Fujifilm X-T4 review

As for the E-M1 III, it is similarly an overpriced camera put together with old parts, including the same 4-year-old sensor, although it has some slightly higher specs than its predecessor, those are outdated specs. Its sensor can't even compete with the old X-T2. However, it has an even higher price than the new X-T4 camera, which has all the features that current technology has to offer. A comparison would be embarrassing/1

But isn't the point of a comparison exactly to highlight the differences/similarities between cameras in the same target market or price range? If a comparison would be "embarrasing" (which IMO is an over-exaggeration in this case), then even more reason to inform the potential buyers about it.

The 'weak' reason given is the actual reason: the width of the site only allows us to fit five cameras in a line before everything starts to look impossibly cramped. But, rather than ignore it, I explained it and linked back to a comparison table it is in.

Your observation: that it would 'win' in the sections highlighted is an interesting one. If you'd just said that instead of implying it was intentional (it isn't: I selected the cameras, built the table, researched the specs and then looked which boxes would be highlighted), I would have recommended your comment as insightful.

Thanks for the reply.

It's about journalistic integrity.

It still doesn't make sense to omit the camera that is a direct competitor, released at the same time, while keeping any of the other cameras in the table.

As the author/editor of the initial review for both the E-M1.3 and X-T4 you are aware of the 400K vs 300K shutter life, even if you do not include the E-M1.3 in the table.

Yet in the X-T4 initial review you write:

"As you can see, the X-T4 offers a competitive all-round spec. It promises the fastest shooting, the most durable shutter and video spec that tops even the updated G9 to the best-in-class title. "

The X-T4 does not have "the most durable shutter" as stated.
Nor does it have top-of-the-class/segment IBIS as implied.
Additionally, the USB-C adapted headphone output is kludgy at best, requiring a splitter if one needs headphone out and power input at the same time. Clearly, that box should be coloured red (there is now a DPR opinion piece that says so).

It's not so much a question of journalistic integrity, more one of 'how many camera specs can Richard hold in his head at any one time.' I'm a nerd about this kind of thing but was busy trying to research whether Fujifilm had put a lifespan number on its shutters before.

I've just got off a flight and will re-address the text as soon as I get a moment.

And presumably buy some more headphones for when you get back to your computer?

If it's not a problem for you, that's great. But, having tried to pack the X-T4 so I can try to shoot some video this weekend, I found myself checking for the dongle three times because I can't afford to forget it. I'm currently listening to my headphones on a flight, and my phone doesn't recognize them if the dongle it attached.

Who does not have at least 5 sets of headphones!

Is there and documented certification from Fuji showing which lenses do 15 fps AF? Or any reviews?

It will not only get gold it will likely win camera of the year.

Yes, but that really doesn't reflect the state of the market in 2020, does it?

Marxter, hopefully the rumors of X-E line being discontinued aren't true. That's the only lineup that seems to be more in line with "pure" photography.

That sounds lovely, but the reality is a little different. A while ago I had a job where I had to use a Canon M camera. I am fully aware that I can make just as good photos with a Canon M as I do with my fujifilm camera. it is just that... having to get into the (in my opinion) way less than perfect touch screen interface to set up the most basic settings totally shifted my focus away from the scene I was photographing as I was immersed in the camera's user interface. Paradoxically, I believe the 'all cameras are equal in every way' is exactly the kind of conclusion one may reach by comparing specs and deciding they do not matter, while someone who is under pressure to deliver the decent photo will tell you that their preferences in reality do matter very much.

I can't understand how the AF on the XT3 can identify and lock on an eye but not track a simple object eg ball against a different background. Can only be deliberate.

simjn - Face and Eye detection involve specific pattern-recognition algorithms, which isn't the case for tracking, where you could point the camera at something of literally any size, shape or colour. A disparity between face detection and tracking is not evidence that anything's been withheld.

There's no evidence at all that Fujifilm has held the X-T3 back. There is evidence that it has committed R&D resources to it even after its launch, which is the opposite of what's being suggested.

Indeed, it's pretty harsh to critique them for "crippling" the T3. It was pretty a huge leap in AF performance when it was launched, and even improved quite a lot. I'm pretty sure the AF performance was a positive factor when you bought it. I know it was for me.

That being said, i also kind of worry about the Fujifilm late attitude about not being that "kaizen" as they used to. Also DPR had an article about that, and the last AF improvement just before T4 announcement worry me that even if there will be an update, it will take some longer than needed time. It would be nice for Fuji to return firmly to their previous "all in" behavior that we all started to appreciate them for.

I am happy my computer is smaller than the ones they made 1965.

Thanks Phil. Your comment added exactly nothing to a conversation about a very specific camera. Super helpful!

Err, I said what I said to answer a very specific point someone made, and to highlight the fact that most of the discussion is based on futile points or in some cases arguments. But then there is always someone like you who comes along and makes a point about me adding nothing by adding the very thing I’m accused of! Pot kettle black!

No it's not the best mirrorless for video...with these:

Crop at 4K 60p, not 400 Mbps, still 4:2:0... and not for H.264 codec.
H.264 mode reduces all video to 8-bit.
also 240 fps (1080p) with big x1,3 crop.

All camera's have limitations.

Perhaps you should try before you shout! Unfortunately there is no foreseeable way that I will be able to upgrade from my secondhand XT-2 but that hands down beats every other camera I've ever tried in low light (Nikon-full frame D810, Olympus, Panasonic) and comes so close to my pro pals Sony's that my old eyes can't tell! 90% of my work is in the golden hour or after it and I rarely have to use a tripod. Noise is still virtually undetectable.

But the full frame is still a crop sensor compared with MF. Why stop there?

But why should I get a Z6 when for the same price I can get the much better equipped X-T4?

Because not everyone wants FF. As simple as that.

@MartynasMartynas should I say again the reasons?? IBIS? Autofocus? Video? Dual-Slot card? Better lenses? Fuji also can use autofocus adapter for Canon lenses. Not to mention crazy prices for Z lenses!

Weight, size, and price of XT-4 compared to A7 III/ Nikon Z6 are basically the same.

XT-4 is a high-end crop camera while A7/Z6 is a mid-range FF camera. If you need the additional features of XT-4 maybe it will be a good purchase. Otherwise, I think that for a newcomer, in the long run, FF camera will be a better investment because camera bodies come and go, but good lenses stay for years, even decades.

Well. you forgot to mention, that you can get other Fuji-x cameras for way less. The X-T3 has basically the same Sensor and Processor, T-T30, X-E3 or even the X-A7 are alle great cameras, that have basically the same IQ like the X-T4.

I did not forget to mention anything because we are talking about XT-4 and her direct competitors in the same price range.

In low-end to mid-range cameras, crop sensors do make a lot of sense because you can buy low-end Fuji with an awesome lens and in 1-2 years upgrade to mid-rang Fuji.

On the other hand, you can buy Canon RP for $850 with a good lens and in the future upgrade to mid-range/high-range FF Canon camera.

So as you can see all crop sensors are in a tough spot unless you want to go with a very small and light configuration and this is where M43 really shines.

This why I bought the Olympus EM5 Mark III, but if I were looking for a camera in the $2,000 price range I will go FF unless the crop sensor camera will give me features that I really want and only can be found in a $4,000 FF camera.

This was my 2 cents on the matter.

Your basis for comparison is superficial, LevAizik - just FF vs APS-C. FF is not necessarily superior to APS-C. Not by a long shot. You don't take into account differences in sensors, haptics, distinctions in lens offerings, uses etc. Pros often choose Fuji XT series bodies over Sony A7/A9 bodies for exactly that reason. Nikon Z series bodies are not taken seriously yet due to the lack of lenses and other issues. Journalists will still reach for the D850 first. Educate yourself more about the differences in bodies and brands before sounding off so authoritatively.

The X-T4 is the high end product of the X-Series, with higher specs than the FF cameras in the same price range. So of course people who buy this camera know what they need.

And in the end you also have to look at the whole system. With Fuji-X, you always have the option to build a compact system, even with the X-T4. So it's more than the camera itself.

Lev, good points but you forgot about the lenses. Those XF lenses are smaller and lighter (as Mr. Butler said), and they are oh so good. Many of us went from Canon and Nikon FF to Fuji APSC and XF glass years ago because of that. But it is true that Sony and Nikon have amazing FF mirrorless products and glass very close to that price point. Yes, plenty of options out there. Fuji is the APSC and MF option, should you choose to go that way. The XT-4 and X100v. Very nice..... And all that great XF glass just sitting there for you to pick from.
Anyway, APSC sensors are not in a "tough spot" as you claim. On the contrary, APSC is the sweet spot in my opinion for 8 reasons I could list if they gave me enough characters here. All these cameras are so good now. But Fuji is not in a tough spot. They are in the sweet spot w APSC and high-end spot w MF - not the tough spot by any means. FF? I love my high-res FF camera but the FF wars are going to be bloody and not all will survive.

The video features are high end that would cost much more if it would be in a FF camera. The Z6, a7iii and Canon R don't come close to these video features. I think in the $1600-1800 price range for video the ASPC is the way to go but for stills FF is the way too go ( unless you specifically need the crop factor). If you need a combination camera for video and stills, an APSC camera is the way to go.

@LevAizik Ah yes the Sony A7III with the worst viewfinder in its class, and the Z6, which despite being a good camera is dependent on a thin supply of overpriced native lenses, and only with a clunky viewfinder can it make use of some, not all, FX lenses. Any newcomer to photography would be well advised to steer well clear of either of these models regardless of their needs. if you wish to make the case for the virtues of a FF sensor, feel free. There are many advantages, but they are unlikely to be found in the cameras you suggest. As for the EOSRP which you mention above, I would not recommend that offering to my worst enemy.

LeviAizik

You are just wrong in this case. And it is not a matter of opinion, but fact.

if you can show me how the A7III beats the X-T4 in terms of overall specs - especially video where the Sony is crippled with 8 bit - then I will happily buy you a new A7IIi with my own money.

Trust me, the Fuji crushes the Sony in video and produces noticeably superior image quality.

X-T4 does many things better(not everything) but we are talking about a 2020 camera vs 2018 one. Guys, the X-T3 shipped 5 months AFTER the A7 III and now we are talking about the X-T4. This doesn't mean you shouldn't go with Fujifilm but we are comparing different gen cameras. Fujifilm did a great job but so did they in 2018 just like Sony hit a homerun with the A7 III in 2018.

I hear you clickclack. I love the way my XH-1 feels vs my XT-3. But many people love the XT 1/2/3 ergo. I like them both, but love the big grip and feel of the XH-1. I don't think Fuji will trump their new XT-4 with a new XH-2 anytime soon like they did with the XT-3 when they trumped their own new XH-1. Fuji learned from that. I don't know what they are going to do. I just know that they will never go FF. So people can stop fantasizing about that. 😁

Greg, I believe they are keeping the XT3 around along with the XT4 simply because the XT3 hasn't been out that long, is still a very relevant and popular camera and is now at a lower price point. I do believe that in the long run Fuji will put IBIS into their XT series from here on out. I can't imagine the XT5 without IBIS.

As to a new sensor, yes that always helps from a marketing standpoint, but the current sensor is pretty much class leading for APS-C. I don't know that Sony, which makes their sensors, offers anything better right now. With the slowing camera market, we may see less updates to sensors.

BTW, I see from your Flickr page that in Jan you embarked on a 7 week tour of SE Asia; has that been impacted by the Coronavirus?

Oh yes. We arrived in Bangkok over 7 weeks ago before the virus news broke. We have been traveling all over Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam since then getting great deals with few tourists and no Chineses groups that usually dominate the scene here, and of course worried about the virus. In Hanoi now heading home soon. We want to keep going but I'm getting more worried about the official reaction to the virus than the actual virus. I don't want to get stuck somewhere or be told where we have to go next and that could happen.

- Not all people need IBIS (like me).
- Some people prefer the tilt screen (like me).
- Some people prefer less size and less weight (like me).
- Some people prefer a lower price (like you).

How so? FF image quality is inferior to MF anyway lol

And for those who want MF, Fuji has you covered there as well!

@Photoman As a MFT user through 10 years and a full frame user too, I agree. This could more or less replace both for me.

@Doom Scythe The pic quality is decided by me, not by my camera. This camera has the advantage of being as small as most MFT camera, but still with a larger sensor and at least as many features.

Hmm thought I'd been able to get back to the "set time"screen but depends how basic you want it-what's so important? Seems like an arbitrary manufacturer decision. I suppose it goes with the territory of not opening up the firmware, with an Android bootloader you could do whatever.

Well Advent, I guess it is for many other people instead of you then.

I didn't know that about the XT100 screen. If that's the case, this change for the X-T4 is even more silly. I am obviously not alone in being unhappy with it.

@Thoughts R Us - that's like saying, if a celebrity likes something, then I automatically like it. It's a weak argument, but nevertheless the majority of people in society operate on that basis.

List down the positives and negatives of the Canon screen, and very quickly, many people will say, it draws attention to itself when it is flipped sideways. That's ok when you are the subject because you know you're taking the picture or video. But when others are the subject, that's when it is obtrusive. The Fujifilm X-T100 screen never had this disadvantage, and had all the advantages of the Canon screen.

Why didn't Fujifilm use their own X-T100 screen? Because of this phenomenon that the majority of consumers like to follow the crowd.

Never shot a medium format camera, either, eh?

Lol found the guy who pays thousands just to avoid learning a new sequence of focal lengths

99% of the people on this site don’t need the Fuji

It’s all in your head

The needing part

"most people "

"Buying decisions are not rational in this way. Do you anyone would buy a Corvette if they were?"

Most people do not buy Corvettes. Almost no one does. More people probably buy Pentax cameras.

Anyway, the XT4 is better in more ways than any FF camera under $4000, than a FF is better than an XT4.

Simply put, the XT4 does MORE, BETTER, for less money. So it is a better fit for "more people".

Unless you want to use legacy 'full frame' lenses as many for example sony users do. There it becomes irrelevent.

Don’t fall for the FF kool aid.

The EOS RP has a terrible spec compared to the Fuji and even though the sensor is larger it is inferior. It is a budget camera specced down to a price. The RP is slow, has a low resolution EVF, poorer AF, much worse DR and terrible video.

The A7R2 has a great sensor but is slow and clunky. It has great IQ but is
cheap because it is slow. It is an old design . Great for landscapes and portraits though - I used to own one.

I say this as a FF owner - but there really is too much emphasis on the sensor size. The BSI sensor of the Fuji is excellent - the latest tech. I urge people to forget about the sensor size because it doesn’t matter 99% of the time.

Yes - and corvette person says that no one with any sense spends $2000 on a camera body. Do you get what I am saying here? We are in a special, self selected, group of people here. We are like the corvette guys (who would buy a corvette) only - for cameras.

The problem with arguing from analogy is that then we argue about the analogy.

I will add to that. The problem with the corvette analogy, is that in some ways this Fuji camera is the corvette, it's fun to use, very nice looking design, fast and responsive. So the Fuji is kind of both: it's the more practically priced option, but it also has that emotional appeal that cars like a corvette do.

So let's not sell Fuji short on its emotional and design appeal. It has that too.

most people do not buy cameras these days....

You make far too much sense for DPReview. Be careful or you could get banned.

>>>Fujifilm Convert Oh wait, the truth is there was never a single shot close to 20 minutes.

Musical concerts, Corporate conferences, Medical procedures, etc...

I do use multiple cameras on some shoots and it's important that any camera you set up to film a specific angle will keep filming during the 2-3 hour event.

There are lots of people shooting live events and right now there are very few hybrid cameras that can film with no time limit. ( most of these are Panasonic cameras. When will the other camera brands wake up ? )

You never want to be artificially limited by the equipment you use...

I’ve started to take videography seriously after decades shooting stills only.

I can truthfully state two things :

1. I have never had a problem with the 30 minute limit

2. I would never , ever choose to watch a film lasting more than 30 minutes from a single point without a pause or edit.

>>>2. I would never , ever choose to watch a film lasting more than 30 minutes from a single point without a pause or edit.

You're not thinking this through. I'm talking about image acquisition, where you film a 2+ hour event with multiple cameras, and then decide in post how you're going to use the footage you shot. Nobody shoots a live event and then dumps the full 2+ hours without editing.

In Dec 2018 I shot a three day medical conference with my GH5 camera instead of using a pro ENG camera, and the finished footage was the best live event footage I've shot in more than a decade.

In Aug 2019 I shot a handheld POV walkthrough with the director of a medical clinic using the IBIS in my GH5 to stabilize the footage, and the raw footage was a single 33 minute shot that was cut down to 10 minutes in the finished video.

I was hoping that the X-T4 would not have the same recording limitations that the X-T3 has, but that's not the case. ( ...and they removed the headphone jack !!! )