X-T3 or Pocket 4K?

[Kisaha]

10 minutes ago, Alex Uzan said:

Actually, as much as I love the X-T3 ergonomics, I'm not sure to keep it.

My biggest issue is the Fuji lens system.
The faster primes are really expensive, and less good that their Sony equivalent, especially for video.

Everyone says Sony Lenses are big and expensive, and you should consider it before to go Fullframe.
I disagree.

The Fuji 56f1.2 is three hundred more than the Sony 85 1.8, and has slower AF, is less sharp open wide, and have less nicer bokeh (sorry for my english)
The 8-16 will cost 2 grands, the 55-140 is at the same price as the Sony 70/200f4
23f1.4 à 850€ - 14f2.8 890€ - 90f2 and 16f1.4 930€

It's very expensive for APS-C lenses, and I could accept their price if they were perfect, but they're not.

So, either I keep the fuji X-T3 but will buy f2 XR lenses only, either I sent it back.
 

Exactly! That is why I am keeping my NX system for now (4 cameras/8 lenses), buying a video camera, and see how the full frame wars pan out and change hyrid system on a year or two.

[webrunner5]

Like I have said I would Never buy the PK4 as my Only system. It is quirky as hell for Normal use. The X-T3 for the money is nearly impossible to beat unless you are thinking about buying a bunch of lenses for it. I would buy maybe one fast prime and a reasonable smaller zoom and be done.

I think I would wait on the Nikon, Canon cameras. They are their first attempts. They will get a lot better with time. The PK4 is a Cine camera, so you have to look at it that way. A person would not carry a C100, a Sony F3 around to just take kids, cat videos, or on vacation, at least very often LoL. Sure it is a pain, but it has the best output of nearly any camera we can afford, and it really is damn cheap to boot. And it has the Studio Resolve with it. I think Resolve is the future NLE down the road. Good time to learn it. I don't see how you can beat it for what we strive for on here.

[IronFilm]

23 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

a Sony F3 around to just take kids, cat videos, or on vacation

Oh I dunno... I took my Sony PMW-F3 across toWaiheke Island for New Years Eve. The F3 can be a "vaction camera" too ?

 

 

 

[webrunner5]

2 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Oh I dunno... I took my Sony PMW-F3 across toWaiheke Island for New Years Eve. The F3 can be a "vaction camera" too ?

 

 

 

You just did that to impress the Girls LoL. Knowing you you probably had a BBC shirt on to have them think they were going to be on the evening news. ☺️

[IronFilm]

Nope, I was in swimming trunks. 
And drinking. 
And filming. 
Next to a pool.
Perfect combo for a summer day!

[thebrothersthre3]

9 hours ago, Alex Uzan said:

Actually, as much as I love the X-T3 ergonomics, I'm not sure to keep it.

My biggest issue is the Fuji lens system.
The faster primes are really expensive, and less good that their Sony equivalent, especially for video.

Everyone says Sony Lenses are big and expensive, and you should consider it before to go Fullframe.
I disagree.

The Fuji 56f1.2 is three hundred more than the Sony 85 1.8, and has slower AF, is less sharp open wide, and have less nicer bokeh (sorry for my english)
The 8-16 will cost 2 grands, the 55-140 is at the same price as the Sony 70/200f4
23f1.4 à 850€ - 14f2.8 890€ - 90f2 and 16f1.4 930€

It's very expensive for APS-C lenses, and I could accept their price if they were perfect, but they're not.

So, either I keep the fuji X-T3 but will buy f2 XR lenses only, either I sent it back.
 

Yeah the fast lenses looked nice but they were too expensive and don't perform well enough. I have old minolta lenses if I want a super shallow softer look.

I would highly suggest the 23mm f2 and 50mm f2 they are very fast and sharp. I got both of mine used for pretty cheap. Next lens I am getting is a 18-55mm 2.8-4 for when I need OIS or just want an all in one lens. A pretty cheap kit all in all. Yeah its not going to give you as good of low light performance as a Sony with an F2 lens though.

[A_Urquhart]

9 hours ago, Alex Uzan said:

Everyone says Sony Lenses are big and expensive, and you should consider it before to go Fullframe.
I disagree.The Fuji 56f1.2 is three hundred more than the Sony 85 1.8, and has slower AF, is less sharp open wide, and have less nicer bokeh (sorry for my english)
The 8-16 will cost 2 grands, the 55-140 is at the same price as the Sony 70/200f4
23f1.4 à 850€ - 14f2.8 890€ - 90f2 and 16f1.4 930€

It's very expensive for APS-C lenses, and I could accept their price if they were perfect, but they're not.

So, either I keep the fuji X-T3 but will buy f2 XR lenses only, either I sent it back.
 

But your comparing completely different lenses. A 1.2 lens is generally going to cost a lot more than a 1.8 lens. Same as the Fuji 55-140, it's rated at 2.8 so why compare it to the Sony f4? I understand that DOF wise they are comparable taking into account FF vs Crop but a 2.8 or 1.2 lens is faster when it comes to light transmission no matter what system and thus generally more expensive to make.

Prime wise, the Fuji XR f2.0 series lens line is pretty well priced and beats all Sony lenses hands down IQ wise apart from maybe Sony's G Master series which are ridiculous money.

If you want a good zoom for video, I'm finding the 'kit' lens, XF 18-55 to be great and only costs $300USD. Sure, it's variable, rated at f2.8-f4 but iv'e been really impressed with the IQ out of it for such a small, versatile and cheap lens. At the current price, it's a no brainer. 

 

 

[Mark Romero 2]

3 hours ago, A_Urquhart said:

But your comparing completely different lenses. A 1.2 lens is generally going to cost a lot more than a 1.8 lens. Same as the Fuji 55-140, it's rated at 2.8 so why compare it to the Sony f4? I understand that DOF wise they are comparable taking into account FF vs Crop but a 2.8 or 1.2 lens is faster when it comes to light transmission no matter what system and thus generally more expensive to make. 

Yes, but f/2.8 - as you said - is same DOF as f/4 on a full frame camera and with a FF camera you can bump up the ISO one stop and have same (or less) noise than the X-T3. Or to put it better, using f/2.8 on an X-T3 doesn't really gain you anything over using f/4 on full frame (we are not taking ergonomics or other things in to account here, just ISO values and DOF).

So it is kind of a wash.

[Inazuma]

Please note that the Sony is actually missing some equivalent lenses. Like it doesn't have a 35mm f2 to equate the Fuji's 23mm f1.4. And it doesn't have a 24mm f2 to equate the Fuji 16mm f1.4. Nor a 20mm f4 or even f2.8 to equate the Fuji 14mm. It's worth noting also that the Sony 12-24mm f4 isn't much cheaper than the Fuji 8-16

[frontfocus]

22 hours ago, Alex Uzan said:

14f2.8 890€ - 90f2 and 16f1.4 930€

you do realize, that the quotes prices are not correct?
There's a cashback at the moment and you get 150€ off each of those lenses. That, on top of streetprices, put them below 800€ each. Personally I think they are great value, since their optical performance is stellar. 

[Alex Uzan]

58 minutes ago, frontfocus said:

you do realize, that the quotes prices are not correct?
There's a cashback at the moment and you get 150€ off each of those lenses. That, on top of streetprices, put them below 800€ each. Personally I think they are great value, since their optical performance is stellar. 

Thos price are correct without the cashback I wasn't aware until you mentioned it.

https://www.provencephotovideo.com/237-fixe#/fabricant-fujifilm

6 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Yes, but f/2.8 - as you said - is same DOF as f/4 on a full frame camera and with a FF camera you can bump up the ISO one stop and have same (or less) noise than the X-T3. Or to put it better, using f/2.8 on an X-T3 doesn't really gain you anything over using f/4 on full frame (we are not taking ergonomics or other things in to account here, just ISO values and DOF).

So it is kind of a wash.

Exactly my point, I was comparing the equivalent dof.
And a faster light on APSC is compensed on FF buy the better ISO performance.

4 hours ago, Inazuma said:

Please note that the Sony is actually missing some equivalent lenses. Like it doesn't have a 35mm f2 to equate the Fuji's 23mm f1.4. And it doesn't have a 24mm f2 to equate the Fuji 16mm f1.4. Nor a 20mm f4 or even f2.8 to equate the Fuji 14mm. It's worth noting also that the Sony 12-24mm f4 isn't much cheaper than the Fuji 8-16

Yes, but some non-equivalent offer outstanding performances.
Like the GM 24f1.4 , the 35f1.4, or any sigma. But true, they're expensive.

[DBounce]

52 minutes ago, Alex Uzan said:

Thos price are correct without the cashback I wasn't aware until you mentioned it.

https://www.provencephotovideo.com/237-fixe#/fabricant-fujifilm

Exactly my point, I was comparing the equivalent dof.
And a faster light on APSC is compensed on FF buy the better ISO performance.

Yes, but some non-equivalent offer outstanding performances.
Like the GM 24f1.4 , the 35f1.4, or any sigma. But true, they're expensive.

The F2 lenses are good lenses... fast focusing and quiet. For quality vs price Sony and Panasonic have nothing that can match them.

Now if price is no object I can highly recommend the MKX series... lovely glass.

[Alex Uzan]

I sent it back, not without regrets I must admit.

But I’m already quite happy with the A7iii for stills, and it was really about video that X-t3 got my interests.

For now I prefer to wait to see how Sony will respond with their next apsc, which if it’s as good as the Fuji on video side, will allow me to use my great ff lenses.

And if it’s not... well... this GAS headache will start over again ?

[Emanuel]

@Andrew Reid I know it is unnecessary to refer it or even add a request here, that's unlikely the million dollars doubt, only the question to know the answer for now, though.

What's the best deal between those two current best options tested from the field by the hands and eyes of some shooter like you?

I think that's everything many of us are eagering to know.

[Alex Uzan]

A really nice video about Fuji and Sony lenses, in relation of my previous post.

 

Don't stop when he says 1.8 are for amateurs. It's a joke to demonstrate its subject.

[DBounce]

1 hour ago, Alex Uzan said:

A really nice video about Fuji and Sony lenses, in relation of my previous post.

 

Don't stop when he says 1.8 are for amateurs. It's a joke to demonstrate its subject.

Sensor crop aside, these are F1.2 lenses, not F1.8. Crop does not mean these are somehow not what they are designed to be. Stick the Fujinon lens on a full frame camera and you would indeed see it is F1.2 not F1.8. Conversely, put one of those full frame Sony lenses on a Sony APSC sensor camera and tell me if the F1.8 is still giving the same DOF as it does on the full frame model? Now I understand that the Fujinon lenses are designed for use with APSC/S35 cameras. But this does not change the fact that it cost more to produce a true F1.2 lens than it does to produce an F1.8 lens.

Bokeh: If the lemon shaped bokeh that the Sony lens puts out is good enough for you then congratulations... you can save a boat load on your lenses. Also the AF test was done with the Fuji at 400 iso vs the full frame Sony at 800? He seems to double the ISO for all of the Sony lenses look here or here ... or here for example. Hmmm? Could it be he's getting more money by referring would be chumps erh buyer to purchase Sony gear in his affiliate links? Hmmm?

Hey maybe I'm confused... Sony makes an APSC lens that is F1.2? Really? Which lens is that?  You say they make an F2.8 constant aperture  50-140? What was that model number again? Hmmm... that's what I thought.

[thebrothersthre3]

Thought I'd share my experience using the XT3 to film a wedding this past weekend.

Lots of continuous shooting, though the camera did get warm, there was no overheating. I experienced no lock ups or errors of that nature.

An issue I ran into was low light auto focus. There wasn't a ton of light at the reception venue. The room was mainly lit by small lights on the walls, and some overhead chandeliers. Neither light fixtures were very bright and the chandeliers were dimmed once the dancing started. Before the lights were dimmed the camera struggled to maintain focus at F4 without hunting quite frequently. At f2 it was fine which indicates it simply reached its limit as far as needed a certain amount of exposure. Once the lights were dimmed even at f2 it was hunting sometimes. I didn't crank the ISO beyond 6400. Maybe 12,800 would have been enough to get better exposure for auto focus.

Basically this auto focus system isn't magic. It still enables me in decent lighting to get in focus shots of moving objects that I wouldn't be able to obtain by myself, especially not with longer lenses and a shallow DOF.

I found the OIS on the 50-230mm lens to be great for non moving shots. I used it with a monopod(didn't get a stand for mine so its pretty unstable) and it worked great. I got to test tracking for people processing up the aisle and it was spot on.

The 18-55 has great OIS as well. Easily can get handheld shots through all focal lengths that look great.


My only wish for Fuji is that they'd give their primes OIS. Especially the 50mm f2.   If they just did a 50mm f2 with OIS I'd be a content man.

[omega1978]

4 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Thought I'd share my experience using the XT3 to film a wedding this past weekend.

Lots of continuous shooting, though the camera did get warm, there was no overheating. I experienced no lock ups or errors of that nature.

An issue I ran into was low light auto focus. There wasn't a ton of light at the reception venue. The room was mainly lit by small lights on the walls, and some overhead chandeliers. Neither light fixtures were very bright and the chandeliers were dimmed once the dancing started. Before the lights were dimmed the camera struggled to maintain focus at F4 without hunting quite frequently. At f2 it was fine which indicates it simply reached its limit as far as needed a certain amount of exposure. Once the lights were dimmed even at f2 it was hunting sometimes. I didn't crank the ISO beyond 6400. Maybe 12,800 would have been enough to get better exposure for auto focus.

Basically this auto focus system isn't magic. It still enables me in decent lighting to get in focus shots of moving objects that I wouldn't be able to obtain by myself, especially not with longer lenses and a shallow DOF.

I found the OIS on the 50-230mm lens to be great for non moving shots. I used it with a monopod(didn't get a stand for mine so its pretty unstable) and it worked great. I got to test tracking for people processing up the aisle and it was spot on.

The 18-55 has great OIS as well. Easily can get handheld shots through all focal lengths that look great.


My only wish for Fuji is that they'd give their primes OIS. Especially the 50mm f2.   If they just did a 50mm f2 with OIS I'd be a content man.

Have you tested the max continuos shooting in 4k50p?

[TurboRat]

6 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Thought I'd share my experience using the XT3 to film a wedding this past weekend.

Lots of continuous shooting, though the camera did get warm, there was no overheating. I experienced no lock ups or errors of that nature.

An issue I ran into was low light auto focus. There wasn't a ton of light at the reception venue. The room was mainly lit by small lights on the walls, and some overhead chandeliers. Neither light fixtures were very bright and the chandeliers were dimmed once the dancing started. Before the lights were dimmed the camera struggled to maintain focus at F4 without hunting quite frequently. At f2 it was fine which indicates it simply reached its limit as far as needed a certain amount of exposure. Once the lights were dimmed even at f2 it was hunting sometimes. I didn't crank the ISO beyond 6400. Maybe 12,800 would have been enough to get better exposure for auto focus.

Basically this auto focus system isn't magic. It still enables me in decent lighting to get in focus shots of moving objects that I wouldn't be able to obtain by myself, especially not with longer lenses and a shallow DOF.

I found the OIS on the 50-230mm lens to be great for non moving shots. I used it with a monopod(didn't get a stand for mine so its pretty unstable) and it worked great. I got to test tracking for people processing up the aisle and it was spot on.

The 18-55 has great OIS as well. Easily can get handheld shots through all focal lengths that look great.


My only wish for Fuji is that they'd give their primes OIS. Especially the 50mm f2.   If they just did a 50mm f2 with OIS I'd be a content man.

Great! XT3 is indeed tempting! Been thinking between a Fuji and an A7III as a hybrid cam to pair with a GH5s. Really liking the colors and af from the Xt3 as far as the ones I see on reviews

[thebrothersthre3]

11 hours ago, TurboRat said:

Great! XT3 is indeed tempting! Been thinking between a Fuji and an A7III as a hybrid cam to pair with a GH5s. Really liking the colors and af from the Xt3 as far as the ones I see on reviews

I sold my GH5 to get a fuji. I think the Fuji would be a great match with your GH5s. Autofocus is top notch.