Fuji X-T2 & Sony a6300

[epscott]

Now that the Sony a6300 has been released, we get to see what was possibly withheld from the X-Pro 2 and what it may imply for the X-T2. I have to admit that this now complicates my buying decision. I love my X-T1 and it's been great for what I wanted to do with it. The possibilities in the X-Pro 2 have me ready to click buy but I wanted to see exactly what the a6300 was gonna have under the hood. Needless to say, the a6300 sensor specs are pretty good. If the Fuji/Sony relationship is as strong as some suspect, I'm wondering if the X-T2 is the camera that Sony is forcing to be withheld for 6 months while Sony gains an economic foothold with its a6300. To me, the timing aspect seems perfect as we are just about 6 months away from Photokina. If the X-T2 has the a6300 sensor...I will buy 2 on release day lol.

 

As an aside, when the X-T2 does get released...which camera gets flagship status? I would think that it would be the X-T2.

 

What do you all think and knowing this now, will you be willing to hold off on an X-Pro 2 purchase in order to wait and see what the X-T2 will bring to the table? I don't know if I can hold out for 6 months.

[Larry Bolch]

 

What do you all think and knowing this now, will you be willing to hold off on an X-Pro 2 purchase in order to wait and see what the X-T2 will bring to the table? I don't know if I can hold out for 6 months.

 

Not for a moment. I don't care if the X-T2 has a built-in transistor radio and a teletype machine for retro, and comes with a full-time klezmer band that plays horas as I shoot while dancing around me. Out of the countless cameras I have shot over a lifetime, the X-Pro1 clearly stands out as the single most enjoyable tool I have ever used. It is as if Fujifilm plumbed my photographer's soul and built a camera just for me. It is only logical to add an X-Pro2 when it ships.

[Patrick FR]

A6300: no IBIS, no more MP, no backlit sensor... in the Fuji world this would have triggered a huge shitstorm the A6300 has an even wider Phase Detection Pixel coverage. That's the most interesting point.

 

However, I hear of a vastly improved Contrast Detection AF with the X-Pro2. And sources confirm that the X-Pro2 can "see in the dark, where my eyes can't see". Let's see if the A6300 can match this

 

I doubt the Sony A6300 will beat the X-TransIII X-Pro2 regaring IQ (focus-numerique tests say that X-TransIII is as good as Full Frame Sony A7II at ISO 6400).

 

So in theory, the only advantage I see for the A6300 is AF... in theory. But if the X-Pro2 AF is really as good as all the reviewer (and my sources) say, I can't see any reason to buy an A6300.

 

Oh... and never forget, when you talk about Fuji, you always should keep in mind the great glass we have

[mkay]

i have also seen the specs and the real thinks which get me thinking were the pdaf poinst (wider and amount) and the 4k video. i guess, other than the color filter the sensors will be the same and it seems that backlit has really no advantage with an aps-c sized sensor. but we will have to wait for some real world pix of both cameras.

and for me if the x-t2 has the evf of the leica sl, the joystick of the pro-2 and maybe the pdaf points of the A6300 i will pre order it.. other wise i will (maybe not) wait for the first price drop.. 

[Nick05]

I ended up placing the pre-order on the X-Pro2. I always sort of wanted the X-Pro1 but went with the X-E1. The AF wasn't quite where I needed it to be for what I shoot, so I ended up getting the X-T1 when it was released. The AF on that was good and only got better, so it ruled out the X-Pro1 for me. The X-Pro2 changes all this and gives me everything I wanted and more. I wanted to wait for a silver one with the 35mm f/2 lens as a kit, but I just couldn't resist any longer. If this camera turns out to be as good as the reviews claim, I think I will be saying goodbye to my DSLR for good. when they announce the X-T2, I'll make a decision about it. It could make a nice two camera kit.

[EyesUnclouded]

For the life of me, I cannot find any meaning in comparing the a6300 with what we expect the X-T2 to be.

 

1) If you are heavily and primarily into video, then investing in Fuji was a bad decision anyway. The X-T2 might change that, but, in my view, it's not that Fuji is trying to lure Panasonic or Sony customers: it's more about giving existing Fuji users an excuse not to buy into another brand.

 

2) The a6300 is a smaller camera, with a format closer to the X-E2. It has no (official) battery grip and IMO is not suited at all for larger lenses. The X-T1 (and T2) are manageable even with the largest 100-400mm Fuji lens, ideally with grip attached.

 

3) The X-T1/2 aim to offer a more "SLR" like experience and that extends to the larger viewfinder and general format. I can't see anyone preffering this type of camera choosing the a6300 instead.

 

4) The X-T line will always be weather sealed and it's almost certain that the X-T2 will be better in this than the X-T1. The a6300 is "weather resistant" at best (meaning, no seals, really).

 

In fact the only area that these two cameras could be compared, would be in AF performance shooting action/sports/wildlife. Here the a6000 was already quite capable. The point is, would you shoot wildlife with a 600mm equivalent lens using the tiny Sony body? With what lens?

 

Comparing the a6300 with the X-Pro2 makes (barely) more sense, and that is being discussed in other threads here.

[Marc G.]

Now that the Sony a6300 has been released, we get to see what was possibly withheld from the X-Pro 2 and what it may imply for the X-T2. I have to admit that this now complicates my buying decision. I love my X-T1 and it's been great for what I wanted to do with it. The possibilities in the X-Pro 2 have me ready to click buy but I wanted to see exactly what the a6300 was gonna have under the hood. Needless to say, the a6300 sensor specs are pretty good. If the Fuji/Sony relationship is as strong as some suspect, I'm wondering if the X-T2 is the camera that Sony is forcing to be withheld for 6 months while Sony gains an economic foothold with its a6300. To me, the timing aspect seems perfect as we are just about 6 months away from Photokina. If the X-T2 has the a6300 sensor...I will buy 2 on release day lol.

 

As an aside, when the X-T2 does get released...which camera gets flagship status? I would think that it would be the X-T2.

 

What do you all think and knowing this now, will you be willing to hold off on an X-Pro 2 purchase in order to wait and see what the X-T2 will bring to the table? I don't know if I can hold out for 6 months.

 

Why even compare a Sony camera to a Fuji? The only advantage of the A6300 I see is the number of focus points. And it seems like some of them cannot be dialed into.

 

Such Sonys are fine for people who buy the camera with the kit zoom and be done with. Sonys lens lineup is ridiculously holey.

 

The repeated nonsense about Sony vs Fuji just goes to show that people have no idea what they actually want. 

[Tikcus]

As a former Sony E user, I personally wouldn't go back now, could not go back to needing to go into menus to alter aperture, shutterspeed, and ISO - to auto shooters or just shutter priority or aperture priority this is a smaller issue as all you need to alter is 1 dial, and can be done without looking at the camera.

 

However if I was not already a fuji shooter, and was not interested in supertelephoto lenses (without needing an adapter), an Alpha 6300 + 35mm OSS F/1.8 + 50mm OSS F/1.8 + 55-210 OSS is about the same price as X-Pro2 + 1 lens.

 

I really feel the Alpha 6300 is not competing with the X-Pro 2 (the Alpha is missing to much)

 

I feel the questions to ask is does the A6300 offer enogh over the XT-10 to justify the extra the A6300 costs.

 

On the focus points that is one area sony wins, not just with PD, the contrast detection auto focus on the A6300 is 169 points; this is up from 25 points on the A6000, a massive potential improvement in low light

[Marc G.]

What does the number of focus points have to do with low light performance?

[umad?]

What does the number of focus points have to do with low light performance?

Not really much. number of AF points is mostly marketing talk (as soon as you have reached a number that you can live with) 

[darknj]

[...] has a built-in transistor radio and a teletype machine for retro, and comes with a full-time klezmer band that plays horas as I shoot while dancing around me. [...]

 

NOW That's something I would LOVE to have for the sake of silliness and ensued hilarity/chaos during any events

 

But yeah the Sony a6300 doesn't move my needle, it barely register it, the 2 points that I like about that new Sony:

 

- Massive amount of AF point, I love being able to exactly pick the point I want during the focus.

- No blackouts during Continuous shots, but I have been perfectly able to live without it, so... meh ?

 

That aside, the rest of the camera looks nice but that's about it. The Nikon D500 is still the X-T2 contender in my book.

[Tikcus]

What does the number of focus points have to do with low light performance?

 

My comment was about the new contrast system compared to model it replaces (and previous to that) sony had used the same 25 point CDAF since the NEX line.

 

As in it is a new system, and not just more points

 

Having said this, multiple focus point can work together to improve reliability (this has diminishing returns)

[danwells]

The a6300 is not a fair comparison to an X-Pro or X-T body - it's really somewhere between an X-E and X-A body with a really nice sensor and a few techie features (primarily in video). Sony's always had a philosophy of "a lot of sensor for the money, often by skimping on other things"

 

Even beyond the award-winning Sony APS-C lens lineup , which they show little sign of trying to improve (their recent lens efforts have been focused almost exclusively on big, heavy FE lenses) it's a relatively low-end body in most ways. There are only two control dials (one of them the rear vertical dial, which is less comfortable to use). The design seems intended to be used in Program mode, with the top dial for exposure compensation. It is certainly possible to design a camera with a "modern" interface of unlableled, modal dials that still offers a lot of control (Olympus E-M1, many higher-end DSLRs, and Sony's own a7 series). The APS-C a series have never been control focused cameras (except for the original NEX-7). A lot of common adjustments such as ISO and drive mode. involve diving into the menu system, which, like all camera menu systems, needs work

 

It's also not a weathersealed body. Even the first generation a7 series, which Sony claims ARE somewhat  weathersealed, aren't actually gasket sealed like most pro and advanced amateur DSLRs, most Pentax DSLRs (including lower-end models), the Olympus E-M5 and E-M1 lines, or the X-T1 and X-Pro 2. From what I can figure out  (the wording is tricky), it's somewhere in between nothing at all and the first generation a7 series - maybe about as good as an X-E2, which Fuji doesn't claim as sealed at all (and it has no gaskets), but it IS built to better tolerances than many cameras, and with some care to minimize dust entry.

 

The viewfinder seems (all I've seen are spec sheets) to be roughly equivalent to an X-E2 finder - competent to be sure, but nothing that will compete with a modern X-Pro or X-T camera). My suspicion is that the X-T2 may show up with something like the Leica SL finder?!?

 

My conjecture on the X-T2 is that they are likely to move it upscale, to introduce it as a high-end hybrid camera with close to Nikon D500 stills speed plus very serious 4k video. I think we'll see video specs in the X-T2 that are a significant improvement over the a6300, primarily because of the much faster card write speed (Fuji will be capable of using UHS-II at full speed, which I've heard not even the A7rII does). I could also see Fuji taking more care to cool the sensor. Remember that the X-Pro 2 has shown up (on EOSHD) as a surprisingly (very) competent video camera - they've figured out how to demosaic X-Trans on the fly.

 

Until Fuji gives us an X-E3 (or a midrange X-T body), which may well be a while in order to keep high-end body sales going, the distinction of the a6300 will be that it is by far the cheapest way to get that sensor. Of course, you get the Sony 16-50 powerzoom instead of the 16-55 f2.8 Fujinon...

 

The a6300 still doesn't show me that Sony really cares about APS-C (they certainly ARE innovating in the a7 line). An A7000 body with weathersealing, a great finder and better controls (plus IBIS?) and a few great APS-C LENSES would go a long way...

[epscott]

Uhhhhhhhh.....I'll chalk this up to simply the language barrier lol.

 

Let me be clear...like Bernie Sanders clear.

 

1. In NO way in my OP did I ever compare any Sony camera to a Fuji camera.

 

2. In NO way did I ever imply that my buying decision was ever between a Sony camera or a Fuji camera.

 

3. I said very explicitly that my desire to buy the XPro 2 is now complicated by the fact that the impending X-T2 will probably ship with another Sony made sensor....JUST LIKE THE X-PRO 2 and IF...IF it happens to be the same sensor that's in the new a6300....that I would buy 2. That clearly means 2 X-T2's. 

 

4. In NO way did I ever state that I would ever buy a Sony camera, or even consider buying a Sony camera. 

 

How anyone can read anything differently from my post is beyond comprehension. With that...

 

What could happen is that the X-T2 ships with the same EXACT SONY MADE sensor that is in the new X-Pro 2. If that is the case, then I'm buying the XPro2 as soon as I can and will buy 1 X-T2 on release day. But if the X-T2 has the new Sony sensor that's in the a6300...for me that's a game changer as I WANT 4K video in my primary cameras. 

[ShutterNot]

The PRO 2 and A6300 appear to have the same sensor. Is there any reason to believe that the PRO 2 firmware down the road could not provide additional function that the A6300 appears to have ... or might have ?

 

I can't wait to enjoy the PRO 2 starting end of February. I should have enough time to get to know the camera in time for Spring blossoms.

[danwells]

The sensor in the X-Pro2 is the EXACT SAME SENSOR as the one in the a6300 - the 4K video is a firmware decision on Fuji's part (they've even hinted pretty strongly that it can potentially be turned on in firmware in the existing X-Pro 2 - given their tendency to Kaizen, I'm more or less expecting it). The X-T2 will have the same sensor as the other two, with (probably very advanced) 4K turned on from Day 1. I suspect that there will be some differences between the 4K the X-Pro 2 gets from a firmware upgrade and what the (more hybrid oriented) X-T2 gets.

 

My personal choice on X-Pro 2 and X-T2 bodies (I like having two bodies, as the OP seems to as well) is going to be one of each. First, I want to get the new sensor in my hands in February, and second, the bodies are different enough that I can see switching which of the two is primary depending on what I'm doing. The controls, on the other hand, are close enough that a mixed bag shouldn't be distracting. I don't depend enough on video that having two X-T2 bodies would be better, or on the OVF that I'd prefer two X-Pro 2.

[umad?]

My comment was about the new contrast system compared to model it replaces (and previous to that) sony had used the same 25 point CDAF since the NEX line.

You could change the CDAF system with firmware, there aren't really hardware limitations (except sensor read out and processor speed, but both was good with the A6000) 

 

The PRO 2 and A6300 appear to have the same sensor. Is there any reason to believe that the PRO 2 firmware down the road could not provide additional function that the A6300 appears to have ... or might have ?

Theoretically: yes. Don't know what your are thinking of. 

But to be precise .......

 

The sensor in the X-Pro2 is the EXACT SAME SENSOR as the one in the a6300 

.....no. the sensor as a whole is not exactly the same. The sensel and read out are probably the same. But there are differences. Different amount of PDAF pixels, CFA, microlenses... So there are differences and thus limitations. 

But yes, the sensor is 4k capable and we will probably see a camera that supports it soon.

[epscott]

An option that I would welcome, 4K or not, please decouple the video from any color profile.

[gdanmitchell]

Not for a moment. I don't care if the X-T2 has a built-in transistor radio and a teletype machine for retro, and comes with a full-time klezmer band that plays horas as I shoot while dancing around me.

 

Regardless of how one feels about the main issue, this deserves a nomination for best forum prose of the year. ;-)

 

In another post someone stated that the XPro2 and, presumably, the XT2 have the "exact" same sensor as the Sony camera. But wait... what about the unique photo site pattern of the X-trans sensor? The Sony doesn't have that and everything I have read says that the XPro2 does. I also thought that the on-sensor AF system was different.

[miksha]

As an aside, when the X-T2 does get released...which camera gets flagship status? I would think that it would be the X-T2.

 

What do you all think and knowing this now, will you be willing to hold off on an X-Pro 2 purchase in order to wait and see what the X-T2 will bring to the table? I don't know if I can hold out for 6 months.

I would think the X-T2 is the Flagship camera, but that's only b/c I shoot an X-T1 !!  Assuming* Fuji hasn't declared which of their cameras is the flagship, it would be better if they didn't- that way the X-Pro shooters can feel THEY have the flagship, and the X-T

shooters can feel THEY do. Not that it matters- it only matters that we shoot with the camera that makes us happy!

 

That said, you seem anxious to part ways with $1,600 cash, but that's your call. I'll be waiting for the X-T2, and keep my X-T1 as a second body. One will have the 55-200, the other the 18-55. Finally, the need to change lenses will get cut by 75%. You can rest assured Fuji will have some new magic in the X-T2 that makes it worth the wait. All the best, though, on whatever you decide.

[olli]

As a former Sony E user, I personally wouldn't go back now, could not go back to needing to go into menus to alter aperture, shutterspeed, and ISO - to auto shooters or just shutter priority or aperture priority this is a smaller issue as all you need to alter is 1 dial, and can be done without looking at the camera.

 

However if I was not already a fuji shooter, and was not interested in supertelephoto lenses (without needing an adapter), an Alpha 6300 + 35mm OSS F/1.8 + 50mm OSS F/1.8 + 55-210 OSS is about the same price as X-Pro2 + 1 lens.

 

I really feel the Alpha 6300 is not competing with the X-Pro 2 (the Alpha is missing to much)

 

I feel the questions to ask is does the A6300 offer enogh over the XT-10 to justify the extra the A6300 costs.

 

On the focus points that is one area sony wins, not just with PD, the contrast detection auto focus on the A6300 is 169 points; this is up from 25 points on the A6000, a massive potential improvement in low light

 

As another former NEX user I would have still been shooting Sony if they had produced an upgrade for the NEX-7 instead of abandoning that line and if they had shown anywhere near the same commitment to producing quality E-mount lenses that they have to producing FE-mount lenses. Sony abandoned NEX users. The A6300 is undoubtedly a nice camera but the lens line up is poor and it's impossible to be sure that Sony has any long term commitment to the format. Since I buy cameras for the long term, even if it were a superior camera to my current X-E2, I still wouldn't buy it.

[danwells]

The differences are not in the sensor itself, but in the various layers of filtering material on top of the sensor - neither Bayer nor X-Trans are part of the sensor - they are color filters placed over the top at the end of the production process (or possibly even after production - I don't know if Sony puts the X-Trans filter on before shipping the sensor to Fuji, or if Fuji actually applies the filter once they receive it.

 

As far as I understand it (and I may be wrong), phase detect AF is largely a firmware function, although it relies on masks placed over part of certain pixels - again in a layer atop the sensor, not within it.

 

Anti-aliasing filters and infrared-cut filters are also placed atop the sensor, and then the whole pile is covered by a scratch resistant cover glass. Using the same sensor, you can construct several cameras with seemingly different configurations. Starting with the simplest, just put an IR-cut filter and a cover glass on the sensor, and you have something fit to be used in a Leica Monochrom. Take that and add a Bayer (or X-Trans) color filter and an anti-aliasing filter if you want one, and you have a basic DSLR sensor (it's a stop or two slower than the base monochrome sensor because the color filter steals light). For a mirrorless camera with on-sensor PDAF, you need to either modify the color filter layer slightly or cut slits in it and add another layer that masks the focus pattern (I don't know which they actually do).

 

The critical point is that this all takes place in layers OVER the sensor, not in the sensor itself. The difference between the X-Pro 2 and a6300 sensors takes place in the color filter layer, and in an AF masking layer that may or may not be part of the color filter layer. Fuji doesn't use an anti-aliasing filter, and Sony may or may not in the a6300, and it is possible they use different IR-cut layers as well.

[danwells]

I also agree completely with Olli about the lens lineup. Sony has shown absolutely no commitment to APS-C lenses above the entry lever. A few of the FE lenses are appropriate and round out the lineup, but most are large and heavy. Perhaps the most glaring example of this is the kit lens they chose - the embarrassingly bad 16-50 powerzoom. It's actually a WORSE lens than the standard 18-55 f3.5-5.6 kit lenses sold with bottom-end DSLRs (and by the time you reach a $1000 body, Canon and Nikon offer kits with lenses far better than the cheap 18-55). If you look for a better standard zoom in Sony's lineup, a slight improvement is easy to find - there's the standard 18-55, no better or worse than any other kit 18-55 (other than Fuji's 18-55 XF, which is in a different league, a stop faster and of much higher optical quality). Then you find four separate editions of the 18-200 travel zoom (original, newer version in silver and black, and a powerzoom for video), none of them of any special distinction, an 18-105 powerzoom and finally the overpriced 16-70 Zeiss. If Fuji made them, all except possibly the Zeiss would be classed as XC lenses. If you'd prefer to use a prime (or are dissatisfied with the zooms), there are three choices at 35mm, but only the very expensive (and heavy) FE Zeiss Distagon is of any real distinction. Wider than normal, there are a couple of lousy pancake primes and a very nice 24mm Zeiss Sonnar, along with a decent 10-18 zoom. Longer than normal, there's a decent 50mm (and the FE 55), a very low-end 55-200 and one (soon to be two) FE options at 70-200, both of which are heavy, plus a big but very sharp 90mm FE macro.

 

Compared to the Fujinons, a very motley selection of lenses, with only a couple of options aimed at higher-end APS-C (the 24mm Sonnar and the 16-70, possibly the 10-18). Other than that, there are lenses aimed at $350 bodies, at video,  and big, heavy full-frame lenses.

[EddieX]

As an aside, when the X-T2 does get released...which camera gets flagship status? I would think that it would be the X-T2.

 

What do you all think and knowing this now, will you be willing to hold off on an X-Pro 2 purchase in order to wait and see what the X-T2 will bring to the table? I don't know if I can hold out for 6 months.

 

Hello, my first post on this forum.  But wanted to share this bit of info....

 

Senior Fujifilm executive Toru Takahashi said:

We have two flagships. The X-T1 and the X-Pro2. [Even after] the launch of the X-T1 the X-Pro1 still had a function. We have two different kinds of photographers to cater for.

 

So strait from the source, Fuji considers both cameras to be flagships.

 

As for what I think X-T2 will bring to the table:

Bigger (E)VF compared with the X-Pro2 (maybe same size as X-T1 but more resolution?)

Faster refresh rate then 85fps, maybe even 120fps

Tilt screen, maybe with touch (ala X70)

Maybe 4k video (not that I care about video, but the X-Processor Pro can handle it)

Faster then 8FPS (X-Pro2), maybe 10FPS

Dual card slots (I'd like for both if possible to be USH-II compliant)

Joystick

Maybe more phase detection points

 

All of those points that I think the X-T2 will have are based on the camera being catered more towards fast-pace action like Fuji said...

 

Toru Takahashi:

When we started the X-series with the X100 we were aiming at street photographers. And the X-Pro1 and now the X-Pro2 are extensions [of that concept]. The X-T1 is for those photographers who like to photograph sports, nature and wildlife. What they like to shoot is different, so we need to provide for two different kinds of photographers.

[El Lawrence]

For what do daily, the X-T1 is a marvelous camera, and any of the performance and refinement features from the X-Pro 2 that eventually go into the X-T2 form-factor will be greatly appreciated, and seal the deal on my upgrading when the X-T2 is released. As far as the Sony a6300 is concerned, it looks like a fine camera, but I'm completely imbedded in Fujinon glass, which in my opinion is second to none and as a professional it's great knowing that the system I've chosen for my companies future is dedicated to IQ and customer satisfaction, and I'm sticking with Fujifilm with no second thoughts after what they've done with the X-Pro 2 and their lens roadmap.