Jump to content
Cy_J

Is the X-T10 right for me?

Recommended Posts

I have been a Nikon user since around 2007 when I moved to a DSLR. Before that I had experience with Fuji cameras (FinePix E900) and loved the pictures I took with it. Over the years I went through some experimenting with camera and lens combinations before my current setup, the Nikon D7100 and 18-300 lens. I used to travel a lot and took pictures like crazy from trains, buses, helicopters as well as during walks. I don't have time or patience to keep switching lenses and the 18-300 has been good for the most part even though the images are a little soft. I also despise tripods or posing people and prefer to shoot in the moment. Anyway enough about my history and preferences, lets get to the point.

 

I have been investigating moving into mirrorless and considering options outside of Nikon which brought me to looking over the Sony range and of course returning to Fuji. The Sony a7 II has a nice feel to it and specs but is way too expensive for my tastes and I'm not much of a Sony fan as I had bad experiences with their cameras in the past (pre-Fuji). The Fuji X-T10 seems like reasonably priced system and I have been enjoying the photos I have seen taken with it. 

Of course any such move to a new camera brings in the concerns so I thought, who would have better information than this group. Any Nikon converts want to share their experience?  I am also open to taking advice on lenses since there doesn't seem to an 18-300 equivalent for the Fuji. 

Thanks in advance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the 18-300 is going to seem a bit weak on the 7100 - but WOW the reach. The closest equivalent in Fuji land is the 18-135, which is obviously shorter, but sharper in the overlapping range. If you crop down from 24mp often, you may feel constrained by 16mp in the XT-10. If you can live with considerably less reach, you will be rewarded with a high quality travel rig with about 1/2 the weight of a D7100+18-300.

 

I'm not a "convert" really. I still use my D7000 for sports and action. I use a D800 at work. But now I happily travel with X-E1 (soon X-E2) and an 18-55 and/or a bag of primes. The 18-55 is great. One quickly gets used to the luxury of small fast lenses. Not sure if the X-T10 is right for you, but maybe you should give it a try. Maybe rent one and the 18-135 to take on a little trip of discovery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really a convert per say, I still use the D3S and D800 on regular basis, I just use the Fuji gear for my personal photos.

 

As for the range, we do have the XF 55-200 and the XC 55-230, you loose some reach but not overly either.

 

The X-T10 is a good camera, not so great for sports or fast moving subject, then again, nothing on the Fuji X series is good at that. So if you put that aside, there is very little else that you won't be able to capture with the right gear.

Also, while not as long in reach, the XF 18-135 is still a small wonder and lots of reach in a single 5 stops stabilized WR lens. It is my get go lens for uncertain weather or subjects.

 

I do not own the X-T10 per say, but I have his big brother the X-T1 and I really can not find much fault with it, I kinda hate the press and turn ISO button but that's about it, after a bit, you do get used to it. Worst case, I just usually swap between Auto ISO and ISO 400 and manually bump to 6400 when really needed.

 

Lens wise, it really depends on what you want to shoot, in very broad sense, the XF line is very good, there a couple of exception but nothing overly deal breaking. The XC line is cheaper but not lacking in IQ either, Fuji cut down the price by using plastic for the build. For the sake of convenience here is the link to Fuji's lens roadmap.

 

Also, unless you really want to go pixel peeping, you won't be noticing much of the differences between the Nikon 24MP and Fuji's 16MP, Adobe Lightroom might give you more troubles tho as they have an issue at correctly decoding the Fuji raws.

 

Here is a cropped shot from my X-T1 with the 18-135 @135 F5.6:

 

18908951960_c5bc6ec14e_k.jpgDSCF1538.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both for the feedback and great sample photo. I don't travel as much with the camera but if I ever make it back to Alaska I will still be talking photos from moving vehicles. The Finepix e900 did fine with that back in 2007 so I don't think the X-T10 should have any issue with it.

 

I also don't shoot sports as much anymore as we only have one child left in high school but I would be interested in hearing why Fuji isn't good at sports. I can deal with lower number of burst shots per second but motion blur could be concerning as that is a huge problem I have had with the d7100 18-300 or 18-200 combos. I am pretty sure I can deal with the shorter range of the 18-135 but might also consider adding the 18-55 for certain situations. I do occasionally crop a photo but for the most part I stick with my original shot and only fine tune minor things like contrast later. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuji and pretty much all mirrorless at the current stage are bad at sports, it's just a matter of fact. The continuous AF speed is not fast enough, nor accurate enough for past paced subjects.

 

The rolling shutter effect shouldn't be visible on the X-T10 if you use the mechanical shutter, the electronic shutter could have it but then again, it would mostly be a matter of working around it.

 

We have several sport shooter who would gladly prove me wrong but a Nikon D4S, for example, would be much easier to use in those situations and achieve a higher number of keepers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A camera is a camera is a camera. This is my credo when I am comparing cameras. In the first aproach I do ignore technical differences and just judge if it can do what I want it to do and where I have to make a compromise. And there are always compromises to make.

But then there is a point where I also look at the price and wonder if the additional benefits are worth the additional costs.

It is very likely that a D4s has a faster auto focus than the Fujis. But does anyone KNOW how a D7200 or a D7 II compares to a T10 or T1 with the latest firmware? They would be in the same price range and for most people the more likely alternatives.

How much better are they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How much better are they?

 

From a conceptual standpoint, DSLRs cannot compete with the superior mirrorless AF concept:

 

MILCs don't suffer from back and front focus issues.

MILCs can use hybrid AF to fine-tune AF results.

MILCs can use the entire sensor area for CDAF and PDAF (sadly, not all MILCs take advantage of this option as of now).

MILCs can use virtual AF frames, so there are no blank areas between AF sensors where a tracked subject could be "lost".

MILCs do not require dedicated AF sensors and a dedicated exposure sensor for 3D tracking. This saves space, material and cost (and takes away stuff that can break).

 

So in the end, it's simply a matter of performance. MILCs are pretty new, and so is on-sensor PDAF. There's still plenty of room for innovation and improvement, so it will take a few more years until MILCs will catch up and surpass the best traditional AF sensors with respect to maximum speed and performance. Of course, like 50 MP or 10 fps, this "maximum speed and performance" is only really required in rare cases. But that only matters in the real world, not in photography forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great point about pricing differences affecting comparisons. I would of course be more than happy with a megabucks system but I just cannot justify it as my activity decreases. I can deal with a few blurry action shots as long as I can get some good ones as well. Even the D7100 with 18-300 or 18-200 lens has produced a fair amount of motion blur shots for me. I thought it was a camera issue as it seemed worse than my D3100 at action but Nikon swears it is performing fine. Unless the X-T10 has a major problem tracking flying birds at the beach or shooting from a moving vehicle on vacation I should be ok.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a conceptual standpoint, DSLRs cannot compete with the superior mirrorless AF concept:

 

The interesting part is that except potential front/rear focus issues (which I luckily don't have), my many years old DSLR still spanks the crap out of an X-T1 with firmware 4.0. It'll probably take until X-T4 or 5 or later to get to the same reliability and performance (AF, tracking, general camera reliability and usability, battery life, shot to shot black out time and so on) as today's DSLRs have. 

 

Until then we have the smaller size, less weight at similar quality of slow or non moving subjects. Good enough for nearly all use cases, but anybody saying that the MILCs are "better" than DSLRs in anything but size is dreaming in my personal opinion. Whether they need to be is a different story though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canon 40D and 50D with various lenses. The Fuji is a lot better in potential image quality, but the problem is that often enough it's just too slow to actually get the shot. Or it sits with Fuji service because of rubber coming loose, the lens connection not working, the side door bulging or light spilling on to the sensor when and from where it shouldn't ...

 

Conceptually the Fujis have advantages but the technology isn't even close at this point in time to play this advantage properly other than in non or slow moving subject situations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times have you had the camera in the service shop and how long have you owned it cug?

He's referring to isolated incidents some members of this forum have experienced Cy_J.  Outside of this forum, I haven't heard anything negative about the Fuji cameras...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Twice in the service for the X-T1, twice for the X-E2, owned X-T1 less than a year, X-E2 since it came out. Owned 40D (three of them) since 2008 now and none of them has been in the shop even once. 50D is too new (to me) and therefore doesn't count but I expect the same. 

 

Every service also was 4 to 6 weeks where the camera was gone without much information from Fuji service about what was going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@cug: Thank you for taking the time to answer my questioin.

It seems that taking pictures of moving objects can lead to different results. This video from May 2014 shows a comparison of four mirror less cameras and a Nikon D4s.

At that pre FW 4.0 time the Fuji T1 was the slowest, but still capable. They also came to the conclusion that the Panasonic GH4 also mirrorless comes very close to the Nikon D4s.

My point is not to discuss if a morrorles has 90% or 99% of the performance of the D4s. But even 80% of the best of the best DSLR should be usable in many cases. Your experience obviously is different where you came to the conclusion that the T1 can be used for stills and slowly moving objects only. 

So apart from all objective measurements the subjective user experience can be very different.

 

Edit:

As the above is just 2nd hand information here my own experience:

At good light condition the auto focus is quite fast but it becomes slow and inaccurate if the light becomes dim. My biggest problem when trying to track a moving object is the long  time where the viewer is dark after each shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty much my experience as well: tracking is so-so, for a mirrorless it's not too bad, but it can't really compare even to my old 40D or 50D, and with the incredible lag you get through viewfinder blackout and not seeing the actual real time image during continuous shooting, close up and erratic movements are nearly impossible to frame. 

 

Also the AF is plain unreliable and goes into a complete block from time to time, taking forever to recover. 

 

Overall, the Fujis are still not there in terms of hardware reliability, add then all the weird shit the camera does or does differently or things that don't make sense or ... it's just not a system I would want to use under stressful, fast paced conditions. Sure I get some shots, but I get probably ten times more usable shots from an old Canon DSLR. That's the point. 

 

Therefore my point is: as much as the Fuji are theoretically superior in concept (no front/back focus issues), that doesn't help until it becomes an actual day to day advantage. You just have to read the various forums - there is a continuous stream of people coming in asking whether they are doing something wrong because they can't get the darn things to auto focus properly, but the real hit are the answers then:

 

- "use zone focus"

- "pre-focus to the right distance"

- "anticipate the moment"

- "learn how the camera works, slow down and take deliberate shots"

 

That's pretty all a bunch of BS instead of just saying: "Hey, you got a camera that doesn't focus the way you expected. Either get used to it or get something else." Might sound harsh, but it's the bitter truth. And for most people it's also the right advise: they'll get used to it and find their way OR they are so pissed that they switch to something else (or go back). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any Nikon converts want to share their experience? 

 

I sold almost all of my Nikon stuff about 6 months ago and switched to the X-T1, which is the same image quality as the X-T10.

I'm a full time photographer/videographer and the Fuji has been great (I don't use it for video). The evf and manual controls were the main reason I wanted to switch.

The smaller size has been a bonus I hadn't previously valued. Now everyone with a bulky Canon or Nikon looks sort of foolish to me.

Focus is a little slower for moving objects in continuous modes, but my "hit rate" is higher. I mostly use single point focus and it has proven more accurate than my Nikons.

Image quality is great with every Fuji lenses I have. I'm not having to add any sharpness in software like I was with my Nikon stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...]

That's pretty all a bunch of BS instead of just saying: "Hey, you got a camera that doesn't focus the way you expected. Either get used to it or get something else." Might sound harsh, but it's the bitter truth. And for most people it's also the right advise: they'll get used to it and find their way OR they are so pissed that they switch to something else (or go back). 

 

Different companies have different idea as on how to focus should work, heck, they can't even agree on the ISO value...

 

The camera is just a tool and with any tool, you need to learn to use it, different tools need different learning process. It might not the case of the casual shooter who just need to point at something and expect a great shot but those of us who got Fuji to actually slow down our picture taking and not just spray around the area because "one of them will be good enough".

 

My X-T1 never let me down on the AF (aside fast subjects), if it misfired, it was because I was the one who made the mistake, the same thing applies when I use any other cameras. The tool by itself is rather stupid, it just take a picture. You could do that with marginally great effect with your regular 2 years old iPhone.

 

The hardest part when using a Fuji is to get rid of your old reflex and expectation from Canikon, they simply don't work the same way, I love how the D3S never let down on the AF, it can even find focus point when my eyes can't seen any. But I still prefer my Fuji even with its "faults" and its merits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More great feedback, from everyone. Cug's experience while concerning can happen with any product. There are bound to be some issues on a few of them (5% for Fuji and most other camera brands according to Consumer Reports). Thanks for sharing the video Jurgen, it really helped to see the camera in a real world situation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@cug: Thank you for taking the time to answer my questioin.

It seems that taking pictures of moving objects can lead to different results. This video from May 2014 shows a comparison of four mirror less cameras and a Nikon D4s.

At that pre FW 4.0 time the Fuji T1 was the slowest, but still capable. They also came to the conclusion that the Panasonic GH4 also mirrorless comes very close to the Nikon D4s.

My point is not to discuss if a morrorles has 90% or 99% of the performance of the D4s. But even 80% of the best of the best DSLR should be usable in many cases. Your experience obviously is different where you came to the conclusion that the T1 can be used for stills and slowly moving objects only. 

So apart from all objective measurements the subjective user experience can be very different.

 

Edit:

As the above is just 2nd hand information here my own experience:

At good light condition the auto focus is quite fast but it becomes slow and inaccurate if the light becomes dim. My biggest problem when trying to track a moving object is the long  time where the viewer is dark after each shot.

I'm having a hard time figuring out why they chose to test the X-T1 with the 55-200 instead of the comparable 50-140.  It is the lens that is the highest quality and the most comparable to the other lenses tested on the other bodies.  Do any of you feel that the 50-140 would have allowed the X-T1 score higher?

 

Edit: Nevermind.  The information I'm finding is that the 50-140 was introduced in November of '14 and this video was published in May '14.  That explains why they didn't use it, but in my opinion, it also drastically changes the outcome for Fuji with all the firmware upgrades since then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more interested in how the X-T1 stacks up against the other MILCs, not against the D4s. I have no interest in a bulky DSLR. I like the Fuji system but I'm concerned that the AF technology just isn't in the same league with the competition for whatever reason. Would the rankings of these cameras still be the same today as it was a year ago? IMHO, the X-T1 is a pretty expensive camera to be exhibiting these shortcomings. Hell, even the X-T10 and the X-E2 are expensive cameras and they too should perform as well as their competition in this regard. IMHO.

 

Still trying to decide on Fuji and this is a concern. I like the look and feel of the cameras, the sensor and the lenses. IQ is terrific. All good. But if the thing can't focus properly in a hurry it's all out the window.

 

What to do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sold my D300 & lenses, including the 18-200, 18 months ago to buy an XT1 from one of the first batches available here in the Middle East. I really liked the D300 & 18-200 for travel & while it is not a super sharp lens by any means, it made pix I was quite happy with & that won several local competitions, so the 12MP & average sharpens of the lens were no technical barrier.

It's a tough place for cameras here, with the temperature extremes and ever present dust in the air, so changing lenses is not something I liked to do very often, so the 18-200 stayed on most of the time. In the end, it was the weight & size that became a deciding factor in favour of the Fuji. Small planes & big camera bags do not go together. Pro friends, such as Zack Arias, Dave Hobby & Bobby Lane all switched to Fuji or at least added Fuji's to their gear list to try the system out & see if they could ditch their full frames & many bags of gear when on travel assignments. I'm not within long distance driving of their talent but I thought if they could make a living with the Fuji's, then I could surely make some pix I'd be happy with. So, I swapped & on the whole, have no regrets. Aside from the light leak when the accessory door was open which affected some of the early XT1's, I've had no issues at all. The lenses are noticeably sharper than the 18-200 but I have to swap between the 18-55 & the 55-200 to get the same range. While these aren't rated as weather resistant, they have coped with the tough conditions here & also been out in bad weather on the Norwegian Atlantic coast & around London on stormy days without a hitch (of course, everyone's experience could vary & Fuji do not rate them as weather resistant).

The biggest issue is getting used to the different feel in the hand & placement of controls. The tech specs from camera to camera are pretty much the same & just about every modern camera will make a good photo in experienced hands. For me, it comes down to that tactile experience & whether you can adapt to the different haptics in a reasonable time. The XT10 is a smaller camera than the XT1 & if you are a person with medium to large hands, this might be a frustrating experience that no amount of usage will overcome. My best advice would be to hire one if you live somewhere where you have access to see if it is a good physical match. Other things to consider are whether you are left or right eye dominant & the placement of the viewfinder & the AF-L & AE-L buttons. If you like to back button focus without taking the camera from your eye & you are left eye dominant, then your nose may get in the way of a smooth access to these buttons. These sorts of things are the more practical considerations that you would need to live with. While it is true that we really buy into a system & the lenses are the backbone of that system while the cameras will come & go, we still tend to keep cameras for several years & several years of frustration will bug you each time you take it out of your camera bag. I really love my XT1 & have had amazing support from Fujifilm Middle East, but I think you should try before you buy if this is at all possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Cy

 

Conscious this is an old thread, but here is my view being a D7100 user.

 

I got the XT1 with the 18-135mm WR lens recently, because:

 

1. it has weather proofing vs the XT10, not sure if this is an issue for you, but I travel a lot.

 

2. Felt more solid and secure in hand - 5'10 so no giant hands ;)

 

3. After rebates over Xmas in the UK, the difference was worth it both from an immediate and a resell perspective.

 

4. This body felt better with the bigger lens on, abalance thing - which will depend on your hands and shooting style.

 

5. Lenses are smaller which is really useful for me - especially the prime 18mm, 27mm & 35mm V2.

 

On the system switch, though I gave up an awesome camera:

 

I use the Fuji more. Did a 10km hike yesterday and hardly felt the weight, even with a ergonomic speed-strap, I always felt the D7100 an encumbrance (note: I am not a small guy).

 

Not having a second card slot is a factor, but not an issue so far.

 

Hope that helps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback. I neglected to update this thread since it was older but I also jumped on an X-T1 and 18-135 combo deal last month. Much like you I am enjoying the new setup without any regrets. I just ordered a me 128gb card which should solve most of my anxiety about the lack of dual card slots. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×