« The Best Camera is NOT the One You Have With You | Main | ERC (Exposure Range Correction) »

Monday, 09 October 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I thought you would have gone for the Fuji 23/1.4 and the Sony/Zeiss 24/1.8

I'm not so sure on the lens choice. Don't you want to do Fujinon 23mm f/1.4 or f/2 vs. Sony's 24mm f1.8?

Or maybe 35mm options from each?

Have fun! Looking forward to your impressions. Bear in mind that without the Vertical Power Booster Grip on an X-T2, you're assessing ~60% of the performance capabilities the camera is actually capable of. Strapping on the VPBG on turns the X-T2 into a mini Canon 1Dx-like performance beast, capable of getting shots like this:



What do you think of the lens choices?

I’d rather you write about snookers, your love of Mazda’s, or politics than these two zoom lenses :)

I have used both lenses for a while, the Sony on a A6000, and the Fuji on a XE-1. They are good general standard zooms for their respective systems.

Bottom line is both cameras are excellent, and it boils down to individual preference and budget.

[Hey, don't give away the ending. Some people haven't seen the movie yet. --Mike]

I see Fuji Rumors suggests that the forthcoming/upcoming Fujifilm X-T2S will have IBIS...

Your lens choices are fine. General zoom lenses for walk around photography and trips. Keeps the kit light and mobile while image quality is still very good.

I am very curious to see what you'll conclude. I just spent a week lugging a D810, a 24-70mm F2.8, an 85mm F1.4 and an SB700 around France. As much as I like the system, I am looking forward to adopting a more compact (and lighter) system such as the ones you are about to review.

Given that I have an EX1 and a couple of Fuji X lenses (including the 23mm), I am leaning towards the XT2, but I am keeping an open mind.

Small plea: please give us a "real" verdict, in which one camera wins, and not a draw with the recommendation that one should choose based on preferences.

Well the Fujinon 18-55 is their usual "kit" lens, whereas the Tessar 16-70 is higher end option. So a more fair fight might be the Fujinon 16-55 2.8 instead. But the 18-55 is a damn good lens.

I would love to have that Sony. Sure the Fuji must be a great camera, tried one in the store once to see what the fuzz was about, but it just never really draws me to it. In contrast, the Sony's sleek lines and compactness, along with impressive electronics pulls me towards it.

Someone will surely say the opposite and love the Fuji. These are not bad cameras, today's products are pretty impressive.

What I keep liking in today's mirrorless is the flexibility in lens choice; go handy zoom for times when fast operation and a few focal lengths are needed and then put on a manual focus prime when the working style requires it.

Lens choices.... Meh. I'm sure both are competent.

24/1.8, 32mm Zeiss, or 30/1.4 Sigma and equivalent Fuji lenses would have been exciting. Any chance of adding some lenses?

Fuji has a better lens line and better jpegs :)

Anyway, looking forward to your 'report'.

Having used both systems, first the NEX-7 and now the X-T2, I must say that both cameras are very capable, but there is a vast difference in the quality and depth of the respective lens lines. Sony simply abandoned the APS-C lens line when they went full frame with the A7. Even the highly regarded 24 1.8, which I own, is no match for the Fuji 23 1.4. No IBIS magic can compensate for the beautiful rendering of the 23 1.4 and 35 1.4. And there is nothing even close to the 16 1.4 and 56 1.2 in the Sony line.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007