Switching to Fuji

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
7,488
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
I've tried Fuji but didn't gel with it. Handling not to my taste and XTrans seems like a technology with downsides and no upsides. Raw processing is less than ideal unless you use specific PP tools. LR is not the best for it and it's my go-to software.
 

Gromit

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2017
Messages
863
Location
Lincoln UK
Real Name
Richard
I've tried Fuji but didn't gel with it. Handling not to my taste and XTrans seems like a technology with downsides and no upsides. Raw processing is less than ideal unless you use specific PP tools. LR is not the best for it and it's my go-to software.
From someone who's dipped in and out of the Fuji ecosystem since 2012, I agree. Excepting the V, I've owned all the X100 cameras plus X-Pro1&2, X-T 1&2 and the X-H1. All good cameras - one or 2 even great (X-H1 and X100F IME) - but the overriding elephant in the room has been that god-awful X-Trans sensor. I really cannot see what it brings to the party.
 

mawz

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
227
I'm actually just boxing up my X-T1 and X-T2 right now, they go in tomorrow for an E-M5 II.

Why?

First off, they're my secondary system these days. I have a FF body (Z5) and I just don't think that there's enough separation between the Fuji stuff and my FF stuff to make sense. Plus the Fuji bodies seem to be growing like the Panasonic ones did. There's good and bad to that.

Secondly, Fuji colour is pretty hit & miss for me. I love the greens and the B&W conversions are second to none, but the blue rendering is weak compared to my Z5 or any of the Oly's I've owned.

Third? If you are used to the level of computational photography that Oly or Panasonic deliver on recent bodies, you'll be unhappy with Fuji, only the GFX100(s) do multishot in any real way.

Fourth? The 12-40 Pro. Fuji's 16-50 is a massive beast in comparison and not as good, and the 16-80 is no match for the 12-100 in range or performance. Thankfully I held onto my 12-40 when I returned the E-M1.2 I dabbled with earlier this year (ended up with that Z5 instead, which works for the uses I wanted it for, I still want another E-M1 series eventually)

Fifth? The 9-18. Still unmatched in any system.

Sixth? The Fuji traditional UI is something I really like, but I realized I don't use it much. And those bloody chiclet buttons suck (Not as much an issue on the X-S10 though)

Seventh? The IQ differences between the 20MP m43 bodies and the 24/26MP Fuji's is pretty small, and with multi-shot will regularly land on m43 as the better performer.

That said, Fuji remains the only company to take APS-C seriously anymore, the lineup is generally excellent and also reasonably priced and if you are a 3:2 shooter you'll pick up significant IQ going to APS-C (since the jump is a fair bit bigger in terms of effective sensor size than 4:3 m43 to 3:2 APS-C is).

You are choosing a great system, but be aware Fuji is a fairly different system. Also be aware that Fuji's lenses often prioritize nice rendering over absolute optical performance. The Fujicrons in particular are generally inferior optically to the equivalent f1.8 Oly's, but do render gorgeously.
 

WT21

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
7,298
Location
Boston
I'm actually just boxing up my X-T1 and X-T2 right now, they go in tomorrow for an E-M5 II.
I'm pretty bored lately, and have been considering trying something else. I've been bouncing between the X-S10 and the Z5. I was about to pull the trigger on the X-S10 to get better OOC jpgs and more resolution, but the 16-80 reviews are not spectacular, and neither really is the 23/2, which are the two lenses I was targeting. The Z5 + 24-70/4 look solid, but no small fast(ish) 35. Frustrating.

You like your Z?
 

Darmok N Jalad

Temba, his aperture wide
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
1,631
Location
Tanagra (not really)
I'm actually just boxing up my X-T1 and X-T2 right now, they go in tomorrow for an E-M5 II.

Why?

First off, they're my secondary system these days. I have a FF body (Z5) and I just don't think that there's enough separation between the Fuji stuff and my FF stuff to make sense. Plus the Fuji bodies seem to be growing like the Panasonic ones did. There's good and bad to that.

Secondly, Fuji colour is pretty hit & miss for me. I love the greens and the B&W conversions are second to none, but the blue rendering is weak compared to my Z5 or any of the Oly's I've owned.

Third? If you are used to the level of computational photography that Oly or Panasonic deliver on recent bodies, you'll be unhappy with Fuji, only the GFX100(s) do multishot in any real way.

Fourth? The 12-40 Pro. Fuji's 16-50 is a massive beast in comparison and not as good, and the 16-80 is no match for the 12-100 in range or performance. Thankfully I held onto my 12-40 when I returned the E-M1.2 I dabbled with earlier this year (ended up with that Z5 instead, which works for the uses I wanted it for, I still want another E-M1 series eventually)

Fifth? The 9-18. Still unmatched in any system.

Sixth? The Fuji traditional UI is something I really like, but I realized I don't use it much. And those bloody chiclet buttons suck (Not as much an issue on the X-S10 though)

Seventh? The IQ differences between the 20MP m43 bodies and the 24/26MP Fuji's is pretty small, and with multi-shot will regularly land on m43 as the better performer.

That said, Fuji remains the only company to take APS-C seriously anymore, the lineup is generally excellent and also reasonably priced and if you are a 3:2 shooter you'll pick up significant IQ going to APS-C (since the jump is a fair bit bigger in terms of effective sensor size than 4:3 m43 to 3:2 APS-C is).

You are choosing a great system, but be aware Fuji is a fairly different system. Also be aware that Fuji's lenses often prioritize nice rendering over absolute optical performance. The Fujicrons in particular are generally inferior optically to the equivalent f1.8 Oly's, but do render gorgeously.
I do appreciate this breakdown. Fuji is really the only other system I have interest in outside of M43, but I can tell it’s quite the departure from what I’m now used to. I don’t fully understand sensor tech, but it sounds like Fuji goes a different direction and folks don’t elaborate on the differences.
 

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,267
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
but no small fast(ish) 35.


Some will appear, imo. Nikon are listing a "40mm compact" on their lens roadmap but exactly what it will be , I'm not sure.

I'm tempted by the Z5 as well. It's a nice camera in the hand and not really any bigger than the G9. Very good value. The 35/1.8 lens isn't small, but it's also not exactly huge, I'd probably go that way, and perhaps the 24-200 as a do-it-all weather sealed landscape lens.


I'd also love an Xpro3 , purely for the control and ergo layouts. That's the big appeal with Fuji, for me. The style and tactility.
 

mawz

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
227
I do appreciate this breakdown. Fuji is really the only other system I have interest in outside of M43, but I can tell it’s quite the departure from what I’m now used to. I don’t fully understand sensor tech, but it sounds like Fuji goes a different direction and folks don’t elaborate on the differences.

Fuji doesn't do anything interesting in terms of the sensor itself, they use off the shelf Sony sensors (the 26MP sensor is the APS-C variant of the 102MP mini-MF sensor and the 61MP FF sensor).

They use a non-standard colour filter array, which they call X-Trans. It gives up colour resolution at low ISO for data stability at high ISO's. The reduction in colour resolution also reduces colour moire effects. It should also deliver cleaner high ISO than Bayer, but that's never actually been observed outside of theory.

The downsides are that good RAW conversions are more difficult and less well optimized than Bayer. That means that you need to be pickier about RAW converter choices. Also there's a larger reduction in red and blue channel resolution compared to green (the source of both the weird foliage artifacts in the early RAW converters and my issues with blue rendering).

I consider X-Trans to be an artifact of Fuji being unable to admit error. They've proven with both the inexpensive X-A and X-Tx00 bodies and the high-end GFX that they can deliver Fuji's colour signature on Bayer, and aside from low colour moire none of the claimed benefits of X-Trans have ever been demonstrated in reality.
 

AaronE

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
801
Location
Idaho
I just picked up a used Xt-3 and the 16-55mm lens. The 16-55mm lens is a beast. I think it weighs more than my entire m4/3 kit. The view finder in the Xt-3 is to die for. Also after just one day with the camera the menu system is more intuitive to me than Olympus. Also the font is like 4 times larger. I can actually see it. Going to have to get use to no-IBIS. Keeping my Pen-f and most of my m4/3 lenses for now.
 

mawz

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
227
I'm pretty bored lately, and have been considering trying something else. I've been bouncing between the X-S10 and the Z5. I was about to pull the trigger on the X-S10 to get better OOC jpgs and more resolution, but the 16-80 reviews are not spectacular, and neither really is the 23/2, which are the two lenses I was targeting. The Z5 + 24-70/4 look solid, but no small fast(ish) 35. Frustrating.

You like your Z?

I love the Z5. The ergonomics are great, the EVF is hands down the best available in the price range and the IQ is stellar. I did buy it for two uses, backpacking (which it probably will never really get used for due to system size although I do have the surprisingly excellent 24-50 muffin lens) and adaptation of classic and manual focus lenses for which it's excellent. S lenses are on par with m.Zuiko PRO lenses for quality. For the current price, nothing matches it unless you need an action camera.

It's not an action camera with the slower sensor and 4.5fps max frame rate, but AF is a lot better than the rumours suggest.

The 35/1.8 S is a world-beater, but small it is not. Of course, the Z5 isn't small either, it's noticeably but not massively larger than an E-M1.2/3, so it's much larger than the X-S10. That pays off in terms of ergonomics, but you do have to haul the extra weight.

One thing worth noting is Nikon's Picture Control system is wildly more powerful than Fuji's Film Simulations, although the starting points are not as good. Fuji nailed the base profiles, but customizability is very limited and you can't trade settings. With Nikon you can customize a lot more to get the look you want AND you can trade the Picture Control files with others (Nikon sadly has not done anything to take advantage of their Picture Control system beyond publishing a PC/Mac editor for the files).

The 24-70/4 is a gem as well, and a compact 40 is coming by Q1 2022.

With regards to the Fuji's, the 23/2 is actually not bad at all except at close focus, but like the other Fujicrons it's about being small, reasonably priced and pleasant in rendering rather than absolutely tack sharp. It's the weakest of the 4 Fujicrons (much as the 17/1.8 is the weakest of Olympus's inexpensive f1.8's)
 
Last edited:

AaronE

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
801
Location
Idaho
Here is an image of the Pen-f with Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 and the Fuji XT-3 with the 16-55mm f/2.8. Almost the exact full frame range on both lenses, 24-80mm on the Olympus and 24-82mm on the Fuji.

20210503-IMG_8517.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
439
Location
Hoher Fläming, Germany
Real Name
Phill
I just picked up a used Xt-3 and the 16-55mm lens. The 16-55mm lens is a beast. I think it weighs more than my entire m4/3 kit. The view finder in the Xt-3 is to die for. Also after just one day with the camera the menu system is more intuitive to me than Olympus. Also the font is like 4 times larger. I can actually see it. Going to have to get use to no-IBIS. Keeping my Pen-f and most of my m4/3 lenses for now.
Wow that lens is really a beast, I already think the 12-40 Pro is pretty big and heavy - a reason why I'm not using it that much anymore. However in terms of flexibility and capability the lens of course is awesome, especially due to the minimum focus range.

Personally I wanted to dive into Fuji with either an X-Pro2 or X-Pro3. I went, surprisingly, however with an X100V, which still gives a great insight into the system. I also like the menu system a bit better, but not as good as I thought I would. While I like being able to fully customize the Q-Menu (the counterpart to Oly's Super Control Panel) and the My Menu, I would like to have an option to disable certain Film Simulations which I most likely would never use. On my Pen-F I can control which Art Filters, Color Profiles and Mono Profiles I can see and select, those I never touch can be easily disabled in the menu. On Fuji you always have every single one visible, which doesn't sound much of an issue, however when you quickly want to scroll or rotate through the Film Simulations, the ones you don't use simply bloat up the whole process. I also kind of miss the short infos the Olympus menu gave about every setting, it was often enough so you don't need to look at the manual, on Fuji you don't get any infos on the menu.

I also very, very much agree to the IBIS impression: I never noticed how natural and "given" the IBIS got for me on my Olympus cameras, until I started using the X100V. Shutter speeds of 1/10s, even 1/5s or in rare instances even half a second was doable with my Pen-F and the 17mm lenses - on the X100V those are out of the question. If I lean onto something and manage to fully stabilize the camera and my body, 1/10s might be somewhat possible, but for typical free handed shots, everything below 1/25th is pretty much set to fail. Of course I can increase the ISO to counter that, however than I get more noise and DXO's impressive noise reduction isn't an option due to the X-Trans sensor.

For now, the glimpse into Fujifilm which I got thanks to the X100V was enough to strengthen my idea of sticking with Micro Four Thirds, many things which really got me interested in Fuji didn't turn out to be so great as I thought they would. Last but not least, and to return to your lens comparison, lenses for the X-System are a critical point:
For example one of my most favourite lenses, the 75mm f1.8 is still fairly light and compact. For Fuji the closest counterpart would either be the Fujifilm 90mm f2 or the Viltrox 85mm f1.8: The Oly weights just over 300g and even with the bulky hood attached it still is shorter than the Fuji without hood - and the 90mm weights around 540g. The Viltrox is also close to 500g and even a tad longer than the Fuji.
 

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,267
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
I came across a new Xpro2 and 23mm - the graphite special edition kit - in a store the other day. It's been sitting there literally for years with little interest. I'm very tempted, but I can't decide, lol.
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
439
Location
Hoher Fläming, Germany
Real Name
Phill
I bid on a couple of X-Pro2 Graphite auctio s on ebay over the last couple of months, but ended up empty handed. It's a nice looking and for sure capable kit, depending on the price they are asking, it might really be worth a thought...
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2017
Messages
1,067
I am not a Fuji shooter but after all the hullabaloos with oly and my investment in their glass I have been looking at other body's that I can use (with my lens collection) and came across this fella whom I really think is more about the end product than anything else and thought I would post in case anyone is interested.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom