Sony A7 III or Fujifilm X-H1?

[aaa123jc]

2 hours ago, noone said:

I have owned quite a few decent Canon lenses including several L's and while Sony does have some very expensive (but very nice) lenses, the equivalents for other mounts are not that much cheaper or in some cases are not cheaper.

There are fewer good cheap E mount lenses as yet because the system is a lot newer but there are some.

The FE 85 1.8 for instance, is I think, the biggest bargain going in photography for ANY brand.       Not too expensive but very sharp with great bokeh.

The Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 IS expensive for a 1.8 normal prime lens but it is anything but a "normal" lens and if it was made by Canon it would have an L ring on it.

The 28 f2 and 50 1.8 FF E mount lenses have their fans and are not too bad optically (the 50 especially seems to be ok optically but it is other things that it often gets pinged for).

That said, the 55 1.8 Sony Zeiss can often be had at quite reasonable prices - I got mine early on and even then didn't pay anything like MSRP though even at its MSRP it isn't overpriced for what it is.     Has put me off wanting any other normal primes after using a great many over many years.

 

There are other bargains now like the 28-75 2.8 Tamron too and even Samyang auto focus lenses with more all the time.

Thank you.

I will definitely look into the Tamron 28-75. Looks like a solid choice. Never tried the 85 1.8 though. 

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

The only big edge to me Canon, Nikon have on lenses is that there is a Lot of used ones out there. But good lens, L type ones are expensive as hell even used. They is no free lunch on late, AF top end lenses, none. Sure the 17-40mm f4.0 L lens is not bad price wise, but it is Very long in the tooth in this day and age. But it is one of a few bargains out there. But a lot of the old ones don't have Image stabilization in them at all, and are noisy focus motor wise, on and on.

The ease to access to a used market is actually important for me (because I am broke). But yeah the L lenses are still very expensive even used. The good thing is you can easily sell it again for a similar price.

1 hour ago, LtJTMarsh said:

love the nx1, and nx500 (x2) , just got the 16-50mm S lens, saving up for the 50-150mm,  if you have any doubts about the video quality out of this camera, just look at this 1080 sample:

i use the nx1 with : tokina 28-70mm, 24-70mm L, sigma 18-35mm,  all the cheap pancakes (16, 30, 45) ,  i think you can adapt fuji lenses as well.   the NXL speedbooster is a must with the nx1.  The only thing that may replace my nx1 is pocket4k, but that remains to be seen.  Sony is heck of a camera which can also adapt lenses easily. 

here is NX1 autofocus test with samsung lens

 

Thanks.

The footage looks amazing! The color and the clarity is so good. Can't believe this camera is already a few years old now. 

 

[Django]

5 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

So you are advising a guy to pass on a NX1 with a 18-55mm kit lens which cost 600 USD!! That is half price!

personally i wouldn't invest a penny in a dead platform (i heard samsung won't even service it). certainly would'nt trade up an XH1 for one neither.

[ntblowz]

2 hours ago, Inazuma said:

I haven't mistaken it. I have it right here. In AF-S mode where the camera uses contrast detection it is a piece of shit but in AF-C mode where it uses phase detection the autofocus is decent.  And it's quieter than the Fuji 35mm F1.4

@Django talking about equivalent lenses here. The 28mm may have a cheaper construction than Fuji lenses, but compared to the fuji the 18mm f2, the focus ring is much better on the Sony and optically much better too. The Fuji is comparatively quite soft in the centre. At least my copy is. 

Since all my lens are really quiet with AF and fast so when I tried the 50mm FE 1.8 (want to save bucks too) at store it stick out like sore thumb, well i guess we all have different standards.  (the Rokinon is too noisy for me as well.)

[Andrew Reid]

On 7/24/2018 at 4:40 AM, webrunner5 said:

If you buy a NX1 you will join a select few crowd on here of Maybe 2 people crazy enough to still have one, let alone use it LoL!  ?  Buy the A7 mk III. ?

 

Haha that's so far off the mark. There's a lot of people here using the NX1. The dedicated sub-forum is where they hang out. It's still a popular camera. I still use mine as well.

It's a good alternative to the X-H1 but if the A7 III is his preference it seems he's made his own mind up and doesn't need more advice

I own both and I think they have different strengths. The X-H1 is a little more enjoyable to shoot with, and has some very nice zooms. The 18-135mm, great for run & gun, the 16-55mm F2.8 is blisteringly sharp, the 18-55mm F2.8 is a lightweight gem / bargain. But it's not full frame and so if that's the look you're after, the A7 III is the best deal for the money. The AF is also better in video mode on the Sony, although it's not too bad on the Fuji. I'd put the dynamic range of both as quite similar in LOG.

[noone]

6 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

The only big edge to me Canon, Nikon have on lenses is that there is a Lot of used ones out there. But good lens, L type ones are expensive as hell even used. They is no free lunch on late, AF top end lenses, none. Sure the 17-40mm f4.0 L lens is not bad price wise, but it is Very long in the tooth in this day and age. But it is one of a few bargains out there. But a lot of the old ones don't have Image stabilization in them at all, and are noisy focus motor wise, on and on.

Indeed,

The Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 is probably optically my best lens but it is far from my dearest.

I have a Canon EF 20-35 2.8 L lens that is almost 30 years old.       These have been updated FOUR times since (17-35 2.8 and three 16-35 2.8 since) and yet they still sell for only about $100 to $200 less than a second hand Sony Zeiss 55 1.8       

I have a almost forty year old Canon FD 24 1.4 and these still sell for MORE than the Sony 55 can be found new!

I strongly recommend the FE 85 1.8 for anyone even remotely interested in an 85mm lens (unless wanting the much more expensive Batis 1.8 or the great 1.4)

[ntblowz]

28 minutes ago, noone said:

Indeed,

The Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 is probably optically my best lens but it is far from my dearest.

I have a Canon EF 20-35 2.8 L lens that is almost 30 years old.       These have been updated FOUR times since (17-35 2.8 and three 16-35 2.8 since) and yet they still sell for only about $100 to $200 less than a second hand Sony Zeiss 55 1.8       

I have a almost forty year old Canon FD 24 1.4 and these still sell for MORE than the Sony 55 can be found new!

I strongly recommend the FE 85 1.8 for anyone even remotely interested in an 85mm lens (unless wanting the much more expensive Batis 1.8 or the great 1.4)

I was looking at 85mm 1.8, but now saw a batis 135mm at not too bad price.. decisions!

[jonpais]

At $1,099, the X-T2 offers more bang for the buck than the X-H1. 

[Trek of Joy]

On 7/23/2018 at 9:55 AM, aaa123jc said:

I've been working as a part time photographer and videographer for 1 year. But I always rent my camera and lenses, depending on the work that I need to do. 

Recently, my girlfriend wants to make a YouTube channel about cooking and finding good restaurants in Hong Kong. So I purchased a fuji X-H1 and a 16-55mm because it was a very good deal. Apart from helping her to make videos, I planned to use it for my professional shoots as well.

However, I've found it not very impressive and kinda want to sell it and buy the more expensive Sony A7 III instead.

 

Here are some of my thoughts:

1. I actually prefer the A7 III more for stills. The new Sony cameras I've rent before (A9 and A7 III) have better color and AF IMO.

2. Surprisingly I love the F-log. And I enjoy using the Eterna film stimulation as well.

3. The ergonomics of the X-H1 is better, IMO.

4. The Fuji lenses are usually much cheaper at least in the place I live.

 

I will be very grateful if you guys can give me any advice. Thank you.

I prefer the a7III for stills as well, the AF is better in every situation I've encountered - especially fast action and low light. For stills - in terms of detail - there's very little difference, but the a7III has a significant edge in terms of DR and noise (it has the same advantage over the NX1 and every other smaller sensor). At base ISO the Sony will have a lot more information in the shadows/highlights - about 1.5 stops. At 6400 the files are so clean its amazing. Face/eye detection are next level, as is the 93% sensor PDAF coverage - once it locks on to something it can track it across the entire frame, the Fuji can only track reliably in the middle portion of the frame.

The three smaller primes are gems - the 28/2 (sharp in the center, a little field curvature - at faster apertures keep your subject in the center), 55/1.8 (super sharp, great bokeh, lots of CA) and 85/1.8 (cheap, sharp and nicer bokeh than the Batis IMO). The new Tamron zooms looks great as well. I have the f/4 zooms, the 16-35 is a stellar UWA - its my most used E-mount lens, the 24-70 ranges from ok to good depending on the FL you're shooting and the 70-200 is a workhorse. I'm going to swap my 24-70 for the Tamron as soon as I can find one, its the hottest lens around right now. The Samyang 35/1.4 looks like a winner too and its just $500. I have one on the way, the 35/1.4 is my workhorse for event shooting.

The number of 3rd party lenses will expand much faster now that CaNikon are getting into mirrorless since they can build them for multiple mounts. Fuji's lenses have slowed to a crawl since they're focusing on the GFX, only 3 new lenses between now and 2020. There have been about two-dozen E-mount lenses released in the last couple years and that pace isn't slowing.

The new Sony body fixes a lot of the ergo issues compared to earlier models. Its not without flaws, Sony went cheap with the LCD and single UHS-II card, they stripped out app functions like time-lapse and have not replaced them - with Fuji that and focus stacking is built-in. People complain about menus, but once you get it set up you rarely need to go menu diving anymore. You can assign custom functions for both stills and video modes, along with the Fn menu - everything else you frequently use can be added to a "My Menu" so you don't have to search dozens of menu pages.

I like shooting with Fuji except its IBIS still has that jerky-ness in video that Fuji hasn't fixed, its AF is a generation behind Sony's, and the DR with stills can never catch the larger FF sensor in the a7III. The ISO dial fell off one of my XT2's as well, a lightly used body with less than 5k clicks, had to replace the entire $210 top plate. Grrr... I was all set to get the XH1, but after using one for a short time it just didn't offer enough over my XT2 to upgrade. After using the new Z battery with the a7III, I'm not spending top dollar for another small battery camera, Fuji really shot themselves in the foot not putting the GFX battery in the XH1, that and the XT100's tilt LCD were major blunders that made it a no buy for me.

If you use Adobe to edit stills, Sony's color got a real shot in the arm with the new color profile from the update earlier this year. Plus you can now easily apply LUT's to stills, Eterna with Sony's raws. Love it.

I've been a faithful Fuji shooter for awhile now, but the future for enthusiast cameras is clearly FF, especially if you shoot a lot of stills since CaNikon is entering that space in the next few months. Tamron, Sigma, Tokina, Samyang and Zeiss are all making AF lenses for the E-mount and many others are doing MF lenses. Plus you can adapt Canon glass. Its just a more versatile system with all the adapter options and such. Smaller sensors can't compete with the DR or the resolution. With Fuji you have one sensor and nothing else for years until the next update. With Sony you have options, APS-c/FF, absolute speed, high resolution and so on. Personally I'm going to be moving on from my Fuji system, the a7III and recent Sony lenses like the 85/1.8, 24-105, 12-24, and 100-400 has all but killed Fuji for me.

Cheers

Chris

[jonpais]

22 hours ago, noone said:

I strongly recommend the FE 85 1.8 for anyone even remotely interested in an 85mm lens (unless wanting the much more expensive Batis 1.8 or the great 1.4)

The 85mm f/1.8 is crazy good and easily balances on the original Zhiyun Crane. The a7 III is fast becoming the best camera I've ever used. Incredibly detailed images without being hideously oversharpened, gorgeous rendering with the right lenses, tons of detail in the shadows.

https://jonpais.wordpress.com/2018/07/26/do-i-regret-purchasing-the-a7-iii/

[jonpais]

No color correction in post. Shadows pulled down a bit.

[deezid]

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

No color correction in post. Shadows pulled down a bit.

Is this with sharpening set to -7
Nice colors btw.
What were your settings?

[jonpais]

5 minutes ago, deezid said:

Is this with sharpening set to -7
Nice colors btw.
What were your settings?

Thank you - they’re pretty much SOOC. Yes, sharpening was set to -7, PP1, Cine2, Cinema. 

[anonim]

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

No color correction in post. Shadows pulled down a bit.

For me this one looks the best and most usable/relevant example for image evaluation so far... not just between yours.

[jonpais]

4 minutes ago, anonim said:

For me this one looks the best and most usable/relevant example for image evaluation so far... not just between yours.

Thanks. ?? May I ask - why?

[anonim]

37 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Thanks. ?? May I ask - why?

Simply - first time it looks to me close to the quality level of your footage achieved with GH5 and Veydras (and some Olys) lenses. But IMO yet not the same.

Actually, I'd really like to play with another camera, and patiently checked A7iii threads in decision to buy it, and I already have in reserve Zeiss Contax super trio - but all samples of A7iii till now look flat or so-popular-call "plasticky" in comparison with, say, your own noncomplex but great/honest for evaluation with GH5/Veydra combination... Of course, even more in comparison with some Blackmagic (which I had plenty) or Canon's (recently I made some shots with C200).   

[IronFilm]

On 7/25/2018 at 4:22 AM, aaa123jc said:

The only deal I can find here is a body with the 18-55mm kit lens which cost about 600 USD in total.

That is bonkers insanely cheap!! 

Buy it, and just use adapter Nikon F mount lenses onto the camera. What a bargain. 

[Mark Romero 2]

4 hours ago, jonpais said:

No color correction in post. Shadows pulled down a bit.

Thanks for posting. Looks real good. Very detailed with out being overly sharp.

[aaa123jc]

Thank you everyone. You guys are so helpful.

I've decided to go for the NX1 because it is very cheap. I can now invest the money on other gears. I still really like the Sony A7 iii though. The footage @jonpais had post is really terrific. Natural and detailed. Perfect for documentaries, IMO.

If I need the Sony A7 iii, I can still rent it. I've been renting it repeatedly since it came out. So... I guess I can live with that. In the meantime I will just save up until I can easily buy it and its lenses without breaking the bank. ?

 

[webrunner5]

2 hours ago, aaa123jc said:

Thank you everyone. You guys are so helpful.

I've decided to go for the NX1 because it is very cheap. I can now invest the money on other gears. I still really like the Sony A7 iii though. The footage @jonpais had post is really terrific. Natural and detailed. Perfect for documentaries, IMO.

If I need the Sony A7 iii, I can still rent it. I've been renting it repeatedly since it came out. So... I guess I can live with that. In the meantime I will just save up until I can easily buy it and its lenses without breaking the bank. ?

 

For video I am not too sure why you would want to buy many, if any, FE lenses to be honest. I would rather have a old Nikkor lens kit than the FE's. Now if you are a total AF user well sure, but..

I have a few FE's because of my eyesight and well just being old LoL. But I really do enjoy old MF glass, and the character they bring, and their build quality..

[aaa123jc]

1 minute ago, webrunner5 said:

For video I am not too sure why you would want to buy many, if any, FE lenses to be honest. I would rather have a old Nikkor lens kit than the FE's. Now if you are a total AF user well sure, but..

I have a few FE's because of my eyesight and well just being old LoL. But I really do enjoy old MF glass, and the character they bring, and their build quality..

I shoot a lot of performances. A lot of clients here in Hong Kong don't communicate with me before the actual performance. And even if I'm at their rehearsal, sometimes they perform very differently in their actual performance. So I usually shoot the whole event with no clue what's going to happen. Somehow I've found the AF system (in Sony) can react faster than myself. I only switch the AF off when I realize it is doing something weird. 90% of the time it is doing a pretty good job.

But if I'm shooting for fun, yeah definitely want to play with some old glasses. Plus it is very cool looking as well. Like I am suddenly become great at photography and videography or something. ?