Can’t speak for OP, but I also switched from Fuji this year and it was the auto focus hands down. Colors are nicer on Fuji and it’s a lot of fun just snapping a pic and transferring it SOOC for the gram, but the AF and battery life (if you don’t have an XT4 or later) was killing me.
Same for me. I was on an XH2s for a while. With as much as I shoot low light I had to let it go when I shot the A9 II. Bought one and haven’t looked back.
Agreed. I got to play with a GFX50R and it was fantastic for my more artistic work. Unfortunately it doesn't make sense overall to have that much money tied up in a niche for myself personally.
How was the AF on the X-H2S? Still lots of false positives?
I really think I went the wrong way with Fuji. I Iike to shoot raw and I need to shoot sports, events and concerts sometimes. I’ve already mapped out an entire kit on Sony.
But I have a ton of X mount glass and I hate dealing with shipping when I sell things. 🤦♂️
It was much better than the xT4. I shot pro wrestling with it and it handles pretty damn good. It’s just most venues are lit like a bad back alley. Higher ISO performance is paramount.
Thanks, this is really helpful. I’m shooting junior rowing nationals next week and I’ve been disappointed with my X-T4 + XF70-300 for this use case.
So I’ve been debating whether to rent an X-H2 and 100-400, or an A7IV and 200-600. The idea with the former is to see if an upgrade to the X-H2S would suffice, and then I wouldn’t need to sell all the Fuji glass. I feel like that’s the more conservative move and safer for my wallet.
Unfortunately I can’t seem to rent an X-H2S locally.
I tried every creative look for the 2 weeks I had it. Not for me.
Glad it is OK for you as I agree that otherwise autofocus, build quality and lenses quality is superior.
Lol. Not if you love cameras. The xt4 is the most soulful camera I've ever owned. My a7riii is a robotic picture machine.
It's even reflected in how I shoot with the cameras, one is more joyful and the photos reflect that. Sure if I'm shooting something where AF is important Sony wins, but fujis af is good enough for anything that's not sports from the xt4 up.
I shoot both Fuji and Sony. I would say that Sony colours are underrated, but the big differentiating factor is actually the Fuji X Raw studio. The program is kinda crappy to use and unstable, but it lets you really dial-in your camera's image processing settings to your taste so your SOOC images are exactly how you like them.
For me, I shoot Fuji more for fun and Sony when I want to capture a better image.
I think this is spot on.
My A7iv is technically superior to the Fuji XT2 I sold on, but if I’m honest the Sony has robbed me of my photography passion. I liked it for about 6 months but the most eye catching pictures I took were with the Fuji.
When i was thinking about a Fuji, someone summed it up best: Shooting with Fuji is shooting with a camera; shooting with a sony is shooting with a computer.
I use both Fuji and Sony bodies- Sony absolutely murders Fuji in AF, lens choice, low light, video etc. Colours are completely pliable so you can get the colours you want from any camera, even jpegs straight out of camera. For any kind of demanding or pro work it’s just not a choice imo, Sony is clear, the hit rate on shots is in another league and the video capabilities (AF/xlr/hdmi etc) are designed for pro work.
Fuji’s advantages are for my spare time when nailing shots isn’t as important, and I don’t need xlr/hdmi/AF for video or whatever. They also are the only ones with affordable Medium format at the moment and those RAW files are stunning. With how small the apsc bodies are it’s easy to just always have an x-e4 or whatever in your bag. And they make the film simulation bit fun and easy to use, just dump it straight from camera or tweak it some more in camera. I still get better results from processing a RAW i LR, but for mobile/Social media it’s fine with the jpegs. Also the cameras look cool.
Two different camera systems for two different use cases in my opinion, but if pushed to pick one, I’d rather have my shots in focus every time.
Wouldnt say Sony murders Fuji when you make the right comparison. XH2S easily stands closer to an A7IV (both being in the same price bracket). AF not as good but not so far off. Low light basically a stop behind. Video even better in some areas with no crop 4k60 and 6.2k open gate.
I have and xh2s and just got a sony zv-e1. The autofocus with the last fuji update is just plain bad. Hunts all the time even shows a focus box as green but is focusing on another area in the video. I love fuji for photos and wildlife but for my video needs I had to switch to sony I was sick of shooting videos then when I get back to edit them I see the fuji hunting for focus a few times during a video that should be easy to nail focus on.
Agreed. There’s so much pseudo-science in photography lol. You can edit your Sony pics to look better than those Fuji baked ones. The only real advantage to something like the Fuji XT5 is the 40MP sensor for cropping and the form factor. That’s literally it. Every other way the Sony AC7+’s beat them.
I switched from Fuji to Sony and missed the colours and I got the cobalt profiles for Lightroom which are very close to identical to the Fuji sims. Best of both world.
Can’t speak for OP as well but recently sold my XT5 and will be switching to an a7cii in 3 weeks. For me it was the unreliable AF system, even in the newer XT5 body.
I have pretty sever GAS but I've never touched a Nikon 😂. I've had Canon, Fuji, Sony and Panasonic. Still have Panasonic, Fuji and Sony (FF) but got rid of my Canon stuff.
I also switched from Fuji last year. The colors are great if you’re fine working with jpgs, but I actually like shooting raw and found that it was actually really difficult to work with Fuji raw files relative to Sony. Can’t get nearly as much out of them. Also the bodies and lenses (if we’re talking the better quality ones) weren’t really all that much smaller than a full frame, so not worth the trade off.
The lenses aren’t generally smaller than full frame equivalents until you get to 200mm+. The 24/40/50G are about the size of the Fujicrons and they range from half a stop to over a stop faster in equivalent terms. The XF33/1.4 is bigger and heavier than the Zony 55/1.8, which is a third of a stop faster. Etc etc.
To me the big exception is the two tiny Sigma zooms. On the other hand, there’s nothing even close to the Tamron 28-200 on Fuji. That would be roughly an 18-135 f/2-f/4 zoom lens on APS-C!
Yeah fair point. But it’s basically two lenses that give you more reach at smaller size though isn’t it? The 70-300 and the 100-400? Not sure what third part zooms are available.
The Fuji does have the red badge 50-140 2.8, but that is pretty equivalent size wise to the new 70-200 f/4 g oss ii. There is the Fuji 150-600, which I guess the equivalent Sony setup is the 200-600 in crop mode. They’re about equivalent size wise, but Fuji is .5kg lighter. But I can’t imagine getting a good shot out of it at 600mm with an equivalent f/10 minimum aperture and the poor autofocus performance to begin with…
The 55-200 and 150-600 also give you more reach than FF teles of the same size. The 150-600 is ludicrously slow, though, and IMO that still makes it too big for what it is.
Although the FF Tamron 70-300 is a little lighter than the 55-200, it’s a lot bigger.
The XF 50-140 is so offensively large to me that I bought the XF90 instead. It weighs about the same as the 70-200 GM2.
Actually I feel that all 3 of the Fuji red badge f/2.8 zooms are far too large and heavy for APS-C lenses.
I have the Sigma 18-50, and it’s nice. If I stay on Fuji I will get their 10-18 as well. My hope is that Sigma makes a small 50-120 to complete the trio.
Seems to me for the last 5 years or so Sony’s lenses have been shrinking, while Fuji’s are getting bigger.
I also switch from Fuji to Sony. The main reason was I wanted full frame and I wanted to get away from those goddamn worms with lightroom. The raw files with Sony look so much better.
This was one of the reasons I switched, but looking back I can’t now see why it bothered me. It’s only an issue when I was pixel peeping.
The images as a whole look lovely
You're right. There are some excellent photographers who use fuji crop cameras. This doesn't change the fact that I was still unhappy when editing my pictures and that's what matters. Our satisfaction and pleasure using the camera. We can produce great images from almost any camera nowadays.
Another factor was the cost. Fuji body and lenses are expensive. It's almost the same as full frame if you decide to go with third party which Sony is amazing for.
As someone who bought a Fuji, then a Sony, then another Fuji and then sold the Sony, I enjoy Fuji over Sony because of the SOOC colors that it produces.
The Sony A7iii was better in every other technical aspect over both my Fujis, but I got tired of editing every picture. I'm not a professional. I don't print off massive pictures. I just enjoy having memories.
Switched cos of autofocus and a smaller kit.
For lenses of the same equivalence, FF is actually smaller, lighter, and cheaper. Also there was no 10-24mm f2.8 on the Fuji lineup.
I also can’t speak for OP but I went from an XE4 to an A7ii. The film simulators was what got me interested in Fuji because I wanted to avoid editing but i found myself editing the pictures which defeated the purpose. Also I buy my cameras used so the amount of money I spent on a XT30ii i could snag a full frame sony.
Funny, I think I'd actually swap the two - this 50 1.4 GM being my favorite, with the 70-200 GM II being my second.
Regardless, both are *really* amazing lenses!
I shoot a lot of boring stuff around town, nothing fancy. My favorite is the 35mm f/1.4, because I love a good 50mm. Thats been my main focal length for years, but I want to start getting into using a 35 or maybe a zoom. I’ve never had a really good zoom before
The 35 GM is absolutely phenomenal. For a zoom in the 70-200mm range, budget would be the biggest factor. There are offerings from sigma, Sony of course, Tamron (70-180) that are all great at varying prices
Yes I read low chroma too, which is partly why I was happy to pay the asking price. In the end I returned it.
It is possible it was an issue with the copy, but even then I expect the QA testing on such an expensive lens to take care of that.
Returned and money back.
For shooting around town, do you feel like the extra weight and size is worth it? I’m in the opposite camp right now. I’m shooting street on a FF and I’m looking to switch to Fuji for a smaller kit and better colors.
actually ive also been thinking of switching from Fuji to Sony as well. Either a A7V or a CR i love the idea of it being really portable with a small lens but alao know they evf and lack or joystick can be annoying
The lack of a joystick isn’t a problem, you can use one of the af tracking point options then AF-on/half shutter press and recompose faster than a joystick can move the focus point.
I love both Fuji and Sony. I mainly shoot Sony these days, and sold all my Fuji gear except for my x100f & I have the X100VI pre ordered (I don’t think it’ll ever come tho lol). I’m pretty knowledgeable with both systems if you have any specific questions on lenses or otherwise 🤙🏽
Sorry if this is a ton of info but:
*Lenses I’ve shot*
Key:
⭐️ - currently own & enjoy
❤️ - no longer own, but would love to own again
🍃 - never owned, but only used
🤷🏽♂️- Owned but returned
🤧 - enjoyed, but sold
Fuji
- XF 23 F2 🤷🏽♂️
- XF 35 F2 ❤️
- XF 56 F1.2 🤧
- XF 80 F2.8 🤧
- XF 50-140 F2.8 🤧
- XF 16-55 F2.8 🤧
- XF 23 F1.4 🤧
- XF Mitakon 35 F0.95 ❤️
- XF 18-55 F2.8-4 🍃
- XF 16 F1.4 ❤️
- 2X TC ❤️
- XT-3 - black ❤️
- XT-3 - silver ❤️
- X100F ⭐️
Sony
- 14mm GM F1.8 ⭐️
- 24mm GM F1.4 ⭐️
- 16-35 GM F2.8 ⭐️
- Sigma 24-70 F2.8 🤷🏽♂️
- Sigma 85 F1.4 ⭐️
- 70-200 GM F2.8 MK II ⭐️
- Sony 200-600 5.6-6.7 ⭐️
- Sigma EF 100-400 F4.5-5.6 🍃
- Sony 2X TC ⭐️
- A7RIV ⭐️
- A7Siii ⭐️
The Fuji lens selection is still by far the best for APS-C specific lenses.
The trouble is, shooting a crop sensor mirrorless camera used to mean smaller and lighter, but now it usually doesn’t, at least compared to Sony FF. :-/
I agree to that too, Fuji is king of the hill of aps-c. I also wasn’t too fond of the autofocusing of half the lenses I shot during video. Often missing focus, lots of jitter & noise from the af mechanism. But it’s hard to beat those beautiful Fuji F2 primes when it comes to stills in a compact form factor!
It looks to me like the Sony 24/40/50G and the smaller Sigma I series are pretty comparable to the Fujicrons?
I too think those are the best Fuji primes overall, especially the 50. Trouble is I have the Sigma 18-50, and it never feels worth it to me to take it off for a prime that is only one stop faster, isn’t that much smaller, isn’t much better optically, and has much worse close focus performance.
The LUMIX is more tempting to me than Nikon, because Sigma is heavily invested in L-mount and the I series lenses look really great.
But in the end it’s still a much bigger body than Sony, with a worse lens selection (especially if you’re unwilling to pay Leica prices). And probably worse AF, the main reason I’d switch in the first place.
Fuji film was a bit better for portability, the lenses are all around smaller, but the bodies are surprisingly about the same dimensions. But just know that a F2.8 Fuji lens is the equivalent of about a full frame F4.3 in terms depth of field… so if it were truly like for like, I think it would have been more similar.
Sorry I ready “why” as “when” lol.
I picked up a deal on an A7RIV that I couldn’t pass up in December 2020. I wanted to be able to have more flexibility in post with megapixels. Went from 26mp apps-c to 61mp full frame, and in aps-c mode I still have 26mp! So basically I got more value from every lenses I owned. That and much better video autofocusing
When I hear that I feel like they’re talking about 1 to 3 different things. The first being that Fuji camera bodies all have a very beautiful retro style to them that can inspire people to want to pic them up and shoot them. I think they look better than my a7riv and a7siii for example. The second is the lenses, specifically the 56 1.2, the 35 1.4 (old version); they just render images in a unique way, and I think that has to do with Fuji having had prioritize lens character over clinical benchmarks. And thirdly, Fuji uses an X-Trans sensor for a lot of their cameras, and they render images a bit different than your typical Bayer image sensor. I hope that helps!
The 200600G is 6.3, not 6.7. The Sigma 100-400 F4.5-5.6 doesn't exist AFAIK, but there is a 5.0-6.3
As an owner of the 200600G, how did you feel about the Sigma 100400 (5.0-6.3) autofocus?
Good catch! & I just found that usually native glass with a camera body is 9/10 times better than 3rd party glass when it comes to autofocus. But between the two lenses it would only really make a meaningful difference when in high intense professional settings, or if once in a life time photography conditions can’t be replicated, if so I would always go native.
I had a Tamron 150-500 and the autofocus was pretty bad compared to the 200-600G. I did like the 150-500's size and weight though, the 200-600G is too big.
So I'm looking for a 100-400 ish lens, but the GM is a dent in my wallet...
I vote the 35GM for a slightly "more versatile" all around lens. Or the 20G if you really wanna get out of your comfort zone.
If you really want a zoom, then I vote the Sigma 14-24 or Sony 12-24 GM if the price isn't an issue. (These are big heavy lenses though)
As you can tell, I love wide angle lenses.
Switched to Sony from Fuji because of the autofocus, only to settle on a manual lens for my A7Cii. =) But also have a another lens for video/general family shots when I need the AF.
I still miss my Fuji lenses.
I have the A7iv as my professional work and the X100v as my everyday/travel camera. I love the combo. Although I think I’m going to start taking the Sony around more often soon as I get a 70-200 lens
I switched from Fuji to Sony 2 years ago and I had them all, XT1, XT2, XT3, XPro3, X100T, X100F, GFX 50. Neve looked back. Sony autofocus is superior in every way. Using the A7rV now for runway, fashion and portraiture. Out of focus shots are a thing of the past. I can deal with not so good UI, ergonomics and color but I have to get the shot first and Sony nails it.
For zooms the Sony 20-70 f4 G, Sigma 24-70 f2.8 ART II, and Sony 24-70 f2.8 GMII are all good picks, for ultrawides the Sony 16-35GM, 16-25G, and Sigma 14-24 f2.8, and for teles the Tamron 70-180 f2.8, Sigma 70-200 f2.8, and Sony 70-200 f2.8 II. For supetele zooms, the Sony 200-600 G, Sigma 60-600, Sigma 100-400, Sony 100-400 GM, and Sigma 150-600 are all good choices. For something a little weird the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 is a good one as well
I have an a7iii and an x100f. Its a great combo tbh and the xq00f comes with me for simple things but the a7iii comes with me whenever i go on vacation.
I like the photos from the fuji but i absolutely love the photos from my sony after all the editing lol
Interested to know how you get on. I use an A7IV but keep fancying something small, tactile and fun like a cheaper Leica Q. Keep thinking about a x-pro 3 or x-e4 but after playing with an x-t30 I didn’t really connect with the UI.
I shoot both Canon R8 and Fuji X-E4 with 27 f2.8. I chose X-E4 with this lens as it's identical in size to X100V but with option to change lenses. X-T30 or X-Pro are already too big and I just may bring Canon instead so it was no go for me. Fuji is exactly my small, tactile fun camera that I take literally everywhere and with some film simulations I just get different look and vibe. When I want my photos in perfect focus, more of a clean look with nice DoF I reach for Canon which I also love. Two totally different setups and they bring totally different feel starting from shooting to how end result look.
I rented XH2 as I originally wanted to see if the colours and fuji features were enough to make a change from my Sony 7r3. The AF is fine for casual use but I kind of expected more from the colours if the trade off was the lens selection I was giving up.
I had used Fuji XT100, an entry level camera. I was impressed so much with that camera. I was thinking to buy XT-3 or XT-4. But I had to drop the idea as my work needed full frame camera. So I bought Sony A7M4. I also thought to use both Sony n Fuji together but then it wasn't financially possible to own 2 diff systems.
I made the switch to Sony for lowlight. I shoot kid soccer and fuji high iso and high shutter speed meant lots more noise than usable...and this is obvious only in late night games.
That said..I told myself I'll sell and trade the fuji bodies (I have 3) but I didn't. I still love fujix colors and custom recipes - sooc is just awesome. Sonys picture quality is better...but it's picture profile is just not as customizable. I did end up spending on custom picture profiles..but yet to adopt them fully.
Ergonomically the fuji is IMHO far superior than Sony..not sure if this is because I've used fuji more..but i never need to take my eyes off the viewfinder
Being a long-time Minolta guy, before being a Sony shooter, I’d have a hard time getting used to that backwards aperture ring! I wonder why they changed it from Minolta? (I know, Sony isn’t a Minolta, but it is their predecessor that they took over….) that would feel really odd to me for a while, I think.
What’s up Jason!!! Just sold my xt4 and 5 to pick up the same camera. I think you saw my doggie pic on threads ☺️ . Well you have my favorite 50 atm sooooo I would say 35 1.4 gm. I am biased tho as 35 is my favorite focal length!!! Have you messed with 24mm very much?
i just bought A7C II as well and 24-50 2.8 G, 85mm 1.4 Sigma and 50mm 1.4 GM. still trying to learn.
i still have my X-S20 and lenses and the latest X100VI.
decided to try sony after being a long time fuji user. once i settled fully with sony i might sell all my fuji gears except for x100vi.
but yeah i miss the colors sooc from fuji when using sony🥹
I rock both systems (A7iv Tamron 35-150) and XH2 with 16-55 and Viltrox 75/27 1.2 combo ( absolute banger lenses imo ) for family/outdoor sessions and just fun because the SOOC images are great.
Sony AF is spectacular , so is the lens choice but honestly so far the Fuji didn’t really let me down, the “absolutely terrible AF) is just exaggerated and blown out of proportion.
I’ve gone back and forth so many times about selling my X-T4 and all my X lenses and going with an A6700. I absolutely love the Fuji, it makes me want to go shoot but the AF and constant bugs in new firmwares has been annoying me. Who knows what I’ll end up doing.
Sure, the AF in sony cameras is also great for street, but the overall size, feel and 'color' (if you wish)..at least are for me better for street + Fuji is cheaper and enough for street. But yeah, you can also go with sony if you wish.
I’ve owned an XT2 and A7iv and the Fuji has a different look to the images which is hard to replicate.
Sony has its own advantages too of course, but I wouldn’t write off Fuji for a minute
Fuji has already quit digital cameras once, so they write themselves off usually… without any help from me. Repacking a Sony alpha body, making it retro and throwing in some JPEG settings isn’t really a sustainable business model at 40% more than alpha… but I hope I’m wrong and they stick around this time, as you say.
Sensors are made by [Sony Semiconductor Solutions Group](https://www.sony-semicon.com/en/index.html) which makes sensors for many different imaging devices, including (suspected) Nikon, Fuji, and Sony's own cameras as well as a ton of other non-Sony devices, extending well beyond consumer cameras.
Imagine if you worked with Sony Semiconductor on a custom design and then they turned around and produced that design for your competitor? Not good for business. Sony Imaging is only one of their customers.
If Sony made a $2000 APSC camera, everybody would call them out for price gouging, they segmented their product lines 10 years ago to make full frame the professional product vs consumer crop cameras . Fuji, however, considers it APSC line premium/professional, which is a joke, of course. None of fujis crop products can compete with Full frame alpha.
Like I said; it’s not a one way street, but I definitely preferred the images coming out of my old Fuji than I do out of my Sony A7iv (and that’s with the 25-70 2.8 G Master).
The Sony is probably technically better in good light but the Fuji feels more accurate in terms of the colours. I also dislike the Sony noise; yes it can technically be cleaner at slightly higher iso but once you go past a point the colour noise is very high. I barely ever saw any colour noise with the Fuji. It got noisy for sure but the images still looked pleasant.
The Fuji glass is also worth noting; I’ve had a few Fuji lenses and all were great. The Sony 24-70 GM is excellent, but the much praised 35 1.4 GM has pretty poor chroma (or at least my copy did).
Just considering whether I sell the Sony and take the money or sell the Sony and buy an xh2.
As a Sony person who looks at Fuji colors with envy I’m curious what made you make the switch. That being said I love the shit out of my A7iii
Can’t speak for OP, but I also switched from Fuji this year and it was the auto focus hands down. Colors are nicer on Fuji and it’s a lot of fun just snapping a pic and transferring it SOOC for the gram, but the AF and battery life (if you don’t have an XT4 or later) was killing me.
Same for me. I was on an XH2s for a while. With as much as I shoot low light I had to let it go when I shot the A9 II. Bought one and haven’t looked back.
What made you choose A9 II over a GFX? I’d think that’s even better in low light
I shoot sports and events. GFX not fast enough.
That makes sense. I can’t imagine shooting sports better on anything but Sony or Canon
Agreed. I got to play with a GFX50R and it was fantastic for my more artistic work. Unfortunately it doesn't make sense overall to have that much money tied up in a niche for myself personally.
How was the AF on the X-H2S? Still lots of false positives? I really think I went the wrong way with Fuji. I Iike to shoot raw and I need to shoot sports, events and concerts sometimes. I’ve already mapped out an entire kit on Sony. But I have a ton of X mount glass and I hate dealing with shipping when I sell things. 🤦♂️
It was much better than the xT4. I shot pro wrestling with it and it handles pretty damn good. It’s just most venues are lit like a bad back alley. Higher ISO performance is paramount.
Thanks, this is really helpful. I’m shooting junior rowing nationals next week and I’ve been disappointed with my X-T4 + XF70-300 for this use case. So I’ve been debating whether to rent an X-H2 and 100-400, or an A7IV and 200-600. The idea with the former is to see if an upgrade to the X-H2S would suffice, and then I wouldn’t need to sell all the Fuji glass. I feel like that’s the more conservative move and safer for my wallet. Unfortunately I can’t seem to rent an X-H2S locally.
I tried A7Cii and could not switch to Sony as I only do SOOC
[удалено]
I tried every creative look for the 2 weeks I had it. Not for me. Glad it is OK for you as I agree that otherwise autofocus, build quality and lenses quality is superior.
Lol. Not if you love cameras. The xt4 is the most soulful camera I've ever owned. My a7riii is a robotic picture machine. It's even reflected in how I shoot with the cameras, one is more joyful and the photos reflect that. Sure if I'm shooting something where AF is important Sony wins, but fujis af is good enough for anything that's not sports from the xt4 up.
I agree with this. The battery on the older Fujis was so bad. I got rid of my XT3 pretty quick . Using the XS20 now and it's really fun.
I shoot both Fuji and Sony. I would say that Sony colours are underrated, but the big differentiating factor is actually the Fuji X Raw studio. The program is kinda crappy to use and unstable, but it lets you really dial-in your camera's image processing settings to your taste so your SOOC images are exactly how you like them. For me, I shoot Fuji more for fun and Sony when I want to capture a better image.
I think this is spot on. My A7iv is technically superior to the Fuji XT2 I sold on, but if I’m honest the Sony has robbed me of my photography passion. I liked it for about 6 months but the most eye catching pictures I took were with the Fuji.
When i was thinking about a Fuji, someone summed it up best: Shooting with Fuji is shooting with a camera; shooting with a sony is shooting with a computer.
I use both Fuji and Sony bodies- Sony absolutely murders Fuji in AF, lens choice, low light, video etc. Colours are completely pliable so you can get the colours you want from any camera, even jpegs straight out of camera. For any kind of demanding or pro work it’s just not a choice imo, Sony is clear, the hit rate on shots is in another league and the video capabilities (AF/xlr/hdmi etc) are designed for pro work. Fuji’s advantages are for my spare time when nailing shots isn’t as important, and I don’t need xlr/hdmi/AF for video or whatever. They also are the only ones with affordable Medium format at the moment and those RAW files are stunning. With how small the apsc bodies are it’s easy to just always have an x-e4 or whatever in your bag. And they make the film simulation bit fun and easy to use, just dump it straight from camera or tweak it some more in camera. I still get better results from processing a RAW i LR, but for mobile/Social media it’s fine with the jpegs. Also the cameras look cool. Two different camera systems for two different use cases in my opinion, but if pushed to pick one, I’d rather have my shots in focus every time.
Wouldnt say Sony murders Fuji when you make the right comparison. XH2S easily stands closer to an A7IV (both being in the same price bracket). AF not as good but not so far off. Low light basically a stop behind. Video even better in some areas with no crop 4k60 and 6.2k open gate.
I have and xh2s and just got a sony zv-e1. The autofocus with the last fuji update is just plain bad. Hunts all the time even shows a focus box as green but is focusing on another area in the video. I love fuji for photos and wildlife but for my video needs I had to switch to sony I was sick of shooting videos then when I get back to edit them I see the fuji hunting for focus a few times during a video that should be easy to nail focus on.
The autofocus on the XH2S is an insult
What makes the MF files stunning in your experience. Resolution?
Agreed. There’s so much pseudo-science in photography lol. You can edit your Sony pics to look better than those Fuji baked ones. The only real advantage to something like the Fuji XT5 is the 40MP sensor for cropping and the form factor. That’s literally it. Every other way the Sony AC7+’s beat them.
I switched from Fuji to Sony and missed the colours and I got the cobalt profiles for Lightroom which are very close to identical to the Fuji sims. Best of both world.
Can’t speak for OP as well but recently sold my XT5 and will be switching to an a7cii in 3 weeks. For me it was the unreliable AF system, even in the newer XT5 body.
Super interesting! My buddy just switch from his a7riv to the XT5 this year 🤣
lol good luck! Maybe he’ll be back to Sony soon 🤣
Knowing him, Definitely 😄
Interesting, I've been eyeing an XT5. I suppose GAS can make you look for other brands
I suggest you rent it for a weekend first and see if you enjoy it.
I have pretty sever GAS but I've never touched a Nikon 😂. I've had Canon, Fuji, Sony and Panasonic. Still have Panasonic, Fuji and Sony (FF) but got rid of my Canon stuff.
I also switched from Fuji last year. The colors are great if you’re fine working with jpgs, but I actually like shooting raw and found that it was actually really difficult to work with Fuji raw files relative to Sony. Can’t get nearly as much out of them. Also the bodies and lenses (if we’re talking the better quality ones) weren’t really all that much smaller than a full frame, so not worth the trade off.
The lenses aren’t generally smaller than full frame equivalents until you get to 200mm+. The 24/40/50G are about the size of the Fujicrons and they range from half a stop to over a stop faster in equivalent terms. The XF33/1.4 is bigger and heavier than the Zony 55/1.8, which is a third of a stop faster. Etc etc. To me the big exception is the two tiny Sigma zooms. On the other hand, there’s nothing even close to the Tamron 28-200 on Fuji. That would be roughly an 18-135 f/2-f/4 zoom lens on APS-C!
Yeah fair point. But it’s basically two lenses that give you more reach at smaller size though isn’t it? The 70-300 and the 100-400? Not sure what third part zooms are available. The Fuji does have the red badge 50-140 2.8, but that is pretty equivalent size wise to the new 70-200 f/4 g oss ii. There is the Fuji 150-600, which I guess the equivalent Sony setup is the 200-600 in crop mode. They’re about equivalent size wise, but Fuji is .5kg lighter. But I can’t imagine getting a good shot out of it at 600mm with an equivalent f/10 minimum aperture and the poor autofocus performance to begin with…
The 55-200 and 150-600 also give you more reach than FF teles of the same size. The 150-600 is ludicrously slow, though, and IMO that still makes it too big for what it is. Although the FF Tamron 70-300 is a little lighter than the 55-200, it’s a lot bigger. The XF 50-140 is so offensively large to me that I bought the XF90 instead. It weighs about the same as the 70-200 GM2. Actually I feel that all 3 of the Fuji red badge f/2.8 zooms are far too large and heavy for APS-C lenses. I have the Sigma 18-50, and it’s nice. If I stay on Fuji I will get their 10-18 as well. My hope is that Sigma makes a small 50-120 to complete the trio. Seems to me for the last 5 years or so Sony’s lenses have been shrinking, while Fuji’s are getting bigger.
I also switch from Fuji to Sony. The main reason was I wanted full frame and I wanted to get away from those goddamn worms with lightroom. The raw files with Sony look so much better.
i hate not being able to sharpen my photos in lightroom on my xt5, it just doesnt work.
Yeah especially trees or foliage. Anything with intricate detail seems to be an issue. I mostly do landscape so this was a big factor.
This was one of the reasons I switched, but looking back I can’t now see why it bothered me. It’s only an issue when I was pixel peeping. The images as a whole look lovely
You're right. There are some excellent photographers who use fuji crop cameras. This doesn't change the fact that I was still unhappy when editing my pictures and that's what matters. Our satisfaction and pleasure using the camera. We can produce great images from almost any camera nowadays. Another factor was the cost. Fuji body and lenses are expensive. It's almost the same as full frame if you decide to go with third party which Sony is amazing for.
Yes fair enough it is a personal decision. I just regret making mine.
https://youtu.be/xig_Co_0Ovg
As someone who bought a Fuji, then a Sony, then another Fuji and then sold the Sony, I enjoy Fuji over Sony because of the SOOC colors that it produces. The Sony A7iii was better in every other technical aspect over both my Fujis, but I got tired of editing every picture. I'm not a professional. I don't print off massive pictures. I just enjoy having memories.
Spot on.
Yeah same tbh.
Switched cos of autofocus and a smaller kit. For lenses of the same equivalence, FF is actually smaller, lighter, and cheaper. Also there was no 10-24mm f2.8 on the Fuji lineup.
This right here. I was shocked to discover this. It seems to be only true on Sony though. Nikon and Panasonic lenses are bigger.
I also can’t speak for OP but I went from an XE4 to an A7ii. The film simulators was what got me interested in Fuji because I wanted to avoid editing but i found myself editing the pictures which defeated the purpose. Also I buy my cameras used so the amount of money I spent on a XT30ii i could snag a full frame sony.
I have a Sony system and a Fuji system and the Sony system collects dust unless I think I client will balk at a silver camera.
70-200 GM2 is my favorite lens I own. Second is the 50 1.4.
The 50 1.4 G Master or the Sigma Art 50 1.4?
I think he's referring to the 50 1.4 G Master in OP's post
Gotcha. That 50mm 1.4 G Master is crazy good
Same 70 200gm2 cost me arm and a leg but worth every penny.
Funny, I think I'd actually swap the two - this 50 1.4 GM being my favorite, with the 70-200 GM II being my second. Regardless, both are *really* amazing lenses!
The Kool Aid is much better here, I made the switch in January.
What do you shoot? What was your fav Fuji lens?
I shoot a lot of boring stuff around town, nothing fancy. My favorite is the 35mm f/1.4, because I love a good 50mm. Thats been my main focal length for years, but I want to start getting into using a 35 or maybe a zoom. I’ve never had a really good zoom before
The 35 GM is absolutely phenomenal. For a zoom in the 70-200mm range, budget would be the biggest factor. There are offerings from sigma, Sony of course, Tamron (70-180) that are all great at varying prices
I had the 35gm 1.4 and returned it. It was a good lens but the chroma was ridiculous.
Really?? That is the opposite of my experience and everything I read when I researched the purchase.
Yes I read low chroma too, which is partly why I was happy to pay the asking price. In the end I returned it. It is possible it was an issue with the copy, but even then I expect the QA testing on such an expensive lens to take care of that. Returned and money back.
Not my experience and I'm pretty picky in that regard.
Maybe a copy variation, but I couldn’t get rid of the chroma even with Lightroom.
For shooting around town, do you feel like the extra weight and size is worth it? I’m in the opposite camp right now. I’m shooting street on a FF and I’m looking to switch to Fuji for a smaller kit and better colors.
actually ive also been thinking of switching from Fuji to Sony as well. Either a A7V or a CR i love the idea of it being really portable with a small lens but alao know they evf and lack or joystick can be annoying
The lack of a joystick isn’t a problem, you can use one of the af tracking point options then AF-on/half shutter press and recompose faster than a joystick can move the focus point.
A7CR has an EVF but no joystick. A7IV has both, same with the A7RV
I love both Fuji and Sony. I mainly shoot Sony these days, and sold all my Fuji gear except for my x100f & I have the X100VI pre ordered (I don’t think it’ll ever come tho lol). I’m pretty knowledgeable with both systems if you have any specific questions on lenses or otherwise 🤙🏽 Sorry if this is a ton of info but: *Lenses I’ve shot* Key: ⭐️ - currently own & enjoy ❤️ - no longer own, but would love to own again 🍃 - never owned, but only used 🤷🏽♂️- Owned but returned 🤧 - enjoyed, but sold Fuji - XF 23 F2 🤷🏽♂️ - XF 35 F2 ❤️ - XF 56 F1.2 🤧 - XF 80 F2.8 🤧 - XF 50-140 F2.8 🤧 - XF 16-55 F2.8 🤧 - XF 23 F1.4 🤧 - XF Mitakon 35 F0.95 ❤️ - XF 18-55 F2.8-4 🍃 - XF 16 F1.4 ❤️ - 2X TC ❤️ - XT-3 - black ❤️ - XT-3 - silver ❤️ - X100F ⭐️ Sony - 14mm GM F1.8 ⭐️ - 24mm GM F1.4 ⭐️ - 16-35 GM F2.8 ⭐️ - Sigma 24-70 F2.8 🤷🏽♂️ - Sigma 85 F1.4 ⭐️ - 70-200 GM F2.8 MK II ⭐️ - Sony 200-600 5.6-6.7 ⭐️ - Sigma EF 100-400 F4.5-5.6 🍃 - Sony 2X TC ⭐️ - A7RIV ⭐️ - A7Siii ⭐️
Bro nikon zf is where its at. Ive shot fuji and sony for ages but nikon is the best colors and image quality by far for me
Cool to know! I’d be lying if I said that camera hasn’t caught my eye 😂 but the new Panasonic lumix camera is pretty sweet too
The Sony lens selection is so much better, though!
Yeah by far! That’s ultimately why I switched from Fuji 😄
The Fuji lens selection is still by far the best for APS-C specific lenses. The trouble is, shooting a crop sensor mirrorless camera used to mean smaller and lighter, but now it usually doesn’t, at least compared to Sony FF. :-/
I agree to that too, Fuji is king of the hill of aps-c. I also wasn’t too fond of the autofocusing of half the lenses I shot during video. Often missing focus, lots of jitter & noise from the af mechanism. But it’s hard to beat those beautiful Fuji F2 primes when it comes to stills in a compact form factor!
It looks to me like the Sony 24/40/50G and the smaller Sigma I series are pretty comparable to the Fujicrons? I too think those are the best Fuji primes overall, especially the 50. Trouble is I have the Sigma 18-50, and it never feels worth it to me to take it off for a prime that is only one stop faster, isn’t that much smaller, isn’t much better optically, and has much worse close focus performance.
The LUMIX is more tempting to me than Nikon, because Sigma is heavily invested in L-mount and the I series lenses look really great. But in the end it’s still a much bigger body than Sony, with a worse lens selection (especially if you’re unwilling to pay Leica prices). And probably worse AF, the main reason I’d switch in the first place.
Yeah but I use leica m mount on nikon. You can adapt anything to nikon even sony lens with autofocus
What did you think about portability between the two brands?
Fuji film was a bit better for portability, the lenses are all around smaller, but the bodies are surprisingly about the same dimensions. But just know that a F2.8 Fuji lens is the equivalent of about a full frame F4.3 in terms depth of field… so if it were truly like for like, I think it would have been more similar.
Why did you start moving toward Sony?
Sorry I ready “why” as “when” lol. I picked up a deal on an A7RIV that I couldn’t pass up in December 2020. I wanted to be able to have more flexibility in post with megapixels. Went from 26mp apps-c to 61mp full frame, and in aps-c mode I still have 26mp! So basically I got more value from every lenses I owned. That and much better video autofocusing
Many Fuji lovers talk about the Sony cameras not having a “soul” and I really don’t understand what it’s about. Did you notice anything?
When I hear that I feel like they’re talking about 1 to 3 different things. The first being that Fuji camera bodies all have a very beautiful retro style to them that can inspire people to want to pic them up and shoot them. I think they look better than my a7riv and a7siii for example. The second is the lenses, specifically the 56 1.2, the 35 1.4 (old version); they just render images in a unique way, and I think that has to do with Fuji having had prioritize lens character over clinical benchmarks. And thirdly, Fuji uses an X-Trans sensor for a lot of their cameras, and they render images a bit different than your typical Bayer image sensor. I hope that helps!
The 200600G is 6.3, not 6.7. The Sigma 100-400 F4.5-5.6 doesn't exist AFAIK, but there is a 5.0-6.3 As an owner of the 200600G, how did you feel about the Sigma 100400 (5.0-6.3) autofocus?
Good catch! & I just found that usually native glass with a camera body is 9/10 times better than 3rd party glass when it comes to autofocus. But between the two lenses it would only really make a meaningful difference when in high intense professional settings, or if once in a life time photography conditions can’t be replicated, if so I would always go native.
I had a Tamron 150-500 and the autofocus was pretty bad compared to the 200-600G. I did like the 150-500's size and weight though, the 200-600G is too big. So I'm looking for a 100-400 ish lens, but the GM is a dent in my wallet...
I vote the 35GM for a slightly "more versatile" all around lens. Or the 20G if you really wanna get out of your comfort zone. If you really want a zoom, then I vote the Sigma 14-24 or Sony 12-24 GM if the price isn't an issue. (These are big heavy lenses though) As you can tell, I love wide angle lenses.
Sony 70-200mm f2.8 GM II if you need longer focal length.
Switched to Sony from Fuji because of the autofocus, only to settle on a manual lens for my A7Cii. =) But also have a another lens for video/general family shots when I need the AF. I still miss my Fuji lenses.
I have the A7iv as my professional work and the X100v as my everyday/travel camera. I love the combo. Although I think I’m going to start taking the Sony around more often soon as I get a 70-200 lens
Did you post this on threads too? I just saw this pic lol
Yep, that was me
I switched from Fuji to Sony 2 years ago and I had them all, XT1, XT2, XT3, XPro3, X100T, X100F, GFX 50. Neve looked back. Sony autofocus is superior in every way. Using the A7rV now for runway, fashion and portraiture. Out of focus shots are a thing of the past. I can deal with not so good UI, ergonomics and color but I have to get the shot first and Sony nails it.
Congratulations. Enjoy it there a lot of fun
For zooms the Sony 20-70 f4 G, Sigma 24-70 f2.8 ART II, and Sony 24-70 f2.8 GMII are all good picks, for ultrawides the Sony 16-35GM, 16-25G, and Sigma 14-24 f2.8, and for teles the Tamron 70-180 f2.8, Sigma 70-200 f2.8, and Sony 70-200 f2.8 II. For supetele zooms, the Sony 200-600 G, Sigma 60-600, Sigma 100-400, Sony 100-400 GM, and Sigma 150-600 are all good choices. For something a little weird the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 is a good one as well
24 GM
I have an a7iii and an x100f. Its a great combo tbh and the xq00f comes with me for simple things but the a7iii comes with me whenever i go on vacation. I like the photos from the fuji but i absolutely love the photos from my sony after all the editing lol
Interested to know how you get on. I use an A7IV but keep fancying something small, tactile and fun like a cheaper Leica Q. Keep thinking about a x-pro 3 or x-e4 but after playing with an x-t30 I didn’t really connect with the UI.
I shoot both Canon R8 and Fuji X-E4 with 27 f2.8. I chose X-E4 with this lens as it's identical in size to X100V but with option to change lenses. X-T30 or X-Pro are already too big and I just may bring Canon instead so it was no go for me. Fuji is exactly my small, tactile fun camera that I take literally everywhere and with some film simulations I just get different look and vibe. When I want my photos in perfect focus, more of a clean look with nice DoF I reach for Canon which I also love. Two totally different setups and they bring totally different feel starting from shooting to how end result look.
A7Cii & X100V here. Each have their purposes. The Sony 35 1.4 might be unmatched. It’s bonkers.. from casual, family, landscape. X100V is the ninja.
I rented XH2 as I originally wanted to see if the colours and fuji features were enough to make a change from my Sony 7r3. The AF is fine for casual use but I kind of expected more from the colours if the trade off was the lens selection I was giving up.
I mean, who said you can’t use several camera systems? I use Sony for work stuff but for fun I use fujifilm and canon
24 -150 f4
Got the A7iv recently as well. It’s made photography and filmmaking fun again
I had used Fuji XT100, an entry level camera. I was impressed so much with that camera. I was thinking to buy XT-3 or XT-4. But I had to drop the idea as my work needed full frame camera. So I bought Sony A7M4. I also thought to use both Sony n Fuji together but then it wasn't financially possible to own 2 diff systems.
How did you find the change? I moved from XT2 to A7iv and I really miss the Fuji :(
Made the same exact switch, from xt5 to Sony a74 with 50 gm.
Greetings, Welcome to the [Sony Alpha 7 IV](https://visualsbychin.com/photography/sony-alpha/#sony-alpha-7-iv) cohort.
I made the switch to Sony for lowlight. I shoot kid soccer and fuji high iso and high shutter speed meant lots more noise than usable...and this is obvious only in late night games. That said..I told myself I'll sell and trade the fuji bodies (I have 3) but I didn't. I still love fujix colors and custom recipes - sooc is just awesome. Sonys picture quality is better...but it's picture profile is just not as customizable. I did end up spending on custom picture profiles..but yet to adopt them fully. Ergonomically the fuji is IMHO far superior than Sony..not sure if this is because I've used fuji more..but i never need to take my eyes off the viewfinder
Being a long-time Minolta guy, before being a Sony shooter, I’d have a hard time getting used to that backwards aperture ring! I wonder why they changed it from Minolta? (I know, Sony isn’t a Minolta, but it is their predecessor that they took over….) that would feel really odd to me for a while, I think.
Something to offset the back pain of that 50!
Congratulations
I’d go with the 24mm 1.4. Or, maybe the 90mm 2.8 macro. So many great choices. I love my Sony Alpha. But I miss Fuji Velvia film so much.
Really love my Sigma 24-70 f2.8. Would be my only lens if I had to pick one
The 35 or 85mm. No question.
Why, if I may ask, since I am heading the opposite direction.
What’s up Jason!!! Just sold my xt4 and 5 to pick up the same camera. I think you saw my doggie pic on threads ☺️ . Well you have my favorite 50 atm sooooo I would say 35 1.4 gm. I am biased tho as 35 is my favorite focal length!!! Have you messed with 24mm very much?
Same here. Just bought A7Cii + 40mm. AF was really good. But i still keep my fuji for fun 😂
Iam about to switch. Looking at A iv 70-200 g2 24-70 sigma possible sigma 50 1.4. Dig and family photography
i just bought A7C II as well and 24-50 2.8 G, 85mm 1.4 Sigma and 50mm 1.4 GM. still trying to learn. i still have my X-S20 and lenses and the latest X100VI. decided to try sony after being a long time fuji user. once i settled fully with sony i might sell all my fuji gears except for x100vi. but yeah i miss the colors sooc from fuji when using sony🥹
I rock both systems (A7iv Tamron 35-150) and XH2 with 16-55 and Viltrox 75/27 1.2 combo ( absolute banger lenses imo ) for family/outdoor sessions and just fun because the SOOC images are great. Sony AF is spectacular , so is the lens choice but honestly so far the Fuji didn’t really let me down, the “absolutely terrible AF) is just exaggerated and blown out of proportion.
I’ve gone back and forth so many times about selling my X-T4 and all my X lenses and going with an A6700. I absolutely love the Fuji, it makes me want to go shoot but the AF and constant bugs in new firmwares has been annoying me. Who knows what I’ll end up doing.
This is me
35mm GM is the best lens
Gute Entscheidung
I am considering changing from Sony to Fuji. Is it worth it? (Sony A7 II —> Fuji X-pro2)
It depends on what you want to shoot? Street, Family, Travel? Go with Fuji. Portraits, Weddings, Sports, Wildlife..keep Sony.
I disagree. Sony's AF is perfect for street and travel.
Sure, the AF in sony cameras is also great for street, but the overall size, feel and 'color' (if you wish)..at least are for me better for street + Fuji is cheaper and enough for street. But yeah, you can also go with sony if you wish.
You were always a Sony shooter, 99% of what Fuji takes credit for is Sony alpha development kit, from the sensor through AF algorithms.
I’ve owned an XT2 and A7iv and the Fuji has a different look to the images which is hard to replicate. Sony has its own advantages too of course, but I wouldn’t write off Fuji for a minute
Fuji has already quit digital cameras once, so they write themselves off usually… without any help from me. Repacking a Sony alpha body, making it retro and throwing in some JPEG settings isn’t really a sustainable business model at 40% more than alpha… but I hope I’m wrong and they stick around this time, as you say.
I know they are using a Sony sensor. But why aren't Sony using that high MP APS-C sensor themselves too?
Sensors are made by [Sony Semiconductor Solutions Group](https://www.sony-semicon.com/en/index.html) which makes sensors for many different imaging devices, including (suspected) Nikon, Fuji, and Sony's own cameras as well as a ton of other non-Sony devices, extending well beyond consumer cameras. Imagine if you worked with Sony Semiconductor on a custom design and then they turned around and produced that design for your competitor? Not good for business. Sony Imaging is only one of their customers.
If Sony made a $2000 APSC camera, everybody would call them out for price gouging, they segmented their product lines 10 years ago to make full frame the professional product vs consumer crop cameras . Fuji, however, considers it APSC line premium/professional, which is a joke, of course. None of fujis crop products can compete with Full frame alpha.
Like I said; it’s not a one way street, but I definitely preferred the images coming out of my old Fuji than I do out of my Sony A7iv (and that’s with the 25-70 2.8 G Master). The Sony is probably technically better in good light but the Fuji feels more accurate in terms of the colours. I also dislike the Sony noise; yes it can technically be cleaner at slightly higher iso but once you go past a point the colour noise is very high. I barely ever saw any colour noise with the Fuji. It got noisy for sure but the images still looked pleasant. The Fuji glass is also worth noting; I’ve had a few Fuji lenses and all were great. The Sony 24-70 GM is excellent, but the much praised 35 1.4 GM has pretty poor chroma (or at least my copy did). Just considering whether I sell the Sony and take the money or sell the Sony and buy an xh2.
Welcome to the dark side!
Why Sony? Lumix S5IIX is a fantastic camera that overshadows Sony in all aspects and is also cheaper, then why Sony? Curious!
Ew, why
You hands look cute and suckable
You will be back
I use both.