Help me become a Fuji user please?

[Doberman]

Hello Fuji users...

 

I am new to this board and wanted to get some feedback from any X-Pro 2 users that are familiar with the Sony A7X line....

 

I have several systems and very much ready to give the Fuji X-Pro 2 a shot. (I have terrible GAS lately.)

 

What do you guys think?

Why do you think I should switch?

What lenses would you recommend, in what order? (I prefer primes...I love the 35mm. as a daily shooter and love manual lenses).

 

Here is what is really intriguing about the Fuji system. (I do still have my X100, original since it was released day 1):

I shoot RAW but the JPEGs out of camera looks amazing on the Fuji XPRO2.

I love the idea of the Focus joystick.

I love the film look of the B&W with the ability to create RAWs from camera.

 

I may have already answered my question here...

 

Thanks in advance and looking forward to exchanging ideas and learning on this forum...

 

 

 

Murat

[Patrick FR]

- Why do you think I should switch?

Fujinon Lenses, Film Simulations (if you love BW, then Acros looks just great), Sexy cameras, Fun to use, ergonimics (like joystick), Hybrid Viewfinder

 

- What lenses would you recommend, in what order? (I prefer primes...I love the 35mm. as a daily shooter and love manual lenses)

23mmF1.4 - 35mmF2 - Samyang 12mm (manual focus only)

 

Oh... and did I mention the X-Pro2 will get a lot of KAIZEN Love   http://www.fujirumors.com/fuji-guy-billy-x-pro2-is-over-engineered-a-lot-of-potential-not-harnessed-yet-firmware-improvements-coming/

[tdGunter]

Dear Murat,

The one thing you should have mentioned in your 'intriguing features list' to become an obvious X-Pro2 user, is the use of a hybrid viewfinder on your X100. Above all this is what sets the X-Pro2 apart from anything else, even from a Leica rangefinder. Other than that, any modern camera will deliver more than decent results nowadays. Sure the Fujis look good, but that shouldn't be the main reason to buy such a system. If you never make use of the OVF, I would say, save your money for a nice trip, good food and great wine ... and be happy with your Sony gear.

 

tdG

[johant]

It's not the camera ....

 

I would not lightheartedly switch systems.

[deva]

The reason to switch are the Fuji lenses

 

If you love primes, then Fuji is kinda unmatched

 

The 16 1.4... and the 23 1.4... and the 35 1.4... and the 56 1.2... and the 90 f2... all amazing lenses. A pleasure to handle, work with, consistent in feel and great image quality. 

[Aswald]

The photo coming out of the Fujifilm is the main reason. It's just breathtaking.

 

If you love 35mm on FF then the 23 F1.4 is a must. Other than that, I'd recommend the XF60. Odd little fella but takes great pictures. I also love the Samyang 12mm F2. Another odd fella but really sharp lens.

 

Compared to the Sony A7X series, I find that AF is more predictable on the Fujifilm and pictures from Fujifilm have more character.

[addicted2light]

I use both systems, and as you can imagine they are both plenty capable.

 

If you shoot handheld switch to Fuji, they're responsive cameras compared to Sony's (not just the AF).

 

If you shoot on a tripod, especially if you don't use long ( >180mm ) lenses, get yourself an "old" A7r for a lot less money you'd spend switching. (I say this because you already say you have a Sony setup, nothing wrong with Fuji as landscape/tripod cameras).

 

My 2 cents.

[Aswald]

I use both systems, and as you can imagine they are both plenty capable.

 

If you shoot handheld switch to Fuji, they're responsive cameras compared to Sony's (not just the AF).

 

If you shoot on a tripod, especially if you don't use long ( >180mm ) lenses, get yourself an "old" A7r for a lot less money you'd spend switching. (I say this because you already say you have a Sony setup, nothing wrong with Fuji as landscape/tripod cameras).

 

My 2 cents.

I agree on the "old A7R"....

[Doberman]

What first 3 lenses? Why?

[addicted2light]

What first 3 lenses? Why?

 

 

Oh man...this is like asking "which one is the best car"; you'll get thousands of answers, all of them valid, but all of them personal.

 

Anyway this is mine.

 

If you shoot landscapes:

18/2 = small, sharp enough and with a 3d rendering that I find extremely pleasing, especially for close up subjects

35/1.4 or f/2 = both terrific lenses

55-200 (or 55-230 if you hike a lot or if you don't use long lenses that often) = paired with the aforementioned lenses you'll be ready for anything

 

if you shoot portraits / streets / etc.:

18/2 = all of the above about 3d etc., and besides it makes an almost pocketable combo with the X-T10 that's brilliant for street photography

60 macro = with this one and the 18/2 you can as well pass the 35mm 1.4 or f/2, and still have a do-it-all, extremely capable two-lenses setup

16-50 II (the cheap one, not the f/2.8) or 18-55 = for the times you don't want / can't swap lenses. Both excellent (not up to the level of a prime lens, but more than good enough). The 16-50 has slightly weaker corners, but I honestly have to look very hard, in landscape shots, to see them (and I've used Zeiss glass for the last 20 years). And with its image stabilization (model II has the IS improved) I can shoot at 1/2s and still have pin-sharp results 1/3rd of the time*

 

*meaning that if I take 3 shots in succession at least 1 of them will be pin-sharp. Please, keep in mind I've been shooting since I was a little kid, YMMV.

Edited June 1, 2016 by addicted2light

[Aswald]

What first 3 lenses? Why?

What do you normally shoot?