Clicky

Jump to content


Photo

X-T2-X-PRO2 VS SONY ALPHA'S


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 lpc

lpc

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 04 January 2017 - 07:54 PM

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)

I have to ask all members who own X-T2-X-PRO2 vs a sony alpha a7 OR A7II price wise fuji costs $1800 to $1900-sony $1500 to $1800 and you get full frame plus. please explain why I shouldn't buy sony!

 



#2 kimcarsons

kimcarsons

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 134 posts

Posted 05 January 2017 - 06:11 AM

If you've ever owned anything made by Sony, then you have your answer. If you don't mind doing things The Sony Way, their equipment is technologically the best--and the lenses are coming along.

 

Personally, I've hated every Sony product I've ever owned---too proprietary, too quirky.



#3 Aswald

Aswald

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 905 posts

Posted 05 January 2017 - 08:45 AM

Do you like big, bulky lenses? If you do, then Sony is the way to go. Otherwise, resolution aside, both system are equally competent.



#4 lpc

lpc

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 05 January 2017 - 05:19 PM

Thx .



#5 Adamcain112

Adamcain112

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 05 January 2017 - 08:41 PM

I sold my Sony A7ii a month ago to buy the XT2. I am very happy the A7ii AF system was horrible unless it was bright outside. I did love the camera but for that reason and how much Sony glass cost I sold it and couldn't be happier. The xt2 jpegs are as good as everyone says. I do miss adapting my Canon L glass and having AF for stills.

#6 Adamcain112

Adamcain112

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 05 January 2017 - 08:45 PM

Another reason I left Sony is there lack of firmware updates. And when they release the a7iii you can forget about any updates. For example they haven't had any updates for the a7 but only for the a7ii. Fuji is well known for there great support and firmware updates

#7 Aswald

Aswald

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 905 posts

Posted 06 January 2017 - 04:29 PM

I sold my Sony A7ii a month ago to buy the XT2. I am very happy the A7ii AF system was horrible unless it was bright outside. I did love the camera but for that reason and how much Sony glass cost I sold it and couldn't be happier. The xt2 jpegs are as good as everyone says. I do miss adapting my Canon L glass and having AF for stills.

 

Sony a7 series has AF? :D 



#8 lleo

lleo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 66 posts

Posted 06 January 2017 - 10:15 PM

Before to get my XE-2 I was thinking abour the II series of the Alpha. Then I saw several test and I went for Fuji. Though I had a RX100 and it was a great compact.



#9 JRphoto

JRphoto

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 88 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 07 January 2017 - 02:16 AM

Another reason I left Sony is there lack of firmware updates. And when they release the a7iii you can forget about any updates. For example they haven't had any updates for the a7 but only for the a7ii. Fuji is well known for there great support and firmware updates

 

In general I love the fuji firmware policy. But some Fuji cameras receive more firmware love than other Fuji cameras...

So, a bit of chance may involve this firmware issue.


X100S & X-T1


#10 Puma Cat

Puma Cat

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 67 posts

Posted 08 January 2017 - 08:17 PM

Do you like big, bulky lenses? If you do, then Sony is the way to go. Otherwise, resolution aside, both system are equally competent.

 

The X-T2 has resolution that is fully comparable or equivalent to the Sony A7RII. The difference in detail that a digital camera can resolve is a factor of pixel pitch (pixels per unit area), not the total number of megapixels on the sensor. If the X-T2 had a full-frame sensor, it would be an ~ 50 megapixel sensor. There are other aspects to what we perceive as sharpness, and a key factor is acutance. This is the ability for the eye to discern small differences in micro-contrast. This is more largely determined by the lenses than the sensor, and the image processor of the camera, as well, rather than the raw number of megapixels of the sensor. 


Edited by Puma Cat, 08 January 2017 - 08:27 PM.


#11 kimcarsons

kimcarsons

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 134 posts

Posted 09 January 2017 - 12:38 AM

The X-T2 has resolution that is fully comparable or equivalent to the Sony A7RII. The difference in detail that a digital camera can resolve is a factor of pixel pitch (pixels per unit area), not the total number of megapixels on the sensor. If the X-T2 had a full-frame sensor, it would be an ~ 50 megapixel sensor. There are other aspects to what we perceive as sharpness, and a key factor is acutance. This is the ability for the eye to discern small differences in micro-contrast. This is more largely determined by the lenses than the sensor, and the image processor of the camera, as well, rather than the raw number of megapixels of the sensor. 

 

This sounds suspiciously like the ramblings of the Angry Photographer...



#12 Aswald

Aswald

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 905 posts

Posted 09 January 2017 - 04:47 AM

The X-T2 has resolution that is fully comparable or equivalent to the Sony A7RII. The difference in detail that a digital camera can resolve is a factor of pixel pitch (pixels per unit area), not the total number of megapixels on the sensor. If the X-T2 had a full-frame sensor, it would be an ~ 50 megapixel sensor. There are other aspects to what we perceive as sharpness, and a key factor is acutance. This is the ability for the eye to discern small differences in micro-contrast. This is more largely determined by the lenses than the sensor, and the image processor of the camera, as well, rather than the raw number of megapixels of the sensor. 

 

You've got a valid point.

 

I guess it makes a difference for photog who wants higher resolution for the exact same picture (i.e. without cropping) to fill up say a small billboard. The Sony would be the way to go.



#13 Adamcain112

Adamcain112

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 09 January 2017 - 11:44 AM

Lleo Sonys compacts are very good. The a7 line up for lenses prices are skyrocketing.

#14 Aswald

Aswald

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 905 posts

Posted 09 January 2017 - 03:32 PM

Picture IQ wise, Sony's new lenses are fantastic.



#15 mjcmt

mjcmt

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts

Posted 15 January 2017 - 03:24 PM

Another reason I left Sony is there lack of firmware updates. And when they release the a7iii you can forget about any updates. For example they haven't had any updates for the a7 but only for the a7ii. Fuji is well known for there great support and firmware updates

 

Except on the 3 year old X-100T. No updates, but they have offered updates on newer cameras.


Edited by mjcmt, 15 January 2017 - 03:25 PM.


#16 addicted2light

addicted2light

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 128 posts
  • LocationItaly

Posted 15 January 2017 - 04:04 PM

I shoot with both (X-T10 and A7r first gen).

 

I toyed with the idea of switching completely to Fuji for quite a bit (you can read about it on my blog, where I published as well a shootout between the 16Mp X-T10 and the 36Mp A7r using the same, adapted, lenses).

 

http://www.addicted2...-vs-fuji-x-t10/

 

But in the end, at least for now, I kept using both.

 

The real advantage of the Sony sensor is not necessarily its size, unless of course you want the shallowest possible depth of field. What keeps the Sony in my bag, its several annoying quirks notwithstanding, is the fantastic ability to push the shadows with (@ 50 Iso) essentially no noise at all.

 

This alone opens your shooting envelope quite a bit. That said, in many circumstances you could do the same with the Fuji just using HDR.

 

And while it's true that taking multiple shots is not always feasible, the same goes for the Sony (or other full frame bodies) when you start taking into account that in order to have extended depth of field quite often just stopping down it isn't gonna cut it, and you will have to resort to focus staking.

 

For comparison, the only three really annoying "features" I've found with Fuji are: the sensor reflections when shooting with the sun in the pictures (not always, but frequent enough to be annoying); the lack of an extended eyepiece for the X-T10; and the HDR bracketing limited to a measly +1 -1 stops.

 

If I were to start from scratch, though, I'd definitely go the Fuji route.


Edited by addicted2light, 15 January 2017 - 04:06 PM.

www.addicted2light.com

www.facebook.com/addicted2light

 

“You cannot depend on your eyes if your imagination is out of focus” Mark Twain

 


 
x

Registration is free

Not registered? Really?

Discover the full potential of the Fuji X Forum... register now!
Registration is free and done in a few minutes!

As registered member you can discuss, post your questions and present your images.
And get in contact with Fuji X photographers worldwide!

We are looking forward to you!

The Fuji X Forum Team

Register Close