Over the last few years, many Sony shooters have been requesting certain features that still haven't been delivered. One of the main features that a lot of people seem to want is better video features. Unfortunately, Sony has, for the most part, stuck with the same video features they initially offered back in 2015.
I appreciate that Sony has offered some incredible photography features with the latest a7R IV. Having a full frame camera that can produce such high resolution files can definitely be useful. Unfortunately, when it comes to video, Sony has really let themselves fall behind. For this reason I have been strongly considering a move to Fujifilm.
The current X-T3 camera offers some brilliant video features. The ability to record 4k at 60p with 10bit and 4:2:2 codecs, makes the X-T3 such a compelling option. Due to this, I decided I would sell all of my Sony equipment and move over to Fujifilm; however, things didn't quite work out the way I wanted. In my latest video I discuss three main reasons why I couldn't make the switch.
I'm hoping that Fujifilm will listen and improve their already fantastic system. In the meantime, however, I guess I'll just have to wait.
Wow that’s a lot of different Systems mate... you can really cut that down to a 1/4... GAS is addictive I heard!
GFX architecture, landscapes
XT3 everyday / video (and some landscape/architecture) for me
Could very well be Phase / Sony or Canon Sony as well... I just don’t see Phase, Canon, Sony, Fuji!
I wish cameras was cameras and not hybrid camcorder or whatever. I bought the XT-1 knowing it was useless as video camera.
Anyways Fuji had come long way since that and think Xt-4 will be a great camera.
I pretty much think at this time we finally seems to get good offerings from both Fuji, Sony, Nikon and Canon. Xt-4, A7m4 and the next Canon mirroless. Nikon soon with a new camera I expect. I think this year's new models will all be mature and great cameras:)
It's great to finally have options:)
First World Problems
Would you rather another type?
I could very well say gear addiction problems... Canon, Phase, Sony and Fuji? Really? I can understand 2 camera systems... I can even understand 4 different cameras in 2 systems. 4 different systems and probably several cameras in each is just waste of money...
We do multiple types of work and there is no perfect camera for everything we do.
As a company we shoot architecture and for that we use Canon or Phase One depending on the project.
For my personal stuff and YouTube I shoot with Sony and Fujifilm. The plan was to only use one system so right now I'm in the middle of two. I'm hoping to have just one system in the next year or so.
If anything the way I have set things up has saved me a lot of money. The alternative was way more expensive. We're talking around £30k expensive. I don't like spending money and this way I have what I want and get to keep my money :).
It is an interesting perspective (excuse?). I also do different work. The Brands are irrelevant here but I can basically cover everything with Fuji X and Fuji GFX with Pentax/Canon lenses for shifting.
The X-Systems lends itself to anyting where portability and speed and video is required
The GFX System for anything where ultra high quality stills are required.
You could very well do the same with Phase and Sony or Canon - the Brand is irrelevant.
There's just not enough of a difference that would commercially justify having 4 different lens, camera systems. Beyond cost it would also be a logistical nightmare...
But fine - I don't want to take away from all the fun you are having.
Functionality is the main difference.
For example there are no technical systems available for the Fuji and no native tilt shift lenses for Sony cameras. Also tethering with Fuji and Sony (including wireless) is a pain.
Canon is the easiest to shoot architecture with especially when wirelessly tethering. Capture One worked incredibly well with Phase One plus the technical camera system is one of the best. They’ve also recently released the XT camera but I haven’t tried that yet.
X systems are great but not quite there yet for much of the stuff we do. What I will say is that considering my latest discussions with Fujifilm I’m very pleased :-p.
Image quality is rarely the reason I’ve ever picked one system over another. Resolution however is a common reason I pick Phase over another system but that’s entirely dependant on the job
Sure you can
Canon lenses work well on the GFX and the Sony for Shifting
67 / 645 Pentax lenses are fantastic on the GFX for shifting as well as some Hasselblad
And then there's of course Canon itself.
You can shift well on an XT-3 with Nikon lenses although you should get the AF-D lenses for aperture control so you can't get ultra wide. But the 20, 35mm and 50 mm work well
If you really want native shifting (why? shifting is manual anyway) - then really you can do Phase / Canon. Canon has decent filming capabilities.
Tilt shift lenses demonstrate visible distortion on the GFX.
Even still it’s not about the lenses and adapting them. It’s functionality and usability.
Do you shoot architecture for a living because I get the feeling that you don’t. I feel like you’re looking at this from the spec sheet instead of actual work experience with these systems.
Also up until the R5 and 1DXIII canon has not had decent video features. 4K with a huge crop and horrible codec. I own the 5D4 I know what the video features are like. Plus it’s a much larger camera system which requires a larger gimbal which makes the whole overall system bigger. It’s actually cheaper to shot video with the mirrorless cameras than it was with Canon when you start factoring in all the costs. Once again you seem to be looking at this from the spec sheet instead of actual experience.
I don’t understand why you think you know what’s best for me?
Quit the bs man. Don't dig yourself deeper than necessary. Since you asked: Yes I am an architecture photographers, but more importantly I also used to hire architectural photographers for 20 years before I moved into photography myself... for "small" companies such as Gensler, Hassell, Moser and others.
So as it happens not only am I aware of what works for me — but I am very well connected and in constant conversation with other high end architectural photographers I used to work with and know what they are using... I have yet to know of one that has 4 (four!) different systems.
I see you work in Real Estate and while you do good work, frankly the people I used to hire were top end. I'm not going to compare your work because that wouldn't be fair - I am only saying this because of trying to discredit what I said. You know as well as I do that 4 systems isn't necessary. You like to spend unnecessary money on gear... I get it. But if you are honest with yourself you don't really need to.
Works for you...
Also I’m not shooting 4 different systems for architecture I use two. Canon for most and phase when the occasion calls for it which I’m not silly enough to buy, it’s rented.
For video I only want one system but right now I’m split between Sony and Fuji so I have the features I need.
I don’t shoot real estate.
You have such a mother know best attitude lol.
Ooof, that Leigh Miller guy in this thread really comes across like a decent, good-natured guy who could care less if Fstoppers gives their stamp of approval to his preferred camera brand. BTW, Fuji's lenses are indeed a step (if not 2 or 3) behind their competition just like Usman says. Fuji users like to believe they are some kind of holy grail of image quality, but in reality they are just the same as any other company's high quality lenses, but with shite autofocus. This reality really starts to suck when you realize that there's pretty much no alternatives within the Fuji ecosystem either. It's why I eventually switched.
I don't know who you are referring to but TBH same could be said about Canon, Nikon, Sony, Phase One users. And some think they need all 4-5 different systems to make it in their domain like the OP. Which is also ridiculous...