Chris Whitten

I put my original FP up against stills from my Leica Q and found little difference. I'm not sure these high megapixel cameras add anything for most photography.

Yeah, the claim (Gerald Undone) the camera is useless in every regard is a red flag to me. And multiple reviewers keep claiming it's useless for photography. On CDNG, it is so easy to edit and grade in Resolve. With hard drive prices so low (WD My Passport for example), you can really store (back up) your raw footage on 1 drive per project. I don't know if the FP-L is a step backwards, but I read many of the same comments about the OG FP. That it is only for landscape photography. But I am making a lot of videos based around my music, and using it as a great quality webcam for interviews. There is a lot of photography that doesn't involve panning the camera - I shoot reportage, cityscapes, portraiture. The FP takes fantastic pictures in almost every field other than fast moving subjects. I bought the Niceyrig grip which is pretty cheap, works great, also adds several mounting points.

Still loving my FP. I don't get the advice to go Sony. I have no desire to switch to Sony. I have been getting great results from my FP as a stills camera. Maybe you can't use it for action, but to say it is useless other than for landscapes is not correct at all. I have shot a lot of video on my FP - 10 bit CDNG to a small SSD. The quality is fantastic, very sharp, great colours. Maybe the FP-L has a few too many quirks and compromises, but many of these same popular reviewers made the same criticisms of the OG FP. I think the FP is the best hybrid, capable of stunning photographs and excellent video. Autofocus, vlogging, pro-resets are not what it is about.

I will be picking up the 35mm for my FP for sure.

The problem is it is not just about money, or financial reward in other ways. The way Youtube is set up, video makers are bumped up the rankings by the number of views their videos get, and by how long viewers are engaged. One major way to achieve that is to be the first to review a new product. All the camera companies have to do to discourage any negativity is to not offer a Youtube reviewer a new product, or be slow in offering it. No money has changed hands. In the music gear game, backhanders has long been a problem. Magazines rely on gear advertising for their income, so would be hesitant to give an item a bad review in case the manufacturer pulled their advertising. What happened was that magazines would only review gear they could be positive about. Maybe the same will eventually happen on Youtube. If a new bit of gear doesn't get reviewed much, read into that most reviewers thought it was garbage.

Looks like it mostly addresses the new 50mm lens, which I don't own.

You can crop in with a video editor anyway? Like Davinci Resolve. Personally I would rather carry two prime lenses. Sigma have just announced an L mount 85mm f1.4. OK, it's expensive. I bought a whole set of Pentax Takumar lenses for my FP for peanuts. My longest is 135mm. The quality is superb. You can get very affordable Nikon (use with an adapter). I don't own a single L mount lens yet, although I agree, auto-focus is definitely a great option to have.

Yeah, I imagine the XT3 is great for weddings. The auto focus is great too. I have a Q. For me the 28mm lens is the biggest downside. I would rather 35 without having to crop in. Everything else about it is great. It's small, it does what it says and it's easy to carry around.

I wonder if you grabbed one whether you would lose interest in the XT3? Best things about the XT3 for me are its easy and fun to use. The images are lovely. The lenses are nice and there's plenty of choice. FP is quirky and can be a bit annoying.

I paid £1300, but body only, no lens. I have seen them between £1400 and £1600 for the body. The same day I got mine there was one with 45mm lens (the full kit) on Ebay (located in Sweden) for £1600, but in the ten minutes I hesitated someone nabbed it. I think early on, first adopters got frustrated with it and just wanted to get rid of it at any price. But now people are starting to appreciate it, especially with the last two firmware updates.

I got my FP cheap on Ebay UK about 6 months ago. They come up at least monthly, obviously from disgruntled or frustrated purchasers. I have a Fuji XT3 and have had a BMPCC 4K. For me the Sigma FP is stellar at both stills and video. I haven't used my XT3 for video as I love the Davinci Resolve workflow and it's a hassle getting the Fuji codec in there. I don't think you would shoot video on the FP, or at least get the best out of it on the internal SD card. I use a very small external SSD. Soon after buying the FP I wanted to sell my XT3, but then Fuji pre-announced the XT4 and my XT3 dropped in value about £200-£300 overnight. The XT3 is easier to use than the FP. The pictures are lovely, especially with Fuji's film emulations. The auto focus is great and the lenses are varied and very good too. I find the FP RAW photo files to be more detailed. I'm using mine in manual, with Leica M lenses and very affordable Pentax Asahi Takumar. The images are fantastic. I too am waiting, hoping, on some more full frame Sigma L Mount lenses. I could use the back screen with auto focus, but at the moment have to use the add-on viewfinder to manual focus. The XT3 is a lot cheaper now, a very excellent camera and easier to use (due to the auto focus superiority). I find the FP more rewarding and more fun. I think it walks all over the XT3 for pure video quality personally.

And as an aside - with the latest update, Capture One Pro 20 now supports the Sigma FP. Great news!

Yep. I'm in all manual mode when shooting video. I would like a native Sigma lens just as an option for stills. At the moment I have the bulky loupe attached. And manual focussing is sometimes slow. Probably the smallest usable set up is the body and the 'kit' lens. The body and Leica M 35mm f2 is much smaller, but I need the loupe to focus.

New L mount lens, 85mm.

Off topic, but it is widely regarded as terrible.