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.
Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography
31–40 of 69 posts
Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography
#32While 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.
> Previous model of this Fujifilm camera also got raving reviews from Verge and was mocked in photography circles. I've found "photography circles" to be ignorant pixel peepers, who wouldn't appreciate good ergonomics or know how to take an actual good picture even if their live depended on it. (Have worked, among other odd jobs, as a freelance human interest/travel photographer back in the day).
Remember, it's the photographer who takes the picture. The camera is just a tool, and if the photog wants to use a Fuji because it makes him happy and his pictures are bomb as fuck then who is to complain.
Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography
#33Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography
#34I 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 suggestio…
Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography
#35I'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…
This camera isn't going to prevent the user from taking serious photographs. APS-C is big enough to capture plenty of data. I have a "1 inch" camera and really all 21 megapixels are usable at base ISO. The small size trades off the flexibility that an 8x10" camera gives you, but is easier to carry around. (It's harder to carry around than a phone, though, but provides vastly better images.)
As soon as you start moving into certain specialties in photography, certain models start making more sense. Wedding photography is about creating fine-art shots in a sports photography environment, so the professionals are using high-end "enthusiast" cameras to great effect. The autofocus gets almost every shot. The metering is always correct. Those cameras don't trade off speed for detail, so you can still make nice 8x10" enlargements that look fantastic (but maybe not take 30fps bursts as sports/photojournalism cameras might).
Other specialties are cost-constrained right now. Nobody wants to take their macro shots with a DSLR, but Phase One backs are $33,000 for your $10,000 view camera, and hobbyists don't have that much money. (It's even expensive for the pros, very much a pricing based on semiconductor yield rather than the time cost of not having one.) Hence they compromise by spending 8 hours in photoshop working around the limitations of their camera, or just use film.
If you don't care enough about the results to do either and are only going to buy one camera, an X-T2 is just as good as anything else. Carry it around to take excellent spur-of-the-moment shots, snap that nice landscape, use it at home to take some pictures of that bug you just killed. It's as good as anything else. (Upgrade to a D810 for a few more pixels and a lighter wallet.)
Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography
#36I 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 suggestio…
Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography
#37I 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…
Fuji took a UX worked for decades on film cameras and applied it to digital cameras. The result is that I'm having a lot more fun taking pictures.
Edit-- just got an XT2 w the 90mm F2.
Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography
#38While 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…
Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography
#39While 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…
But, as you noted, carrying an SLR can be a pain. I tried to get into photography many years ago, with a Canon Rebel XT. It didn't stick because I hated carrying the bulky thing around. I stuck to point & shoots, then my iPhone.
I recently picked up an Olympus PEN e-PL6, which, for me, strikes a nice middle-ground. It fits in my wife's purse, or my small backpack (easy to carry-on flights, unlike the Canon, which ate up my underseat area on its own). It is light enough to carry all day. And has an excellent selection of lenses for all purposes.
Of course, I also frequently carry my Canon S100 because it is truly pocketable and still takes excellent photos.
Re: Fujifilm X-T2 review: for the love of photography
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 suggestio…
If you're happy shooting with the screen, Olympus and Sony have more pocket-able options with similar quality.