tbhv55
Well-known
Well said...!
MCTuomey
Mentor
You probably know this, but you can have a Sony Alpha body modded by Kolari to play nicer with M-glass (the wider FLs).
gavinlg
Mentor
Fuji X - best overall value IMO. All superb optics in small sizes due to slightly smaller sensor, excellent build quality, simple menus and traditional ergonomics. Due to the traditional dials you can operate the camera without needing to look at the screen or into the EVF. X-trans sensor is excellent, not really subpar to any of the current full frame sensors from sony especially when you factor in colors the camera produce (classic chrome anyone - also available in RAW files with acr). Overall size and handling is best compromise. Video is pretty rubbish.
Sony - Great ideas with sometimes weird execution. Excellent sensors, limited native AF lenses. The good lenses are superb, but massive due to slightly larger sensor. Menus a bit smartphone like, and ergonomics are closer to DSLR, if you like twiddling nondescript wheels and watching a screen to change settings. Video is superb.
m4/3 - Excellent bodies in top line (em5ii/em1 especially), great sensors severely handicapped by sensor size (if you care about some level of subject separation). All the high end lenses are excellent, and smallest of the mirrorless bunch. Menus are an absolute nightmare of proprietary terms and wanky unnecesary options. IS tech in top bodies is a BIG plus. Video is superb.
Sony - Great ideas with sometimes weird execution. Excellent sensors, limited native AF lenses. The good lenses are superb, but massive due to slightly larger sensor. Menus a bit smartphone like, and ergonomics are closer to DSLR, if you like twiddling nondescript wheels and watching a screen to change settings. Video is superb.
m4/3 - Excellent bodies in top line (em5ii/em1 especially), great sensors severely handicapped by sensor size (if you care about some level of subject separation). All the high end lenses are excellent, and smallest of the mirrorless bunch. Menus are an absolute nightmare of proprietary terms and wanky unnecesary options. IS tech in top bodies is a BIG plus. Video is superb.
willie_901
Mentor
SONY doesn't appeal because, as Godfrey described, it's clunky. I wouldn't enjoy a camera with those ergonomics. SONY seems to spit out new products all the time.They just seem unstable to me. Perhaps it would be more accurate to describe their marketing philosophy as too dynamic. Obviously I am not interested at all in videography.
The OVF on the Fujifilm bodies is enjoyable. It's not that tricky to set the camera up such that it's operation is minimalistic and simple. The X-T1 EVF is well... an EVF. There are many generations of EVFs and the newest technologies outperform the older ones. For commercial work I prefer the EVF to DSLR OVFs. For action photography EVFs require anticipation and shutter bursts. DSLR OVFs are superior for action. For candid work I prefer the OVF. But with practice the EVF is not limiting.
The APS-C sensor size is not a significant handicap because the Fujinon lenses' focal lengths mean you can use the system just as you would use a 24 X 36 mm system with traditional focal lengths. Those who require the shallowest possible DOF and work in extreme low light will benefit from the increased sensor area.
Otherwise the physics of equivalence applies. Equivalence is a controversial topic due to its complex nature. It's relevance is even brand dependent because read noise is brand dependent. Equivalence levels the playing field for m4/3, APS-C and 24 X 36 mm camera bodies. This is especially the case for cameras with ISO-invarient data streams.
For me, after using film lens lenses with APS-C sensor bodies and 24 X 26 film and digital bodies, I did not enjoy using the APS-C bodies. I honestly feel differently when using lenses designed for APS-C sensors. However I don't curate lenses. I'm sure I'd think about sensor area quite differently if I had an emotional attachment to lenses I acquired and enjoyed over decades.
The Fujinon lenses are one the three reasons I am, and will remain, a Fujifilm owner. The second is I can simulate (not duplicate) the RF usage experience. Third, the Xtrans data stream's signal-to-noise ratio meets all my needs. I have no issues rendering the raw files. In terms of making progress on my projects, the Xtrans sensor is neither a positive or negative factor.
The OVF on the Fujifilm bodies is enjoyable. It's not that tricky to set the camera up such that it's operation is minimalistic and simple. The X-T1 EVF is well... an EVF. There are many generations of EVFs and the newest technologies outperform the older ones. For commercial work I prefer the EVF to DSLR OVFs. For action photography EVFs require anticipation and shutter bursts. DSLR OVFs are superior for action. For candid work I prefer the OVF. But with practice the EVF is not limiting.
The APS-C sensor size is not a significant handicap because the Fujinon lenses' focal lengths mean you can use the system just as you would use a 24 X 36 mm system with traditional focal lengths. Those who require the shallowest possible DOF and work in extreme low light will benefit from the increased sensor area.
Otherwise the physics of equivalence applies. Equivalence is a controversial topic due to its complex nature. It's relevance is even brand dependent because read noise is brand dependent. Equivalence levels the playing field for m4/3, APS-C and 24 X 36 mm camera bodies. This is especially the case for cameras with ISO-invarient data streams.
For me, after using film lens lenses with APS-C sensor bodies and 24 X 26 film and digital bodies, I did not enjoy using the APS-C bodies. I honestly feel differently when using lenses designed for APS-C sensors. However I don't curate lenses. I'm sure I'd think about sensor area quite differently if I had an emotional attachment to lenses I acquired and enjoyed over decades.
The Fujinon lenses are one the three reasons I am, and will remain, a Fujifilm owner. The second is I can simulate (not duplicate) the RF usage experience. Third, the Xtrans data stream's signal-to-noise ratio meets all my needs. I have no issues rendering the raw files. In terms of making progress on my projects, the Xtrans sensor is neither a positive or negative factor.
BillBingham2
Registered User
I think Fuji focuses on the photographer's needs (great output) and how to get there (well designed and different bodies, wide range of glass).
Sony is driven by core engineering (sensors, sensors, sensors) and marketing platforms that hold their creations.
m4/3s should have more of my attention than it does as Olympus seems to do as good a job at Fuji does with well thought through bodies.
B2 (;->
Sony is driven by core engineering (sensors, sensors, sensors) and marketing platforms that hold their creations.
m4/3s should have more of my attention than it does as Olympus seems to do as good a job at Fuji does with well thought through bodies.
B2 (;->
rinzlerb
Established
The full frame sony cameras have gotten a bit too big I think, especially the A7ii--not quite "clunky" but I think they've forgotten why we all went down this mirrorless path in the first place. I think they'll improve the form factor (and shrink--I hope) in another year or two--and get cheaper. I jumped in with the NEX 7 and have felt no compelling reason to change. I think they perfected the form factor of that design with the NEX 7 and tri-navi (after several iterations!) and I have yet to try another camera I prefer. Every new camera feels a bit weird at first. Size and weight make the most difference to me in the end. Both the Fuji XT and the Oly OMD have gotten too heavy for such small cameras. The first Fuji X cameras felt too light and got dinged for feeling "cheap" and I think they over-compensated. And why make small-sensor cameras so big? The Sony FF definitely wins in IQ, but all these cameras can make beautiful pictures. I think for me having the shared APS-C/FF mount will ultimately be the deciding factor to stay with Sony. I can haul out the big one when I need immaculate IQ, and carry around the little APS-C when I want to be small (most of the time), and use the same lenses on both. And by the way, the Zeiss Loxia 50 F2 is an excellent small (but heavy) manual focus FF for the e-mount--and it magnifies the instant you touch the focus ring. The best focusing system I've ever used. Faster and better than AF at getting exactly what you want in focus.
jloden
Established
So true... the part that rankles the most is the total abandonment of the customer past the initial purchase. Ok, ok - that and not including a battery charger with a $2800 camera. Seriously, Sony???
I had and really enjoyed a Sony RX1 (and even still miss it sometimes) but it boggles the mind that they could not be bothered to release even a simple firmware update for it. The message from Sony has been pretty loud and clear: they want your money, and after that the relationship is concluded. They simply do not care about building customer loyalty or goodwill.
Bingley
Mentor
I agree. Although I like the results I've seen from Fuji X100*, I haven't been persuaded to leave m4/3. The lens offerings are great, the AF on the Olympus E-P5 is lightening fast, and the IQ is more than good enough.
YYV_146
Well-known
What specific things are you looking to get through a firmware update? As far as I know the RX1 hasn't had glaring issues that need to be addressed. The NEX-7 got an update for the movie button placement issue. And the A7S got an update earlier this year for the 3-second startup time.
I would say that good customer support is address known issues and providing a good software solution from the start. If Fuji can "improve AF speed" in three different updates, one might wonder why they didn't bring AF to better speeds in the first place...
judsonzhao
Well-known
I will invest the same amount of money for A7 II other than X-T1, 100%. Very close price range now (used market).
Fuji is more of a hype for me these days, CMOS is way too bad. Digital era, no oldies will be forgiven. Having the best raw means huge potential. If I like film I just shoot film. Just like how people opt for M240. M9 is great, but very limited comparing to the little brother.
I do find that the straight-out RAWs of Fuji have pleasant colors of most time. However, drawback is that the widely used LR/PS CC doesn't do great job to decode Fuji's Xtrans raw, so you might need other software/profile.
If you are good at post-processing, Sony allows more to be tweaked.
X-E1 was on part with nex6. But years later, X-E2 is still the same CMOS with slight AF improve. X-T1 is also the same CMOS; Sony's got A6k, and A7k is right near.
I can't even justify myself selling X100s to get X100T.
And ironically, X100/X100s really holds there values so well, still reminds me days that you need to pay more than MSRP for X100s. And look at the X100T, discounted almost day 1, they are $1099 quite often through authorized dealers.
Seriously if next Fuji X-pro X-E is still like this, I'm just totally done with Fuji.
FE lenses are great now, together with Zeiss Loxina/Batis. Zeiss is never a good manufacture in terms of sizes of lenses. Glass is superior, but always relatively bulky. So it happens to FE system.
Fuji's APSC lens line-up is unarguably better, but quite bulky too if you ask me. Turns out Sony's 35/50mm (APSC) is small, 24mm is long but only has a 49mm thread. Of course these are slower lens, inferior IQ.
Fuji is more of a hype for me these days, CMOS is way too bad. Digital era, no oldies will be forgiven. Having the best raw means huge potential. If I like film I just shoot film. Just like how people opt for M240. M9 is great, but very limited comparing to the little brother.
I do find that the straight-out RAWs of Fuji have pleasant colors of most time. However, drawback is that the widely used LR/PS CC doesn't do great job to decode Fuji's Xtrans raw, so you might need other software/profile.
If you are good at post-processing, Sony allows more to be tweaked.
X-E1 was on part with nex6. But years later, X-E2 is still the same CMOS with slight AF improve. X-T1 is also the same CMOS; Sony's got A6k, and A7k is right near.
I can't even justify myself selling X100s to get X100T.
And ironically, X100/X100s really holds there values so well, still reminds me days that you need to pay more than MSRP for X100s. And look at the X100T, discounted almost day 1, they are $1099 quite often through authorized dealers.
Seriously if next Fuji X-pro X-E is still like this, I'm just totally done with Fuji.
FE lenses are great now, together with Zeiss Loxina/Batis. Zeiss is never a good manufacture in terms of sizes of lenses. Glass is superior, but always relatively bulky. So it happens to FE system.
Fuji's APSC lens line-up is unarguably better, but quite bulky too if you ask me. Turns out Sony's 35/50mm (APSC) is small, 24mm is long but only has a 49mm thread. Of course these are slower lens, inferior IQ.
Spanik
Well-known
RAW's that retain all the information for a start. What's the use of a great sensor if you trow away information of it? Should be a simple firmware fix or extra option.
I'm not sure this is entirely fair to say. You make it sound like it wouldn't even be useful to a photographer. I think if people got past the lack of traditional dials and the shutter sound, they might find the Sonys are actually very good cameras.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I tried, I really did. And couldn't. The overall lack of coordination and sophistication in the A7 finally just made it such that I'd rather use something else.
"Lack of tradional dials" has never been a problem for me, as long as the design works. The E-1 and E-M1 both work, as did the G1 and as does the E-PL7. But all of these work in a coordinated and sophisticated fashion.
G
Tejasican
Well-known
For me in the end it was the Fuji X-T1 and the E-M1 that were the options and the knobs that so closely simulated my film on camera workflow were the main selling point for the Fuji. It was a very smooth transition in that respect. Still looking for the perfect grip though and I think an X-pro is calling my name- something about that camera.
Due to a series of bad customer service experiences with various products, including cameras, Sony was off the table for me before I ever got started.
Due to a series of bad customer service experiences with various products, including cameras, Sony was off the table for me before I ever got started.
uhoh7
Mentor
Well if you go used Sony A7, send it in for 400 to Kolari, you just spent 1100USD on a camera which will smoke all A7 models and can hang very close to M240 with M wides, let alone comparing it to the crop Fujis (which are perfectly nice and really good for what they are).
That A7 mod will still AF just fine if you need it.
Here is mine last night with 75 Lux and CV 35/1.2
DSC09781 by unoh7, on Flickr
Annabels by unoh7, on Flickr
I still prefer the M9, but the Sony mod does pretty well, and will focus close and shoot any lens ever made for 135 film.
To get A7.mod level performance from a stock A7x (excluding r2), you need batis 25/2; FE 35/2.8; and FE 55/1.8 and you better check them very very close for decentering. Even then I think the mod would still win.
That A7 mod will still AF just fine if you need it.
Here is mine last night with 75 Lux and CV 35/1.2
DSC09781 by unoh7, on Flickr
Annabels by unoh7, on Flickr
I still prefer the M9, but the Sony mod does pretty well, and will focus close and shoot any lens ever made for 135 film.
To get A7.mod level performance from a stock A7x (excluding r2), you need batis 25/2; FE 35/2.8; and FE 55/1.8 and you better check them very very close for decentering. Even then I think the mod would still win.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Thanks, Mike. But wouldn't it be cool if Fuji or Sony started building a line of small manual focus lenses. They could hire Cosina to do it!
Spanik
Well-known
The problem is why should I have to do that? All other cameras I can use without having to do something similary.
Well, I know you have tried... but many others commenting here haven't. And let's not forget, you did like the A7 at one time (for your R lenses). I will admit that the Olympus E-M1 is a great camera...and feels better than the Sonys, but I don't like 4:3 aspect ratio though.
But that is not really true...except for Leicas.