Causio

You can power the camera over usb while using it, given that not all power banks allow that.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Did you read the review? There is no crop for majority of the video modes, the camera uses the full width of the sensor. For some video modes where the data readout is extreme there is a modest 1.18x crop. 1.29x only on 120fps ..like stated in the review. For extreme long clips the camera can be powered by USB, a power bank through USB or by 3 batteries by using the battery grip.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

If you are filming non-stop for 8 hours/day, battery life is the least of your concern. Where are you doing to store and edit all that footage? And who is going to do all the editing?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Satyaa

I feel that you have very demanding video need and it is unrealistic to expect a sub $2000 do-it all camera to do it well with a couple of batteries. You probably need more equipment than that.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

DrewRick

X-T3 has no crop at 4K@30p and only 1.18x crop at 4K@60p. Only the 120 fps mode has the crop you mention.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Johans81

Lol "there is a 1.29 crop on 120p" and people start baching him "did you even read the review its no crop except when you said it was" lååål

Oct 23, 2018permalink

DrewRick

Johans81 that's not what the OP claimed, read their claim again.

Oct 24, 2018permalink

Benjamin Kanarek

I am in total agreement with the review. I have used Fujifilm for ELLE magazine and results have been outstanding. Keep up the great work Fujifilm!

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Wow, Fuji got new ambassador =)

Oct 22, 2018permalink

focalphotography

Have they not changed the Fuji X shooter program so you can only use Fuji now ? Are you still using Nikon for majority of your work Ben ?

Oct 23, 2018*permalink

Benjamin Kanarek

We use Fujifilm for all of our videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/benjaminkanarek

I would say that the use of my Nikon and Fujifilm systems are close to evenly split. When I want anything longer than 90mm, I go with Nikon in general, as I have the DC 135, 180 and 300 mm leses which I have grown very close to over the last few years.

I am not sponsored nor am I an Ambassador of Fujifilm. I have never been offered that priviledge. :-)

Oct 23, 2018*permalink

focalphotography

Great videos always been a fan of your work and the interview you did with Ken Wheeler was awesome.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

zakaria

Kudos to fujifilm. Nice camera with the goodies of fujifilm jpeg. Though I hope that fujifilm uses the XT1 body for all XT models .this xt3 shape is not handsome enough like xt1 and xt2.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

joresh64

I don't know why, but I still prefer my old X-E1 to all the newer models.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

MrTapi

Me too -- I don't do video, and rarely use continuous focus, so the upgrade is not worth the price for me. It is a great camera, though. But so is the one I already have.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

It's already a classic, the X-E1. ;)

Oct 22, 2018permalink

I have an X-M1 and just love it. I respect and admire my X-H1 for its power and flexibility but love the straightforward simplicity of the X-M1, its small size and its very decent image quality.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

zzzxtreme

Xe1 + 7artisan lens would be good for portraits 🤔

Oct 22, 2018permalink

ikaika777

Then the camera isn’t for you.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

DominikT

Same as I, love my X-E2 and use legacy manual lenses with a speedbooster, so AF is not really relevant. But I get the full frame equivalent depth of field and field of view, plus an extra stop of light with both my Zuiko lenses. The only advantage I can see to getting the X-T3 is for video work, if the dynamic range can equal the C200 I use at work.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Three cameras from three different formats will compete for the best camera of 2018. X-T3 will probably triumph as the most balanced and cheapest option.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

PWPhotography

Well we might have difference balanced point. To me FF is the best balance of IQ and weight/size/cost/option... Compared to A7 III? just like comparing apple to orange.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

It depends on what your needs are. Lenses are of similar size and weight for the same depth of field but you need to double your ISO for the same shutter speed loosing most of the advantage you got with the larger sensor. There simply is no free lunch, no perfect balance for all. Generally speaking higher shutter speed will result in sharper images and for many that's more valuable than the thinner dof. So it's easy to see why APS-C and M43 are popular for travel.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

MrTapi

I wish you had noted as negative, that Fuji is a little lacking on saving and retrieving custom settings, and storing various settings depending on mode. When I, for instance, have focus switch on C and focus mode in Zone, switching Focus to S and setting Single Point, will reset the focus mode on C to Single point as well. (unless these have been fixed with X-T3, but there was no mention that Fuji has done so).
So even though I have a tactile focus switch, I still need to go to the menu to set the mode, which is an annoyance.
Others have said that same is true switching between Photo and Video - I don't do video so cannot say anything about that.

Also, I would love it, if I were able to store all settings under Q-menu as custom settings. Edited to add: And also 3:4 crop

An annoyance, but not a deal breaker, I only wish you had mentioned it, because I am sure Fujippl read your reviews.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Good comment. There should be a menu option that allows users to choose whether or not different focus mode settings should be retained for the different AF modes. And I completely agree that the custom settings should include *all* settings, not just the limited subset that is primarily useful to JPG shooters and, perhaps, video shooters.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Causio

The problem is the dedicated wheels and switches (iso, exposure comp, af and especially speed/aperture), which if could be overridden with custom setting would arguably generate some confusion.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

MrTapi

I don't find that to be a problem, there is an Auto mode on each of those wheels. The problem is that we are unable to store many /software/ settings, and assign separate software settings to diverse positions on the physical switches, such as focus mode, video etc...

Oct 22, 2018permalink

@Causio You're right that the X-Series doesn't have a way to offer C1, C2, C3 functionality the way other bodies do. Yes, you could jury rig it by using the A position on every dial to be something other than auto but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about every setting that isn't controlled by a marked dial or switch. Self-timer, for example, or whether back button focus uses AF-S or AF-C, night vision mode. Anything that is selectable in the menus should be able to be stored as part of a custom preset.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Kiril Karaatanasov

" a6500, but Fujifilm's larger range of lenses" this assertion sounds flaky on mulitple accounts:

1. E mount has many more native lenses as pure count of lenses like more than 2 times more models. Consider Zeiss, Samyang, Tamron and Sigma native lenses that simply don't exist for Fuji. These count on top of the splendid Sony lens line up.

2. E mount is friendly to adapting 3 party lenses and so it is easier to use non-native lenses should it come to that.

PS Other than this out of place comment X-T3 is the best APS-C camera on the market today by reasonable margin

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

True. Let's see if Sony can release a7000 by the end of this year that has 4K60, IBIS, and a lighter 2.8 zoom.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Relaxed

Maybe. But Fuji has a much more complete native lens setup. Most people (99%) don't adapt lenses.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

@Relaxed For now A6xxx series is more of a backup body to FF users. But Sigma has some cheap and sharp primes like 16, 30, 56 that costs more on Fuji side.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Kiril Karaatanasov

Relaxed that assertion is simply false.

See 28 lenses for Fuji http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/xf_lens/roadmap/

See 46 Sony made E mount lenses https://www.sony.com/electronics/lenses/t/camera-lenses?cameramount=e-mount

There are 5 Batis AF lenses, There are 6 native E mount Sigma lenses, There is one Tamron lens, There are 5 Samyang lenses. There are 11 or so Sigma full frame lenses. There is 2 Tokina lenses announced one of which made and sold. 3 Zeiss Touit lesnes

Total Af lenses avaiallbel to E mount user is 46 + 5 + 6 + 1 + 5 + 2 + 3 = 68 !!!!

Sony offer 40 A mount lens types today all these work on A6500.

So we are at a 100 models supported by Sony!

..and there is much more when we start with adapters......

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Relaxed

That’s not an assumption.

Not all E lenses are of Fuji quality, and the full frames aren’t native size, are they? Granted, there are no sigmas for Fuji- but I’m not sure they’re necessary..

These of very comparable systems, but the APS Sony line is lacking. Not a surprise given Sony is focused on full frame.

Btw, I’m a Sony (A9, RX10, RX100) and Fuj(XT, XE, X70) owner.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Fuji is designing high quality APS-C lenses. Sony's high-end lenses are all designed for FF with size, weight and price that reflect this. Their APS-C lenses are kind of "meh". I don't pay much attention to the third-party glass. Roger Cicala (owner of LensRentals), who has more experience than any of us, has suggested that their reliability isn't at the same level as OEM lenses.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

s1oth1ovechunk

I disagree. Fuji has more lenses. There are basically very few aps-c sony lenses, and the others you mention are third-party lenses, with a third-party experience. I do wish Fuji had some of the sigma lenses, but I don't count these as e-mount lenses since they're also available on micro four thirds and may someday(?) be available on fuji.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

That's got changed somewhere in the editing process. It originally read "We suspect many photographers will find Fujifilm's range of lenses more attractive, too."

It's not about number, it's about which lenses exist and how much they cost. It'll be up to each individual to consider their shooting needs and work out which system looks more attractive to them.

I've changed the phrasing, though. It should never have said Fujifilm had more lenses.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Almost as many mechanical adapters and Lens Tubo adapters exist for Fuji X as Sony E (I should know I own about seven of them).

Fringer adapter performs slightly better with EF lenses on Fuji X-H1 than Sigma MC-11 with EF lenses on Sony A6300.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Kiril Karaatanasov

I agree with Roger’s formulation. Attractiveness I suppose is hard to judge and subjective to some degree. I would change the system for 24 and 35mm f/1.4 full frame equivalents that Fuji will never have.

I agree that the x-t3 camera is great. Some people as is evident from this discussion may find the severely limited lens choice sufficient for their goals. It is a matter of personal choice after all.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

1. Zeiss Touit and the Samyang lenses are all available for the Fuji X mount. All of the Chinese brand lenses are for both systems, Meike, Laowa and more. Sigma and Tamron are just adding a piece of pipe to the back of lenses designed many years ago for DSLR. Just take look at the Sigma 30/1.4 and compare it to the Fuji 35/1.4. The size difference is laughable. It's not on offer for Fuji because it would be extremely hard to sell.

2. There is not a lens you can adapt to the Sony a6500 that you cannot also adapt on Fuji X unless it's Sony's own. And if you're thinking auto focusing EOS lenses you can also get Fuji adapters with full electronic function and I think a Nikon one is just around the corner.

I however think adapting lenses to the FF Sony bodies makes a lot more sense than doing so on the crop bodies.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

@Hauxon2 1. I agree third party takes the easy way to cut down the cost but it works for consumers wanting cheap glass. The size difference between those two lenses is just 1.9cm and 60g. The new Sigma 56 however is lighter and cheaper than Fuji's (due to the 1/2 difference).

2. MC11 adapters (quite cheap) can reliably retains most AF functions of EF Sigma lenses including eye AF and continuous tracking in still and video. We don't know much about Fringer adapters yet.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

DrewRick

Not so much native APS-C lenses though, and mounting big hulking FF glass on a crop body is a huge drag, financial drain, and reduces resolution.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Not so good for: "Sports shooting at the highest levels." There will no doubt be plenty of sports and wildlife shot with the X-T3 and by some pros. Not sure what "highest levels" means. Also, a friend and I tested his D500 against my X-T3 and the X-T3 wins in the AF and AF tracking department. The difference is noticeable and the keeper rate is higher on the X-T3 when burst shooting.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Yeah, we had it the other way around. T3 had quite some trouble with counter light situations. AF of the Nikon is much easier to handle and worked better in lower light. Fuji needs more configuration. And of course the Nikon was much better to handle larger Tele lenses. T3 did a good job though against the best in class.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

"highest levels" is obviously referring to:

1) the 1.29x or whatever crop that it has at the highest fps rates.
2) only getting 12-13fps with constant af-c and some lenses, in real-world sports shooting: https://youtu.be/-oXHiORuRk0?t=9m57s

use the a9 and it'll all become much clearer... sony fe lenses are rated at 15-20fps, with constant af-c, and the lenses really deliver that on the a9... even the mc-11 and supported sigma glass will have constant af-c at 13-15fps on some lenses... no Nikon camera do that, either.

regardless, the x-t3 looks like a huge step up for Fuji, and it's really boxed sony into a crop corner; the new a7000 will need to finally give us 4kp60, and real advanced fps rates.

the advantage for sony there, tho, is the xlnt stable of 15-20fps capable fe lenses, that neither Fuji nor Nikon nor any other camera company on the planet has anything comparable to.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

https://www.facebook.com/aleckinnear/posts/559187397853056

Fast sports ask for high ISO levels (up to 12800 for night shooting and ISO 3200 for cloudy days). Fuji X (and other APS-C) look dreadful past ISO 1600 in comparison to full frame. Here's a mixed set of soccer with Fuji X-H1, Canon 5D and Canon 5D III. It's easy to pick out the Fuji shots right away.

When I shot on a sunny day with maximum ISO 1600, the X-H1 was more competitive.

http://bit.ly/Kittsee-Andau-2018

In that session, it's hard to pick out the X-H1 shots (in the top right there's a link to download the photos with full EXIF if you're curious). But I'm not willing to deal with the low shutter speeds an ISO 1600 ceiling would impose.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

https://flic.kr/s/aHskK1saMX

I've never had any issues shooting high ISO sports with Fujifilm cameras, including ISO 8000 and 10000.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

ikaika777

@UncoyDP, it’s obvious you have zero hands on experience with Fuji camera’s.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Since Tony Northrup YouTube review was linked above it should be noted that he says that there actually are some lenses that will achieve 20 fps with the a9, notable the $12,000 400/2.8 super-tele. All of the a9 still frames shown in the video are using this lens. It's $16,000 for body and lens. Even if the ($6000) XF 200/2 was used for a more fair fight it would still be kind of ridiculous.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

@racin06 Thanks for the example links. Great action shots but the image quality of your sports photos feature exactly the kind of noisy, desaturated, strange paste colour I was talking about. Example: https://www.flickr.com/photos/30161756@N00/30867989124/in/album-72157674129204573/

Compare with Canon full frame. The first shot in that Facebook post linked above I believe is a Canon 5D from ten years ago shot at ISO 3200 (not at my main computer so I don't have ISO information).

Oct 23, 2018*permalink

@ikaika777 I linked events shot with both Canon full frame previous generation (5D Mark III) and the current generation X-H1. The X-H1 is a lot of fun to shoot with. One can coax good images out of it at low ISO. For a black and white shooter, Fuji can be competitive or even outdo Canon full frame. But for colour images at mid to high ISO, Fuji's APS-C sensors cannot compete.

Here's an example of the high quality of image I've been able to coax out of my X-H1 in good light: https://500px.com/photo/273088795/late-afternoon-at-the-beach-by-alec-kinnear

For mid-to-high ISO examples please see above Facebook link - the colourful detailed photos are the Canon 5D and 5DIII photos and the other photos are the X-H1. All shot at either ISO 1600 or 3200 (no crazy 6400 or 8000 or 10000 here: tip ISO 10000 is the last ISO point at which the Fuji X-Trans III or IV image can still be made presentable in colour - I did night action tests the night before this shoot).

Oct 23, 2018*permalink

@Hauxon2 - "All of the a9 still frames shown in the video are using this lens. It's $16,000 for body and lens."

you sound a bit confused about sony, despite reading what I posted.

there are 16 sony fe lenses that will all do 20fps with continuous af-c on the a9: http://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/www/support/ilc/products/ilce9/continuousshooting/en/index.html?id=spt

and another 26 fe lenses that will do 15fps with continuous af-c.

as i stated earlier, Fuji has nothing comparable to that, and neither does any other camera company... sony was thinking of the future, with those lens designs that can do 15-20fps with continuous af-c, it was a conscious design goal.

Fuji, canikon, etc., are all laboring against old lens designs, many of which can't provide a high fps rate.

Oct 23, 2018*permalink

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/6884391759/sony-alpha-7r-ii-can-match-or-beat-dslr-low-light-af-performance

@racin06 - "https://flic.kr/s/aHskK1saMX"

that's a nice action set, shot in difficult circumstances.

i would suggest shooting at wide-open aperture, instead of f/4, in part because ospdaf can take advantage of wider apertures, unlike dslrs:

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Gediminas 8

"Not sure what "highest levels" means. "

Running children?

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Don't forget that Fujifilm has a history of releasing frequent firmware updates for their cameras to improve performance and add features. No doubt, the X-T3 will only get better!

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

And I will wait for it. Cheaper camera with more refined features if you wait for it.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

CanonSharpShooter

This is exactly why you should wait for Fujifilm to iron out the features before buying. Kaizen!!

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Burdenp

Not sure why the Olympus E-M1 Mk-2 is not even mentioned as competition yet it got a gold award. Its maybe a bit behind right now but not that far and has better build quality and great ergonomics and a very good sense system behind it. The fuji is a great cameras all the same! - as is the D500. It seems with dpreview if you haven't released the camera recently you are forgotten. The Only is certainly a better photographers cameras the the Panasonics.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

entoman

Yes the Oly EM1 Mk2 is an excellent camera. I know someone who dropped hers in a river, completely submerged. After fishing it out the camera still worked perfectly! Not many cameras (pro Nikons and Canons included) would be capable of surviving that ordeal. My only real criticisms of the Oly are that it very fiddly to operate if you have large hands, and the menu system is a complete mess. It has a smaller sensor than APS cameras like the D500 and XT3, but the results are adequate for most users.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Well you are absolutistic here. I have the EM1.2 and the handling, the menusystem etc is far worse than my Panasonic GH4. My GH4 never gets in my way, the EM1.2 does. Just to show how personal this is. Other than that the Oly definately should be mentioned here. It is very close to this Fuji in each and every way with the excepton of IBIS (hugely in favour of Oly) and AF in video (Fuji demolishes Oly here).

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Jefftan

EM1.2 is just a showcase
even today price after 2 years , olympus not really trying to sell it
it is just there for show
same for g9

one day when new model come it will be sold at bargain bin price, just wait

i bet most mft sold today in both units and dollars are still 16mp

don't know what to say
many said 16mp enough
enough for what
one can say 1/2.3 12mp in my tg-5 enough

right now i have no confidence in mft
can it survove as a casual system people only willing to paid $500-600?
maybe, hard to say

look at yi m1 price, can still have profit for $500-600?

Oct 23, 2018*permalink

bluevaping

@etoman I have no issues with menus or shooting with the EM1.2. I am coming from other Olympus tho. Its way better than old generations. The EM1.2 menus are so fast and snappy. It fast to operate and shot. Dedicated custom setting presets. Too many features and ecosystem advanages over most mirrorless!
@Jefftan What are you talking about? the YiM1 is slow to operate. Slow moving grandmothers are a blur. Shutterlag. You assume way to much on image quality as well. Sorry for your confidence. I am shoting models, breath taking landscapes, and star at night. It took Fuji 2 years after EM1.2 to come up with that almost great AF again. My confidence is fine. Glad they got something going. But it another pony show because they have medium fortmat now.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

Jefftan

YiM1 is slow to operate

i am seriously thinking about getting it for laowa 7.5mm f2
slow in AF? no problem, i use MF
better than 16MP if i buy a new camera in 2018

Oct 23, 2018permalink

entoman

bluevaping - I'm glad to hear that you have no issues with Oly menus, but I'd say you were definitely in the minority.

Menu systems, in common with other aspects of ergonomics, are to some degree a matter of personal preference, and yes, almost anything can become easier to use with familiarity.

But, compared to a Canon or Nikon DSLR, or even to a Sony, the menu of Oly EM-1 Mkii is poorly laid out, difficult to read and slow to adjust.

I've used EM-1 Mkii several times and certainly it has a great specification and feels comfy to hold, but changing settings via what I find to be fiddly controls and terrible menus is something that doesn't come easily to me.

Oct 24, 2018permalink

I was certain the X-T3 would receive the Gold Award label, but I thought DPR would rate the X-T3 above 90%. However, 88% is a very high and fair rating. No doubt, the X-T3 is the best "all-round" hybrid still/video camera ever manufactured. Great job Fujifilm!

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

It's a limitation of our (and any) point-in-time scoring system that a camera that performs very well in one respect, sets the height of the bar that subsequent cameras have to reach, and yet aren't then held to the high bar set by newer cameras.

As such, the D500's excellent AF performance makes it difficult for anything else to get a 90% but the D500 isn't scored based on the higher expectations we now have for video, for instance. Our planned next-gen scoring system will resolve this problem.

What should be clear is that the X-T3 is very, very good.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

PWPhotography

No IBIS and not a D500 killer per AF-C tracking just cannot score X-T3 at 90% or more :-) Hope that spot will leave to rumored A7000, a true ML D500 killer - BSI stacked-sensor (26 or more mp), even better AF than A7 III and A9, Z battery, no blackout EVF, 20fps and similar 230-RAW buffer, of course IBIS and improved DR and high ISO, at least 4K/30p (personally video is not my top priority with that camera). So FE 100-400 GM will become FF eq 150-600mm FL as 400mm on A9 is not long enough while A9 doesn't have sufficient pixel density if cropping out.

Richard, do you already have an A7000 beta in playing? Sure you will not disclose :-)

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

entoman

I don't really understand why anyone gets so worried about camera "scores" and awards. A camera is a very personal thing, so one that scores more highly might not necessarily be the best for any particular person or usage. Far better IMHO to ignore the scores and awards, and just make an assessment based on the detailed text of the review. Even then, it's very unwise to order a camera purely on the basis of a review. Cameras really need to be handled before purchase, as models that seem perfect for some photographers will turn out to be fiddly or awkward to use for others.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

wy2lam

you can keep on waiting but the thing is these companies are bound to leapfrog each other. don't base your system decision on a single body, whether it is an existing one or a rumoured one.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

I think the best hybrid is the G9 or the Gh5. The IQ on both is very good in every way and they both have excellent IBIS which is where the Xt3 is lacking. But the XT3 is one heck of a cam for sure.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Oilcruzer

“Jorghino” said:
“I think the best hybrid is the G9 or the Gh5. The IQ on both is very good in every way and they both have excellent IBIS which is where the Xt3 is lacking. But the XT3 is one heck of a cam for sure.”

Very well said. At this level, there are subtle differences. With all the new releases, I considered every system. The XT-3 is an excellent camera. It offers a lens weight and lens price advantage over FF. It was a very close second for me. It came down to how it felt in my hand and that I am much less a video person and a bit more of a handheld action shooter.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

AbrasiveReducer

Nice to see a fine performing portable camera system. Slightly smaller cameras with bigger lens mounts to accommodate even bigger lenses is one approach, but Fuji offers a really nice alternative.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

taruaS

"Sony a7 III which, for a few hundred dollars more..."
A very parochial comment. Here in Europe the Sony is a whopping $700 more expensive. I can consider buying the Fuji with the kit lens, but the A7iii remains far out of my budget, particularly with any decent native lens attached.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Sorry about that. I'll amend the text.

It's around 33% more expensive for the a7 III body in the US at present but I'd not recognised that it's nearly 50% more expensive than the Fujifilm in Europe.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

It's even more, Richard. Into Germany, the Body (not from some mysterious amazon 3rd party Seller) costs 2290-2299 EUR, the A7 III, whileas the X-T3 costs 1499 EUR - so it is some whopping 800 EUR, which means ~917 $ more expensive, the Sony A7 III vs the X-T3 Fujifilm. That's a hell lot more.

Good Light!

Oct 22, 2018permalink

The real trouble with the a7 line only starts when you also want native lenses on par or at least close to Fuji X lenses. Then it gets much more expensive (and heavy) quickly... ;-)

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Like with 55 1.8 or 85 1.8? On the wide end you get all the Voigtländers and Zeiss lenses for Sony with optical qualities I am severely missing with my Fuji. Manual lenses, but that does not matter much @ 10/12/15/18/21.

Real trouble for me is to find the ibis in the T3 for all my primes. Still, it is a great option. But with a growing number of alternatives, decision is getting harder.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

wy2lam

to be honest if $700 means the difference between affordable vs not, a new ILC body might not be for you. buy used.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

In the US if you get the body+kit lens the difference is only $300.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Docno

Only US$450 more to get the A7iii where I am. Just over 25% higher price for a full frame camera. What’s going on in Europe?

Oct 23, 2018permalink

uMad

as others said, the A7 III costs 800€ more here in Europe. And that‘s just the start. Fuji had some nice combined deals on lenses and the grip as well.

Camera + grip was 1700€ when the camera was released and ghere where up to 300€ cashback on lenses.
To compare this to the Sony, the A7III + batterygrip has been around 2650€ since it launched

Oct 23, 2018permalink

M H S

no IBIS is only a minor drawback here, but Armageddon for the EOS R. please explain?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Where have we said it's a bit problem for the EOS R?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

I suppose because Fuji offers a camera with IBIS for those that want it, but Canon does not?

I think lack of IBIS is a pretty significant drawback in both cases, personally, but that's because I only have one camera body, so it needs to be versatile.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

CanonSharpShooter

Maybe one is $1500 and the other is $2400. 🤷 But we'll just stick to Canon fanboys narrative, DPR is Bias!!.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

DangerouslyCheesey

I would imagine that the Fuji being nearly 1k dollars cheaper than the Canon has something to do with it.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

It still does not have Ibis which is a pity with all the nice Fuji primes. X-h1 is a last generation camera, especially in respect to AF and it is bulky.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

webber15

Lack of ibis is only significant for the techy types who can't get buy without every feature.

Fuji & Canon prioritize features that provide the optimum image quality...and that doesn't include ibis.

Same could be said for Nikon with their higher end cameras, which of course are dslrs.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Ajka

Impressive camera at a great price. If Olympus does not come up with an OMD EM-5 Mark III at a similar price point, I will likely switch over.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

armanius

I'd hope an EM5 iii is cheaper than $1500!

Oct 22, 2018permalink

You meant M1...I guess. A new M5 wouldn't be the equivalent to the X-T3 but rather to something in between the X-T3 und a coming X-T30...

Oct 22, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

The dynamic range test would be more useful if it would show that Iso 160 protects more highlights than other Fujifilm cameras with base Iso 200.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

"Ultimately the 1/3EV lower base ISO gives the X-T3 1/3EV extra dynamic range, since it can be given more light, which in turn slightly reduces the contribution of shot noise."
My impression is that downstream noise is more relevant than shot noise for high dynamic range scenes. It's mostly the downstream noise that makes base Iso shadows unusable. My Canon 350d has so much downstream noise that it's not worth shooting at base Iso.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Can you expand on this thought? Why would lower ISO yield higher noise with this sensor? My understanding is that there's less amplification, lower shot noise, and read noise is the same at any ISO. What am I missing?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

There is read noise that gets amplified when you choose a higher Iso. But there is also read noise that doesn't get amplified when you choose a higher Iso, that's downstream noise, so the downstream noise isn't important at high Isos.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Chris_Brln

First of all thank you very much for that great review.

However I am getting a bit confused: in the video you state that it can track moving subjects/people quite well. But in the written part you would not recommend it for running kids.

How should one interpret this?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Which video says that?

It's pretty good at tracking people (in general) but it's not quite responsive enough for running kids. So they've already run towards or past you by the time it's worked out that there's a face to be tracked.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Chris_Brln

Thanks for the reply - highly appreciate the direct comment.

That was my takeaway from the review video at around 8:40 - the AF test with the biker.

So do I understand correctly: if I would use face detection it would not get the kid. But with the right settings - not relying on face detection - this could be overcome?

I am just trying to figure out if this camera would make sense for all round family pictures. As I also want a somewhat reasonable small kit. So FF is not an option, considering the lens weight/bulk...

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

TW14

Good to know that it is not good enough for running kids as I am in the market for one. Still not sure if i should get 5DIV or a7iii though.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Causio

@Richard Butler how would it work with normal tracking (no face detection) and kids? Do you think it does better than a 5D mk III?

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Marcelobtp

Selling my nikon gear, Xt-3 will be my next camera.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

NexLupus

Tchau!!!

Oct 22, 2018permalink

CanonSharpShooter

Welcome to the future!

Oct 22, 2018permalink

I'm torn about this system. Clearly Fuji has a good thing going with this X-Trans sensor; it's a triple threat of great stills, great video, and great on-sensor AF.

However, I don't know if Fuji will play games with their lesser models, if they will ever put this exact sensor in a truly lightweight, affordable model, which is what I'm actually interested in as a nightscape / astro-landscape photographer.

In the past, Fuji has sometimes left the cheaper models to "make-do" with a lesser sensor that doesn't even have X-Trans tech, or not as good AF, or worse high ISO noise.

I have seen a shift with at least one of the slightly lighter, more affordable bodies, however, so maybe we can expect the X-T3 sensor to show up in the next-down class of camera, if not the ultra-basic beginner camera, which understandably might not be able to receive a flagship sensor.

I'm also waiting for Roki-Yang to do a 16 1.4 MILC like Sigma, since Roki-Yang tend to have even less coma than Sigma...

Oct 22, 2018permalink

larkhon

well, the X-T20 was not very far from X-T2. Of course you'd lose weather resistance, some fps and maybe AF performance but IQ was the same, in my experience.
But anyway, I don't think you'll find many manufacturers who are giving anything for free, Canon has always been famous for castrating their lesser cameras, Sony is keeping older models instead of releasing new entry/mid-level cameras, the sensor on the Olympus E-M1 II is not available on any other cameras...

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Impulses

I think one of the biggest question is when and whether IBIS will ever filter down from the XH1... I would've thought that would start to happen with the X-T3 but apparently not.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

The lack of X-Trans tech doesn't make the sensors "lesser." The real issue is simply that their lower end cameras that happen to have Bayer sensors (X-A5 and X-T100) use outdated processors, meaning they can't handle the data required for modern AF or video capabilities.

Otherwise, though, Fuji has been pretty good about filtering their higher-end sensors into their less expensive cameras. The X-T20's image quality is just as good as the X-T2, X-Pro2 or X-H1. Since that line has performed so well for Fuji, I imagine that eventually there will be an X-T30 as well. Really, an X-T200 with a better processor and Bayer sensor at a lower price point would be even better, but Fuji likes to create the artificial distinction of X-Trans = high-end, Bayer = low-end because it reinforces their marketing.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Yup, don't care about AF or FPS, as a nightscape & timelapse photographer, but I DEFINITELY miss weather sealing when it is removed. However, if it makes the camera that much cheaper and lighter, I'm still happy to have a flagship sensor in a compact, affordable body.

Speaking of "giving things away", Pentax had a long-standing tradition of putting weather sealing in even their most entry-level cameras. I don't know if that tradition still stands, but it was a selling point for them.

It really depends on what the company itself chooses to prioritize, based in who it thinks its strongest user base is. For example, Sony has made sure to put IBIS in every single full-frame body it makes, for video shooters, and now dual card slots for working pros too. Pentax has a large user base that love outdoor photography. Fuji has a solid user base, but I'm not exactly sure if they fall into one specific genre...

Oct 22, 2018permalink

@Androole,
Good to know; I'll keep an eye out for an....X-T30 (???) then?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Grive

They've been doing that with the X-TNN series. I'd guess they're going to release the X-T30 around January-March.

The cameras that don't get X-Trans usually are the casual-oriented entry-level cameras, where it makes sense to go more basic with everything.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

"In the past, Fuji has sometimes left the cheaper models to "make-do" with a lesser sensor that doesn't even have X-Trans tech, or not as good AF, or worse high ISO noise."

Not really...the X-E1 (as well as the X-M1) got the sensor of the Pro1, the X-T10/T-20 the sensors of the X-T1/T2 respectively. Guess, the X-T30 will get the sensor of the X-T3. Even the X-T100 has gotten the X-T2's sensor. The X70 got the sensor of the X-T1. And apart from the original X100 (which obviously was there before the X-Pro1) all subsequent X100 models got the sensor that was used in the flagship camera at the time.
The only cameras I'm not sure about are the X-A1 and A2. Both got a 16.3 MP sensor but no X-Trans color filter. The "base" sensor still could be the same as the respective one used for the X-Trans models at the time - just with a Bayer filter. But of course you cannot compare the absolute entry model to the flagship. It's crazy enough that all but the X-As got the flagship model sensors.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

bergat

With the complimens for the beautiful extensive and precious review. Thanks you!

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

D_Gunman

I can't imagine what a masterpiece the X-H2 will be when it comes out with Fuji XT3 hardware + IBIS. Anticipation is killing me.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

If it gets the Organic Sensor (could actually be within the time frame, provided they manage mass production) it will not just be a masterpiece but earth-shattering...

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Karroly

I am a bit skeptical about an organic sensor. Not in terms of image quality, but longevity. Organic stuff does not last long... It may be OK if you upgrade your camera frequently.

Oct 23, 2018*permalink

MasterWayne

Very interesting camera and nice write-up!
A question to the native speakers out there. From the conclusion:
"If you're interested in stills and video, though, it's knockout."
The sentence before that one is also positive and I'm wondering how to read the "knockout" here. Does it mean something like "killer argument" in a discussion? Judging from the rest of the article, the balance between stills and video is a major selling point, but I actually never heard the term in such a context. Thanks in advance! :)

Oct 22, 2018permalink

I'm no native speaker either but Collins Dictionary has to say the following:

"If you describe someone or something as a knockout, you think that they are extremely attractive or impressive."

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

BlinkNot

KO! - "it's a winner"

Oct 22, 2018permalink

AbrasiveReducer

I think it means the only people who won't enjoy this camera are photographers who are not interested in stills and not interested in video either.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

BlinkNot

@Abrasive i have to disagree, i think these "photographers" you meant would enjoy the XT3 as well.. it's really pretty they would use it as a fashion accessory.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

cosinaphile

a really superior review ....honest about iso25600 and above ...well written...thorough...intelligent

for those not "bewitched by full frame " me thinks a Pulitzer is due someone on staff.
anyway, thanks for your efforts.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Thank you for your kind words.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Indeed, the simple truth is that we have gotten to a point in sensor technology where an APS-C sensor is entirely capable of professional results, at any ISO or in any shooting condition that a full-frame camera is capable of professional results.

Yeah, full-frame might have a slight advantage here or there with image quality, but having a slight advantage is different from the simple fact that BOTH sensors are, like I said, "professionally acceptable". In other words, if you nail your exposures on this camera, you're probably actually doing better than anyone who "shoots sloppy" on a full-frame camera, and just tells themselves "I'll just fix it in post"...

So, the joke is on you, all you full-frame fankids, unless you're nailing every single image you take to within a 1/3-2/3 EV of "perfect".

Oct 22, 2018permalink

mxx

But if the XT3 guy and the FF guy both nail their shots, I guess the FF shot will be better, and there's not escape from that fact. I love both formats, by the way.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Yeah, I'm not sure why you'd assume that the Fuji photographer is inherently better at metering than the FF photographer. Weird logic.

My experience is that smaller sensors force you to be more sensitive to perfect exposure (whatever that happens to mean - for me, it is often underexposing to protect highlights), but it's only because your shooting envelope is smaller. It's not an advantage.

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

@mxx, of course, but let's be honest here, both shooters /might/ "nail", and miss, an equal number of shots. So, the point is sort of moot.

I simply wanted to point out that you CAN do better than a full-frame camera, on average, if you work harder to nail MORE shots than the average shooter.

@Androole,
I'm not assuming anything, just pointing out the possibility, and I'm encouraging anyone who has a "smaller" sensor to focus on nailing their shots.

Then again, you also help to prove my point by mentioning that users of smaller sensors do indeed tend to be more mindful of this stuff. It's not an "advantage", of course, to have to be more concerned about image quality. However, it turns into a superior overall final result, if you've trained yourself to do better than the "average" shooter.

Kinda like how shooting with a prime can teach you to pay closer attention to your framing and composition...

Oct 22, 2018*permalink

Son Of Waldo

Nice camera (and lens lineup) but for some reason I don't see myself ever becoming 'bewitched' with spending US $1-2K(+) on lenses that cover an APS-C sensor. Particularly when considering the (soon-to-be) four(4!) 'full-frame mirrorless' mounts available and the accompanying (and predictable) wide variety of new lens choices.

Oct 23, 2018permalink

cosinaphile

its a good point about shooters who are not nailing exposure , be they ff or apsc
are "wasting" often a stop or more by being blasé and making post adjustments

also at most isos except extreme, a well shot 24 mp asc or 24 mp ff are indistinguishable for nearly every everything detail dr bokeh etc

yes full frame can be better,, has more dr, often better high iso a little bit less
dof in a portrait situation in a side by side comparison , but the reality of shooting is %99.999 are not side by side shootouts , but just a camera and operator doing the best in the moment

a good shooter can do wonders, even on a professional level ,with any good m43, apsc ,FF,orMf camera out there

Oct 23, 2018permalink

TomHudsonVisual

The review states that some lenses don’t take full advantage of the camera’s autofocusing ability, but does not specify which lenses work best. Which lenses best access this camera’s AF capacity?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

In a perfect world, we'd have time to test every lens, but that's not really practical.

Generally the newer lenses (F2 primes and LM zooms are fast, with the earlier F1.4s not quite so fast to focus), but it's not been possible for us to test them all enough to feel able to publish.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

To expand on Richard's comment, Fuji lenses come with a string of letters behind their focal length that will include "LM" for lenses with linear motors.

Other reports suggest that the lenses that benefit the most from the X-T3's upgraded AF are the older lenses, the 35 F1.4, 23 F1.4, 56 F1.2. That, however, doesn't make them the fastest, just most improved. Two of the fastest lenses are the 16-55 F2.8 and 50-140 F2.8. The F2 primes are also very fast and attractively priced however you do give up IQ compared to their bigger brothers. This is particularly true of the 23 F2 and 50 F2. Read the reviews. :-)

Oct 22, 2018permalink

ogl

"The X-T3's image quality is impressive, especially at low ISO" is good, but I'd prefer sharper photos. And IQ is not better than other 24 MP APS-C cameras from N, S and P. As for me, Fuji's APS-C IQ lacks for sharpness. Stronger AA filter?

Oct 22, 2018permalink

jgbbxl

The joke's on you buddy. The X-T3 doesn't have an AA filter at all.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

All X-Trans Fujifilm DSLM doesn't have an AA Filter.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

kristian2000

I don't have a X-T3, but I just got a X-E3, I barely have to sharpen at all in PP!

Oct 22, 2018permalink

mxx

"The joke's on you buddy. The X-T3 doesn't have an AA filter at all."

Well if the shots seems unsharp, and the camera does not have an AA filter, then the joke is of course not on the OP.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

danny006

I agree, the X-T3 images look soft and washed out, raw and jpeg. Compare it to the A6500, night and day difference.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

Bernie Ess

As far as I know, dpreview use always Adobe converters, which is known for X- Trans files to be mushier and less detailed than other converters. Iridients X- Transformer will make them as sharp as the Sonys, plus the better colors.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

DangerouslyCheesey

Sample images have always been the weakest point of camera reviews in large part because a lot of the final image quality is determined by choices the authors make such as settings, post processing tool and preferences, etc.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

SmilerGrogan

Great review except for one slight slip up in the cons: “A tripod or gimbal is needed to get the best of the camera's video.”
If you want the best out of a video camera there are many more, and better tools, starting with the 73-foot Chapman Telescoping crane, the 600-horsepower Hurricam camera car built on a Lamborghini, and the Triton 36000 submersible that can take your Fuji and a three-person camera crew as deep as 11,000 meters.

Oct 22, 2018permalink

“A tripod or gimbal is needed to get the best of the camera's video,” is a much nicer way of saying, “A tripod or gimbal is needed to get acceptable video.”

Oct 22, 2018permalink

SmilerGrogan

There’s that.
People really underestimate the time, effort, and brains it takes to become even just mediocre with a video camera. Passable takes two or three years after that.

Oct 23, 2018permalink