Fujifilm X-T4 review

It doesn't hinder the photographic process in anyway, it's just a shame about the post processing faff for no benefit. I've found that Adobe's Enhanced details does a good job of removing the X-Trans artifacts. Better than Irrident or Capture One.

I had to sell my X-E3 because of X-Trans but I loved everything else about the Fuji system. Enhanced details has made it viable for me again.

It's a pain to wait but I don't see any other way to get acceptable results in Lightroom/Photoshop. Irrident is quicker but less detail, Capture One is quicker but doesn't completely remove the watercolour/worms and requires a whole new work flow.

It's why I hate X-Trans, there's quite litterally not a single benefit to it, only downsides. It's a shame because otherwise Fuji offer a really good system.

I know it won't be forever, Fuji will likely drop it in the near future so I just have to ride it out.

@Fujifilm Convert has he considered using a power bank to keep his camera powered? You can record indefinitely with a USB-C power bank.

Considering it does 10 bit 4k /60 the Fuji beats every Sony and Canon mirrorless you can buy.

That’s not a bad place to be for Fuji.

Panasonic gets two categories, but Pentax don't even get one. Must be a paid comment. ;)

Battery life has always been Fuji's weakness and FYI many of their cameras do not support battery grips.

You needed 4 bodies? Most of the National Geographic guys only take two. My Alaska trip needed only one body. Maybe mine was less epic?

I concur with @influxphoto. I never had issues with battery life on my X-T3. On most days one is enough. On the toughest days I was able to empty three. 🤔

In a few years the new battery will be the new normal, and we'll all have better battery life.

I agree, I can get around 1500 - 2000 pictures out of two batteries. I barely use the third one. And it costs almost no time to swap a battery anyway, so it was never an issue for me.

20 FPS (15 mechanical shutter), C4k, 4k/60p, H.265, 10 bit video, 1080 video at up to 240 fps, Fully articulated rear touchscreen, Dual UHS-II card slots, are not high end?

What other camera has those features?

And they all have the same sensor, USB 2.0, no UHS-II, limited Max shutter speed, only 11 fps, limited video specs, and so on.

Those are entry level while this camera is for enthusiasts.

@Victor: Seriously??
If you complain about the grip size of Sony in a thread on the Fuji, have you taken a close look at what Fuji actually offers as grip size?

The XT4 has a few mm more than the XT3. This comparison shows that even the dated A6000 has way more of a grip than the XT3. A7M3 or A6600 offer large grips.
See comparison:
https://camerasize.com/compact/#535.446,831.847,777.681,800,ha,t

Sometimes it makes you wonder...

The XT4 does a whole heap of stuff a Sony cannot do in video.

The difference is HUGE !

The most notable being the fact that all Sony's are stuck at 8 bit colour only. Fuji does 10 bit internally. This makes a massive difference potentially when grading -the Fuji will produce noticeably more flexible files with more colour, better skin tones, more flexibility, better shadows, more highlights recovery etc etc - even though the sensor is smaller the Fuji IQ is noticeably superior to any Sony in terms of video right now.

Sony will have to produce camera with 10 bit internal video and improved color science - until them Fuji is crushing them.

EVFs today are different that EVFs in 2013. So you are comparing apples to oranges.

Yes the 3,690,000 1.25x EVF in this camera is often better than an OVF, but the current 2,359,296 1.07× EVF found in today's Sony's 'flagship' APSC camera (that is really from 2013) is probably not.

No. There were people here using the word 'never'. I remember.

And yes - the mirrorless crowd was saying "yes - it isn't ready to kill off DSLR yet - but as tech improves it will take over". And there was the DSLR camo saying it would never happen and that mirrorless could never be good enough.

Olympus is "OK". Sony APSC camera EVFs are worse.
Panasonic and Nikon have some good ones

I second Peter's request. Thanks!

Of course. My comments apply to it as well. Simpler means simpler, much simpler.

Stills only.

Minimalist design with essential exposure controls only. A great sensor. Clutter free viewfinder, essential information only to exposure. A clutter free menu, essential menu items to control and exposure only.

No video. No overly complicated or unnecessary external controls.

This viewpoint will get lost or buried easily on a site like DPReview. It's not the right site to share this viewpoint. Branch out and you'll see many photographers wanting the same thing. Camera companies need to do the same.

There's a market out there for specific designed cameras.

And I've heard all the arguments about setting a camera up your way and forgetting it. Ignore the features you don't need. Etc. etc.

Fact is you can't ignore them. They are all over the camera and inside the camera. It's like finding one person in a crowd of people. I don't want to have to do that.

I do not understand the principal objection to features, as long as they are not getting on the way of me using the camera. For example, I never use video -- but the feature is so well tucked away, that I see no reason to be bothered simply because I know it is there.

I like the Fujifilm cameras exactly for the reason that I do not need to know anything about the features I am not interested in. There are the dials for the basic photography and lots of assignable function keys, so I have exactly the things I want available, and nothing more.

Things do not bother me simply because they exists. If they do not bothe me, I have no reason to be bothered by them.

One small thing that <i>does</i> bother me (and where I disagree with the reviewer) is that they replaced the exposure mode dial. I use that a lot. Oh, and the flip-and-twist screen. These two things are a step away from basic photography.

why don't you just ignore the video function of the camera? I can easily just ignore it, it is in no regards in the way for taking photos, not even a bit.
And what is so complicated with the external controls? Each button is important and has quite a basic function:
Aperture
Shutter speed
ISO
Exposure compensation
____
AF Joystick or cursor
Menue button
Play Button
Delete Button
On/Off Button
AEL Button
...

which one is not neccessary?? And the menues are not THAT complicated. And if you are a "exposure settings only" type of guy you set your menue once and don't touch it for ages.
"Branch out and you'll see many photographers wanting the same thing" says who? I guess the camera manufacturers know better and made their research.
And for your claimed market, this would be such a very small niche, that a camera for that would be very, very expensive.

After my comment about hearing all the same arguments, there are three more comments I've heard before. Trust me, you aren't saying anything I don't already understand or have considered.

That's no slight on you, trust me, I get your points. But I'm making a completely different point.

Ok Mr. fancy pants, tell me how I make the flip out screen behave like the better solution for stills photographers in the X-T3? Tell me how I use the still/movie switch like it was before on the X-T3. These are two things for the worse considering photo only that you cannot simply ignore.

Apart from that I totally dig the concept of simplifying things. Have a look at the Q2 or even X-E3. Problem for the E3 is it works only as entrance level with its subpar viewfinder, small size and tiny user interface. And it is missing the flexible screen and ibis of course. Again, look at the Q. Pro 3 can go to school @Leica and learn some things.

I do not want to pay 15000$ for a Leica plus lenses and I do not want an entry level camera. Fuji is the next best thing but they are loosing it lately in regards to simplicity, pumping in the video crap.

I've never used the video function on any of my cameras (I've gone from Olympus/Panasonic to Nikon to Sony). I never felt the video functionality got int he way of still photography. And it's not like it costs much to add that functionality - especially on mirrorless cameras, where high cadence readout of the sensor is necessary for the viewfinder.

@emerson
Best for what.....?
Not wildlife - probably Nikon D500
Not resolution - Canon M6 ll
Not video - A Sony I believe
Not sales - lots of cams sell more..
Not compactness - lots of smaller options...
So maybe the best all rounder perhaps....?

@Kandid Best of being well-rounded. Fujifilm only falls behind Sony in AF department but the quality is far superior. 4K60fps? 400Mbps? All-I? 10bit internal and 4:2:2 output? Sony does not have it yet but Fuji has those.

Kandid - Fuji absolutely crushes Sony for video. Sony still do only 8 bit video for example - and that is something that really, really matters when you are grading.

Sony have fallen way, way behind on video specs.

The X-t4 is the very best specced hybrid cam you can buy right now. No Sony or Canon comes close in terms of specs at the moment.

I think we are at crossed purposes.

For video - there is no subject tracking but there IS face and eye tracking ( and animal tracking too ) with the latest FW. I find I only want to track faces or animals and the Fuji does a great job at this in video AF.

I do not agree. And until a week ago I had an EOS R compare it with.

I certainly agree that Canon DPAF is very good, no question.

But I do not agree that Fuji AF is far behind.

Put it another way, I have been shooting stills and films with X-T3 and I have not been cursing the AF. It has never presented a problem for me.

As a fellow Fujifilm user, I am unimpressed by the continual difficulty behind Fujifilm interfaces. I am not talking about metering or exposure (though serious problems exist), but the small things that usually are invisible that you expect to work a way and they don't. Touch interface for menus, touch drag and the like as is seen on Canon's cameras.

Absolutely, output for video, X-T3 is king. But the interface to get to that point is years behind. In fact, the first time I used an 80D I thought I had gone to heaven. It was so simple and reliable, but its output was poor next to the X-T3. Despite its bad output, the simplicity of using it next to the X-T3 really made it hard to use the X-T3 back to back with it.

Fujifilm's interfaces are sometimes good, but often dismally straddling two worlds. I hope that changes.

Resolution is not much different. Can the Canon compete with the dynamic range and low amount of rolling shutter? Maybe someone know and can answer.
The sensor is a generation or so better than what Sony uses for APSC (which is weird because Sony makes the XT4 sensor). The old Sony is only capable of about 10 FPS and has the worst rolling shutter of any camera.

I don't think the difference in resolution, high ISO noise or DR is that significant in practice. The latest Canon sensors have improved the DR to the point where it's not a major problem anymore (if it ever was). Maybe the 26 MP Sony has the edge in read-out speed, though?

I find it difficult to compare fuji iso performance to canon,nikon and sony:
the sistem fuji uses to measure iso is different, if you check on dpreview image comparison tool you'll notice that for the same iso the fuji has always a faster shutter speed. There is like a 2/3rd stops difference... so fuji 6400iso is more like iso 10000 for canon, nikon and sony

Mark3794 - In Raw mode, we give all the cameras the same exposures and process them to the same brightness, so that you can compare sensor performance on a common basis.

Kandid - I must admit, I thought I'd written 'arguably' the best or 'probably' the best. Obviously if resolution is the priority for you then the Canon sensor is better for you.

I meant in all-round terms: it has DR and high-ISO performance to match the previous-gen 24MP. But it has lower rolling shutter than the 24MP chip, meaning use all its pixels for its video (which the Canon chip can't) and also deliver oversampled 4K 60p, albeit with a crop.

There's a discussion to be had about whether Fujifilm squeezes the most out of it, but the underlying sensor is really good.

Why ?? It has better quality with good glasses, has IBIS and good battery life. And it is smaller.

Ergonomics are inferior, Ibs is inferior, 5 fps slower, No 4k 60, No 240 fps, No dual UHS-II cards, dumpster fire menus, Inferior auto WB, Inferior JPGs, looks and feels like a sony remote control, Star eater, limited long exposure settings without using bulb, lack of manual dials.

There is a lot more to a camera than the sensor

In reviews IBIS makes 4 - 5 stop stabilization of Sony. I shoot raw many times.WB or Jpgs doesn't interest me actually. If I get a full performance from high end cam, I shoot raw. Actually I don't like the design but quality is good. I don't mean fuji is bad. I am really happy with that. But X-T3 and 4 is same in photo quality. No need to change or buy for stills I think.For videographers, it is good but I don't think sony is bad at video. I don't know the lack of dual card, not good.

Probably people who like Fuji/have Fuji lenses. This is a high end aps-c, the full frames at this price are not (of course they are still great etc but may lack features)

15fps mech shutter is d6/1dx territory

Because I like to use Fuji cameras more than others. The dials, ergonomics, film simulation, superb jpeg files ooc, great lenses etc. I don't understand why sensor size is such a big factor to some. For the type of photography I do (street, portrait, event), there is nothing I can't do with a Fuji camera.

Oohhh yes :-)
You can use a gimble when missing IBIS
You can use external monitor when missing articulated screen
You can use external battery when the internal is weak
You can focus manually....

Look at this picture. How long time do you think the USB will hold the pull and movement of the hanging headphone cable?

https://2.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS250x0~articles/3092032226/product/Fujifilm-X-T4-headphones-01.jpeg

Creatives care about composition and productivity in Photography, no need for duct tape or to crop manually hundreds of pictures when a simple code can take care of this.
A Live Crop can also affect Exposure and Auto-focus at the moment of taking the picture so it is not only for visualization purposes.

while i don't like much cropping options, having a 4x3 ratio grid guide (similar to the HD one) would be nice.

But the "It is perplexing the irrationality of this." phrase looks pretty funny, as beside cameras where that is the native sensor ratio nobody else really has it. And except iPads ... i can hardly find other devices that do have 4x3 ratio. :)

It is not only about filling up the display, sometimes a client requires a 4:3 final image for whatever reason or just for composition, the subject looks better framed as 4:3, which is often the case with classical portraits.
You don't go and produce all your pictures at 3:2 just because that is your camera sensor native AR. That is not photography.

My point was simply that it is not a common seen feature in any 3x2 sensor camera (FF or APSC), that is all - so suddenly being so outraged because of it and calling it "perplexing irrational" seems completely out of place.
I usually crop the images as i see fit, nothing against cropping, and the 4x3 is a classic, indeed. Also totally agree that would not be a bad thing to have it directly in camera (or at least as a shooting guide, as i suggested).
But i guess you know true photography and all your true cameras have this option :)

Everything they did in the film days was "not photography"? Cropping has been a part of photography since the earliest days.

It is a very common feature, Canon, Nikon and Sony have it. Even lesser Fujifilm cameras like the XT100, XT200 have it, that is why is insane and irrational not to have it in a new camera like this costing more than $1,000.

Have you heard about Photoshop? Crop tool and there you go, your 4:3 ratio!

What a troll, every single Fuji article you came with your same whining. Stay with M43 and be happy.

You post the same comment with every camera being released. Don't you ever get tired of it?

Unfortunately, trolls never get tired. But indeed, Photatroll has copy-paste the same BS like 40 times.

Completely agree.

4:3, and, of course, 5:4 aspect ratio. The classic format used by many masters like Atget.

I like my X-T2 and do consider the upgrade, but Fujifilm is really missing an opportunity to give us more artistic freedom. I actually once bought a Canon S95 just to have this format.

Fuji discontinued the X-H1 in November 2019. after a relentless discounting during most of 2019. There is no announced successor. I would say that is a sure sign that X-H line is not alive and well. RIP.

I liked the grip on the H

Yes even Lazarus would have a hard time coming back in the X-H line. Fujifilm had to resort to almost giving it away.

Well, I don't feel the need for IBIS but it's nice to have.. however i feel the need for a photo screen and not at all for a video oriented one :)

"burning the dead dinosaurs to travel and transport"

Oil doesn't come from dead dinosaurs.

it's a common used ironic/sarcastic phrase ... and I thought it is pretty obviously sarcastic without crossing my mind that someone will correct that. But hey we're on internet, and on DPR on top of that...

@badi First off, do not put your words into My mouth: I never mentioned lithium. Furthermore, dinosaurs aren't murdered for oil. Your sentiments, not Mine.
Yes, I'm very critical (to say the least) of people consuming flesh of murdered animals and milk of raped animals. But again, despite the presence of parallels between murdering animals and munching on their flesh, these aren't the same thing. I know a lot of people who wouldn't murder animals, but are so accustomed to munching on meat (and dairy) that they would need to be hard-pressed to change their eating habits. To lack the will power to quit eating animals murdered by some hick in a slaughterhouse is one thing, to actually slaughter animals whether in a slaughterhouse, in a barn or paddock, in a forest, savannah, desert or sea - is something entirely different - a perfectly subhuman exploit.

And how those people eating meat at a restaurant or in a sandwich, or enjoying a nice ice cream would be able to do that if some "subhubans" would not exist to kill that pigs or get that milk? I would not be happy to be called subhuman by some snob keyboard warrior without a clue...

Tell me again how is that different if you choose to use coconut or almond milk instead of regular milk? They are also products of agriculture, often on the other side of the globe (involving underpayed people, huge transport costs, and whatnot), which require (now or at some point) the destruction of vast natural habitats, killing wild animals and endangering animal and plant species.

There is no "right" way to eat your cake, be it vegan or not. The sense of superiority is just a poor understanding of reality.

Remember when we thought only birds could fly? Then human innovation changed the equation...

Don't be an idiot. Technology does not stand still.

So it went from a conversation about IBIS to people being told not to be idiots or stupid. That's a pity because DPREVIEW can be a great forum

What are you guys even talking about? The size difference between most of these mirrorless cameras and a similar level DSLR is huge. Compare a Nikon Z7 or Sony A7R IV side by side with a D850. Almost half as big!

As for the X-T4 and X-H1, they're comparable in size the smallest, lowest end APS-C DSLRs, but remember that these are the top cameras in Fuji's lineup (short of the ultra-high end MF bodies) and they're intended to compete with an APS-C flagship, something like a Nikon D500, which, again: Way, way larger. The model that competes with the D7500 is not the X-T4, it's the the X-T30, which is half the size.

Well, as Orem said, the size advantage is still pretty obvious if you make an apple-to-apple comparison.
But when a camera becomes a production tool, it has to act like one. Small size is cool for some things, but if you go for a camera that one professional uses full day, it has to have a comfortable handling. And that includes a reasonable size to fit in the hand and not in the pocket, enough and well positioned external direct controls, etc.

Weight is a big part of comfort too though, if you're going to be holding a camera all day, and pro-level mirrorless cameras are generally around 500-800 grams (except for medium format and Panasonic's giant monsters) versus around 900-1500 grams for a pro-level DSLR.

Being able to shave off nearly half the weight of the body is a big deal.

Bodies yes, might be closer, but I guess you haven’t put into the equation the size and weight of Fuji primes vs FF lenses right?

There's still plenty of smaller MILCs and seemingly a demand for them as well, just because the flagship model in each line was up-sized to cater to certain needs doesn't mean they all were or will ever be. An Oly E-M5 Mark-w/e is smaller than an E-M1 II/III, and an X-T40 or X-T300 will in all likelihood carry on being smaller than an X-T4... Never mind Sony's APS-C bodies which are all pretty small, or the EF-M lineup, or Fuji's X-E/X-A bodies for that matter.

Comparing a mid to high end Nikon APS-C DSLR vs higher end A7/Z/EOS R FF bodies seems just a bit disingenuous. The D500 stood at the top of the Nikon APS-C lineup, not the D7500, here's your relevant comparison against other second tier MILCs that released at or are going for a similar price point as the D7500 did at release:

http://j.mp/2wRUzNX

http://j.mp/32uNGOa

^Another comparison with the Z50 added in, I dunno about you but even that looks significantly smaller to me than the D7500 (and some 300g lighter, or the weight of a pretty good lens). The D7500 is closer to the D500 than to it's current MILC equivalents. If anything mirrorless allows for more size variation in each model line. Not sure why having that choice would be cause for concern, snark, and factually wrong assumptions.

Consumer behaviour is sometimes unpredictable.

The E-M1 III is probably better in ergonomics, features etc but with a smaller sensor, the X-T4 is still really good though.

This thread is about a new camera, not about you.

Mostly agree - but that IBIS though. A good reason for buying an X-Tx series fuji camera is that it has generous manual controls, which to me at least is an open invitation to use adapted vintage lenses. I have a bunch of those - like the legendary Helios 44-2 58mm F/2, and I for sure could use some IBIS there.

@LeoNL You should visit https://www.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/ I think it's the perfect subreddit for you.

@Michael Berg

...And you should visit this: https://www.reddit.com/r/ihavereddit/

Please don't ever link to a subreddit outside of Reddit again.

You don't "need" IBIS, photographers shot photographs before IBIS for a century, it's just a VERY good convenince that you can put down your ISO number by 4+ stops, and if you shoot video it's a literal life changer. Imagine a 5DII with a 5kg gimbal/rig for stability and a follow focus system + focus puller on a ln external screen, can all now be replaced by a camera with IBIS + DPAF or so... Yes you can still shoot the old way but why? You save so much money and effort by adopting new technology, just like it is in every other field.

But if you're a hobbyist, my advice still haven't changed, any 300$ kit (any Rebel SLR with the 18mm kit lens for wides and a 50mm for the closeups) can create 24mp RAW imagery worthy of gallery display!

@Mariano Pacifico, "Why do they build small-sensor camera for pros? Pros' requirements are full frame and over-the-top specs."

Eh? Pro here. X-T3 all day long. Two of them.

There are pros that use M4/3m there are pros that use GoPros or iPhones ... a pro is a person that uses right tool for the right job, not the one that uses the largest sensor available for cat pictures. :)

I'd say that pros in general are the ones least impressed by "over-the-top" specs. They want reliability and a tool that doesn't get in their way. The performance and image quality requirements will vary depending on the job.

Trolls are like animals - if you feed them they come back.

Otto,
Animal? Do you tell people in their face in real life? A bit much, isn't it? For me it's trolling too.

@one I'm a direct and honest person in real life, I like it that way and others seem to do too.

That said, do note that I did not call anyone an animal. I compared the behavior to that of an animal and I stand by it. If you want the troll to move along and stop bothering you - do not feed him, ignoring is the best tactic.

Have a nice day.

Its funny otto k, Many people think "that was a dumb thing to do" is the same as "You are dumb".

And what you said was obviously not calling anyone an animal, which we all are anyways....

neat! Trying to convince yourself that you don't need the latest gear? :D

That IBIS is looking pretty slick.

GTFO

@NotAPhotog Seems like you would find yourself at home on that subreddit as well.

Let me just make it easy for you to get there - here's the link: https://www.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/

I was actually thinking on the upgrade of my XT30. For me the most important aspect is the AF performance (eye, face tracking). The XT4 looks good, but:
- I do not like the flippy-screen
- and the price.
In Europe the XT40 costs 25% more, than the A6600, which is already a very expensive APS-C camera.
So, yes, I`m a bit disappointed, and probably will look for a used XT3...

But in europe the price will soon be at 1500€ or under, but yeah, its still a pricey camera... since the Z6 is a simmilar price at a discount

What an odd statement. Why on earth?

Why do you post similar comments from different accounts?

Is that to do with using flash on extremely fast lenses, high speed sync tops out at mech shutter speed I think

Imagine as a photographer being told you can no longer buy iso 100 film, it is the most bizarre situation of all, a camera company with history and legacy that can't put an iso 100 film equivalent sensitivity on their digital camera, it is the most basic feature of all and Fuji doesn't have it, go figure!

But this isn’t film photography anymore, is it? What exactly do you want ISO 100 for?

Badi -
First: No camera company actually said they would never go mirrorless.

Second: Only Canon did

Third: This has never been said by Panasonic, but by Olympus. As far as I know Olympus still does not offer a FF camera.

Fourth: So you also think Fujifilm will be forced to enter the FF market soon as they said they never will. ;)

Marketing is marketing. We BOTH get that.

Engineering team saying it WON'T work in a small body like FUJI is an entirely DIFFERENT beast.

I'd guess this wasn't false info at the time but technology moves on

Well, then X-T4 is 84mm thick vs 59 the X-T3, so they did increase the size. I didn't see them side by side relative to thickness in the video/photos above, so i assume that difference is more related to the grip, but the body itself is probably a bit thicker. Engineers tend to be very specific, and when they meant "this size" they were referring to exactly 59mm :))

I do get you point, but even the Engineering have some rules of what to say and what not, when to say and when not, imposed by marketing. And if you look for it you will find this type of speech in every single domain and manufacturer.