Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 69 posts

Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

#21

Post by hanklazard »

imaginenore wrote: post #18

I'm a semi-pro photographer, do commercial work from time to time, get flown to shoot weddings across the globe. $1600 is a ridiculous amount of money for this camera, considering the competition. $1600-1700 buys you a used Sony A7s, the king of low light photography and video (if you don't count the new prototype from Canon), and it's full frame, unlike X-T2. $1650 buys you a used Canon 5D mark III, which is also fu…

Agreed, the price is way too high for this decent crop sensor camera. Many people like the aesthetic of the Fujis, including myself (I have an XT-1). In the end, the low-light performance and build quality of this great little camera just wasn't good enough and I got a refurb 5Diii body for about the price of this new model.

While certainly more limited than the selection for Canon, Fuji does have some really nice lenses for these X series cameras. The 23mm 1.4 (=35mm FF) is truly fantastic.

Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

#22

Post by xzez »

imaginenore wrote: post #18

I'm a semi-pro photographer, do commercial work from time to time, get flown to shoot weddings across the globe. $1600 is a ridiculous amount of money for this camera, considering the competition. $1600-1700 buys you a used Sony A7s, the king of low light photography and video (if you don't count the new prototype from Canon), and it's full frame, unlike X-T2. $1650 buys you a used Canon 5D mark III, which is also fu…

My sentiments exactly.

I used a fuji X-E1 before I picked up my A7. I really enjoy the Fuji X series, but the prices are so close to the Sony A7 series that the extra expense is more than worth it for the clearly superior Sony FE system. I mean, the X-T2 is pretty much the same price as an A7ii.

I do love the build and feel of the Fuji XF lenses though, particularly the lenses that have the aperture ring.

Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

#23

Post by meowzero »

rplst8 wrote: post #4

I up-voted this because I think the Fujifilm X series cameras need more love than they currently get. I have an X-E2 and I love it, but I'm very curious to see if they release an X-E3 and what features of the X-T2 and X-Pro2 it will incorporate. The whole X series is a pretty great system IMO. The designs are simple, bodies offer fully manual control, the lenses are extremely high quality, and certain models of lense…

X-T2 is still a mirrorless camera. I think you meant that for rangefinder-inspired cameras like the X-E2, the viewfinder is on the side.

Also, even with that design, your nose can still smash into the screen if you're left eye dominant. I personally just use the back screen to shoot, not the viewfinder. Technically I guess I'm not taking advantage of the X-T2's beautiful viewfinder.

But I do agree with your suggestion of Fuji's cameras. With the old-school dials, it helped me to understand how to use the camera manually.

Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

#24

Post by dmark3 »

imaginenore wrote: post #18

I'm a semi-pro photographer, do commercial work from time to time, get flown to shoot weddings across the globe. $1600 is a ridiculous amount of money for this camera, considering the competition. $1600-1700 buys you a used Sony A7s, the king of low light photography and video (if you don't count the new prototype from Canon), and it's full frame, unlike X-T2. $1650 buys you a used Canon 5D mark III, which is also fu…

The raw specs on the Sony are better, but the actual feel and handling of the Fuji X series is vastly superior.

BTW, the Provia and Velvia film simulations are stunning, IMHO.

Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

#25

Post by meowzero »

hyperbovine wrote: post #15
samsnelling wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Up voted as well. I just purchased an a6500 after quite the back and forth with myself. Fuji actually uses Sony sensors. So the XPro2 / XT2 has the exact same sensor as a a6300 and a6500. So on paper, the Sony have a lot more going for them in terms of price to features. It should be really interesting to see what kind of pressure that puts on them. That's not to say that the Sony's are better cameras. Fuji has a gre…

I believe it is made by Toshiba. Google "HXM4-229393".

Their old cameras were, but the new cameras use Sony sensors.

Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

#26

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

desireco42 wrote: post #3

While definitely great camera, I don't think it compares favorably with Sony's offering. A6000 and A7 (II) series. Previous model of this Fujifilm camera also got raving reviews from Verge and was mocked in photography circles. The review, not the camera.

I'm not awed by the photo samples.

This looks like a premium-priced hobbyist camera, not a realistic substitute for a good SLR.

There's a lot to be said for the form factor for hobby/casual photography. SLRs can be a PITA to carry around in a way that smaller cameras aren't. Just by being portable, this camera will catch a lot of images that a big SLR won't.

But image quality is clearly a good few steps short of the output of an equivalently priced Canon or Nikon DSLR.

That will be an acceptable compromise for many buyers - but it won't work for everyone.

Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

#27

Post by xzez »

dmark3 wrote: post #24
imaginenore wrote: post #18

I'm a semi-pro photographer, do commercial work from time to time, get flown to shoot weddings across the globe. $1600 is a ridiculous amount of money for this camera, considering the competition. $1600-1700 buys you a used Sony A7s, the king of low light photography and video (if you don't count the new prototype from Canon), and it's full frame, unlike X-T2. $1650 buys you a used Canon 5D mark III, which is also fu…

The raw specs on the Sony are better, but the actual feel and handling of the Fuji X series is vastly superior. BTW, the Provia and Velvia film simulations are stunning, IMHO.

The raw specs are objective can be clearly stated as superior. Handling and ergo is a subjective and largely personal preference. I'll agree that the Fuji X-T* has some better ergo, but to me the difference over the A7 is marginal and not at all vastly superior.

Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

#28

Post by wepple »

colanderman wrote: post #8
rplst8 wrote: post #4

I up-voted this because I think the Fujifilm X series cameras need more love than they currently get. I have an X-E2 and I love it, but I'm very curious to see if they release an X-E3 and what features of the X-T2 and X-Pro2 it will incorporate. The whole X series is a pretty great system IMO. The designs are simple, bodies offer fully manual control, the lenses are extremely high quality, and certain models of lense…

Agreed, Fujifilm gets what many other manufacturers don't: that the camera needs to get out of the way of photography. Their recipe for this is to have great physical manual controls combined with great automatic settings. Fujifilm cameras don't beep and boop, they don't Instagramize your pictures, they don't have "fireworks over a snowy beach while your kids are chasing backlit dogs" mode. They just take pictures an…

I sold my X100 and it's the biggest regret I've ever had. I have a D600 with all the glass and an E-M5, both been sitting in the closet for too long now.

Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

#29

Post by pizlonator »

imaginenore wrote: post #18

I'm a semi-pro photographer, do commercial work from time to time, get flown to shoot weddings across the globe. $1600 is a ridiculous amount of money for this camera, considering the competition. $1600-1700 buys you a used Sony A7s, the king of low light photography and video (if you don't count the new prototype from Canon), and it's full frame, unlike X-T2. $1650 buys you a used Canon 5D mark III, which is also fu…

It depends on what is important to you. I like good UI and I will pay a premium for it. Fuji has the best UI - physical knobs for everything. Even ISO has a physical control. I find that UI makes a big difference for my workflow and makes it easier for me to take good pictures, so the price is worth it.

Also, I happen to use an X-Pro2 not the X-T2, but I think similar arguments apply.

Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography

#30

Post by wepple »

imaginenore wrote: post #18

I'm a semi-pro photographer, do commercial work from time to time, get flown to shoot weddings across the globe. $1600 is a ridiculous amount of money for this camera, considering the competition. $1600-1700 buys you a used Sony A7s, the king of low light photography and video (if you don't count the new prototype from Canon), and it's full frame, unlike X-T2. $1650 buys you a used Canon 5D mark III, which is also fu…

> I'm a semi-pro photographer, do commercial work from time to time, get flown to shoot weddings across the globe.

I think this differentiates you fairly significantly from the target market of this camera.

By way of example, I'd take an X100T over your above suggestions, despite it being less expensive and not full-frame and having a few annoying quirks. I consider the way a camera integrates into your image-making process more important than low-light capability, pixel count, and couldn't give any less cares about video.

Post reply on HN