A7ii/A7rII or Fuji X-T20

Discussion in 'Other Systems' started by mesmerized, Aug 12, 2017.

  1. mesmerized

    mesmerized Mu-43 Veteran

    427
    Jun 18, 2012
    Howdy,

    I'm going to sell my E-M5mk2 soon-ish and I'm thinking if I should pick up one of the Sony's offerings or Fuji's.

    Just to get a few things out of the way:

    - I'm asking this question here, rather than on Fuji forums or Sony forums because I believe m43 users are somewhere in the middle and can offer fairly unbiased opinions on those two manufacturers and their products
    - as far as APS-C is concerned, I'm only taking into consideration Fuji's cameras (I strongly dislike Sony's design on their APS-C cameras and nothing beats Fuji's dials)
    - the price of r2 scares the hell out of me

    Both A7mk2 and Fuji X-T20 offer a 24Mpix sensor. Sensor-size aside, I find Fuji to be more refined than Sony, but then again, I keep hearing about blurry/washy results of the X-trans sensor... I don't mind the size of Sony lenses. Primes are small enough and I don't think I'd be buying any of the G-master lenses anytime soon. On the other hand, Fuji has really good stuff out there and the 56mm f.1/2 is one hell of a lens...

    I know some of you will say that the jump from m4/3 to APS-C isn't really a big one DOF control-wise. I don't know how good dynamic range Fuji offers... Sony's A7r is supposedly superb in this department...

    Anyway, I could keep going, but... it essentially boils down to getting to know your opinion.

    Cheers.
     
  2. turbodieselvw

    turbodieselvw Mu-43 Veteran

    348
    Jun 29, 2010
    Ottawa
    Why A7ii or A7Rii? You should just get the A9.
     
  3. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    I dont like fuji. I dont like xtrans and i think FF is better. I also prefer dslr type controls over dedicated shutter speed dial and aperture rings. I also like auto focus that works.

    But Sony lenses are limited or big and expensive.

    Pick your poison. I keep m43 for light and on the move and sony for high IQ when needed (and when i can carry my big bag). Maybe Fuji is in between, but id need them to drop that nasty xtrans before id consider them.

    If had to have another system that wasnt m43, and i didnt already own the sony, i think id get a Nikon FF setup. Far better lens choices, but its not worth it to me to switch.

    Unvarnished enough for ya ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Repp

    Repp Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    950
    Jan 27, 2011
    Oak Harbor, WA
    I guess the most important question to ask yourself is what reasons are you unsatisfied with the camera you currently own, and which of the newer cameras will fix/satisfy more of those issues. Thats a question that should be asked with almost any purchase.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  5. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    I agree with @Repp@Repp . Let us know where you found your m43 gear lacking enough that its forcing you to sell it, and that'll help steer the conversation.
     
  6. mesmerized

    mesmerized Mu-43 Veteran

    427
    Jun 18, 2012
    Thanks... Emm... Did you read my post? I said: - the price of r2 scares the hell out of me... Thus, A9 is definitely out of my reach...
     
  7. mesmerized

    mesmerized Mu-43 Veteran

    427
    Jun 18, 2012
    Thanks for your replies.

    There are many reasons for that.

    1) If I were to go down the Fuji path... I find their manual controls to be what I'd like to have under my fingers
    2) Olympus's PRO level lenses are pricey (and quite sizeable, too) and I can't justify paying extra for wide aperture lenses to compensate for the smaller size of the sensor (DOF!)
    3) 16Mpix vs today's 24Mpix
    4) High-res mode is useless (for me)
    5) Sony has affordable lenses too
    6) Fuji - same here
    7) Olympus's size isn't much of a factor for me anymore as both Fuji and Sony have good primes. I will miss Oly's 75mm and 12-40 but aside from those (and perhaps 40-150, which is a beauty) I can't convince myself to invest in any other lenses from the PL/Olympus lineup (perhaps the new 45mm would change my mind if it's priced below Nocticron's price)

    Cheers
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Henk

    Henk Mu-43 Veteran

    232
    Aug 18, 2010
    the Netherlands
    I shoot Panny GX8, Sony A7r and recently Fuji X-T20. The Fuji and the 10-24mm have not yet produced files that enthuse me. The Sony is being used with my old all-manual OM-Zuiko lenses and produces amazing detailed files. If you only shoot jpg the Fuji may be interesting, the menu system is a bit odd though.
    So if you are after detailed files I'd go for the A7r. The only minus of this camera is it's loud shutter, that's why I am trying the X-T20 as the A7r mkII is too expensive for me.
     
  9. Lcrunyon

    Lcrunyon Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jun 4, 2014
    Maryland
    Loren
    So, what you are looking for is getting wider angles and shallower depth of field at a more affordable cost? Then it has to be full frame if you want to see an appreciable difference -- though you will likely lose more money in the short term by making the switch. The reality is that M4/3 lenses are priced in line with the competition's. The only way they aren't is if achieving the above is your primary objective -- which can be achieved by spending on the sensor instead of the lenses. My point is that cheaper lenses won't necessarily be as good as the Oly lenses of a higher price point, regardless of the brand. I highly doubt the 45mm Pro will be priced less than the Nocticron, nor do I think it should be.

    With Sony, I would also really consider whether they have the lenses you want. I know their lens lineup is improving, but it hasn't been progressing as well as that of the other systems.

    As for going from 16 to 24 megapixels, maybe you personally have a need for more (do you print really large or crop a lot?), but for the vast majority of people it's a complete non-issue that was merely hyped up in competitive marketing. I'm using 20mps now, but unless one of the two above issues applied, 16mps was more than enough.

    Lastly, consider renting the cameras first before taking the plunge. It's all a compromise somewhere. There are many advantages that m4/3 has over those systems that you might find yourself missing, or that the differences in the factors you did mention are not as great as you thought. I don't know how many times we've seen people throw away money, bouncing from system to system, because they're looking for the non-existent perfect system. I'm not saying that m4/3 is better for your needs, or that you shouldn't switch if it makes sense for you; just do it with careful study first.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 3
  10. Saledolce

    Saledolce Mu-43 Regular

    133
    Apr 17, 2017
    Italy
    Really? They seem to have the kit zoom... and then what? Everything else seems pricey to me. I'm looking at sony too, but the lens system seems very inconsistent yet and they are not famous for long term support and evolution of their system.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Henk

    Henk Mu-43 Veteran

    232
    Aug 18, 2010
    the Netherlands
    Like Oly is reliable? I guess you missed how they terminated the 4/3 system and let down many people who invested heavily in 4/3 glass. The EM-1 was not really a compatible replacement for the E-5.
     
  12. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    Only pentax and nikon are solid on "long term commitment" and pentax is a solid also-ran. Everyone else can be finger-wagged at. Oh, also Leica I suppose.
     
  13. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    So, what are you looking for someone to say? Sounds like you want to try one of the other systems. Go do it.
     
  14. Lcrunyon

    Lcrunyon Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jun 4, 2014
    Maryland
    Loren
    That's really not the same thing. Cannibalizing one's system in order to stay relevant with current technologies and markets is a painful but sometimes necessary thing -- one that Canon and Nikon have been resisting for a while now, to their gradual detriment. Furthermore, there was already a healthy lens selection in the 4/3 lineup -- so one could have built a legit kit with them that would have been perfectly fine even after they were discontinued. The E-M1 was an attempt to mitigate what was a necessary evil, and it was the best revival that 4/3 users could hope for, the Mk ii even more so -- to the point that those 4/3 lenses are still being sought after today for use on E-M1s.

    Sony is different. They are notorious for starting a new mount and never fully developing it before dropping it and going on to something else. Since Sony is a technology pioneer and largely driving these changes rather than being dragged into it, one can debate whether they are wise/benevolent to do so, but it doesn't change the fact that they are known to do this. I personally do think that Sony has stuck with this current mount and will likely continue to do so, but they certainly are taking their time in fleshing out their lens lineup, and still haven't done enough to alleviate people's understandable skepticism that they will make do on their promises.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. mesmerized

    mesmerized Mu-43 Veteran

    427
    Jun 18, 2012
    Sure, I wouldn't have started this thread if I didn't want to try a new system... The question is - which one? That's what I'm looking for someone to say.
     
  16. Henk

    Henk Mu-43 Veteran

    232
    Aug 18, 2010
    the Netherlands
    I know a lot of Oly shooters were not amused, especially when an Oly official stated publicly that 12MP was the maximum for 4/3 and if you needed more you should look elsewhere......
     
  17. Lcrunyon

    Lcrunyon Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jun 4, 2014
    Maryland
    Loren
    Totally understandable. Who would be pleased when their system gets discontinued? In the long view, though, it was the right decision for Olympus, and those users weren't left as high and dry as they were likely thinking at the time.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    I'm a little confused here. First let me say I'm not a Sony fan APS-C or FX. But are Sony FX bodies really that different than their APS-C bodies? A faux mirror box for the EVF, another command dial, and a dedicated exposure comp dial.

    I did a quick look on B&H, Sony primes seem to be by far the most expensive. Other than the f/1.8 50mm / 85mm and 28mm f/2.0; anything fast starts at $900 and goes up the $1800. Unless you're an adapted lens shooter I'm not seeing Sony as the best option.

    If I were chasing DOF and dynamic range on a budget I'd consider two options. Static subjects, Nikon D610. Static and moving, Nikon D800. The D610 has the narrow 39 point AF system pulled from the D7000, way to narrow for an FX frame. The D800 has the 51 point system with better frame coverage. And there are just so many older fast and cheap primes out there for the f-mount.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, USA
    You get Sony for adapting, it's the best system to use almost every FF lens in existence. You can get AF manual lenses via the Techart Pro adapter or get the various Nikon/Canon adapters for AF lenses. I'm sorry to say, but even a lowly adapted manual 50mm 1.8 lens will blow away the Olympus 25mm 1.2 Pro when it comes to DOF control on an FF body.

    Contrary to what others may think, FF DSLRs aren't going away. They're work tools. Solid and reliable. All these Sony switchers on Youtube are morons in my opinion. Don't believe the hype. I only had a brief experience with Fuji and honestly I don't really see anything special compared to M43. Same goes for Sony APS-C. Where Sony excels in is their on-sensor phase dectection. In my opinion though, M43 is the best well-rounded crop frame camera system.

    Also if you can afford it, there's nothing wrong owning two systems. It's so ridiculous how people get up-in-arms over formats. Use FF when you need shallow DOF and better DR and M43 when you need a small and competent system. My personal preference is that I prefer FF for portrait and event work and M43 for travel and portability. Also I process everything using the same work flow, so my images usually end up looking all the same at the end of the day!
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Like Like x 1
  20. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    You know @Jonathan F/2@Jonathan F/2 I was going to tag you in my comment about adapted glass. ;)

    I'll echo the right tool for the job sentiment.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1