Digital Photography Discuss how to take the best digital photos of your Lexus & other subjects

Fuji X-T3 announced

 
Old 09-06-18, 10:43 AM
  #1  
RA40
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
RA40's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Posts: 18,725
Received 105 Likes on 96 Posts
Default Fuji X-T3 announced

RA40 is offline  
Old 09-09-18, 09:23 PM
  #2  
bitkahuna
resisting entropy
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 55,476
Received 64 Likes on 55 Posts
Default

not FF though.
bitkahuna is offline  
Old 09-10-18, 12:12 PM
  #3  
RA40
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
RA40's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Posts: 18,725
Received 105 Likes on 96 Posts
Default

True offers a nice size to feature set. I've had no complaints with the APS-C sensor size platform for any given task I use. Relative cost to the Canon R is ~60%. That's a pretty significant difference and attractive if one is outfitting from scratch.

X-T3 body with bundled battery grip $1698
18-55mm $599
16mm $849
23mm $399
spare battery $65

Total $3610

If opting for the 16-55/2.8 over the 18-55 that would add $400 more. At $4K, that's a pretty nice rig.
RA40 is offline  
Old 09-11-18, 10:04 AM
  #4  
bitkahuna
resisting entropy
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 55,476
Received 64 Likes on 55 Posts
Default

glad it works for you and i had a number of aps-c cameras before moving to ff. i've not seen photos from any aps-c sized camera that are nearly as good in quality (color, dynamic range) as a full frame one.
bitkahuna is offline  
Old 09-11-18, 12:11 PM
  #5  
RA40
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
RA40's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Posts: 18,725
Received 105 Likes on 96 Posts
Default

I've seen some very nice samples from both. FF yields a nicer image taken as a whole though there are variables for the resulting usage size that become less apparent. The APS-C is still very useful. Few would want to go in using less and it is easier to go from big to small all considered.

I'll eventually revisit Fuji because they have a system that suits a character set for my uses. Canon's road map and speed remains to be seen with the R system. Their M line is a dog with ticks-fleas that users were left scratching for relief that didn't and will not happen. LOL.
RA40 is offline  
Old 09-11-18, 12:24 PM
  #6  
bitkahuna
resisting entropy
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 55,476
Received 64 Likes on 55 Posts
Default

i think the canon r shows they're serious and don't like getting clobbered by sony.
bitkahuna is offline  
Old 09-11-18, 06:04 PM
  #7  
RA40
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
RA40's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Posts: 18,725
Received 105 Likes on 96 Posts
Default

Yeah...their slowness didn't help. One of my buddy's was long time Canon but he's gone Fuji in multiples. His constant not so subtle positive comments are an influence. I've had a minimal amount of time with the X-T2, X-T20, X-Pro 2, would like to play with the X-H1. This new release ticks more among my list including the MP bump and being affordable.
RA40 is offline  
Old 09-14-18, 10:52 PM
  #8  
tools4fool
Lexus Test Driver
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: between Bangkok (Thai) and Basel (Swiss)...
Posts: 910
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Relative cost to the Canon R is ~60%. That's a pretty significant difference and attractive if one is outfitting from scratch.
Interesting how people come to different opinions on the same thing.

I've looked into the Fuji's as a cheapish, small, quality 2nd line setup. X-T100, 10-24mm f4, 18mm f2, 80mm f2.8 macro, 600+950+550+1000= $3100
Somehow that was a bit expensive for a 'cheapish' system...

If I would use it a primary I would likely add the 50-140mm f2.8 at 1400 and that new X-T3 at additional 900, total $5400
Now that is quite substantial for an APS-C.

Z6 plus adapter, 60mm f.28 micro, 16-35mm f4, 28mm f1.8, 70-200mm f4, cost 2150, 600, 1100, 700, 1400 = $5950
Not bad for outfitting from scratch in FF.
Caveat is that the new Z lenses coming will be more expensive than those above - at least for the time being. (I suspect there will be a third, cheaper Z lens line coming at one point)
On the other hand it's FF.
Since I already have Nikon glass it's no question, throw the saved extra bucks into z7 and ready to rock'n roll.

Agree however that for someone who starts from zero it's certainly a good line, if you can't get good results then it's rather user error I would say...
Important to me in that price range - +$4k - is that the whole setup should appeal for long term, not just the next 3-4 years or so. No matter what brand, camera, sensor size.

(As for the low cost, secondary, small system I've looked recently into the Canon M50 but it might go the Nikon 1 series way, and that one still does a decent job for me.)
tools4fool is offline  
Old 09-15-18, 08:51 PM
  #9  
RA40
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
RA40's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Posts: 18,725
Received 105 Likes on 96 Posts
Default

Always interesting running numbers in these.

As a secondary system I seldom desire a full lens compliment. The X-T3 with or without grip and the 18-55 covers the majority of casual uses. At sub $2,400 all new that's more in line with my wallet. I came across the 18-55 for $300 so for about $2K that's a nice spot. Still more than I desire to spend for a tourist casual rig though for value that beats the Canon G1X-III at $1,100.
RA40 is offline  
Old 09-15-18, 11:46 PM
  #10  
tools4fool
Lexus Test Driver
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: between Bangkok (Thai) and Basel (Swiss)...
Posts: 910
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

My Nikon 1 J5 cost me $1600 with kit zoom, 10mm 2.8 (ff 26), 6,7-13mm (ff 8-35) and 30-110 (80-300). The lenses are very good and it is a tiny system, I still love it, you just can't crank up the ISO very much (my max limit was 800). I just hoped they would make one more body, same price as the J5 but with a small EVF bump. A dead system now, so I will by a new J5 body (for about $300) to keep it going for another few years for me (my J5 has the screen cracked on two places and one button missing; still works fine but life's limited for that baby.)

Ideally for a secondary system $1500 is the max I like to spend and that's where Fuji has got a problem - while they've got a decent cheapish body, with two lens zoom kit for $900 quite ok, there's only one other interesting lens for me, the 18mm f2 (ff27equiv) and even that one is not really cheap at $550. No real wides for me and I'm a wide junkie. The 10-24 f4 (ff 15-36) would be great but at $850 this will kill my budget. That's about $2300 for the setup and while it's good value for money it is too much for my secondary budget.
In my opinion Fuji APS-C would be way more interesting if they had a few more lenses in the $200-400 range.

Canon I can get the EOS M50 for $700 with kit zoom, plus EF-M 11-22mm (ff 17-35) for $350 and EF-M 55-200 (90-320) for $350. So far so good, $1400.
Problem is there is only one small cheapish low light, the 22mm f2 (ff 35) for $220. The overall price of $1600 (with double zoom kit even just $1470) would be fine with me, but first I would prefer ff 28mm for low light, and secondly I there hasn't been much news there recently - apart from the 32mm 1.4 (ff50) for $450, and I don't want another Nikon 1 experience...
Otherwise I really like this system, I get EVF and APS-C quality images in a small package, a lot of bang for my bucks. Probably the best small, cheap, capability combo right now.


tools4fool is offline  
Old 09-17-18, 11:55 AM
  #11  
RA40
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
RA40's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Posts: 18,725
Received 105 Likes on 96 Posts
Default

I recall your liking the Nikon 1. I concur that the Canon M system seems iffy in that regard. Fits into a good price point but their so-so native lens line-up leaves much to be desired. The bodies like the M5/6 are well featured but for lenses they push into the adapted EF line for anything that an experienced photographer would like. The 11-22 does tempt at times just wish it was a tad faster. The M50 would be a pretty nice travel-secondary rig that can be assembled reasonably.

The Fuji system does add up. I had the budget 16-50 zoom and felt that was a pretty nice lens. Liked it better than the Canon 18-55 range. Outfitting the Fuji it is pretty easy to spend $$. (That applies to any camera system so more so. )
RA40 is offline  
Old 09-21-18, 09:53 PM
  #12  
tools4fool
Lexus Test Driver
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: between Bangkok (Thai) and Basel (Swiss)...
Posts: 910
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Fits into a good price point but their so-so native lens line-up leaves much to be desired.
For an enthusiast or pro sure, but for the vast majority it likely does the job.
I'm sure Canon looked into what their best seller were in their dSLR line up, and looking at bestsellers on Amazon, etc I would say that the vast majority of folks - which are unlikely part of photo internet forums - want a cheapish, small camera with two zooms and maybe one prime at the max. The M series ticks all of those boxes.

According the Petapixel article here Canon does sell their baby mirrorless very well in Japan:
https://petapixel.com/2018/08/01/can...eras-in-japan/
This indicates as well that those cheaper cameras with a few zoom lenses are responsible for overall sales numbers, not the fancy $1200 and up bodies and fast $$$ zooms and primes.
That's where Nikon screwed up with their 1 series. The smaller sensor and not being able to do much (if any) manual setting apart form the way too expensive top of the line bodies likely killed the line. The last incarnation, the J5, was what it should have been from the beginning - cheapish, with manual controls. If they had gone that way early on plus added a slightly more expensive version with viewfinder bump things might have turned out much different. It would have been a cheaper system than the Sony RX 100 series, and more capable. Alas, they did it wrong and paid for it.
I wonder what their take on entry level mirrorless will be in the future. Will they come up with another lens mount, like Canon with the M series, or will they use the new Z mount and launch a series of cheaper lenses?

The XT-3 seems to be a very well rounded APS-C camera in the top level there, right up there with the D500, but mirrorless.
However it gets squeezed in hard by FF in my opinion, and that trend will continue. It's not the 'now' that would worry me about putting up a few grand for such a Fuji system, it's very capable as it is. However looking into the future - using my Chinese crystal ball, the AF-CV MkIII N with nano-coating, btw - I see many Sony, Canon and Nikon mirrorless FF bodies and lenses floating around, well within the price range. In that sense I see those systems as more future proof, more long levity in them. Then what? Buy another Fuji APS-C body, or start all over in FF with whatever brand?
The cheapish Fuji body on the other hand suffers from a lack of cheapish lenses, apart from the bread and butter standard/long zooms.
I guess Fuji will have to re-asses their strategy as well at one point, too. Currently Fuji users don't want a Fuji FF, logically as it will render their APS-C format lenses useless on a new mount. However it might be increasingly difficult to attract new customers to buy into a Fuji system in the future, when about everybody else is on FF.
tools4fool is offline  
Old 09-23-18, 02:37 PM
  #13  
RA40
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
RA40's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Posts: 18,725
Received 105 Likes on 96 Posts
Default

Very good points about the future goals for these in the life cycle scheme and Fuji's place with FF mirrorless. In the "now" of timing, Fuji will have challenges to attract new users in. If there were no FF from Nikon or Canon, I could see the Fuji. In my situation, that isn't enough motivation to jump even if running the numbers has some favor to them.

LOL at the
Chinese crystal ball, the AF-CV MkIII N with nano-coating
Mine is much worse being single coated from a rattle can. I'm a slow adopter though and feeling due end of this year.
RA40 is offline  
Old 09-28-18, 09:18 PM
  #14  
tools4fool
Lexus Test Driver
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: between Bangkok (Thai) and Basel (Swiss)...
Posts: 910
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

It really seems Fuji is going a different way with the recently announced cheapish GFX 50R - no FF but medium format instead for their top line.
Problem is that this is one really expensive line, lenses $1000-3000, most around two grand. With a 3 lens setup this gets you to about $10,000, or more.
I dunno what that means for Fuji's long term strategy, the crystal ball is a bit fuzzy there, despite the nano coating.

The Lumix S1R from Panasonic is yet another star on the FF sky, and a sign for the future.
Olympus is another brand, they have patented some FF lenses, but what's their future, only heaven knows.

If I were in your shoes I would likely sell the whole APS-C system (there's still demand for it now - albeit the number of Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 DX lenses at the second hand dealers here is telling something...), take that money and add the cash for a new APS-C body. Then put that total in a new FF EVF with basics and then start adding slowly to it.
tools4fool is offline  
Old 09-28-18, 09:51 PM
  #15  
tools4fool
Lexus Test Driver
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: between Bangkok (Thai) and Basel (Swiss)...
Posts: 910
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Thinking about it, one the other hand...you're in a similar situation than myself with my little Nikon J5.
Would make sense to go over to that Canon M50 as the J5 is dead for sure.
So long term the Eos M is better.

However with very little cash I can breathe life into my existing Nikon 1 setup. Just need another J5 to replace my beaten up one - for $200-300 (used-new) I can extend the life of this system for another two years or so. Very cost efficient.
On the other hand if I would sell my 4 lenses for just $300 and get the M50 kit it might makes more sense long term.

Guess the only advantage is that in two years there might be other options, clearer what direction things are going.
Difference between you and I is about $1200 however...
tools4fool is offline  
 


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: