In the latest episode of DPRTV, Chris and Jordan have been out and about shooting with Fujifilm's latest APS-C format mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, the X-E4. Is it just an X100V with an interchangeable lens mount? Spoiler - not quite. Watch the video to find out why.
That’s odd because other reviewers said that the feel of the camera was quite fine. But it’s possible that the X100V that he is comparing to feels better.
From what I hear, it's not as plasticky as the, say X-M1 or X-A series. But even the X-T10, 20, 30, 40 have not as plasticky a feeling as those, but my concern is, that their build is less durabel, than X-Pro, X-H1 or X-T1 2 3 4 line. My X-T10 didn't feel plasticky and still three of them broke a piece or another (replay button, auto switch, power switch). And I'm not talking about, that I broke it, but even within 2 years warrantee, those parts failed one way or another. Never had anything like it with the X-H1. Honestly, that's what keeps me off buying an X-E3 or 4 as a small second body.
It would be nice if reviewers explained this a bit more and specified what if anything is actually plastic. That said, this is nothing new for the XE series, the entire rear section and half of the baseplate was entirely plastic on both the XE1 and XE2.
It's not 'plasticky'. As the initial review here on DPR says,
"But really, I find this to be a really attractive little camera. The faux-leatherette looks and feels nice, the magnesium-alloy top plate is lovely and the camera body feels solid."
@cosinaphile, for the record I’m not saying they felt plasticky, it just is a fact that a substantial part of those bodies was made of plastic. You can usually tell these days by looking at the seamed baseplate, as the metal and plastic halves tend to age and wear differently.
@ether2, it depends which quotes you cherry pick from which reviews, more than one XE4 review has mentioned plastic and/or cheaper build, and to be honest it’s to be expected on a cheaper camera.
Threaded I can certainly believe that the outer case of the main body is plastic. I expect that from most cameras around this price point and weight.
I checked my X-E1 and the base does indeed have a thin plastic cover. Not sure what it's screwed into. Definitely something more sturdy than those faceplates which are paper thin. The mount point for the tripod is obviously metal. I don't believe that that is simply glued into plastic. I also looked at the X-E3. That definitely has a metal base. Same for the X-E4 as can be seen here:
@ether2, the XE1 has a metal frame inside holding everything together, but that thin plastic cover you identified on the base actually extends all the way up the back of the camera - it’s the same piece that the screen and all the buttons are set into. The top plate is metal, and the front of the camera where the lens mount is (extending down to form half the bottom plate) but from the top plate down the entire rear of the camera is plastic, just disguised well with leatherette. XE2 is the same.
As I understand it, they went to full metal bottom and plates on the XE3, and probably the XE4, but it’s likely much of the rest of it is plastic. Nothing strictly wrong with that of course.
What I hear people in the forums complain about the X-Pro3 and X-E4 is, that many people go berserk about what they feel was "taken away from them" and instead don't start thinking and trying what they will actually have at their disposal. #goandtry worked for me.
The more I read you comment, the less sense it makes to me... Unless you are a MFT owner who wants to reassure himself? Good choice, MFT is an awesome platform! Don't see, what APS-C has to do with that, but that doesn't matter.
The APS-C manufacturers are going in odd directions. Fuji is throwing out weirder and weirder bodies that are regressions on some fronts. Their lens pipeline is also lackluster with the MkII versions of many lenses doing little (if anything) to remedy their shortcomings. Canon, Nikon and Sony have questionable commitment to APS-C. That leaves m4/3 as the sole crop format with a fleshed out line-up of lenses and bodies. That's why it makes more sense for m4/3 to survive.
Well the lenses and existing MFT bodies won’t suddenly disappear, but where are future bodies and sensors coming from? If APS-C is a dying format, why is Fuji busy producing bodies and lenses?
I never said APS-C was dying for Fuji. On the contrary, they are strongly committed to it. My point was it makes sense for m4/3 to continue given the weirdness going on in APS-C land, not that it will. Having said that, Panasonic has committed to a GH6, so there is at least that.
Had to laugh reading this: "... Sony have questionable commitment to APS-C. That leaves m4/3 as the sole crop format with a fleshed out line-up of lenses and bodies. "
So Sony has questionable commitment to APS-C, but Olympus bailed out of m43, so logically m43 is the future??
@unhappy: so you are that desperate that you need to resort to ad hominem?
Let me explain: You spread FUD about Sonys committment to Apsc and promote m43 as future proof alternative. That was and is a joke considering that Olympus already bailed out of m43.
Fuji have gone in “odd” directions to carve out their niche and double down on what makes their system interesting precisely because they don’t want to be the next m43. That system is a dead man walking because it challenged full frame on nothing aside from size and weight and that wasn’t enough. Fuji’s hope lies in their quirks and appeal as a photographer’s tool. I don’t know if that will be enough long term, but it seems to be working for them so far. If it fails, it’s hardly going to benefit m43.
I get the point the OP is making here. And this is why I shoot MFT along side my FF . APSC is neither here nor there IMO. There are little in the way of size advantages vs FF and for the price difference vs FF in looking at Fuji’s pricing I’d pay the little extra for FF. MFT offers an advantage in having a large DOF which actually does allow for a different approach and different images. Then there is Olympus IBIS!!! There are real size advantages to MFT when paired with the right lenses. The best thing Fuji makes is the x100 series. The beauty of the x100 for Fuji is there is nothing stopping them making a FF version. The X series is just not very exciting and this camera release only further proves that. Also drop Xtrans it offers nothing!!
@Kodakcolor: Hm. The Olympus EM1 weighs more than several FF cameras. Almost all Sony APSC cameras weigh less in spite of having a larger sensor. The EM5 neither weighs less than most APSC cameras, be it Sony or Fuji (exception XT4).
m43 is lightweight if you buy a small, low performance body and couple it to a not-bright zoom lens, utilizing the IBIS for unmoving target. Which is what a lot of Japanese people do.
The higher performing m43 don't offer size, weight nor prize benefits, all the time without the benefit of the larger sensor of APSC.
Which is why m43 is in intensive care station phase on the way out.
@kodacolor200 interesting theory but not grounded in any fact, Fuji’s sales are strong even despite the pandemic and the X system seems to be doing well, all while Oly is dumping their camera business for a loss. We all know everything’s a compromise between image quality, size, weight, and price. Fuji being somewhere in the middle rather than at either extreme end has been an advantage for them, not a weakness.
Hmm? Sound like you are speaking from what you have viewed online.
From 1st hand experience and I have owned, shot and sold a number of Fuji bodies. My EM1ii allows me to shoot handheld 2-3 second exposures consistently 5 -7 in a pinch. The em5ii is again giving your same hand held capability as the em1ii. As for lenses I can point to the 15mm 1.7 20mm 1.7, 45mm 1.8. 12-40 zoom which is again sharper and more consistent - especially with the zoom range Vs the 16-55, which is large:expensive and no as consistent throughout.
The benefit of the larger apsc sensor is less than half a stop, when comparing my em1 ii vs the d500 I sold - it’s negligible- and this is recouped by a larger DOF in many cases vs apsc not to mention IBIS
The big misconception that because Olympus is out of the camera business so is the format. Sorry this is click bait rubbish. This has more to do with Olympus the larger company than an issue with M43 format, which is doing just fine as far as sales go.
Maybe but a fact is that Fujifilm as a company takes in more money from Instax filmthan it does from its entire x series line of lenses and bodies. So as far as sales goes the digital camera business is simply not that profitable and hence why Olympus sold its division. Your facts seem to stem from it seems to be doing well to telling me sales are strong?? Vs what - projections. You do understand that companies are rarely going to say sales are bad. They make projections based on the market. If they excepted to sell 30% vs what the sold the year before and then sold 35% - the spin would be sales are strong. Now if you checked to see how the M43 mount was doing outside of Olympus’s decision to leave the camera business you would see sales vs the industry as a whole (which is crap) are strong
I’m talking about the BCN figures which aren’t being spun either way, they simply show that Fuji sales have held up well vs the rest of the market.
Yes Fuji make a bigger profit from Instax (although that’s fallen back a little recently) - truth is film was always a very profitable business as long as there’s interest in the format, and if Fuji could convert us all back to analogue they’d do it in a heartbeat. But their digital business is also profitable and predicted to remain profitable. Olympus’ wasn’t, for years, which is why they’ve gotten out. There’s really no way to spin that into a good thing for m43.
@threahold - MFT boast over 20% of the Japanese market ( and this isn’t for stationary shooters) I have spent a lot of time in to Japan through marriage. It’s train photographers that drive MFT sales and they are not going anywhere it’s huge. Lots of DOF at fast apertures is very useful for shooting long fast trains. It’s the mount of choice here. Sales in Japan alone are enough to keep the mount viable long term.
Smaller sensors and processors to drive smaller sensors equate to lower production cost which make the cameras more profitable.
Lets hope Fuji keep selling lots of that instax film while it continues to loose market share vs FF in the west and MFT which in not dependent on Olympus.. I don’t think Fuji is going anywhere soon, however there are many like me that see the benefits of gapping systems like FF and MFT for overall solutions. In a market that is clutching at straws to make profit it will be interesting to see how companies separate themselves.
56 companies make up the Micro Four Thirds consortium, so it is doubtful that they are all just going to abandon it. VS the X mount that is supported by one company. The fact that the mount is used for a number of applications outside of photography, obviously video being a big one. However due to lower cost surveillance systems also drive sales of the mount. So to say MFT is dead on the basis of one of 56 companies pulling out and being taken up by another is a little premature.
This fact alone means that newer sensors are likely to continue being produced and given Sony have released a 47mp mft sensor is actually a sign vast future potential. Married with advances in computational solutions the potential for such a sensor is massive. Especially where computational solutions can more than bridge the small advantages of apsc whilst offering far smaller production costs and massive resolution. Does apsc actually offer solutions outside of dinky dslrs and Fuji cameras?
@Kodakcolor: I am not sure whether you are actually open for a fact-based discussion. Still, I will try.
First, you voiced the argument about size & weight beenfits of m43 which I refuted, funnily for the exact camera bodies you seem to own.
Secondly you post the IBIS argument being able to shoot at 1-2 seconds hand-held. Well, the general usefulness is exactly what I wrote before: static scenes.
Lenses: Here your lack of technical understanding becomes apparent: "12-40 zoom .. sharper and more consistent - especially with the zoom range Vs the 16-55, which is large:expensive and no as consistent throughout." So much bs. 1. Your 1240 is f2.8 which translates to a 18-60 f4 APSC. That is a slow standard zoom with medicocre range. The 1655 is much wider and at 2.8, so one stop faster. The 1655 is a lens universally experienced as exceptionally good optically and you are the first to claim consistency (from heresay or fantasy? :-))
... Sensor: You claim the APSC is only half stop better (in what, noise?) You ignore the inherent one stop less DOF capability. Then the final joke: "recouped by a larger DOF in many cases vs apsc". Huh? Simply stop down the APSC camera once and you are there, enjoy more DOF, higher resolution.
In another post you write of 56 other companies involved in m43. The point which you seem to ignore is critical mass. This was an issue in the beginning and with Olympus bailing out, it has not gotten more. 56 companies - that nobody knows and cares about (Panasonic being the exception,but then, they have gotten into FF for no reason :-) )
I'll leave it there, because I have little hope that this will have any influence on your mindset.
@kodacolor200 You’re showing your hand with the 56 companies. I’m sure most are fully committed to keeping the mount alive, but we all know that the two which matter to m43 as a viable system going forward are Olympus and Panasonic. Oly have thrown in the towel and it remains to be seen what “OM Digital” attempt or succeed with going forward. Panasonic have shifted at least some of their interest and R&D into full frame. I’ll say no more on that other than just like Olympus, OM Digital and Panasonic will need more than popularity in Japan to keep it all going.
As for Fuji, again, their digital business is profitable and performing relatively well in terms of market position, they are not and never have been in the same boat as Olympus. You keep bringing up instax as if that’s keeping the whole thing afloat, when actually Fuji’s digital imaging isn’t dependent on that at all, and in any case Instax itself is only a small part of Fuji’s wider business, which is mainly in pharmaceuticals these days. They have deep pockets having diversified away from a dependence on film or photography many years ago, - the reason they didn’t just become another Kodak.
Yes noise and it’s negligible, and when shooting at the edge of an acceptable IQ envelope in lowlight - one could argue the benefit of a larger DOF is far greater - 1.3 stops of DOF is the difference between shooting 3200 iso on MFT vs iso 8000 1600 vs 5000 etc to achieve the same DOF on apsc. 6mp of resolution is not going to negate that gap in noise via downsampling. So your arrogance in the subject is misguided given this clear advantage that you seem lost on through simply not knowing what I do through experience.
There are plenty of companies that we don’t know or care about who are very profitable. The fact is Olympus will continue as a brand or a version of and will continue to make cameras.
Olympus as a company makes most of its money via other ventures and tech that are mostly in the medical imaging and communications businesses. Olympus as a company simply pulled the plug on its photographic interests as yes it was loosing money. This can be attributed to poor management as much as anything. With Olympus out of the picture and Panasonic being one of the largest global electronic manufacturers it also has very deep pockets and a large MFT customer base much larger than its FF. So who knows
Fujifilm imaging solutions which contains both its photo and digital imaging is heavily skewed towards its photo business which is essentially instax. Instax delivers by far and large the bulk of profits for the division. Whilst the digital business is profitable it’s not going to be relying on digital cameras to maintain profits in it imaging division and whilst it maybe holding on, the trend overall for digital camera sales is down.
Olympus as a company is essentially now irrelevant to the discussion, they’re out of m43 and photography as a whole, because they were unable to turn a profit from that side of the business and, in particular, the m43 strategy they’d been pursuing for the past few years.
It remains to be seen whether “OM Digital” will fare any better, or whether they will even attempt to pursue the same strategy and continue producing m43 equipment in the future. It’s entirely possible that the planned restructuring will end up taking the brand in a different direction altogether.
Will all this benefit Panasonic? It’s certainly possible. But it’s also a fact that the widespread perception of m43 as a failing format has only been amplified by the loss of Olympus. People don’t tend to invest heavily in systems they think might be on the way out. There’s a good chance that this will all become a self-fulfilling prophecy, which is probably part of the reason that Panasonic are hedging their bets.
Again, for Fuji, see my previous replies. They are not Olympus, their digital business is profitable on its own, regardless of anything else the company is involved in. The demise of m43 only cements their niche in the premium, compact mirrorless market.
From that article - “In the electronic imaging business, overall revenue decreased from the previous fiscal year due to a decline in the sales of entry-level mirrorless digital cameras under severe market conditions. However, the sales of middle- and high-end models were strong”
They were of course still perfectly profitable still, entirely unlike Olympus digital over the past three years.
What have they done since - killed off their entry level models (the XA7, XT200) completely, and doubled down on middle and high-end models like the XS10, XT4 etc. Seems like a good strategy to me.
I got my X-E4 kit lens 27mm WR. While I like X-E4 (my first Fuji camera), I don't like 27mm WR as it's so noisy and slow focus, unless you're outside and in bright light. However, the combo is great for traveling. I don't have to carry my Canon gears anymore. I hear lots of people complaining X-E4 of lacking buttons. Maybe it's just me, but I get used of manipulating X-E4 fine after a few days. You just have to learn to adapt.
there is quite a difference between a GR, a X100(V) and a X-E4+XF27. Personally, I have a very different experience and have to position myself in a completely different way, when I use a 18mm lens compared to a 27mm lens, or I have to focus on a more narrow field of view. Nothing bad at all, but those are very different tools.
Try a 23 or 35 f2 to compliment it... much faster. use the 27 when you want to throw in your pocket. The mark ii did not update af/optics that I'm aware of, just added aperture ring and WR gasket.
My X-E3 was a blast to shoot with but I had to let it go when it came to the post processing, an element of photography I really enjoy. I was desperately hoping the X-E4 would drop X-Trans but alas, I must wait a generation or two more.
Every Fuji X-Trans camera review should automatically mention workflow limitations. I pray DxO delivers on their promise of finally developing for X-Trans.
or, perhaps it should come with workflow advice that a different approach is needed. It is limited by skills, which can be developed through just a little re-training, not X-Trans.
There are for sure requirements for a specific workflow for some of us, no doubt. But the "X-Trans has worm-like artefacts" discussion was tiresome and useless.
Well, I am of a different opinion. First, worm like artefacts are often introduced by poor workflow techniques and are avoidable. X-Trans does 'obliterate foliage' if the techniques used are inappropriate. Second, as one who has made a career out of high performance in the military and commerce, few aspects of life are delivered to optimal performance out of the box. If people do not wish to invest a little time to optimise a workflow, that is fine, just use a system that suits one, but if changing to a new system then I would suggest that a little investment in time to learn the best processes would deliver great outcomes. I'll leave it there.
unhappymeal + kreislauf To be fair, the vast majority of cameras don't need any changes. But also, if you use Capture One you don't need to change anything for Fuji. I've not tried it but I've read that it's very good at handling Fuji raw files. There's also the X-Transformer plug-in for Lightroom which is supposed to be v good. Not sure if that counts as a 'changing your workflow'.
The faveon processor by Sigma might also require workflow changes.
oh yes, the Foveon sensor does need quite a different workflow, I agree :) I still have a ton of x3f files that I would need to process with their software *urks* maybe that is why I don't yell "treason" when it comes to X-Trans RAW files...
Listen, I know we all are different and people might get annoyed by the X-Trans rendering at times. But for the last 7 years that I shoot X-Trans (for personal use), not once did I think about strange artefacts during post-processing in lightroom except blown halos when pushing the highlights too hard. It is a carefree, good sensor without too much chroma noise. I love it, but it is in no way categorically superior/better than a bayer or foveon sensor. Well, except the foveon for any amplification over base ISO.
Two things helped tremendously: - no excessive cropping - no pixel peeping
Honestly, I never got the discussion about pixel peeping images of a grassland or foliage. It's just not my cup.
True, it is like an upgrade M50. With the RF 50 f/1.8 though the RP is very light and compact for a full frame camera.... I mean I get it the FujiFilm has shiny metal bits on it so it is expensive...
It is interesting that a lot of people don't want to give Canon their due with the RP. It takes nice pictures and it has excellent video output. Is it a cinema camera? No, but it is cheap and does a lot of things well enough to be usable for everything except maybe professional sports photography. I know that if I pick up the RP it is going to get accurate focus and it is going to produce a clean image, what else do people want? Of course I pick up my R5 99% of the time and I keep my R as my backup now. But I did shoot some weddings with the RP and had no issues. And the dynamic range isn't as bad as everyone acts like it is. The high ISO noise levels are pretty well controlled especially if you get a good exposure. All in all I don't understand the RP hate.
@bloodreyna Shutter frame rate. Battery life. EVF. LCD. Sensor (christ the DR is on par with a m4/3 camera and the m4/3 camera can drag the shutter a tonne due to IBIS). Lack of IBIS. Video features. Focus acquisition in low light. Autofocus. The RP is a cheap way to get into Canon RF glass and I question if that's worth it since quite a few lenses are not (optical) improvements over the EF equivalents. That's it. At $1,300 CAD for the RP and X-S10 (or X-E4), I'm taking the Fuji all day, every day.
Well, you say that, but in all reality I've found the AF on the RP to be quite reliable. And the image quality is also very nice when it is used properly. I guess that is one of the cool things about knowing how to use a camera, you can take something like an RP and make it work in a large variety of situations. I will admit that sometimes the speed of the camera is a little on the slow side, but, other than that I can't really agree with your assessment of the RP. In some ways I have found the RP to be superior to the R in sheer image quality. And to be honest, when I look at this gallery for the Fuji I don't see anything the RP could not do.
Well, you say that, but in reality I've found the AF on the [INSERT ANY CAMERA HERE] to be quite reliable. And the image quality is also very nice when it is used properly. I guess that is one of the cool things about knowing how to use a camera, you can take something like an [INSERT ANY CAMERA HERE] and make it work in a large variety of situations. I will admit that sometimes the speed of the camera is a little on the slow side, but, other than that I can't really agree with your assessment of the [INSERT ANY CAMERA HERE] . In some ways I have found the [INSERT ANY CAMERA HERE] to be superior to the [INSERT ANY COMPETING CAMERA HERE] in sheer image quality. And to be honest, when I look at this gallery for the [INSERT OTHER BRAND HERE] I don't see anything the [INSERT ANY CAMERA HERE] could not do.
To compare an RP to an X-E4 doesn't make ANY SENSE at all... - The RP is (with lens) bigger - The RP has a completely different (I don't say better or worse) output in JPG (think of the film simulation with the Fuji). The results just look different. - The lens choice is completely different. - The RP is full frame, so it is easier to achieve a shallower DOF
All they have in common is that they are cameras on which you can change the lens...
BTW, the RP works great in a studio environment. I have it an like it a lot. As much as I liket my former Fujis.
The RP clearly has better EVF than X-E4, Canon's AF and OIS are also much more reliable than Fuji. When I started shooting with RP, I don't need to constantly worry about the accuracy of AF anymore. It is simply an easier to use device.
It'S all relative. Setting the focus mode, cycling through one command wheel's mode rather than two, having to choose between AE-L and AF-L rather than having two separate buttons in the past... these are all functions that previously didn't need any menu involvement at all - be it Q menu, my menu, or full menu.
@FTOG. Disappointing for you and those that want direct controls. Not disappointing for those that do not change settings inbetween shots very often :).
@Peter1976: Yes. The X-E line is priced as and used to be a mid-range camera. We're not discussing features being "streamlined" (aka removed) from the entry-level X-A or X-Txxx line. Indeed, buyers of previous X-E cameras still expected to be offered an updated mid-range camera, rather than a capable, but much simplified camera that is expensive when compared to its X-T30 or X-S10 siblings. This is criticism from people who supported and bought the X-E line up to this point. Can't blame them for having expectations when this is the supposed continuation (in name only?) of their preferred Fuji camera line.
FTOG "...rather than a capable, but much simplified camera..." Nonsense. The X-E4 has several functional upgrades over the X-E3. For example, the latest sensor and processor giving improved auto focus. Improved, articulating screen. Faster burst speeds and better video.
The X-E4 has the innards of the X-S10 so can't be said to be expensive in comparison. And as a review on this site stated, "As you can see, the X-E4 really offers a lot of bang for your buck in this market segment."
This is from someone who has bought into the older X-E line and is pleased with the upgrades.
I guess unpopular opinion here, but as someone who isn’t a gear head and simply loves taking pictures this camera looks quite interesting and looks absolutely beautiful.
Front focus switch really wouldn't have cluttered the body to death though, and every other X camera has it. So, come on Fuji. Rear wheel is a different story. Also I'm glad, they moved the Q-button away from the thumb area, but whether it is easy to access, where it's now, I'll have to try myself. I mean now you'd need it more often right? However, X-E4: it is for, who it is for. And if four is not for you, look somewhere else. Like for three or four thirds.
I honestly can't count how many times my index finger has inadvertently moved the focus switch on my X-T3. So yes I understand the decision to remove it. Rear wheel omission I believe is secondary to the fact it will be hidden by the thumb rest.
@NexUser "Then all cameras are good for you" Yes, pretty much. I would be amazed, If you select a camera above $500, that would not work for you (or that you could work with). Unless you have very specific requirements or are a gear-head, who can't live w/o perfect CAF, 5sec 15fps RAW burst and at least 11 stops dynamic range or whatever the marketing teams are pitching today.
I may read comments but not going to watch the video: it's inefficient. The only direct relevance for video format review is demonstrating the quality of the video itself... ok, continuous autofocus might probably be shown, too. Strangely enough, while I may be quite interested in the written outcome/reviews from the reviewers, I am absolutely not interested in watching or listening to them. So, basically, I will go google X-E4 to find out something about the camera.
They post above headings so you can skip to the bits you want to know about without watching it all.
This is more efficient than you taking the time to place a posting of several dozen words or googling it. If "efficiency" is your thing, that's the logical thing to do.
I think these reviews are supposed to be entertaining, and not just a way to learn facts about the cameras (although learning facts can certainly be entertaining in itself). If you want entertainment to be "efficient", you must have very little spare time, or you simply aren't entertained by it. Personally, I really enjoy these videos, and see them as complementary to the written reviews.
Thanks for your informative and "feeling" video. I like them.
For the X-E4, I think Fujifilm did well.. but not for people interrested in photography. They try to catch causal user looing for something simple, stylish, and compact to take better picture as their phone. In this regads, the camera is brillant will it be enough ? No sure..
On one side, you've got: XH1(and the surely coming beast XH2), XT3/4, XS10, XT30, GFX100, GFX100S, GFX50SII(rumored)...
On the other side, you've got: XP3, XE4, GFX50R...
The SLR side has all the good stuff, while the other side is more positioned for either hipster or casual shooters (I am not saying those cameras can't make professional photos. The truth is, any camera can be used for professional work if the photographer is indeed that good).
I just don't really understand why Fuji feels the need to make that so clear. Come on! It is OK to release a good all-around capable rangefinder style camera once in a while.
To me, I've been waiting for a good EVF version of XPro (or X100V or whatever you say) for a while, if it can even have IBIS to support low-light handheld shooting then it'd be perfect.
2nd Fuji release that made me stick to the old model. After the disappointing XP3, now this. I would not mind a real X Pro or X E successor with IBIS and the latest AF! That way I’m sticking to my XP2 and XE3. If an upgrade is finally due, other brands will have to be considered...
Yes, it's almost as if all complaints were introduced by the imparting of the camera. All they needed to do is bring the latest AF into the X-E and maybe the flip screen, rather than this.
man, I am on board for the ride since the first X-Pro3 rumors and I love it (the crowd's reaction, that is) I never read so much disgust, hate and drama than those comments about the "stupid LCD" of the X-Pro3. I do like the LCD and I find it ok to reduce the buttons on the rangefinder-styled fuji cameras and make the models more distinct than the X-T models. I had a X-T2 and X-T10 and I couldn't warm up to the handling.
Yes, I get it when people, who gravitate towards a rangefinder-like look but want DSLR-like controls, might feel betrayed now. But did you think ONCE about the people who do want a rangefinder-like camera that is not riddled with controls?
I am eager to see, where fuji will go with the development of the X-E and especially with the X-Pro line and will, as always, pick a model that fits my needs (and not cry about it, when I can't have the latest iteration because it was not custom-developed for my tasebuds)
Unlike most other camera manufacturers, Fuji segregate their lineup by lifestyle: hippies (X100V), casual shooters (XE4), the pragmatic (XS10), control freaks (XT4), poor control freaks (XT30), the tough guys (XH1), ladies (XF10). So we should not expect any one model to be good in all aspects.
I got out of Fuji crop-frame. X-Trans led to lots of fiddling in Lightroom (had to use various plug-ins). I do, however, have a GFX 50R, which is Bayer. I predict that Fujifilm will abandon X-Trans. It made sense when resolutions were low; now, not so much.
@Welsh No. IMO For Fujifilm marketing, X-Trans sensor are key for differential Fujiflm camera from other brands (regardless whether X-Trans useful or not).
GFX series use bayer sensor because too low volume, difficult to buy customize sensor. How about missing Fujilike dials in GFX?
Xtrans didn't even make sense when the resolutions were low. It never made sense. It's merely a production cost saving feature for Fuji. It decreases color resolution below even Bayer. Not to mention it destroys the ability to adequately use pixel shifting, because the imbalance of green pixels makes it much more difficult to get an RGB reading for every pixel. Anything that falls in the 4x4 area of green pixels, is essentially invisible to the sensor, since it has no reference point to determine its shade, let alone color. All you're gathering at that point is luminance, so all color detail is essentially invisible to the camera. It's why foliage turns to mush on Xtrans. But it affects more than foliage. It also makes images noisier than they need to be, because if you've got red or blue details falling on that 4x4 green pixel grid, you're effectively under saturating that area. And on the flip side, green details over saturate the area, which under saturates everything else.
I was really looking forward to this camera. I hoped for a X100V like camera. I understand that Fuji would have to distinguish the X-E4 from the X100V (e.g. with an EVF instead of the hybrid viewfinder). I think an ILC camera with more or less the body and controls if the X100V would sell like hotcakes. Instead they dropped the X-E4 to point and shoot territory. Not a smart move IMO.
They don't have to go for a minimalism design like this to distinguish it from X100V. It only seems they made the decision to make it an entry level camera before everything else.
Yes, If course. A X100V like camera would have been perfect IMO, but not necessary. Weather sealing a decent grip and an AF lever would have been enough for me.
Given how nice the EVF's are now, I'd take a lighter cheaper camera without an LCD screen at all! It would leave room for some much needed/preferred (IMO) dials and buttons. The ability to drop an old smartphone on the hot shoe facing forward (or ANY direction/size) with an app is available. ;)
Those screens are clumsy for still shooters. Looking at a tilt out screen sideways while shooting is like driving a car with the head sticking out of the side window.
I really like flipping an articulating screen over to protect it from the elements/damage/storage. Flipping it over gives you the peace of mind that it won't turn on and attract attention in a dark venue. The 90 degree flip down helps to not disturb people/video/etc. behind you. The most common time I use a tilt screen is to do a lot of menu work. If I had an articulating screen I'd use it a lot more than my tilt. Manufactures could simply offer two models, let you swap them out (sales opportunity,) or even skip the monitor altogether.
Which would block the screen if someone were using a hotshoe mic. It's like a vlogging camera only half fleshed out. And I don't see the difficulty in having a flippy screen, there's really no extra engineering required, if anything, less engineering for more capability.
I put together a solution for that with a strip of metal and cold shoe parts from my rigging bag.
SmallRig make very inexpensive hot shoe extensions for similar cameras for the purpose of relocating a shoe mounted mic to the side. Little doubt one is in the works for the X-E4. They have a cage available now with an offset cold shoe.
There are other solutions. One of the simplest and least expensive methods any vlogger with any camera can do is plug an $80 Rode SmartLav into their phone to record audio.
Not sure why you want Full Frame ? What do you expect it will do ? I shoot Full Frame along side my Fuji and cannot tell the differences between the two formats 98% of the time.
I don't get why so many people are getting their panties in a twist over a few lost buttons and missing a fairly useless front bump.
I have the X-E1. It has just 1 wheel. Only ever use it when viewing shots. Touch screen better. Never used the Fn button on X-E1. New AE-L / AF-L position on the X-E4 looks better than it was before.
I use a hand strap so not sure if I need an extra grip. The optional thumb grip looks like it would be better than old bump, though I'd probably wait and see if Lensmate makes its hinged version rather than buy the Fuji one.
I see the clean approach of the X-E4 an opportunity to customise as I want. Inside that small body is a *lot* of camera.
As for X-E3, I'd prefer the X-E4 flip screen and better focusing etc. The HSS flash capability of the X-E4 is handy too. The much lower price of the X-E3 is certainly attractive but I'd rather have the latest sensor and better screen. I don't need to press a plethora of buttons each time to get a good shot.
NexUser No, just not crucial. The X-E4 has several, multi-function, customisable buttons and swipe commands. The X-E3 has two wheels but the X-E1 had only 1. Did you complain about the X-E1's lack of a 2nd wheel?
Too many dedicated buttons can be accidentally engaged and can also add confusing clutter.
I totally agree, most photographers won’t even need all those dials and will just use the touchscreen. If you need dials, Fuji offers other good models with those.
@ether2 You may never use the Fn buttons, but they could've mattered a lot to some people. The same goes for the loss of the M/C/S switch. I know that I use all the dials and most of the custom functions on my E-M1 III when shooting wildlife.
A handstrap is useless if you are using a longer (or heavier) zoom. You still need a thumb relief and grip.
I agree about flip screens. They're far more practical and less likely to the damage the camera for everyone except videographers.
unhappymeal The standard grip on the X-E3 is no use with a large lens either. You'll also need the optional grip when using a tripod or else the lens will clash with the tripod. And this is why Fuji - and third parties - sell optional grips and neck straps! (And we have two hands.) I bought the optional grip for my X-E1 for such situations.
And the E-M1 III is an SLR body, incomparable with the X-E4 in form and purpose. If so many buttons are crucial then you can choose from one of the various other SLR bodies from Fuji.
You missed the point ether2. The X-E3 had more buttons and many of them would be useful to people. While you may only use yours for adjusting the exposure triangle, other people may want to use buttons for things like having easy access to Focus Peaking/Zebras, quickly changing AF modes, etc. There was literally no reason for them to regress in the number of buttons offered other than aesthetics.
unhappymeal No. You raised the issue of grip and I addressed it. As for buttons, I agree that aesthetics were a consideration but as I previously said in this thread, "Too many dedicated buttons can be accidentally engaged and can also add confusing clutter."
And as I also said in this thread, there is a difference between 'useful' and crucial.
I've seen several people complain about accidently engaging, e.g. the Q button on their Fujis.
As for the M/C/S switch, that would seem to be a purely aesthetic decision. I don't know know how radiply people need to switch between these modes and whether the new X-E4 interface would be a hindrance but that is the sole gripe that I could imagine being valid. Crucial enough for such strong language in this forum though?
LoL. Sure. Clearly a genius move. Spend millions releasing a new camera so that people won't buy that new one and instead buy others that not enough people were buying because they hadn't realised how lucky they were with the first choices.
It does look like they stripped cost out of it to allow for selling it at a lower price once they've had a while selling it for what the early-ish adopters will pay. Also it is getting a bit crowded in the middle of Fuji APS body land... oh and spot the gap... X-Pro3 1799 X-T4 1699 X-T3 1499 --- X-S10 999 X-T30 899 X-E4 849 --- X-T200 699
Agree, they could have easily made the mid range grow into the gap, to around 1200, with features worthy of that price (let's say WR, IBIS, high res evf). Then let the entry level grow to 900, with features similar to this new E4, instead of letting them die off.
The removal of the back dial was just.......genius /s I'm sorry was looking forward to the X-E3 successor but this is a hard pass. Similar to the X-Pro 3 this successor seems to me Fuji is losing touch with its user base bit by bit. Would have love to see IBIS, WR, improved EVF, upgradable film simulations (Don't buy the CPU limitation BS), newer battery and ability to transfer RAW files via WiFi
Have an X-T3 and wanted a smaller 2nd body rangefinder. I was tempted to buy an X-E3 but kept pushing back because the LCD was fixed. I bet on a successor changing that but stripping out the rear command dial, no grip, no focus mode button on the front... etc. I would gladly take that new X-E3 now. Not sure what Fuji is thinking....
Just bought a second X-E3 last week. Couldn't be happier. If you prefer the left-side EVF, it's an X-T30 w/o flippy screen and drive mode dial, and a detachable rather than integrated flash. If you've got a viewfinder location preference, the only one that might be missed is the flippy screen.
I'm in the same boat. I have a X-T2 and also wanted a rangefinder camera. I was hoping for a X-E4 with more or less the X100V body and controls and with EVF instead if the hybrid viewfinder to keep the price and weight down. I think that camera would have sold like hit cakes.
@BillMass: I bought a hardly used X-E3 body with <200 shots on it. New old stock X-E3s are rare and overpriced. Not sure if MPB is available in your location, but you could try that, your local classifieds etc.
FTOG- I can get on the MPB website and give it a try. I tried Ebay and Amazon but when I filter the sellers, they are outside the US.Thanks so much, good luck with yours.
Good point as to a tad stale EVF. Yet manufacturer's keep parading it out with the likes of Olympus OM-D EM1 III, Panasonic S5 to name just two higher end cameras. I suppose if no one bought them they would take the hint.
The point here was the 2.4M EVF, that some people feel antiquated. You typed something about a bicycle and are now telling me, that I "make a poor case for" what exactly?
It's fascinating how I am stating "[your] point exactly but from a different perspective and with a very different conclusion" in one conversation with you here, and in another you can't help but question my intellect because you didn't like how I responded to your "more wheels on cars" analogy.
says the guy who tried to ridicule me by placing me on a penny-farthing.
I break it down for you once more: we have 2.4M dot displays for a decade now in digital cameras; the OP finds that on the low side; I am fine with it as it fits my needs, so I came up with something, that is sufficient and did not change in ages e.g. 4 wheels on cars.
If you try to ridicule people, do it with a wee bit more elegance.
As a XE3 owner, which is a great travel and general purpose camera, I had planned to upgrade to the XE4. I can live without IBIS, I can live without WR (but I view this as a lost opportunity with the new WR 27 and f2s), but the removal of the rear dial and the front and rear grips has put form over function, vanity over ergonomics (see Chris's point at the 2 min point). It is too minimalist for me. I now intend to stay with my XE3 and the 27 Mk I instead up upgrading the XE4 and 27 Mk II. Pity, but with virtually no difference in image quality and a down grade in ergonomics, it is not worth the cost of change.
Also an X-E3 owner myself, and all I am seeing as improvements is the latest gen AF and an articulating screen. But giving up the focus mode switch, the rear command dial, separate AE-L and AF-L buttons, loss of the thumb rest and the already minor grip the X-E line had? A P mode on the shutter speed dial rather than an auto switch, and the Q button moved to an inconvenient location? No, thanks.
I own the XF27 as well and I use only one dial on my X-Pro2 for aperture control. I could live without a second dial.
I was on a budget for most of my life and had to rely on refurbished models, so I read about the latest and greatest and had to use cameras of the previous or even older generation and had to make them work for me. The marketing hype is non-sense and your adaptation to your camera is the only relevant thing.
Yes, it is nice to have a dedicated AF-L and AE-L button, but I personally don't use it often on my X-Pro2 and don't miss it much when using a X100F. If you know your camera, you can circumvent "missing" buttons. For example grab AE with a half pressed shutter or program a button! AF switch is a problem? Use a button for AF-L and get into manual focus mode. Yes, it would be nice to have a dedicated switch, especially when you change that option twice per minute, but ... do you?
The X-E4 is a very good and customizable camera. Just w/o the bells and whistles
@kreislauf: Of course that's a valid experience. However, the case isn't about whether things can be worked out some way. The discussion is surrounding the removal of features that were previously available in the X-E line.
My point exactly but from a different perspective and with a very different conclusion.
I omitted Olympus bodies, because they were LOADED with features and settings. My most loved camera, I ever had, was a X100T, because it was almost "stupid", that is, you were not overwhelmed with options/settings but had a good interface for the vial settings (and a bit more). If the high ISO would have been better, I would use only that camera to this day.
I do get the anxiety about "missing" features, I really do. Before, I was carefully weighing the best performance that I can get for my money (all the options I thought I could not live without, LOL), but I believe, you can gain more, if you increase your focus. For some that means more direct control via buttons/dials and for some it means less distracting buttons/dials. My best argument for that is always: Leica M-10. That would do, that would do.
@kreislauf: I have a Leica M2, and I appreciate its simplicity. Heck, I'd even appreciate a Fuji camera _like_ the X-E4, that isn't realigning the X-E line so drastically. There is no longer a "complex" controls left-side EVF camera in the Fuji line up. Not counting the hybrid VF in the much more expensive X-Pro line.
Meanwhile - if the X-H and X-Txx lines are continued - there are four centre-of-camera lines to choose from. I would have been more welcoming if this had been a new alternative to X-E and X-Pro line, or a Bayer sensor entry model. But hamstrung physical controls on the only left-side EVF mid-range camera in the entire line up is disappointing.
@ether2: I don't care about the price, that wouldn't be an issue. And I did get another 2nd hand X-E3. The X100V is an apples to oranges comparison, as it's a fixed lens camera and has a hybrid VF. The hybrid VF is also the reason why even the X-Pro line isn't just an "upgraded" X-E line. These are all changes to the only remaining EVF-only interchangeable lens camera in the Fuji portfolio.
Terrible handling with no grips at front and back, removed very usefull parts, nothing new from X-S10 offer, most crippled of all Fuji X-E line, actually with X-E4 Fuji killed X-E line and it's Fujis worst release in last years, dissapointed for most XE1/2/3 users (I have X-E2) so, no thanks, absolutelly nothing exiting for this price.
Funny. I was looking back through comments on X-E3 review and people were complaining about the poor grip.
You can add whatever grip you want. I have the X-E1. I found the thumb area poor and often hit one of the buttons. Plus I had to buy an extra grip anyway for using the camera on a tripod: a) couldn't change the battery without removing the plate each time and b) you need the grip when using larger lenses.
Having handled grip-less cameras, thanks but no thanks. The X-S10 is attractive for that reason, but I am not sure whether I would want to buy into Fuji and not have the looks that draws me to the company in the first place. Still, looks like a nice camera to me. Any recommendations? I may be placing myself out of the lower priced camera category.
If the XE doesn't work for you there is a lot to like about the X-T30 and X-T3 if you can live without IBIS. They are a little bit more expensive than the X-E4 but since they are older models deals might be available. The grips are small compared to DSLR type cameras but workable in my opinion. They also follow the classic FujiFilm "cameraness" design which is kind of the point of buying a Fuji IMO. Nothing wrong with the X-S10 but it is a different animal.
Thanks! Ibis would be nice, I suppose, but, shooting DSLRs, I never had it. The 3 does produce great images from what I have seen. I would need to have a decent evf. Looked at models a few years ago and couldn't find one with decent, life-like colors. Likely a lot better with the models you mentioned. Will have to check them out.
@SleedyNeo “There are still people out there who prefer no IBIS”.
Then they are mad, especially given you can turn it off if you want to be a masochist.
When few cameras had it the arguments against having it made me laugh. It’s a genuine innovation and when all of a sudden the likes of Canon, Nikon and even Fuji introduced very good IBIS it suddenly became cool and these arguments fell away, or so I thought. No idea why Fuji leave it off any camera these days.
As to,your potential downsides Sony can get 700 shots out a camera with IBIS. The mechanism is of negligible weight to the extent you simply won’t notice and the “potential sensor shake issue” is something you have made up.
@Dave Oddie You can't really turn an IBIS completely off. What happens is that the electromagnetic motors exert even more energy trying to keep the floating sensor in place through counteracting forces that try to move it. IBIS has to always consume battery juice. It can't be turned 'off'.
Sure. Any extra feature would be nice - so long as it didn't negatively impact other desirable aspects such as size / price. But is it crucial? Especially with OIS is so many of the Fuji lenses.
IBIS module of X-S10 is tiny so it would not increase weight and size by much. Besides you need it much more in a small body which will be used more likely with no tripod nearby and 16mm f/2.8 rather than f/1.4. Lenses with OIS are zooms, while X-Ex series is rather meant to be used with small primes.
I think the sales numbers of this camera will determine the future of the X-E line-up.
By slimming down its features and clearly cutting on production costs it looks like Fujifilm management is undecided which way to go.
Same with X-S10. A modern X-H design not following the traditional Fujifilm style and then slimming features, adding IBIS. That camera feels like an X-T200, combined with what should have been the X-T40 but slammed into an X-H styled body. Still I think the X-S10 can be considered a succes.
So frustrating that Fuji went backwards on the handling this time, stripping it down instead of moving closer to the X100V or even just staying even with the XE3.
Yeah that's one of the things I'd long praised about their lower end lineup vs say Oly's super stagnant PEN E-PL... Shame to see them regress on something as basic as control points. I'm not sure they've got a ton of competition tho, Sony is even more uninspired with their a#### bodies, and who knows what CaNikon are doing with APS-C MILCs.
No grip and plasticky seems like a double whammy or whatever it's called in US English. I mean the Canon 7 has precisely as much grip but lacks plastic (and electricity) and a Sony A6100 is plasticky but has a grip.
Definitaly jacket-pocketable with a small lens though; seems like a nice sensor (Darktable supports X-trans) and cool film simulations for the jpegs.
Leica rangefinder cameras are significantly bigger, heavier, the viewfinder is different of course and grips are readily available and often times used. Plus since the entire thing is manual focus, you constantly have two hands on the camera. The only relevant overlap is the location of the viewfinder.
FWIW, on a really small body I'd rather have a flat front than a really half assed attempt at a grip... Flat means I can easily add something like a Franiec grip, or a Flipbac, or the RX100's stick-on grip, or a gripped plate accessory...
It's not ideal but I'd rather have workarounds than a small useless grip bump that makes those workarounds impossible. I've never owned a Fuji, speaking from experience with other really small really flat ILCs and P&S.
The lack of grips seems to be a common complaint. Perhaps someone will come up with an inexpensive wrap-around, self adhesive rubbery grip for fingers at the front and thumb at the rear...
^ What I've seen most often is a two part solution, although the front part was usually enough for me (see previous comment), for the rear/thumb there's a bunch of hotshot mounted grips that basically extend to the thumb area and add a contoured edge there. I've seen several specifically meant for Fuji bodies, eg:
Some might even prefer that alone over the front grip solutions I alluded to before, YMMV. I resorted to the latter since the bodies I was using a front stick-on grip with all lacked a hotshoe.
It is quite simple, if you truly need grip don’t buy E4 as for those people Fuji already introduced s10. E4 was designed as stylish travel/street/walk around camera
Sure, if you like 35mm and You truly know that you will always want shoot 35mm. Personally I like switching prime lenses based on current needs and 35mm would be too limiting. With E4 you can use any lens and with x100v you are stuck with that 35mm. Also x100v is noticeably more expensive and not everyone need optical viewfinder
E4 is stylish looking camera that will work excellently with most prime lenses. As with all stylish cameras you are buying it because you like how it looks and how it makes you feel
I buy it because i like it, but i also buy it because i like the small team. With a lens other than the XF 27mm you lose the small size appeal. That's why i say that i only like it with that lens.
@Mentt "Most Leica cameras are also flat/no grip and nobody is complaining there". It's because everyone is complaining about the ridiculous price, so we can't get pass that to complain about other things 🤣
If camera companies want to truly compete with smartphones for relevance, they need to offer models that are as easy to use as a phone, but offer substantially better image quality.
Fujfilm's latest APS-C offering, the X-E4, is also the brand's smallest interchangeable X-mount camera to date. Despite its compact dimensions, the X-E4 sports the same outstanding 26MP APS-C sensor with X-Trans color filter array as the flagship X-T4.
We've topped off our Fujifilm X-E4 pre-production sample gallery with a wide variety of additional images showcasing an array of 'Film Simulations,' for your viewing pleasure. Have a look!
The Fujifilm X-E4's classic looks and compact size almost suggest an X100 series camera with interchangeable lenses. How close does it come? Chris shares his first impressions of this new camera straight from his basement quarantine.
The Fujifilm X-E4 is a compact, high-performance APS-C format mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, which inherits a lot of technology from higher-end X-series models. Is it right for you? Click through to learn more.
Razer's Blade laptops have always been marketed as premium gaming PCs. But the company's unflappable focus on build quality, a bloatware-free operating system, and the most powerful hardware on the market makes these laptops a phenomenal option for photo and video editing.
The FLM CP34-L4 II is the latest in a line of well-respected premium tripods from this European brand. How does it compare against its peers? Read our in-depth review to find out.
The The SIrui SR-3204 is an affordable 'Systematic' tripod that offers attractive features. So how does it compare to other models in its class? Read our in-depth review to find out.
The new Sony ZV-E10 is seemingly a vlogger's dream. It shoots uncropped 4K/24p video, offers headphone and microphone ports, a touch-sensitive selfie screen, class-leading AF and a darn good onboard mic. Unfortunately, jiggly 4K and subpar Full HD footage detract from its appeal.
The Fujifilm Fujinon XF 50mm F1.0 R WR is a premium fast aperture portrait prime for the company's X-mount cameras. Find out how it performs in our review.
If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that might be a bit older but still offer a lot of bang for the buck.
What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.
Although a lot of people only upload images to Instagram from their smartphones, the app is much more than just a mobile photography platform. In this guide we've chosen a selection of cameras that make it easy to shoot compelling lifestyle images, ideal for sharing on social media.
H&Y Filters has announced a new Black Mist filter in its Revoring series. The Revoring series features an adjustable filter, eliminating the need for step-up adapter rings.
By allowing users to mount Sony E-mount lenses on compatible Nikon Z-mount cameras, Techart's TZE-01 adapter brings us one step closer to that distant dream of universally interchangeable lens–camera combinations – but the key word is 'compatible.'
After speaking with a photo editor working with files captured at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, DPReview has confirmed that the native resolution of the Canon is 24MP.
Razer's Blade laptops have always been marketed as premium gaming PCs. But the company's unflappable focus on build quality, a bloatware-free operating system, and the most powerful hardware on the market makes these laptops a phenomenal option for photo and video editing.
The FLM CP34-L4 II is the latest in a line of well-respected premium tripods from this European brand. How does it compare against its peers? Read our in-depth review to find out.
With smoke from forest fires keeping them out of the Alberta countryside, Chris and Jordan take to the streets of Calgary to test out Tamron's ultra-wide 11-20mm F2.8 lens for Sony APS-C cameras.
Chris and Jordan from DPReview TV just wrapped up their review of the Tamron 11-20mm F2.8 Di III-A RXD for Sony E-mount. Check out their sample gallery and judge image quality for yourself.
This week marked the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 15 mission. The 9th crewed Apollo mission was the fourth to land on the Moon and the first to use a lunar roving vehicle (LRV), affectionately known as a 'moon buggy.' Join us as we look back at the historic Apollo 15 mission and the first lunar rover.
Curious about film photography? Don't know where to begin? We've got you covered! Parts 1-10 of our absolute beginner's guide to film photography cover all the basics of the medium, from film and camera types to advice on choosing the best camera for you.
A few photographers are testing the upcoming Canon EOS R3 mirrorless camera at the Tokyo 2020 games, including Atiba Jefferson, who has published an animation showing the R3 shooting at 30 frames per second.
The The SIrui SR-3204 is an affordable 'Systematic' tripod that offers attractive features. So how does it compare to other models in its class? Read our in-depth review to find out.
The Tamron 11-20mm F2.8 Di III-A RXD is a compact ultra-wide zoom for Sony APS-C E-mount bodies. See how it performed in a variety of situations in our sample gallery.
A government registration filing for a pair of unannounced (and unnamed) Nikon cameras states that one of the models will include Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and GNSS. It would be the first camera to use GNSS instead of GPS.
Photographer Jeff Cable, who’s shared that he’s testing the unreleased Canon EOS R3 mirrorless camera at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, has posted photos whose metadata suggests the camera has a 24MP sensor.
The Sony ZV-E10 combines the ergonomics of the a6100 and the vlogging features of the compact ZV-1 to create a camera designed for making yourself the subject. Find out everything you need to do about the ZV-E10 as we go hands-on.
The Sony ZV-E10 may be aimed at vloggers, but it's a capable stills camera too. Check out this gallery from our team at DPReview TV that includes everything from landscapes to portraits.
Kodak removed the post following backlash in China, but is now facing criticism elsewhere for issuing an apology and saying the post was the result of a 'supervision loophole.'
The new Sony ZV-E10 is seemingly a vlogger's dream. It shoots uncropped 4K/24p video, offers headphone and microphone ports, a touch-sensitive selfie screen, class-leading AF and a darn good onboard mic. Unfortunately, jiggly 4K and subpar Full HD footage detract from its appeal.
Chris and Jordan review the ZV-E10, Sony's new E-mount vlogging camera. Does it raise the bar for vloggers? Can Chris be bribed with Swedish fish gummies? Tune in to find out.
The new Sony ZV-E10 may be aimed primarily at vloggers, but it's still a highly capable stills camera thanks to its familiar 24MP APS-C CMOS sensor. Check out our samples - complete with plenty of pics of cute pups!
The ZV-E10 is Sony's first interchangeable lens camera designed specifically for vloggers. It's similar to the company's a6000-series bodies, but incorporates many features from Sony's compact ZV-1 vlogging camera.
Comments