To try out a Fujifilm X-T20: should I or shouldn't I?

Joined
Jun 23, 2017
Messages
1,473
Oh boy, another one of these threads in our favourite forum! I've arrived here after reading so many articles an reviews online about this model - which is selling used for around $500 in Australia, with careful looking.

Over the past few years I've owned and sold X-E1, X-E2, X-T1, X-T100; I still have my second copy of an X30, which is my 'best compromise' daily carry compact. As a 100% JPEG shooter who edits only on a phone or tablet, it's the film simulations which keep me circling, and - more specifically - the film recipes based on the simulations which really interest me.

Aside from that, I know my way around the menus reasonably well, so there's not much of a learning curve.

The only X lens I've used is the 18-55mm with X-T100, and I didn't love it.

I still have a Roxsen FX-FD focal reducer ready to play with my Canon FD lenses, which is getting to the crux of it: tweakable film simulations + legacy lenses. The output is very nice, but I haven't enjoyed the lack of IBIS, and worry that the X-T20 body won't feel as pleasant as my GX9 or G85, or previous EM10 mkII.

The idea is to use it the way I once used my Canon FD SLR cameras: shooting carefully with primes.

Have you used an X-T20, maybe with adapted legacy lenses? Can you compare with your micro four thirds experience?
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
114
I have not shot the X-T20 but the X-T30, its successor I assume.
I tested it when my E-M1 Mark I and E-M10 ii were starting to seem a bit old and long in the tooth, and I wanted to try something new to decide between two things:

1. start switching to Fuji and sell/keep old Olympus gear
2. stick with Olympus and upgrade to the newer bodies.

Well, you can peek at my signature for the final result but here are a couple of points I noticed.

I shot the X-T30 with the 18-55mm zoom and the 27mm f2.8 prime.

1. Handling / design
The body handles nicely with the two lenses above but the 18-55 is not as heavy as it looks. Really nice and lightweight mirrorless setup but I don't think it will be as comfortable with larger lenses.
(having a joystick was a really nice touch. Unfortunately the X-T20 does not have this)

At the same time, parts of the body felt really cheap, hollow and flimsy for such an expensive camera targeted at 'the enthusiast'. This was especially true of the control dials, which are clickable, but are very flimsy.
The E-M10ii, a 'beginner' mirrorless cameras seemed more solid, including dials, while the E-M1, a former 'flagship/pro' camera, was miles ahead.

Speaking of dials, I think PASM+twin dials makes more sense for mirrorless because the dials change function depending on mode, so obviously I did not make much use of the Fuji's dedicated control dials.

The lack of weather sealing on any 'affordable' Fujifilm cameras and lenses is a bummer, I think.

2. Menus
Quite a lot of options here and frankly I don't see how it's any more or less intuitive than Olympus' menus, which are often criticized for their complexity. It's a mirrorless camera so it has a ton of options, read the manual!

3. Features
In terms of raw features I believe even the little E-M10ii has a couple more to offer, such as live composite and in-body image stabilization. I think having IBIS is a huge win as the whole sensor is stabilized, so it also works with legacy lenses. I must confess on the weekend of testing the X-T30 I whipped out the Olympus for campfire/night scenes as IBIS trumps any high ISO advantage the Fuji might have.

On the other hand the Fuji countered with something nice and intuitive that every camera built after 2018 should have: USB-C charging. Unfortunately, the X-T20 does not have that either, but at least it has Micro USB.
It's vexing how long it took Olympus to implement in-camera-charging. You actually need to buy the newest E-M1 Mark iii or E-M10 iv from Olympus to get USB-C, which is frankly ridiculous (E-M5 iii has USB charging, but it's MicroUSB).

And of course with any Fuji you also get the Film simulations. I never shot film so they're make-believe for me - I don't see anything special in the appearance of the JPEGs, compared to jpegs from Olympus or other vendors. If you like/believe in the simulations then they might be nice to have. I personally did not like either Provia (too flat) nor Velvia (way too saturated) so I had a bit of trouble getting a good default setting for this camera (for reference - I shoot the Olympus mostly in natural color mode, sometimes with sharpness reduced to -1)

4. Performance
As I mentioned I did use Olympus for night scenes but in daylight and low light the Fuji was a fast and responsive camera, allowing for spontaneous and candid scenes, as well as action shots. It's a really fast camera and I would trust it more for sports/action than the E-M1 or E-M10ii I owned at the time. I'm not so sure the same is true for my current setup but I'm mostly a landscape/nature photographer anyway and 80% of 'action shots' of fast subjects are my or our friends kids.

5. Image quality
Here we finally come to 'the big one' and where most people think the biggest difference lies. To be honest, the biggest difference I noticed is how long 3:2 is and what a bad fit it is for portraits. I found I shoot around 50% of scenes in portrait orientation and 4:3 is a much better fit for this. If I remember correctly, the only crops available in Fuji X cameras are 16:9, 3:2 or 1:1. I would've liked to see 4:3 or 5:4 for portraits.

The quality of the images itself was very good. Some really benefited from editing (as I wasn't as happy with the jpegs as mentioned above) but overall there were a couple where the quality of the sensor and jpeg engine was really shining through. On the other hand E-M1, E-M10ii, heck even a little E-PL7 all have the same jpeg engines and can also deliver beautiful and rich images straight out of camera. The sensor is "only 16MP" but with nice sharp lenses there is little left to ask when viewing on a computer screen or "normal" sized print. The difference is even smaller with the newer 20MP cameras.

So overall, a wash here, if need be I can try to find some samples but I did not make a 'brick wall' resolution comparison test.
I think it's really IBIS vs. larger sensor, each have its strengths.

That said it's the lens that renders the image on the sensor, and maybe I didn't have the best lenses available for the Fuji, so I might not have used the full potential of the camera.

6. Lenses
As I mentioned I had the 18-55 'kit' zoom and the 27mm pancake.
I wanted to test the 18-55mm as it looks and feels really nice, the thing exudes quality. When buying used, it is also surprisingly affordable. I quite liked the handling, build quality and aperture ring.

In terms of quality it's unfortunately not a landscape photographer's lens, as it lacks corner-to-corner sharpness and really left me kind of unimpressed. This is collapsible zoom level but in a really high quality assembly.

Now the competition:
In terms of size,weight, and fastest aperture it sits right between the lightweight Olympus 12-45mm F4 and the 12-40mm f2.8.
For build quality, it definitely beats the 12-45mm, but not the 12-40 zoom.
For image quality, and sharpness across the frame, it cannot match either, as the 12-45mm is essentially a baby version of its older brother, with negligible performance differences (the main differences are actually weight, build quality and maximum aperture).
Both Olympus lenses are weather sealed, so are the Panasonics, 12-60 from plastic kit to Leica, and the two 12-35mm lenses, all can deliver 24mm-equivalent angle of view for that true wide angle effect.

In terms of performance, I would rank it about equal or slightly above the Panasonic 12-60mm kit lens. That lens is all plastic, but that lens is 150€ on the used market.

The pancake, in a word: Underwhelming. I liked the looks, focal length and small size and the lens worked fine for me, sharpness and image quality were all okay, but there was just nothing special about the images. I have seen blog posts about this being one of the sharpest lenses available for Fuji X, so maybe my expectations were too high, but overall it wasn't a worthwhile experience. At least it was cheap.

The competition:
Well. Pretty much everyone knows the best pancake for Micro Four Thirds is the 20mm Panasonic f1.7.
It's lighter than the Fujifilm, brighter and has a special quality that is hard to describe. Its rendering is cooler than other lenses, but it is pin-sharp, absolutely capable of landscape photography and seems to have lots of micro-contrast, if you believe in that sort of thing. Its huge weakness is the slow autofocus, but for static subjects and non-action scenes it is fine.

The rest of the lenses: I won't go into too much detail here but it's generally agreed that there is a lack of weather sealed compact primes in the Micro Four Thirds system, and a lack of good and affordable telephoto options in the Fuji X system. Fuji has a couple of high-quality lenses while M4/3 simply has a ton of affordable or expensive options, one for any budget.


Conclusion
The true or perceived benefits of the Fuji X system did not outweigh my actual or perceived benefits of the Micro Four Thirds, more specifically the Olympus system.
I have since upgraded to newer bodies but I was comparing the newer Fuji to the older Olympus cameras at the time, which still came out on top. If you have similar needs and wants the older X-T20 may not be a huge upgrade if your previous camera was an E-M10ii, a sidegrade more than anything.

Hope this was helpful for you.
 
Joined
Jun 23, 2017
Messages
1,473
To the OP: Save another $500 and buy an X-S10. You won't be sorry. I just pulled the trigger on one myself.
Haha er, not worth it to experiment, they are retailing at AUD$1700 ($1,200 more, not $500) here, and it's too soon to see much on the second-hand market. Whenever I buy, I aim to at least get my money back...most times, I make a small profit. Hence looking a an outdated model, instead of the X-T30.
 
Joined
Jun 23, 2017
Messages
1,473
I have not shot the X-T20 but the X-T30, its successor I assume.
I tested it when my E-M1 Mark I and E-M10 ii were starting to seem a bit old and long in the tooth, and I wanted to try something new to decide between two things:

1. start switching to Fuji and sell/keep old Olympus gear
2. stick with Olympus and upgrade to the newer bodies.

Well, you can peek at my signature for the final result but here are a couple of points I noticed.

I shot the X-T30 with the 18-55mm zoom and the 27mm f2.8 prime.

1. Handling / design
The body handles nicely with the two lenses above but the 18-55 is not as heavy as it looks. Really nice and lightweight mirrorless setup but I don't think it will be as comfortable with larger lenses.
(having a joystick was a really nice touch. Unfortunately the X-T20 does not have this)

At the same time, parts of the body felt really cheap, hollow and flimsy for such an expensive camera targeted at 'the enthusiast'. This was especially true of the control dials, which are clickable, but are very flimsy.
The E-M10ii, a 'beginner' mirrorless cameras seemed more solid, including dials, while the E-M1, a former 'flagship/pro' camera, was miles ahead.

Speaking of dials, I think PASM+twin dials makes more sense for mirrorless because the dials change function depending on mode, so obviously I did not make much use of the Fuji's dedicated control dials.

The lack of weather sealing on any 'affordable' Fujifilm cameras and lenses is a bummer, I think.

2. Menus
Quite a lot of options here and frankly I don't see how it's any more or less intuitive than Olympus' menus, which are often criticized for their complexity. It's a mirrorless camera so it has a ton of options, read the manual!

3. Features
In terms of raw features I believe even the little E-M10ii has a couple more to offer, such as live composite and in-body image stabilization. I think having IBIS is a huge win as the whole sensor is stabilized, so it also works with legacy lenses. I must confess on the weekend of testing the X-T30 I whipped out the Olympus for campfire/night scenes as IBIS trumps any high ISO advantage the Fuji might have.

On the other hand the Fuji countered with something nice and intuitive that every camera built after 2018 should have: USB-C charging. Unfortunately, the X-T20 does not have that either, but at least it has Micro USB.
It's vexing how long it took Olympus to implement in-camera-charging. You actually need to buy the newest E-M1 Mark iii or E-M10 iv from Olympus to get USB-C, which is frankly ridiculous (E-M5 iii has USB charging, but it's MicroUSB).

And of course with any Fuji you also get the Film simulations. I never shot film so they're make-believe for me - I don't see anything special in the appearance of the JPEGs, compared to jpegs from Olympus or other vendors. If you like/believe in the simulations then they might be nice to have. I personally did not like either Provia (too flat) nor Velvia (way too saturated) so I had a bit of trouble getting a good default setting for this camera (for reference - I shoot the Olympus mostly in natural color mode, sometimes with sharpness reduced to -1)

4. Performance
As I mentioned I did use Olympus for night scenes but in daylight and low light the Fuji was a fast and responsive camera, allowing for spontaneous and candid scenes, as well as action shots. It's a really fast camera and I would trust it more for sports/action than the E-M1 or E-M10ii I owned at the time. I'm not so sure the same is true for my current setup but I'm mostly a landscape/nature photographer anyway and 80% of 'action shots' of fast subjects are my or our friends kids.

5. Image quality
Here we finally come to 'the big one' and where most people think the biggest difference lies. To be honest, the biggest difference I noticed is how long 3:2 is and what a bad fit it is for portraits. I found I shoot around 50% of scenes in portrait orientation and 4:3 is a much better fit for this. If I remember correctly, the only crops available in Fuji X cameras are 16:9, 3:2 or 1:1. I would've liked to see 4:3 or 5:4 for portraits.

The quality of the images itself was very good. Some really benefited from editing (as I wasn't as happy with the jpegs as mentioned above) but overall there were a couple where the quality of the sensor and jpeg engine was really shining through. On the other hand E-M1, E-M10ii, heck even a little E-PL7 all have the same jpeg engines and can also deliver beautiful and rich images straight out of camera. The sensor is "only 16MP" but with nice sharp lenses there is little left to ask when viewing on a computer screen or "normal" sized print. The difference is even smaller with the newer 20MP cameras.

So overall, a wash here, if need be I can try to find some samples but I did not make a 'brick wall' resolution comparison test.
I think it's really IBIS vs. larger sensor, each have its strengths.

That said it's the lens that renders the image on the sensor, and maybe I didn't have the best lenses available for the Fuji, so I might not have used the full potential of the camera.

6. Lenses
As I mentioned I had the 18-55 'kit' zoom and the 27mm pancake.
I wanted to test the 18-55mm as it looks and feels really nice, the thing exudes quality. When buying used, it is also surprisingly affordable. I quite liked the handling, build quality and aperture ring.

In terms of quality it's unfortunately not a landscape photographer's lens, as it lacks corner-to-corner sharpness and really left me kind of unimpressed. This is collapsible zoom level but in a really high quality assembly.

Now the competition:
In terms of size,weight, and fastest aperture it sits right between the lightweight Olympus 12-45mm F4 and the 12-40mm f2.8.
For build quality, it definitely beats the 12-45mm, but not the 12-40 zoom.
For image quality, and sharpness across the frame, it cannot match either, as the 12-45mm is essentially a baby version of its older brother, with negligible performance differences (the main differences are actually weight, build quality and maximum aperture).
Both Olympus lenses are weather sealed, so are the Panasonics, 12-60 from plastic kit to Leica, and the two 12-35mm lenses, all can deliver 24mm-equivalent angle of view for that true wide angle effect.

In terms of performance, I would rank it about equal or slightly above the Panasonic 12-60mm kit lens. That lens is all plastic, but that lens is 150€ on the used market.

The pancake, in a word: Underwhelming. I liked the looks, focal length and small size and the lens worked fine for me, sharpness and image quality were all okay, but there was just nothing special about the images. I have seen blog posts about this being one of the sharpest lenses available for Fuji X, so maybe my expectations were too high, but overall it wasn't a worthwhile experience. At least it was cheap.

The competition:
Well. Pretty much everyone knows the best pancake for Micro Four Thirds is the 20mm Panasonic f1.7.
It's lighter than the Fujifilm, brighter and has a special quality that is hard to describe. Its rendering is cooler than other lenses, but it is pin-sharp, absolutely capable of landscape photography and seems to have lots of micro-contrast, if you believe in that sort of thing. Its huge weakness is the slow autofocus, but for static subjects and non-action scenes it is fine.

The rest of the lenses: I won't go into too much detail here but it's generally agreed that there is a lack of weather sealed compact primes in the Micro Four Thirds system, and a lack of good and affordable telephoto options in the Fuji X system. Fuji has a couple of high-quality lenses while M4/3 simply has a ton of affordable or expensive options, one for any budget.


Conclusion
The true or perceived benefits of the Fuji X system did not outweigh my actual or perceived benefits of the Micro Four Thirds, more specifically the Olympus system.
I have since upgraded to newer bodies but I was comparing the newer Fuji to the older Olympus cameras at the time, which still came out on top. If you have similar needs and wants the older X-T20 may not be a huge upgrade if your previous camera was an E-M10ii, a sidegrade more than anything.

Hope this was helpful for you.
Thanks for your comprehensive explanation of your experience.

A year or so ago I tried an X-T30 at a camera store and really loved how it handled. From what I've read, the main differences from the XT20 are the joystick (not having used one, I'm perfectly happy to use the touchscreen trackpad for focus, and the D pad buttons), maybe a film simulation, and a different X-trans sensor version.

As the Panasonic 20/1.7 is one of my favourite mu43 lenses, I was hoping the XF27mm might be more appealing than you've described, but mainly I planned to use adapted legacy lenses via a focal reducer, to get close to original FF angle of view.

The APSC sensor and film simulations are the only reason I keep longing for Fujifilm. I loved many aspects of the EM10(2), but have consolidated to Panasonic bodies - it certainly had better IBIS and peaking, but overall I prefer the shooting experience with Panasonic.

Which goes to show that we're all different, and choice is a great privilege! ;)
 

MarcioK

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
43
Just making this test right now - two days ago I got a used XT-20 with the 18-55 f/2.8-4. I've only used m4/3 since the beginning (still have a GH2, a E-P1 and a LX100, had the GX7, GX85, E-M10 MKI and the E-M5 MKII - currently have a GX9 and a E-M10 MK III). No complaints about the system, I love it - but (personal opinion) I think that Olympus will not come back and Panasonic probably will only release a GH6 and a G9 sucessor, and my only option would be Fuji (no interest in full frame at all - BIG lenses).

In fact, my interest is the X-S10 - once you have IBIS, you never go back. The XT-20 is a test bed for the system, to see if there is a BIG deal breaker. The XT-20 is very similar to the latest models - almost the same IQ of the 26mp sensor, almost the same PDAF performance (only in the center of the sensor, though), same EVF of the X-S10, general operation is the same. The price is much lower, though - got a used one in VERY good condition, with the 18-55, seven (1) batteries, an external grip (not original, but much better than the Fuji one - more on that later) for 20% less than a new XT-30 body only (if comparing only the bodies, was less than half the price).

Let's start with the bad ones:
- The EVF: holy sh*t. The same reviewers that trounced the GX85/GX9 field sequential EVFs said that this EVF is good? For me, is worse - and much worse than the E-M10 MK III, which looks like have the same OLED panel. Bad optics (corners and a little bit hard to see), bad eyepoint...it is usable, but even the EVF of the E-M10 MK I looked better for me. And the eycup is shallow and a hard plastic one - already ordered a 3rd party rubber eyecup. Not a deal breaker, but dissapointing.
- The Fuji screen info did not help too - font is VERY small for a guy with growing presbiopia. You have an option to make them bigger, but they become VERY big and some info (like af mode) is lost. After two days I'm getting used to it, but both Olympus and (specially) Panasonic have better EVF/LCD infor layouts.
- @shreebles talked about the front/back dials feeling, and I second that. Very small, mushy feeling. After using the glorious Olympus dials, it is strange.
- Size / grip - small camera, with small grip. Always used external grips in my m4/3 cameras, this one will be no exception.
- No vertical electronic level gauge, only horizontal.
- You must reset your mind to operate it. Much more than the "film dials" (somewhat diminished with the drive mode on the left - better for hybrid users), the operational flow is very different (like, metering mode is something somewhat relegated, and I change it a lot). After two days, starting to get the grips, but right on the start is VERY frustrating.

Liked:
- The 18-55 f/2.8-4. Loved id. The OIS is amazing (much better than the OIS of every lens that I had - the 2 Panasonics 14-42, the 12-32, the 45-175, the 42,5 1.7, 12-60 Panasonic...) - not Olympus IBIS or Panasonic Dual IS level, but as far as OIS goes,it is very good. And VERY sharp too - better than all my ordinary Panasonic zooms, even the 12-32, that I consider a little gem. Weather resistant too, if I pick a WR body in the future.
- The AF. In Single AF, a tad slower than M43, but in the range of miliseconds. But in C-AF...never played with the PDAF Olys (probably will get the E-M5 MK III in the future even if I switch systems), or the GH5 / G9 after firmware updates, but comparing to the E-M10 MKIII or the GX9, is miles ahead, VERY reliable and precise. Liked the grouped target modes, the touchpad AF is slow but usable, and the Eye AF is better than the GX9s. For manual mode, the peaking looks better than my cameras too.
- Video AF: works VERY well. Not bulletproof, but much, much more precise than the GX9 (the better that I have in this regard).
- Image quality: ok, very subjective topic here. The last Panasonics (like my GX9) have a much better color science and Olympus color are always lovely. Made a photo shoot of my little daughter some time ago with the E-M10 MK III in good sun light that was gorgeous, incredible skin tones. But yesterday, with dull interior light (ISO 2500 needed), pointed the 18-55 in 35mm (50eq mm) to my daughter, took some shots...and right after that, my mind was made, and got a 35mm f2 from the same person that sold me the camera and a Viltrox 85mm f/1.8.
The pictures look amazing, VERY low noise, perfect skin tones, good boked even in f/3.5, eye AF nailed. Right after tried the same with the Oly 45mm 1.8 and the Panny 42,5 1.7, both with the Oly and the Panny - clear win for the Fuji.
Of course, working the RAWs, for sure I could got the same, or very close results. But I'm tending to prefer already done images when needed, tired of spending time in editing. And the film profiles of Fuji needs very little or no adjustments to my taste (used Provia in the mentioned photos, but Classic Chrome and Astia looked amazing too).
And since I like to shoot music concerts, better high ISO is always welcome - albeit I got very good results with my m43 cameras (specially with the Olympus 75mm 1.8, this lens is out of this world), was even once fetured in the Franz Ferdinand's Instagram account.

Conclusion: if you like your m43 gear, or if you make money from it (making the eventual ending of the system less painful - your body / lenses will generate income, it's devalution could even be an advantage to get better ones in the long haul), or you don't mind if Oly and Panasonic drops the system - stay with it. Not insane advantages from Fuji - maybe better C-AF for video (not so much if you have a PDAF Olympus - but maybe the X-T4 better codecs will make a difference), maybe better C-AF in stills in the lesser bodies, or some high ISO work a little bit better. In fact, if the system continues, and a newer sensor could gain 1 more low light stop (for me, 20mp is good enough), very likely I will come back. Just Live Bulb / Live Composite from Olympus (the most underrated feature of the system, in my opinion) would be enough to justify it. But I live in a country that don't have official Olympus or Panasonic support (Fuji have), prices of the m43 gear here are VERY inflated (I will probably sell my GX9 + 12-60 for MORE money than 1 year ago, when I bougth it), and if the system don't go forward, the prices will drop almost 50% instantly (as happened with the Samsungs, with the excepction of the NX1). As an amateur, I will get the good present oportunity to move the bodies and lenses for the locally good current prices - cannot afford a huge devaluation.

And Fujifilm, here in Brazil, have sometimes VERY good sales prices - got a LiPlay Instax in the official store for the same US prices, and the X-T4 is around 20% than the US price; the usual here for photo equipment is 80 to 100% more than US price because of import taxes (60%).

It is more a case of what you think about the future, and the consequences of the possible outcomings - it will vary from people to people, with geographic reasons in the mix. I will switch (with a LOT of pain in the heart, i really love m43, and will always have some m43 gear), but anyone will have it's opinion.

Feel free to ask some specific questions.
 
Joined
Jun 23, 2017
Messages
1,473
Just making this test right now - two days ago I got a used XT-20 with the 18-55 f/2.8-4. I've only used m4/3 since the beginning (still have a GH2, a E-P1 and a LX100, had the GX7, GX85, E-M10 MKI and the E-M5 MKII - currently have a GX9 and a E-M10 MK III). No complaints about the system, I love it - but (personal opinion) I think that Olympus will not come back and Panasonic probably will only release a GH6 and a G9 sucessor, and my only option would be Fuji (no interest in full frame at all - BIG lenses).

In fact, my interest is the X-S10 - once you have IBIS, you never go back. The XT-20 is a test bed for the system, to see if there is a BIG deal breaker. The XT-20 is very similar to the latest models - almost the same IQ of the 26mp sensor, almost the same PDAF performance (only in the center of the sensor, though), same EVF of the X-S10, general operation is the same. The price is much lower, though - got a used one in VERY good condition, with the 18-55, seven (1) batteries, an external grip (not original, but much better than the Fuji one - more on that later) for 20% less than a new XT-30 body only (if comparing only the bodies, was less than half the price).

Let's start with the bad ones:
- The EVF: holy sh*t. The same reviewers that trounced the GX85/GX9 field sequential EVFs said that this EVF is good? For me, is worse - and much worse than the E-M10 MK III, which looks like have the same OLED panel. Bad optics (corners and a little bit hard to see), bad eyepoint...it is usable, but even the EVF of the E-M10 MK I looked better for me. And the eycup is shallow and a hard plastic one - already ordered a 3rd party rubber eyecup. Not a deal breaker, but dissapointing.
- The Fuji screen info did not help too - font is VERY small for a guy with growing presbiopia. You have an option to make them bigger, but they become VERY big and some info (like af mode) is lost. After two days I'm getting used to it, but both Olympus and (specially) Panasonic have better EVF/LCD infor layouts.
- @shreebles talked about the front/back dials feeling, and I second that. Very small, mushy feeling. After using the glorious Olympus dials, it is strange.
- Size / grip - small camera, with small grip. Always used external grips in my m4/3 cameras, this one will be no exception.
- No vertical electronic level gauge, only horizontal.
- You must reset your mind to operate it. Much more than the "film dials" (somewhat diminished with the drive mode on the left - better for hybrid users), the operational flow is very different (like, metering mode is something somewhat relegated, and I change it a lot). After two days, starting to get the grips, but right on the start is VERY frustrating.

Liked:
- The 18-55 f/2.8-4. Loved id. The OIS is amazing (much better than the OIS of every lens that I had - the 2 Panasonics 14-42, the 12-32, the 45-175, the 42,5 1.7, 12-60 Panasonic...) - not Olympus IBIS or Panasonic Dual IS level, but as far as OIS goes,it is very good. And VERY sharp too - better than all my ordinary Panasonic zooms, even the 12-32, that I consider a little gem. Weather resistant too, if I pick a WR body in the future.
- The AF. In Single AF, a tad slower than M43, but in the range of miliseconds. But in C-AF...never played with the PDAF Olys (probably will get the E-M5 MK III in the future even if I switch systems), or the GH5 / G9 after firmware updates, but comparing to the E-M10 MKIII or the GX9, is miles ahead, VERY reliable and precise. Liked the grouped target modes, the touchpad AF is slow but usable, and the Eye AF is better than the GX9s. For manual mode, the peaking looks better than my cameras too.
- Video AF: works VERY well. Not bulletproof, but much, much more precise than the GX9 (the better that I have in this regard).
- Image quality: ok, very subjective topic here. The last Panasonics (like my GX9) have a much better color science and Olympus color are always lovely. Made a photo shoot of my little daughter some time ago with the E-M10 MK III in good sun light that was gorgeous, incredible skin tones. But yesterday, with dull interior light (ISO 2500 needed), pointed the 18-55 in 35mm (50eq mm) to my daughter, took some shots...and right after that, my mind was made, and got a 35mm f2 from the same person that sold me the camera and a Viltrox 85mm f/1.8.
The pictures look amazing, VERY low noise, perfect skin tones, good boked even in f/3.5, eye AF nailed. Right after tried the same with the Oly 45mm 1.8 and the Panny 42,5 1.7, both with the Oly and the Panny - clear win for the Fuji.
Of course, working the RAWs, for sure I could got the same, or very close results. But I'm tending to prefer already done images when needed, tired of spending time in editing. And the film profiles of Fuji needs very little or no adjustments to my taste (used Provia in the mentioned photos, but Classic Chrome and Astia looked amazing too).
And since I like to shoot music concerts, better high ISO is always welcome - albeit I got very good results with my m43 cameras (specially with the Olympus 75mm 1.8, this lens is out of this world), was even once fetured in the Franz Ferdinand's Instagram account.

Conclusion: if you like your m43 gear, or if you make money from it (making the eventual ending of the system less painful - your body / lenses will generate income, it's devalution could even be an advantage to get better ones in the long haul), or you don't mind if Oly and Panasonic drops the system - stay with it. Not insane advantages from Fuji - maybe better C-AF for video (not so much if you have a PDAF Olympus - but maybe the X-T4 better codecs will make a difference), maybe better C-AF in stills in the lesser bodies, or some high ISO work a little bit better. In fact, if the system continues, and a newer sensor could gain 1 more low light stop (for me, 20mp is good enough), very likely I will come back. Just Live Bulb / Live Composite from Olympus (the most underrated feature of the system, in my opinion) would be enough to justify it. But I live in a country that don't have official Olympus or Panasonic support (Fuji have), prices of the m43 gear here are VERY inflated (I will probably sell my GX9 + 12-60 for MORE money than 1 year ago, when I bougth it), and if the system don't go forward, the prices will drop almost 50% instantly (as happened with the Samsungs, with the excepction of the NX1). As an amateur, I will get the good present oportunity to move the bodies and lenses for the locally good current prices - cannot afford a huge devaluation.

And Fujifilm, here in Brazil, have sometimes VERY good sales prices - got a LiPlay Instax in the official store for the same US prices, and the X-T4 is around 20% than the US price; the usual here for photo equipment is 80 to 100% more than US price because of import taxes (60%).

It is more a case of what you think about the future, and the consequences of the possible outcomings - it will vary from people to people, with geographic reasons in the mix. I will switch (with a LOT of pain in the heart, i really love m43, and will always have some m43 gear), but anyone will have it's opinion.

Feel free to ask some specific questions.
Thanks, Marcio, this was very helpful, particularly as you also shoot with a GX9, and I've found its image output to be much better than the 16MP models.

I don't intend to switch from mu43 in the foreseeable future, even if the system becomes orphaned - this would just be a sideline, to scratch the Fuji itch again with my old lenses.

It would be interesting to hear from users who shoot Fujifilm with legacy lenses, too.
 

MarcioK

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
43
Thanks, Marcio, this was very helpful, particularly as you also shoot with a GX9, and I've found its image output to be much better than the 16MP models.

I don't intend to switch from mu43 in the foreseeable future, even if the system becomes orphaned - this would just be a sideline, to scratch the Fuji itch again with my old lenses.

It would be interesting to hear from users who shoot Fujifilm with legacy lenses, too.
Will be me, too - I use a lot of legacy lenses. :) (one of my concert workhorses is the Contax Zeiss 135mm f2.8 - amazing lens).
Have an Canon FD to X mount adapter on the way, already researching others.
 
Joined
Jun 23, 2017
Messages
1,473
Will be me, too - I use a lot of legacy lenses. :) (one of my concert workhorses is the Contax Zeiss 135mm f2.8 - amazing lens).
Have an Canon FD to X mount adapter on the way, already researching others.
Ah, good to know! I really like the cheap (ish!) focal reducer I have, I like gaining the extra stop of light.
 

Aviator

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Apr 15, 2019
Messages
44
Hi melanieylang,

Along with M43, I run a Fuji X system and I shoot vintage lenses. I don't have the X-T20 but I will give you my key impressions providing you want to use vintage glass.

1. EVF and vintage lenses

If you want the camera to mainly use it with vintage lenses, I would suggest you to consider the X-T1 over the X-T20, as it has a much better EVF, larger and with higher magnification, which makes focusing vintage lenses very very easily.

Check this link: https://jonasraskphotography.com/2014/08/31/x-vintage1-my-fujifilm-x-t1-review-part-two/
and this one: https://www.gracegetscreative.com/post/fujifilm-and-the-zhongyi-lens-turbo-ii

2. Weather sealing (with modern primes)

The X-T1 is weather sealed, (the X-T20 is not), so you can always pair it with the F2 primes and you are good to go on any conditions. The combo is not going to be bulky at all!

3. Price

The X-T1 sells today on ebay for around 350 USD which is a steal, it is even slightly cheaper than the X-T20 prices.

Conclusion

If the 16MP X-Trans II sensor on the X-T1 is good enough for you, if you don't need IBIS, if you don't care about video, if you don't need the fastest AF in the world, if you don't need a joystick, if you are fine without the latest film simulations and if you don't need a fully articulated screen, I would highly recommend you this camera.

I own it and it is a joy to use, specially when working with vintage lenses.

Also check this video:

Greetings!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 23, 2017
Messages
1,473
Hi melanieylang,

Along with M43, I run a Fuji X system and I shoot vintage lenses. I don't have the X-T20 but I will give you my key impressions providing you want to use vintage glass.

1. EVF and vintage lenses

If you want the camera to mainly use it with vintage lenses, I would suggest you to consider the X-T1 over the X-T20, as it has a much better EVF, larger and with higher magnification, which makes focusing vintage lenses very very easily.

Check this link: https://jonasraskphotography.com/2014/08/31/x-vintage1-my-fujifilm-x-t1-review-part-two/
and this one: https://www.gracegetscreative.com/post/fujifilm-and-the-zhongyi-lens-turbo-ii

2. Weather sealing (with modern primes)

The X-T1 is weather sealed, (the X-T20 is not), so you can always pair it with the F2 primes and you are good to go on any conditions. The combo is not going to be bulky at all!

3. Price

The X-T1 sells today on ebay for around 350 USD which is a steal, it is even slightly cheaper than the X-T20 prices.

Conclusion

If the 16MP X-Trans II sensor on the X-T1 is good enough for you, if you don't need IBIS, if you don't care about video, if you don't need the fastest AF in the world, if you don't need a joystick, if you are fine without the latest film simulations and if you don't need a fully articulated screen, I would highly recommend you this camera.

I own it and it is a joy to use, specially when working with vintage lenses.

Also check this video:

Greetings!
Thanks for your comment. You may not have noticed that I have previously owned the X-T1, which I used with adapted Canon lenses, but I didn't keep it - not having a touchscreen bothered me more than I expected! I'm also keen to try the Acros film simulation, which it doesn't have.
 

Aviator

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Apr 15, 2019
Messages
44
Thanks for your comment. You may not have noticed that I have previously owned the X-T1, which I used with adapted Canon lenses, but I didn't keep it - not having a touchscreen bothered me more than I expected! I'm also keen to try the Acros film simulation, which it doesn't have.
Ah sorry my bad, yeah I didn't notice that! :dash2:

I can't really comment on the "feeling" of the X-T20 as I have never handled one. I tend to like better the big brothers of the double digit cameras.

However if the touchscreen is a must, the X-T20 may be your camera, otherwise you have to step up to the X-H1 or X-T3.
 

MarcioK

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
43
Ah, good to know! I really like the cheap (ish!) focal reducer I have, I like gaining the extra stop of light.
The adapter arrived, and I liked the experience. Operation is much like the Panasonics - I put the camera in "A" mode (in the case of Fujifilms, the shutter dial in "A", and you choose the aperture on the lens), have the peaking always active, press the back dial to bring an enlarged image.

The peaking is much better than the E-M10 MK III or the GX9 - used it with my Canon FD 35mm f/2, which is not a contrasty lens (and kind of hard to see the peaking in my m43 cameras), and the peaking was very clear even in the high sensitive mode. Just have to see if its precision is ok.

Every day getting more accostumed with the camera, liking it more. Just missing the IBIS, but for this the X-S10 will solve the problem...
 
Joined
Jun 23, 2017
Messages
1,473
Rather than hovering in uncertainty beside the waters, I took the plunge, and await the arrival of a silver-bodied X-T20, with spare battery and bonus formed case. Sometimes it's best to just find out for oneself!
 

exakta

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2015
Messages
768
You had 5 different X series cameras and sold them all. My thoughts: stay with m43, what do you expect to be so wonderful about the X-T20 compared to all the others?
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
114
You had 5 different X series cameras and sold them all. My thoughts: stay with m43, what do you expect to be so wonderful about the X-T20 compared to all the others?
Comparing to the X-T100, the X-T20 are almost identical, and the T20 does not seem to bring much more to the table. Question is why was the X-T100 sold.
 
Joined
Jun 23, 2017
Messages
1,473
You had 5 different X series cameras and sold them all. My thoughts: stay with m43, what do you expect to be so wonderful about the X-T20 compared to all the others?
Comparing to the X-T100, the X-T20 are almost identical, and the T20 does not seem to bring much more to the table. Question is why was the X-T100 sold.
I can understand why this looks like lunacy! Let me explain a bit more...

Where I live, there are no camera stores stocking Fujifilm X series cameras, or much of anything, so instead of driving hundreds of kilometres to try something, I buy used; if it doesn't work out, I sell it and break even.

Fujifilm makes it easy to shoot JPEGS that tick my box for nostalgia - I love the film simulations, and don't love creating them in post. The X-T100 had a PASM dial, a Bayer sensor, and only 1 stored custom setting; X-T20 has traditional dials, X-trans sensor, room for numerous custom settings, and Acros film simulation.

These cameras offer something different from mu43 - if Panasonic had these things in one package, maybe I'd be content...but I don't have to be, it's fun to play 😁👍
 

Latest posts

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
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom