Sony α6300 vs Fuji XT1 vs Fuji XPro2

[nirvan_a]

<p>Which camera will you choose for landscape, street and portraiture ? My priority is weight but I cannot compromise the quality.</p>

[peter_gilbert4]

<p>Which lenses are we considering?</p>

[andylynn]

X-Pro2 because of the lenses. If video were high on the priority list I'd take the Sony.

[eric_arnold]

<p>see my response on your other thread, but basically the XP2 and A6300 will be about the same as far as optical quality since they both have 24mp sensors. But Fuji has better lenses overall than Sony's APS-C line, which would make a difference in portraits and landscape. i wouldnt hesitate to shoot street with an A6300, but for portraits the Fuji 56/1.2 is better than anything Sony offers, and even the 18-55 kit lens is corner to corner sharp for landscapes. the one really good Sony prime, the 24/1.8 Zeiss, is almost 2x the price of the Fuji 23/1.4, and the Sony 16-50 kit lens would be a terrible landscape lens. If i was considering an XT1, i would wait for the price to drop when the XT2 comes out.</p>

[peter_gilbert4]

<p>"the one really good Sony prime, the 24/1.8 Zeiss," has the same DXO Mark P-MPX score (on A6000) as the FE28F2 which I bought used for $339.<br>

If Fuji would make a better 18/f2, a new 23/f2 and a 60/f2.8 (non macro) to go with the 35/f2 I'd be happy with the X-Pro2</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>"<em>the one really good Sony prime</em>, the 24/1.8 Zeiss," has the same DXO Mark P-MPX score (on A6000) as the FE28F2 which I bought used for $339.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>i meant for APS-C. the 28/2 is a full frame lens. if you're suggesting this for the A63k, it might be okay optically, although DXO Mark only do lab tests, so they don't completely assess a lens' performance. some lenses, for instance, are sharper at certain distances, or may have other characteristics which dont show up in lab tests. But the bigger issue would be that 28mm is moderately wide on full frame but 42mm on APS-C, which is an odd focal length for some. (i have the 27/2.8 for Fuji and it's great optically but i dont love the 41mm equiv. focal length. i also had a 28-75 i used to use on Nikon DX and i eventually bought a 17-50 as it was too long at the wide end. YMMV.) 24mm on APS-C, however, gives you 36mm which is a preferred focal length for many. $1100 is a lot for a crop-body prime, though, so i wouldnt blame anyone for trying to save some cash there.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If Fuji would make a better 18/f2, a new 23/f2 and a 60/f2.8 (non macro) to go with the 35/f2 I'd be happy with the X-Pro2</p>

</blockquote>

<p>the 18/2 is perhaps unfairly maligned and is fairly unique as a wide pancake. a lens with better corners might gain some bulk which would make it less optimal for street, where composition trumps sharpness, anyway. and fuji also has the 14/2.8 and the 16/1.4, which are more landscape-ish. expecting sheer perfection from a pancake is perhaps missing the point of those lenses. i bet we will see a 23/2 with weather-resistance to match the 35/2, but a 60/2.8 without the macro doesnt do a lot for me on paper, and may be just a bit too long for the XP2's OVF anyway. for portraits, i'd prefer a 60/2. YMMV.</p>

[eric_brody]

<p>You seem to be asking essentially the same question multiple times on photo.net but here goes. Landscape, street, and portraiture, hmm, almost all of contemporary photography there, except studio product work, and macro. Landscape is often tripod based, slow, precise, street is fast and impulsive, usually hand held, portraiture covers everything. I'm not sure your question is answerable as framed. Larger sensors may have better quality if enlarged greatly. Do you print? If not, most of this is moot anyway. If you do, how large? Unless you go > 13x19, it's also moot. <br>

<br /> Cameras are tools; different ones work best for different tasks. No one tool can do everything equally well. I suspect you'd like to know what's the best compromise and I believe the X T-1 probably is the one you want. There are a wide variety of excellent reasonably small lenses from 15 (FF equiv) to 600 (FF equiv), primes and zooms. The X T-1 has a tilt screen, great for street work, and for some reason the XP2 does not. The EVF is excellent. I use Fuji gear since the X E-1 and now an X T-1. I've played with the XP2 but not the Sony tho I spent almost a week with a rented A7RII. <br>

You'll commit to a system so choose wisely. Rent if you can, play in a store if you can, but if you do, buy from them even if it's slightly more expensive. We need to support local stores where they exist.</p>

[Ken Katz]

If you plan to use mostly legacy lenses, then I would think that any of these options would be fine, with some

advantage to the 24mp sensors for landscapes. Ergonomics would play a bigger role in my decision so I

would encourage you to handle each camera. If you plan to use native lenses, then Fuji seems like the best

mirrorless APSC choice right now simply because Sony does not appear to be providing much APSC support

and is concentrating on their FF lens offerings.

[vandit]

<p>There is no point buying a camera based on specs or lens resolution tests - in the real world, it is going to make no noticeable difference (no one ever looked at a photo and said "great shot, but it would have been better if you shot it with lens Y instead of lens X). <br>

If you are shooting wildlife, you should care about AF speed. For street, landscapes and travel - pretty much any camera these days is going to be competent enough.<br>

So buy whichever camera feels best in your hands, and whose interface/working quirks suit your shooting needs. <br>

I could never shoot with that Sony - it feels like an electronic gadget, not a camera and for whatever reason, that comes in the way of my photography. So i went with a Fuji system last week: was planning to get the XT10, but that was too small in my hands, so XT1 it was. Lens resolutions, image quality pixel peeping, etc - none of these even remotely entered into my equation.</p>

 

[derick_miller]

For my working methods, the Sony interface is horrible. But that doesn't mean it can't work for you. As stated above, if

video is important, Sony wins. The XT-2 might have better video (and I'm guessing it will have 4k). We will probably know

soon enough.

 

Fuji lenses are fantastic. There isn't a bad lens I am aware of and there are some truly outstanding lenses. The 18mm is

often pointed to as the worst Fuji lens, but I think it has a lot to recommend it, depending on your purpose. The 35mm f1.4

is among the best normal lenses and is very light for what it is. The 16mm f1.4 is unique in its quality, rendering and

price, focuses to 6" and, for its angle of view has little competition even at twice the price. In the 56mm f1.2, the APD

version renders substantially better, but has some shortcomings. As stated above, even the kit lens (18-55mm f2.8-4) is

surprisingly good.

 

If your style of street is to use a tilting screen, the XT-1 could be a good choice. But many street photographers have a

strong preference for rangefinders because of the type of optical viewfinder they provide. If you feel that way, the Xpro2 is

your choice.

[shutterbud]

<p>Of course, Landscape and Street require different strengths in a camera, but modern enthusiast cameras are good enough for both. Whenever Sony is mentioned, the lack of lenses is cited, for good reason. These days, Sony has a LOT to offer full frame users, but seem to have given up on crop lenses, whereas Fuji are crop specialists. This might make a big difference to you. I am very happy with my A6000 but I only use one prime lens and sometimes I just can't get the shot; this is a trade-off I am willing to make to get the best IQ possible from my camera. But I certainly wouldn't expect others to share my view. There is little doubt that Fuji is an admirable system. Sony crop cameras are very good indeed; if you find the lenses you need from Sony, I am sure you will be very happy, but there is far more choice from Fuji...for crop.<br>

Fuji has no full frame option at all.<br>

Sony excels in full frame.<br>

So perhaps the first question you should ask yourself is whether you want to move up to full frame at some point?<br>

If not, if you are comfortable with the Fuji ergonomics and slower AF, then go for it. If you want much better AF to prioritise Street over landscape, the Sony might be better. </p>