DPReview TV: Fujifilm X-S10 vs Sony a6400 - two great cameras with different superpowers

Same here. Basically an X-T4 with a bit less dials and buttons, better grip, smaller battery, worse EVF and a bit less video features if not digging into the detauls (headphone jack, shutter etc).

I think the hate on the AF is exaggerated (even if Sony seems ridiculously good when it comes to tracking), and even if I do miss some buttons I can still take the same pictures that an X-T4 can take for half the price. Fantastic camera for the family IMO.

I don’t have much use for IBIS. Most of my subjects these days move.
Different strokes for different folks.

Wait a minute...for years we heard about how Sony had IBIS and Canon/NIkon and even Fuji did not and so IBIS was the greatest thing in the entire world.

Now that other brands have better IBIS than Sony, then to some it has become irrelevant to have IBIS. What happened?

Wait a minute...for years we heard about how Canon and Nikon had great battery life and Sony and even Fuji did not, and so battery life was the greatest thing in the entire world.

Now that Sony has better battery life, then to some it has become irrelevant to have good battery life. What happened?

Wait a minute....for years we heard about how GEAR doesn't matter, now that's all that's matter. What happened?

TRU you didn’t hear that from me.
It’s useful in certain situations. Sure.
And I do generally leave it on.
But I’m typically shooting faster than 1/FL anyway.

You can tell the people who don’t own cameras here. They don’t realize IBIS can help with moving subjects. A beginners photography class would help them.

How exactly? A moving subject is not frozen by ibis.. (MAYBE if your panning.) You can tell the people who don’t own cameras here.

Those hating on IBIS: Your hand moves the pixels orders of magnitude more than any of your subjects the vast majority of the time. IBIS is great. Don't hate.

If that were true how was any Canon camera before the R5 even useable?

Come on. Such ridiculousness!!!!

How sad this guy knows nothing about photography. Maybe in his beginner photography class they’ll explain ILIS too, 😆
Next the difference IS modes and what they are for. 🙄

MikeRan it's as easy as shooting an image at 1/60s or 1/30s or so with a normal focal length. Your subject will be still at the pixel level. Your hand will not most of the time. It's a really easy experiment, one you can do all of the time if you have a body with ibis.

If you're careful, sometimes people hold still for even longer stretches of time. Times you can take advantage of if you have IBIS.... These are not infrequent occurrences.

Ahhh. You are lucky to have people posing for you.
As I said if someone is walking, 1/60 isn’t fast enough.

You only take pictures of people walking? And they are always walking? Even toddlers slow down for long enough to take advantage of IBIS...

I brought a tiny GM1 with an unstabilized 85mm equivalent lens into a concert. After that experience, with all of the shots I missed because of lack of stabilization, I will never shoot with an unstabilized lens indoors again... The singer was plenty still many times. Singers pose. My hands were consistently shaky... Very low percentage of keepers...

I very rarely take a picture of someone "posed". Sure it happens. But generally I just take pictures while things are happening. And no, when people stop moving I don't slow my shutter down from 1/250 (or whatever) to 1/60 because I don't know when they are going to start moving again. And I want all my pictures sharp so I can use the one with the best expression. Not simply the one that's not blurry.

And if you were shooting a concert at 1/60, well it's your own fault you got very low percentage of keepers. Not your camera's fault.

Mike you really need to buy a camera or take a class. Its pretty easy to get pictures at concerts using 1/60, and I've shot auto racing with shutter speeds under 1/100. Your problems sound more like user error.

I guess I need a bigger sensor camera to shoot faster than 1/60 at a dark concert at acceptable ISO, but I don't have one. But I do have IBIS... Why don't I just use that?

You're kind of being ridiculous so this is pointless...

Sony makes better APSC sensors but doesn’t use them. They make better Displays and VFs too. They even make cameras with Bluetooth newer than v2.0 and without memory stick slots.
It was pretty easy to port over the AF software from A7 cameras that use the same CPU, but all other APSC development slowed or stopped a few years ago.

@MikeRan While that's a good option, the 70-180 is best for bodies with IBIS, so that limits APS-C users to the a6500 & a6600.

The value of IBIS depends on what you’re shooting. (Moving targets or not) But yes that is a consideration.

Fujifilm needs to keep making cameras with IBIS too.
The X~S10 is the first APSC mirrorless camera under $1000 to have it which is a great start. M43 has probably a dozen under $1000 with IBIS and that’s always be an equalizer and actually put it ahead for video in the minds of many because of their insanely steady video.

Photokhan frankly it speaks to the ability of the older Sony’s to go head to head with the latest bodies. That there is a valid discussion illustrates that point. It ends up being good news for those that have been using the Sony for a few years already.

A really old camera too. Same sensor, CPU, most everything as the A6300. The FW was updated to add great AF.

But it doesn’t matter. This is Sony’s latest and there is no hint of a replacement coming anytime soon. Blame Sony not this site for that.

What I've been noticing in the last 3/5 years:

1. Sony starts a strategy of keeping older models on the market until they dry out. This challenged the traditional approach in this market, one that has always relied on fast renewal cycles, with consumers dropping the older models.

2. In a national forum, I come across a Sony user that, suddenly, starts to make comparisons between older Sony cameras and new offers on the market, based on some intangible time-crossing “qualities” of those older Sony models.

3. Within a small time frame I notice that approach starting to appear all over the net, propagating at the pace, rhythm and whim of any new “influencer”.

4. Serious outfits, like DPR review, with honest reviewers like Chris and Jordan, probably subliminally influenced by that trend, hop on the bandwagon and start making those kinds of comparisons.

5. The older model being evaluated is ALWAYS a Sony one, whereas the newer one varies in brand.

Again, mere observations...

@PhotoKhan
At current price points and some moving even higher of some APS-C models while FF is coming down, it might soon become a moot point. I like the fact that Fuji and some of their Medium type cameras are moving, Down in Price. That might be my next move. FUJIFILM GFX 100S Medium Format Mirrorless Camera.

Photokhan Perhaps it’s simply because the older Sony’s are still available in the market and because they are still competitive. Those two facts explain everything you wrote.

DP did that with the RP, Z5, against the A7II. Sony doesn't (chooses to?) have anything else in that price range to compete against. Other manufacturers need to compete on price at this point.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/0111187336/nikon-z5-vs-canon-eos-rp-vs-sony-a7-ii-how-do-they-compare

It really isn’t DPR’s fault if Sony doesn’t have something more up to date to review.

If Sony doesn't want the 6400 to be compared against newer cameras at that price point, then they should stop selling it. Same goes for the old versions of A7 cameras.

Pretty sure Sony is happy to have these comparisons.
I suspect once the A7IV is released (perhaps sometime this year) the A7III will be price reduced and continue to be compared to the low cost full frame options from Nikon and Canon. And I believe the A7III will continue to sell well.

I think it’s clear the people that don’t like these comparisons being made are the people that don’t like Sony. Comment histories are telling.

A different perspective, so my point may come across more clearly.

1. 10 years ago car magazines would make comparisons between 2 equivalent, relatively new to market car models. Camera magazines would also make comparisons between 2 equivalent, relatively new to market cameras.

2. 10 years later, car magazines still do comparisons between 2 equivalent, relatively new to the market car models but photography specialized publications started comparing years-old models with more recent ones.

(cont.)

(cont.)

3. The only thing that changed in those 10 years is that one specific brand of photographic equipment decided that their oldest cameras models would be kept in commerce shelves until all the production of said has been drained.

4. We are invited to believe that, in said recent asynchronous comparisons trend, the fact that a Sony camera is always the oldest one being compared derives from pure coincidence or from the idea that their products are so fantastic that the very same commercial and technical evolution laws that govern every other brand’s products don’t apply to them.

Thom Hogan has written about how Nikon went down this path of having all of these older models in inventory and used them as the lower priced tiers of their product line.

First it’s a sign that the manufacturer overproduced. I think Sony and Nikon were caught by surprise at how quickly the market for dedicated cameras declined.

Second it creates confusion among customers and also results in customers buying older tech but thinking it new, which can lead to customer dissatisfaction. It also results in some customers comparing new tech from some companies with this older tech, due to similar market positioning.

We will see if this works better for Sony but it created a problem for Nikon that only now are they digging out of.

Nah man. One or two is an overproduction mistake. This seems to be a calculated strategy by Sony.

Develop the high end cameras and let the previous generation become the low end models.

You canon folk don’t like that Canons apparent release rate is lower than Sony’s. But Canon just develops and releases explicit low end models in addition to their high end models.

As I said, Sony will probably continue to produce the A7III after the A7IV and it will likely compete fairly well against the next gen RP canon releases.

It’s a different strategy. Canon develop high end and low end models. Sony just develop higher end models. Seems a more efficient use of the R&D resources. Given how long the A6000 sales had lasted it seems to work for them.

please tell me what newer Sony at this price has? sadly nothing, no apsc with 2 card slots, no apsc with a decent sized evf, no apsc with a new sensor and fast readout and no apsc which has anything newer than an usb2 port LOL

You have to compare with the best camera in the same price range. You cannot compare a $800 camera with a $2000 from the other manufacturer just because it's newer. Full frames are much more expensive and same for the A6600.

It's not about who's winning the competition and to make Sony fanboys happy.

"That 331 owns Sony against Fuji X s10' 80 is very revealing"

Considering some people will click on "Own" before a camera is even released, that doesn't really reveal anything.

s10th1ovechunk So you don't know of a place USEBYDATE? Don't worry sooner or later you'll get there. In fact you're on your way there already. No, it's not commune, nor Military and not even a jail.. Some love it there, other complain its too hot. By the way leave your camera behind, no pictures allowed either. If you happen to get there before me, let me know if you like it there .hahahahaha

Ah I get it now.
I probably wouldn't think the same way because owning a bunch of camera models seems complicated to me. Especially if it seems more fun to play with different lenses? Not that those things are mutually exclusive.

@Thecyclon: 2 questions then:
1. The bar is higher for the A6400 (or longer going further to the right than the S10
2. If the bars don't matter, why have them at all?

@deednets
Scores are relative to the competition in their time.

For example, the A7R II got 90%
But the A7R III also got 90%
The R III is clearly the better camera. It is just that expectations also have grown over time.

Same for X-T3 and X-T4 both 88%. And even more visible in the D750
D750 - 90%
D780 clearly superior in every way - 87%

So you cannot compare scores from products released so far apart.

And awards are NOT given based on scores at all. They are given based on innovation. New Innovation there = Gold, No Innovation = Silver at max. Even if the score is higher

" (Though I'm not really happy with the a6400.)"

Thats what happens when you buy the less expensive camera, instead of a the camera you will enjoy using.

Did it. Didn't love it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2geR06EvH0

Just a little over a year. The a6600 was released end of 2019.

Fuji has so many different cropped sensor camera lines that they seem to update constantly whereas sony really just has 1.

APS-C is just following the path of M43 - It is getting irrelevant. DSLR users that used to buy APS-C cameras now buying entry level FF or up.

Give it another 5 years and the only brand selling APS-C wil be Fujifilm. That said Fujifilm then also won't give it the attention any longer than they have given it in the past. For Fujifilm the future is in the GFX not in APS-C.

The market is shifting towards higher end product, not lower end.

@Francis85: I don't think APS-C or M43 will become irrelevant any time soon. Crop sensor cameras have their big benefits when it comes to telephoto work. Lenses with the same FOV can be (a lot) smaller for cropped sensor cameras then for FF cameras.
Yes the price of FF cameras is going down, but they are still more expensive when you add lenses with the same FOV.
And an important reason to keep crop sensor is that it is a great camera people can start photography.

Its fine to have differrent opinions -
Time will tell who is right

I think those 'advantages' don't exist any longer with APS-C
The problem for Fuji is that FF is going high res at lower costs whereas APS-C is stuck at ±24MP since 2012 already. Image Quality is just degrading at a higher resolution where 60MP FF is having the same pixel density as current APS-C

With these resolutions of FF today you can easily crop to 24MP and therewith you will find having those exact same 'advantages' for FF as you have had with APS-C

With these resolutions for FF you have 2 cameras in one FF and APS-C when you need that reach

Then there is the fact that 90% of all photo's are not taken with longer lenses but with lenses at a focal length of 24 / 70mm. There is just more creative options with FF including within the editing process

This is also the reason why Fuji is now getting more focussed upon the GFX. It just offers more options on the long run though at the cost of higher price and weight

As technology progresses, the cost benefit of smaller sensors becomes almost meaningless. For extra ‘reach’ there is an APS-C camera inside every FF camera. Speed is becoming a non issue where it was before a benefit to smaller sensors. At some point in the near future it will be that while smaller has a benefit, that benefit is so meaningless to consumers.

Shortly after this time, in a contracting market for crop cameras, it will start to become MORE expensive to make crop cameras. A bit like how making cameras now without video features would be more expensive, not less.

But this is probably a little way off yet. But eventually. Plus we will almost certainly see systems created around larger sensors than 135 being much less niche.

Alex I agree, that's the other part of it.
Users either upgrade or fall away in this segment.

@Francis85
I show where APS-C is still relevant. And yes it is still relevant when it comes to size and price, that is when we want a comparable result in the end.
The A7R4 costs at the moment about $1400 more then the A7III, and that is the cheapest Sony camera that can do that trick. In my book $1400 is a lot of money.
Then the 90% argument, well I can use that argument too: 90% of the people do not need FF or even 60MP, so FF is irrelevant. For those 90% of the people the A6600 is the better choice as it gives them a smaller camera at a lower price with more then enough creative options.
So at this moment an APS-C camera makes more sense then a FF camera for 90% of the people. Why?
It is smaller, it is cheaper, it is what they need.
But you are right when you say:
Its fine to have differrent opinions -
Time will tell who is right

You don't show anything except your bias.
I think your view is a little short minded. But as said I am sure the pink glasses will come off one day with you too. Once you find out how expensive the Fujifilm system actually is compared to its competition. Pay more get less with Fujifilm and the hurd still seem to fall for all the little lies they have told you.

Fujifilm users are like a religion. Those who believe are fully committed and those who have seen there is more than Fujifilm are being banished and excluded by those still die hard Fujifilm users.

I wish you well.
I am glad I have left Fujifilm behind me.
And yes I am fully convinced many more Fujifilm users over the next few years will go back to the brand they came from in the first place. It is happening already and the pace of people walking away will increase.

The 6300 is awful. Terrible af in low light and an ergonomic disaster.

IQ

To my eyes the E-M5 III looks pretty much one-stop worse:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=fujifilm_xs10&attr13_1=sony_a6400&attr13_2=oly_em5iii&attr13_3=sony_a6400&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=12800&attr126_2=1&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=-0.11271322607298187&y=-0.7057762061385212

Maybe the reasons dig at menus are taken is because... it's a real issue? It's not just Chris that has brought this up. Ditto for Olympus menus.

The vast majority of Sony Cameras have horrible menus, that's hardly a newsflash nor anything to knock Chris on. That's not a bias against Sony by Chris, that's just a hard FACT.

I agree on this. The new breed of affordable FF cameras (e.g. Z5) and lenses (e.g. Tamron 28-75mm F2.8) are really killing Fuji's value proposition. When you can get a larger sensor AND brighter lens for less...

@BrentSchumer Well having a larger sensor, which gets you better light gathering capabilities does not automatically mean you have a better overall camera. The GFX100s has a better light gathering capability that the A1, but does not mean it is an overall better camera. The Z5 may be cheaper than something like an X-T4 or a D500, but they're not built for the same market. It's like choosing between a basic Mercedes-Benz and a full option Volkswagen or Škoda.

Jusine - There is much more to the story and have left Fujifilm after 7 years of use. Owned X-Pro, X-T1, X-Pro2, X-T2, X-T3 and now X-T4. AF still sucks in low light and backlit situations. It is often too much off and soft to still be a usable image. If you are happy with that I am totally fine with it. But I am not!

The X-T4 has been the greatest buyers regret I have ever had over a camera. The AF on its video is totally unpredictable in its response (and which is also been demonstrated in many YouTube video's). Again if you are happy with that then fine for you. Not for me.

Fujifilm is just getting behind the competition.
They started out pretty well, improved and then.... they just left the ball not even willing to improve it.

Nope I am just not happy any longer with their Fuji and then came the time to move back to where I once started. And I am sure many Fuji users will start doing the same. Fujifilm is just over its hype. The pink glasses will come off one day for you too.

Iserp - My issue is not cost, but reliability which has always suffered with Fujifilm. Just too many problems with these cameras all along. No reason to stay with an inferior product offering when others have more to offer. It was just time to move on. I have given them enough chances and now the time to stay with Fujifilm is up. Especialy because Fujifilm is neglecting the issues with the X-T4.

Mariano...lets don't get political LOL

Q = Qued 🤔😊😷😎 without "anon"

I have X100F (from eBay)
X-H1 + 35mm equivalent lens (I am a 35mm crazy shooter)
These are dated cameras but works ultra-fantastic

Biden stimulus $1,400.00 comes goes to ..... (drum roll, please) ... SX10

As of Feburary 2021, nine years ago :-) And it was $749 at that time.

@Tomasz_Wk
Fuji vs Sony
16-55mm F2.8 - Fuji 100$ cheaper
18-135mm F3.5-5.6 - Sony 350$ cheaper
70-300/350mm - Fuji 100$ cheaper
50mm F1.8 - Sony 100-250$ cheaper depending on the version
85/90 F1.8/2 - Sony 400$ cheaper

and the list goes on and on back and forth. Of course, there aren't exact matches for everything but overall the price level is pretty similar

@panther- at the APSC level, I would take a Fuji lens over a Sony lens any day. It's too bad because Sony has shown they can indeed do good lenses, but the APSC line has always been littered with a lot of clunkers. They should do a "mark II" better lens design of those - if they care about APSC.

@Raist3d that depends alot on the individual lens. I'd love to have the Sony 16-55 and 70-350 for Fuji. Not 100% sure yet the 70-300 Fuji will be worse, but it seems like it will.

Many native Sony APS-C lenses are rather old and some are just bad, but if one just needs those better ones, it's the better lens system for that person.

Why does the Fuji 70-300 seem like it will be worse? Chris and Jordan already shot it and it seems in IQ, build quality, and capabilities to pretty competitive. At $799 for a partly metal build with an aperture ring, zoom lock, focus limit switch, OIS and weather resistance, it seems to me to be shaping up quite nicely.

Sigma lenses for Fujifilm are rumored to be coming within the year. No announcement as to which but the 16-30-56 primes are a pretty sure bet.

That's great, but I feel like that bag of primes segment is already covered, between Fuji, Viltrox and now Tokina. Would like to see some of their f2.8 zooms and some long glass come to Fuji.

Seems like the big argument against Fuji is the lack of cheap(er) third party AF glass and that argument could be largely negated by Sigma, if the parties involved can get things worked out.

Note: Viltrox primes are not on the same level as either Fuji or SIgma.