Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I got a second hand X-T3 9 month ago, and I must admit that the first contact was quite disappointing in term of touch and feeling. I just came out of 6 months of handling a Pentax K-1 II and the step down in external build quality and feel was a bit of a chock (I mean the K-1 is a more expensive body, and its not like Pentax is a sound investment currently anyway).

Last week, I sent the X-T3 for repair for an extremely frustrating reason: the shutter button had become unreliable, I was missing 1/2 of my shots. Obviously, some bad connectors, using the touch screen shutter triggered perfectly. Cost of the repair: 230€: replacement of the whole upper part... For a button malfunction...

Maybe I got unlucky, but my old DSLR became "obsolete" way before breaking a mirror spring or a shutter, I would never have thought that my first mirrorless would let me down so fast on a stupid thing. Even the buttons on the controllers of my old sega genesis are still working 25 years later, and they have been hammered countless time)... Fuji would be a great brand if they were focusing less on marketing gimmicks (X-Trans, film simulations) and more on product reliability IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, my previous own camera  was a Canon 7D, I was the third user. It was externally worn out, previous owner really fielded it. Worked like a charm for thousands of photos. Its still in good working condition, simply I don't use it anymore.

You always buy new, but still someone will buy your used camera. The X-T3 I bought was in perfect external condition, I gained trust in the user who was a professional photographer, having this one as backup. I ran some test before hand and I am pretty sure it was not defect when I got it. So I don't blame the seller. Perhaps the one you sold will unfortunately go wrong in 6 months, or in 10 years, who knows ? As for me, buying it new would have save the repair cost if the warranty was still running. Somehow, I lost my bet this time but it's fine, I'll get a X-T3 with a brand new upper part. Simply I did not save that much money due to the repair cost.

I am a bit more shaken in my choice of entering Fuji system. I found out that the issue I faced was not unique, and several users reported it. I saw in another post (the one I erroneously posted in first) that people had the feeling of a quality drop between the X-T3 and the X-T4, this leave me a bit dubious as I was already not seduced by the X-T3 external build quality.

This has nothing to do with the picture qualities, which are perfect for me. If the defect does not come back, then I am good. Fingers crossed.

 

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
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • A fungus in the forest.

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

      (p.s. Open Topic.)  
    • The backslashes you are referring are just symbols denoting path.  Once you import into these LUTS into Davinci Resolve those backslashes are removed by default and you only see is the true file name which has no backslashes.  Convince yourself of this by opening the LUT folder from the Davinci Resolve Project Settings.  Do you see any backslashes in those LUT names? Of course not.  The only name you see is the one that has the underscores and the periods. These LUTS work as designed without having to change any path names.  However, they need to be set up properly through CSTs and by what is supported in Davinci Resolve.  Hence, the FLog2C film simulation LUTS cannot be used because Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut color space and the FLog2C gamut. Alternatively, Davinci Resolve does support Flog2 film simulation LUTS because the color space for FLog2 is Rec 2020 and there is an FLog2 gamut. If all you are doing is changing the path names then you are not getting the correct results.
    • I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
×
×
  • Create New...