Posts: 8,042
Threads: 1,865
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
09-06-2018, 07:25 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2018, 09:22 AM by Klaus.)
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_t3/
Honestly, I still think that Fuji is, besides MFT, the most attractive mirrorless system.
Full format lenses are just too big relative to the size of the camera.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
22
Hahaha, with 3 new ML systems you already made up your mind. But why not? Fuji really is not bad, and Canon M is much younger (to be more widespread in Europe).
No Klaus, Fuji to me is not the most attractive ML system - and I'd say that depends very highly on what a buyer expects from it. You put your emphasis on less weight and small size - Fuji checks all these boxes. I put my emphasis on usability and flexibility, also 3rd party lenses and some features I like to see decently implemented - Fuji is out of the game and my Fuji sales is going on.
Posts: 8,042
Threads: 1,865
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
Sure, your choice.
My argument is not about weight but balance. A tiny camera combined with massive lenses just feels wrong in my book.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 38
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
No doubt about that. And they have better ergonomics and are handsomer (if that is even a word...  )
Buttons are somehow smaller than they should be (they are much better on the X-H1) but even I with my huge hands can handle them.
FF or APSC are just words and categories inherited from the past: a file is a file, we are not using slides anymore; I don't see the 1 stop differential in DOF as a real problem; feels like more a marketing hype (I own and use FF and APSC as well).
regards
Vitantonio Dell'Orto
www.exuviaphoto.com
www.sarnavandrarhem.com
Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
22
09-06-2018, 12:54 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2018, 12:59 PM by JJ_SO.)
(09-06-2018, 12:50 PM)Klaus Wrote: Sure, your choice.
My argument is not about weight but balance. A tiny camera combined with massive lenses just feels wrong in my book.
Absolutely. Which is why a smaller Fuji body and their 100-400 (or the new 200/2.0) is a weird combination and needs a body with battery grip to feel sort of balanced.
It was also weird to put a 135/1.8 or a 14/1.8 in front of the Z7.
(09-06-2018, 12:51 PM)exuvia Wrote: No doubt about that. And they have better ergonomics and are handsomer (if that is even a word... )
Buttons are somehow smaller than they should be (they are much better on the X-H1) but even I with my huge hands can handle them.
I contradict from the bottom of my heart The ergonomics suck massively, and I tried to make that clear on a couple of occasions. But your choice, if your happy with it, cool.
Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
22
09-06-2018, 05:40 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2018, 05:45 PM by JJ_SO.)
After all what I said against Fuji, here is Jordan Drake's comment on the new X-T3 in comparison with his trusty GH5: https://www.dpreview.com/videos/7560075369/dpreview-tv-fujifilm-x-t3-vs-panasonic-gh5-video-comparison
Alright, he's only the video guy... 
Posts: 186
Threads: 4
Joined: May 2017
Reputation:
4
Yup. And lot’s of good impressions also from photo guy, Chris, same team, same site, first hands on video:
https://www.dpreview.com/videos/4827370180/dpreview-tv-fujifilm-x-t3-hands-on-first-impressions
When I was switching to mirrorless, Fuji was a strong alternative. Few bits and pieces that were and are important to me made me decide otherwise. Nevertheless in my eyes Fuji system is growing nicely and X-T3 seems to be another step in right direction.
Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
22
09-06-2018, 07:09 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2018, 11:03 PM by JJ_SO.)
Maybe i should wait to sell the Fujinons until X-T6 or 7 is rolling...
There ARE definitely a lot of improvements - but also there are some quirks I don't like on the X-T2 and they made it into the X-T3. Well then... The base ISO from 200 to 160 is a bit too ridiculous to be mentioned, I think.
Posts: 8,042
Threads: 1,865
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
09-06-2018, 07:21 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2018, 08:01 PM by Klaus.)
I think that in terms of ergonomics it all depends on which system you were socialized.
I started with Canon and never really warmed up with Nikon for instance.
I think Panasonic is fairly related to Canon so I quite like that - less so Olympus.
Fuji is alright albeit a bit too traditional for my taste.
In the end, I consider all this a lesser concern because all of them are "good enough" and the ergonomics are secondary to other aspects.
e.g. the Oly M5 II is a killer when used with the 12-100 PRO.
The Fuji cameras are awesome with the Fuji prime lenses.
etc. pp.
As mentioned DSLRs are not my thing but I do understand their qualities and why they are popular among many users.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
Posts: 186
Threads: 4
Joined: May 2017
Reputation:
4
I think as well ergonomics are far from being universal.
For example, my preference today is Panasonic, as well. Neither Canon nor Nikon (nor Olympus) worked for me, while transition from Pentax was very natural one.
It is great there are various choices to choose from.
|
