About Turn ? - FF back to Fuji and M43

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

Hello Rob, I value your opinion greatly as you have so much experience trying and testing multiple systems. Right now I'm on the boat of staying with Olympus (I'm in the process of changing my lenses to Olympus 12-100mm f 4 Pro and Olympus 100-400mm f 5-6.3) or going with Fujifilm with the X-T4, 16-55mm f 2.8 and 100-400mm f 4.5-5.6 or (possibly) Sony a9 with Tamron 28-200mm f 2.8-5.6 and Sony 200-600mm f 5.6-6.3 (though this one is harder because of budget constraints, I may have to wait a few months to be able to afford the Sony lens).

Could you please help me with some information:
*How does the AF compare between X-T3/4 and E-M1X/1.2? As I have a big interest in wildlife (I know it's not the same as motorsports since it's more sporadic and erratic) I am looking for an AF that is more confident and solid, if possible.
*Have you tried the Fujifilm Pre-Capture and how it compares to Olympus Pro Capture, it's one of the biggest interest I have for getting the right moment with birds (which Sony doesn't have and I am having trouble convincing myself going for because of that), I know Fujifilm has a more limited buffer for Pre-Capture compare to Olympus but what about the performance of the camera when using it (Olympus seems to slow down in EVF refresh rate and performance Pro-Capture is active).
*I found that the high ISO IQ limit I'm finding most comfortable with is ISO 3.200 on my E-M1.3 (ISO 6.400 is doable but has a significant small detail penalty like fur and feather and gets quite desaturated with blending of colors especially in more shadowy areas), what is the comfortable max ISO that you have found on your Fujifilm X-T3/X-S10?
*My biggest worry with X-T4 (which is the only one I can really accept because I want the IBIS and I would love an EVF upgrade not a sidegrade from E-M1.3) is the front grip, it looks way too small to hold comfortable the XF 100-400mm f 4.5-5.6 comfortably for a whole day (for wildlife trips). How are you handling such a heavy lens? I can't find anywhere in the market a make-shift 3rd party grip that gives a proper grip to grab on to.

This is less of a question and more of a ponder, I am a RAW shooter because I want to maximize the IQ I can get out of M4/3 and it feels quite needed, to learn the limitations of the system (but that's up to an individual's needs) but if IQ from the X-Trans would be higher I could go from RAW to JPEG shooting? Though I would find it difficult to dial back on editing because I always force myself to do better than "before".

(I have looked into ALL the other systems and the only ones that fit my interests and needs are Olympus and Fujifilm. Canon (too expensive), Nikon (no native +200mm), Sony (no Pre-Buffer capabilities), Panasonic L (no native +200mm))

 

[stevedo]

Hello Rob, I value your opinion greatly as you have so much experience trying and testing multiple systems. Right now I'm on the boat of staying with Olympus (I'm in the process of changing my lenses to Olympus 12-100mm f 4 Pro and Olympus 100-400mm f 5-6.3) or going with Fujifilm with the X-T4, 16-55mm f 2.8 and 100-400mm f 4.5-5.6 or (possibly) Sony a9 with Tamron 28-200mm f 2.8-5.6 and Sony 200-600mm f 5.6-6.3 (though this one is harder because of budget constraints, I may have to wait a few months to be able to afford the Sony lens).

Could you please help me with some information:
*How does the AF compare between X-T3/4 and E-M1X/1.2? As I have a big interest in wildlife (I know it's not the same as motorsports since it's more sporadic and erratic) I am looking for an AF that is more confident and solid, if possible.
*Have you tried the Fujifilm Pre-Capture and how it compares to Olympus Pro Capture, it's one of the biggest interest I have for getting the right moment with birds (which Sony doesn't have and I am having trouble convincing myself going for because of that), I know Fujifilm has a more limited buffer for Pre-Capture compare to Olympus but what about the performance of the camera when using it (Olympus seems to slow down in EVF refresh rate and performance Pro-Capture is active).
*I found that the high ISO IQ limit I'm finding most comfortable with is ISO 3.200 on my E-M1.3 (ISO 6.400 is doable but has a significant small detail penalty like fur and feather and gets quite desaturated with blending of colors especially in more shadowy areas), what is the comfortable max ISO that you have found on your Fujifilm X-T3/X-S10?
*My biggest worry with X-T4 (which is the only one I can really accept because I want the IBIS and I would love an EVF upgrade not a sidegrade from E-M1.3) is the front grip, it looks way too small to hold comfortable the XF 100-400mm f 4.5-5.6 comfortably for a whole day (for wildlife trips). How are you handling such a heavy lens? I can't find anywhere in the market a make-shift 3rd party grip that gives a proper grip to grab on to.

This is less of a question and more of a ponder, I am a RAW shooter because I want to maximize the IQ I can get out of M4/3 and it feels quite needed, to learn the limitations of the system (but that's up to an individual's needs) but if IQ from the X-Trans would be higher I could go from RAW to JPEG shooting? Though I would find it difficult to dial back on editing because I always force myself to do better than "before".

(I have looked into ALL the other systems and the only ones that fit my interests and needs are Olympus and Fujifilm. Canon (too expensive), Nikon (no native +200mm), Sony (no Pre-Buffer capabilities), Panasonic L (no native +200mm))

Why not try something like DxO DeepPRIME with your Olympus RAW files (assuming you haven't already). You could easily shoot at ISO6400 all day long. If you're happy with Olympus at ISO 3200 then Olympus plus DeepPRIME at 6400 will be no problem at all and should close any gap to Fuji when it comes to perceived IQ. Note that DeepPRIME does not work on Fuji files.

I know I'm not Rob and I have no direct experience with Fuji cameras but I do think that our Olympus cameras have the most complete feature set of any system. Olympus AF, although not class leading, is also pretty good. With software like DxO DeepPRIME to reduce noise and upsizing tools such as GigaPixel AI I see no real need to change systems for the foreseeable future unless the setup you currently have really does not enable you to get the initial shot.

 

[Robstar1963]

@L0n3Gr3yW0lf
At work on lunch so can only address some of your points right now
Have just bought a Smallrig bracket for the XT4 - huge improvement ref grip with bigger lenses
I only have the 50-140f2.8 at the moment and don’t have the 100-400 currently but the grip is that much better with the Smallrig that I would be confident using with the 100-400
Its not a big grip and extends the base for somewhere to put your little finger and has a sculpted front grip
Has a key included for the tripod screw - the key being retained magnetically to the base of the grip so always to hand - good design
Has a removable end plate which if fitted will restrict the articulated screen - either remove it or grip can be bought slightly cheaper without the end plate
Good access to the battery which is still easy to change with the grip fitted
The battery grip for the Xt4 is larger (deeper) than the one for the XT3 and for me it has grown too big making the overall package with the grip too tall - this being due to the newer bigger 235 batteries being placed in the grip vertically on their side
Luckily the battery capacity of the XT4 is much better than the XT3 so a battery grip is not required - it was almost a necessity for a day shooting with the XT3 which I think may have had the batteries horizontally ?? in the grip which made it shorter and a better size as a combined package

edit - ive already mentioned AF between XT3 and EM1X in one of my posts above - very basic notes but can’t provide a better analysis and have not yet used the XT4

 

[fortwodriver]

I keep trying Fuji cameras. A friend of mine is a self-proclaimed Fuji evangelist. Yet, every time, I feel like the AF is not as sure-footed as my E-M1mkiii. It feels different - less assured than even my old E-M1.

 

[Robstar1963]

I keep trying Fuji cameras. A friend of mine is a self-proclaimed Fuji evangelist. Yet, every time, I feel like the AF is not as sure-footed as my E-M1mkiii. It feels different - less assured than even my old E-M1.

Hi @fortwodriver
Thats a little bit of a vague comment
what Fuji cameras have you actually tried / used ?

 

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

Why not try something like DxO DeepPRIME with your Olympus RAW files (assuming you haven't already). You could easily shoot at ISO6400 all day long. If you're happy with Olympus at ISO 3200 then Olympus plus DeepPRIME at 6400 will be no problem at all and should close any gap to Fuji when it comes to perceived IQ. Note that DeepPRIME does not work on Fuji files.

I know I'm not Rob and I have no direct experience with Fuji cameras but I do think that our Olympus cameras have the most complete feature set of any system. Olympus AF, although not class leading, is also pretty good. With software like DxO DeepPRIME to reduce noise and upsizing tools such as GigaPixel AI I see no real need to change systems for the foreseeable future unless the setup you currently have really does not enable you to get the initial shot.

Thanks, I have been using Topaz DeNoise AI since October and I do have DxO but I haven't tried it beyond a few tests (mostly because learning a new UI is taking me more time than I thought). Where I get quite frustrated is once I hit ISO 6.400 the RAW files become very rigid for editing, shadows can't be hosted without getting extreme blotchiness and noise, and turning down highlights brings the entire exposure down including the shadows, on normal .ORF files and on HHHR/HR files (which should have more latitude than normal files). I haven't done deep tests on DeepPrime (sorry I just couldn't help myself ) but on Topaz DeNoise AI in Low Light, the setting seems to smear smooth texture which doesn't help with improving the look of the image (using the other settings it works just fine 99% of the time).

@L0n3Gr3yW0lf
At work on lunch so can only address some of your points right now
Have just bought a Smallrig bracket for the XT4 - huge improvement ref grip with bigger lenses
I only have the 50-140f2.8 at the moment and don’t have the 100-400 currently but the grip is that much better with the Smallrig that I would be confident using with the 100-400
Its not a big grip and extends the base for somewhere to put your little finger and has a sculpted front grip
Has a key included for the tripod screw - the key being retained magnetically to the base of the grip so always to hand - good design
Has a removable end plate which if fitted will restrict the articulated screen - either remove it or grip can be bought slightly cheaper without the end plate
Good access to the battery which is still easy to change with the grip fitted
The battery grip for the Xt4 is larger (deeper) than the one for the XT3 and for me it has grown too big making the overall package with the grip too tall - this being due to the newer bigger 235 batteries being placed in the grip vertically on their side
Luckily the battery capacity of the XT4 is much better than the XT3 so a battery grip is not required - it was almost a necessity for a day shooting with the XT3 which I think may have had the batteries horizontally ?? in the grip which made it shorter and a better size as a combined package

edit - ive already mentioned AF between XT3 and EM1X in one of my posts above - very basic notes but can’t provide a better analysis and have not yet used the XT4

Thank you, it's good to know there are options to improving the grip. (When I had the Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm f 2.8-3.5 and used it on the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark I the 1.1 KGs, with the Olympus MMF-3, was quite comfortable and easy to hold on given the size of the grip).
I do use an L bracket on the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III to get the extra verticle space for my pinky, which makes the camera so much more secure and comfortable to use, though I use only the bottom part since I don't even own a tripod (anymore, had only one and broke it a week ago) and I wouldn't bother with the side piece anyways.
I am happy to hear that the Fujifilm X-T4 gets a bigger battery

 

[fortwodriver]

Hi @fortwodriver
Thats a little bit of a vague comment
what Fuji cameras have you actually tried / used ?

So far the XT4, XS10, XT100, XE4, XA7, XT200, X100V. The XT4 was the best of them all but still felt sluggish. I couldn't find a single reason to want one over my Olympus gear. My old Canon 20d, with it's relatively simple 9 focus points seem to be more sure-footed than the XS10, which surprised me.

AF tracking seemed really dodgy to me, too.

Even with all of the film simulation options, I come from film and remember most of the colour emulsions pretty well, but the emulations seem vague and more of a marketing gimmick than a useful tool.

Playing around with them, though made me curious - the GFX line are essentially medium format cameras with higher megapixels and moving way more data around in real-time. The APS-C cameras should have better AF, much better tracking, and be more responsive, but they don't and they aren't.

 

[melanie.ylang]

I keep trying Fuji cameras. A friend of mine is a self-proclaimed Fuji evangelist. Yet, every time, I feel like the AF is not as sure-footed as my E-M1mkiii. It feels different - less assured than even my old E-M1.

I've had a parallel experience, but with Fujifilm vs Panasonic: I love the Fuji film simulations, JPEGs and image quality, but prefer the Panasonic package in every other way. Not to mention I'm already invested, with many mu43 lenses (3 zooms, 5 primes). At this point in my experimentation, I think the only Fuji body I could "move up" to would be the X-S10 to benefit from IBIS, size and ergonomics.

@Robstar1963 what decided you to sell the X-S10, was it primarily the preference for classic Fuji control dials? Did it otherwise do what you wanted it to, or as well as your mu43 gear? I've seen your amazing motorsport work, and I like to do a little of that also, but I tinker with many genres of photography. I know that many argue that there isn't much between sensor sizes, but to my eye the Fuji files are better.

 

[richjac]

Glad to see you are saving some of us from having to try out other systems
My mu-43 kit is complete for what I want need now
I am glad you keep coming back to Fuji as i hope to dip my toes into that system at the end of this year if I can save some funds, proably XT-4 and one lens. Since they dont make a one stop solution like the Oly 12-100 or Pany 14-140 i am not sure what zoom to get. I use the long end mostly and do not really like the Fuji 18-135, looks a bit soft to me. Anyway plenty of time to look into that.

If you dont mind me asking what happened to uour Oly 12-100 as i have not heard of any problems with that one yet

I have used several Fuji bodies with assorted lenses. They are built like a tank and as a result are heavier than I lIke. Specifically the 18-135, 16-55, even the 18-55 zooms. I never tried the new 16-80, but it gets very mixed reviews. I’d say the strength of Fuji is their primes.

 

[richjac]

So far the XT4, XS10, XT100, XE4, XA7, XT200, X100V. The XT4 was the best of them all but still felt sluggish. I couldn't find a single reason to want one over my Olympus gear. My old Canon 20d, with it's relatively simple 9 focus points seem to be more sure-footed than the XS10, which surprised me.

AF tracking seemed really dodgy to me, too.

Even with all of the film simulation options, I come from film and remember most of the colour emulsions pretty well, but the emulations seem vague and more of a marketing gimmick than a useful tool.

Playing around with them, though made me curious - the GFX line are essentially medium format cameras with higher megapixels and moving way more data around in real-time. The APS-C cameras should have better AF, much better tracking, and be more responsive, but they don't and they aren't.

i feel right at home on this forum. I have owned or used the XT10, XT3, XE3, X100F, X100V, XT20 - so you have me beat! If anyone had an XS10 or XE4 kit in stock I would probably buy one now. I love their film sims and high ISO performance, and 35mm f/1.4 lens. Ergonomics are so-so.

 

[ac12]

Kinda in a similar boat.
I shoot high school sports, so night games under lights and in the dim gym.
I'm looking at a trade off: FF, Z6ii, or a denoise sw for my m4/3.
FF = COST, I figure about $3k, for Z6ii + FTZ2, + 24-120/4, and use my current 70-200/4.
m4/3 = cost and TIME. I need a graphics accelerator card for the various denoise sw, which are really expensive now. But I also have to shoot in RAW and process and convert all the pics Here it is the TIME that I am concerned with. I shoot JPG to shorten my processing time.

I have been leaning to FF.
FF is a one-time cost vs. the denoise SW processing time is essentially for forever/as long as I am shooting sports in dim lighting.

 

[Ghostbuggy]

Fujifilm released a short video preview of things to come, the X-System was announced ten years ago and the company is doing a celebration campaign. In addition the next X-Summit, an event where new products and updates are being announced, will be held in May. This event will include the presentation of the first 5th generation X-Mount camera, which will be a further evolution based on the expertise they gained over the last ten years. While no further details have been spoiled, rumors are talking since months about a possible X-H1 successor.

 

[jhawk1000]

All the differences in feel, features, prestige, and price pale for me because the one area that I need is with my m4/3 system. It is weight and reach. It is light even with 400mm equivalent lenses. It has a reach with 100-400mm of an equivalent of 800mm. Surely, I want to have every camera I hold but I am past that spending for spending sake. Even the extra time needed to extract the best from low light images is less expensive and not too long in time to defeat the weight and reach. I still have a couple of Nikon FF and trust me, I would never go back to that as a full-time system. I suspect my wife will pry my Olympus camera of choice from my cold, dead hands when it is my time.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

All the differences in feel, features, prestige, and price pale for me because the one area that I need is with my m4/3 system. It is weight and reach. It is light even with 400mm equivalent lenses. It has a reach with 100-400mm of an equivalent of 800mm. Surely, I want to have every camera I hold but I am past that spending for spending sake. Even the extra time needed to extract the best from low light images is less expensive and not too long in time to defeat the weight and reach. I still have a couple of Nikon FF and trust me, I would never go back to that as a full-time system. I suspect my wife will pry my Olympus camera of choice from my cold, dead hands when it is my time.

No need to pry. Asked to be buried with it!

 

[retiredfromlife]

Currently I am scratching the Fuji itch with the X-T4 and Tamron 18-300 [Fuji 70-300 was not available when I purchased this kit]
The only Fuji lens I have is the 18-55 kit lens.

Since there is no travel currently I am limited to my close up photography of insects etc.

Now some of my observations may be due to the Tamron lens not the Fuji system as a whole, plus my lack of understanding of setting the Fuji up for my use.

My main observations so far are.
The Fuji small focus point size works far better for close up work than the Oly fine/small square because it always keeps it's size unlike the Oly fine/small square the changed back to the bigger single square if you tap the rear screen rather than move it with the joy stick, if that makes sense.

The Fuji stabilization is no where near Olympus or Panasonic for my use case hand holding for close up work. Now I know I am not using a Fuji lens that may give dual stailization, but both Olympus and Panasonic do far better with just OIS or IBIS.

The play back zoom magnification is not as great as with Olympus & Panasonic so I cant judge sharpness of shots taken for close up work. With Olympus a shot has to be pretty good fully zoomed in on the camera or it gets deleted straight away.
So with this in mind I wont be purchasing the 80mm macro lens yet and just use my zooms and close up filters for testing purposes.

Low light,
I have taken the X-T4 with the Tamron 18-300 and my Oly EM1.3 & 12-100 together on some short bush walks near home to compare the systems.
The Oly lens is sharper, but I do like the range of the Tamron and for most cases for general shots the Tamron is sharp enough. But when the sun starts to go down I start to have problems with the Fuji setup. I start with both system set to ISO 400. With the Oly kit I have no trouble with the lowering light levels on the walks, but with the Fuji kit I quickly have to increase the ISO to 6400 and still cant get sharp enough shots to keep. How much of this is due to the Tamron lens I do not know.

I have now purchased a SmallRig cage for the X-T4. It effectively give me a grip on both sides of the camera and makes it far better to hold but does increase the weight a bit.

Would love to try the Fuji 100-400 but cant find anyone who rents Fuji gear. There is no real difference between the Fuji 100-400 and Olympus 100-400 is size and weight so it would be a great comparison.

At this stage I cant afford to purchase more Fuji gear so cant really do a good comparison to what I have. But I hope to use this time to learn enough about the Fuji gear to be in a better position when I can afford to get some Fuji lenses.

Anyway I will just sit back and joy the ride with my current Fuji kit.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Currently I am scratching the Fuji itch with the X-T4 and Tamron 18-300 [Fuji 70-300 was not available when I purchased this kit]
The only Fuji lens I have is the 18-55 kit lens.

Since there is no travel currently I am limited to my close up photography of insects etc.

Now some of my observations may be due to the Tamron lens not the Fuji system as a whole, plus my lack of understanding of setting the Fuji up for my use.

My main observations so far are.
The Fuji small focus point size works far better for close up work than the Oly fine/small square because it always keeps it's size unlike the Oly fine/small square the changed back to the bigger single square if you tap the rear screen rather than move it with the joy stick, if that makes sense.

The Fuji stabilization is no where near Olympus or Panasonic for my use case hand holding for close up work. Now I know I am not using a Fuji lens that may give dual stailization, but both Olympus and Panasonic do far better with just OIS or IBIS.

The play back zoom magnification is not as great as with Olympus & Panasonic so I cant judge sharpness of shots taken for close up work. With Olympus a shot has to be pretty good fully zoomed in on the camera or it gets deleted straight away.
So with this in mind I wont be purchasing the 80mm macro lens yet and just use my zooms and close up filters for testing purposes.

Low light,
I have taken the X-T4 with the Tamron 18-300 and my Oly EM1.3 & 12-100 together on some short bush walks near home to compare the systems.
The Oly lens is sharper, but I do like the range of the Tamron and for most cases for general shots the Tamron is sharp enough. But when the sun starts to go down I start to have problems with the Fuji setup. I start with both system set to ISO 400. With the Oly kit I have no trouble with the lowering light levels on the walks, but with the Fuji kit I quickly have to increase the ISO to 6400 and still cant get sharp enough shots to keep. How much of this is due to the Tamron lens I do not know.

I have now purchased a SmallRig cage for the X-T4. It effectively give me a grip on both sides of the camera and makes it far better to hold but does increase the weight a bit.

Would love to try the Fuji 100-400 but cant find anyone who rents Fuji gear. There is no real difference between the Fuji 100-400 and Olympus 100-400 is size and weight so it would be a great comparison.

At this stage I cant afford to purchase more Fuji gear so cant really do a good comparison to what I have. But I hope to use this time to learn enough about the Fuji gear to be in a better position when I can afford to get some Fuji lenses.

Anyway I will just sit back and joy the ride with my current Fuji kit.

As one who always wonders what it would be like to shoot Fuji, I always appreciate these shared experiences.

Something I’ve come to really realize with M43 is how in many situations, you can get away with not raising the ISO, but instead just lower shutter speeds and lean on the IBIS. In situations where you want to freeze motion, this doesn’t work, and it’s a use case where something else might be preferred. But for a still situation, it works extremely well, and can often be used to great effect (like to get motion blur on people in a public setting). I took an EM5 and the 9mm BCL (f8!) into a low-lit indoor environment, and managed to get great shots at around 1s exposure. Another format would maybe perform better by raising ISO instead, and not going so low with the shutter, but for the situation I was in, either option would probably have worked.

 

[MacBook]

I recently got the Fuji X-T4 and added the XF 16-80mm lens after initially trying the XF 18-55. I made the switch principally for the extended range and OIS. It seems the dual stabilization works quite well.

I have the XF 70-300mm on order, but it may be many months before that appears, there must be a whole crate full of them somewhere waiting to be unloaded. I am really interested to see how that lens and the 1.4x teleconverter work (FOV equivalent would be 630mm as opposed to the 800mm on the Panasonic Leica 100-400mm).

I have to admit to liking the aperture ring and ISO, shutter speed, and exposure compensation dials. The EVF is very nice (for a glasses wearer), the shutter action is quite nice, and the shutter sound just right. The 16-80mm lens has a very smooth zoom function.

The Tamron 18-300mm performance does not seem unrealistic. The lens is a little more than half the cost of the Olympus 12-100mm and twice the focal range (16.7x as opposed to 8.3x), while weighing only about 2 ounces more (59g). I was tempted by it, but have decided to wait for the 70-300mm.

 

[retiredfromlife]

I recently got the Fuji X-T4 and added the XF 16-80mm lens after initially trying the XF 18-55. I made the switch principally for the extended range and OIS. It seems the dual stabilization works quite well.

I have the XF 70-300mm on order, but it may be many months before that appears, there must be a whole crate full of them somewhere waiting to be unloaded. I am really interested to see how that lens and the 1.4x teleconverter work (FOV equivalent would be 630mm as opposed to the 800mm on the Panasonic Leica 100-400mm).

I have to admit to liking the aperture ring and ISO, shutter speed, and exposure compensation dials. The EVF is very nice (for a glasses wearer), the shutter action is quite nice, and the shutter sound just right. The 16-80mm lens has a very smooth zoom function.

The Tamron 18-300mm performance does not seem unrealistic. The lens is a little more than half the cost of the Olympus 12-100mm and twice the focal range (16.7x as opposed to 8.3x), while weighing only about 2 ounces more (59g). I was tempted by it, but have decided to wait for the 70-300mm.

No 70-300 where I come from as well, and the shop had no idea when they may get some. Same for zooms for other brands as well.
I will be interesting to hear your thoughts on the 70-300 & TC when you finally get your copy.

 

[Vermont3133]

Guys, the 70-300 Fuji is just excellent!
And it just gets better with the 1.4 TC.
Once fitted I find no reason to revert to the basic lens. A possible slight drop in IQ but the extra reach is a real bonus!

 

[Ghostbuggy]

I also heard very good things about the 1.4 TC in combination with the 70-300. The lens however is hard to find anywhere, last year Fujifilm has released a warning about certain products suffering from supply issues and I think the lens was on that list.