Jump to content

Fuji vs Sony Lenses

matteo

By matteo
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

matteo Apprentice

matteo

Posted
Posted

Hey there, 

 

Before I switched to the Fuji System (X-T2) I was using Sony E-Mount (A6000) with many lenses. 

My Idea was to use the X-T2 for "bigger" lenses and the A6000 for smaller primes and the 10-18.

 

So I made a short (non scientific) comparison of some lenses...

Test conditions inside:

  • levelled Tripod
  • both OIS off
  • 10sec self-timer
  • 6 shots p. Aperture 3x AF/ 3x MF (best result of them...so mainly MF)*
  • Base ISO100
  • Distance +/- 2m-3m
  • RAW files imported in LR (100% NO EBV)
  • AWB (Sony is a bit darker because of the clouds coming up an hour later)

*Sony MF pics were much better than AF. Fuji AF/MF pics were looking almoust the same

 

So let's start: 

 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
matteo Apprentice

matteo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Fuji XF18-55 vs Sony SEL35F18

Fuji left / Sony right 
CENTER

1855F36 35F35MITTE

 
LEFT CORNER

1855F36 35F35linksoben

 
My Conclusion: 
Center-sharpness is almoust the same when you add a bit more contrast to the Sony pics
Corner-sharpness is almoust the same...(in my eyes Fuji looks a tick sharper)
 
The winner for me is the Fuji XF18-55:
  • sharpness on the same level (zoom vs fixed lens!!!)
  • Sony has very slow and loud AF

 

next review comming soon...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
milandro Grand Master

milandro

Posted
Posted

well, I seem to have this permission, because I see them just fine.

 

There are many such tests, some tell us similar things some tell us otherwise. I like Fuji cameras and don’t like Sony’s, lens come with the camera which is the thing that determines a pleasurable experience in shooting it, or not, but nobody and no camera is perfect. 

 

The thing with digital images is that variables are great and number and end results are greatly varying by means of tiny variables.

 

So there can be results that are contradictory, resolution of a text is not the same as resolving grass or foliage or clouds some would object.

 

I have made my choice already.

Link to post
Share on other sites
matteo Apprentice

matteo

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

FUJI XF100-400 vs SEL70200

As I told already...there's a diff. in AWB because there were some clouds an hour later...don't let you cheat by the "darker" Sony image... 

 

Fuji left Sony right

100mm F4.5 Center

100mmF4.5Mitte

 
200mm F5.0 center

200mmF5 Mitte

 

200mm F5.0 left corner

200mmF5 oben links

 
400mm F5.6 center

400mmF5.6 Mitte

 

Conclusion:

I was quite impressed of the Fujis corner sharpness: I mean it's a APS-C lens...Sony is FF. 

Also wide open is not a problem for Fuji.

 

In both tests so far, the vantage was on Sonys side (fixed lens vs zoom / 2.9x Zoom vs 4x Zoom) So should be an easy "win" for Sony. The SEL70-200 was beside my SEL50F18 one of the sharpest lens...now I sold it  ;)

 

 

Edited by matteo
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Giampaolo Masserano
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By Giampaolo Masserano · Posted

      I use a TECHART ring to mount Canon EF lenses on the GFX 50S-II and 100S-II, maintaining image stabilization and autofocus. The only limitation are lenses with a small rear element diameter that make it impossible to cover medium format. Fast lenses like the EF 85/1.2L or the 100-400L, however, work great.
    • thelostkiwi
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By thelostkiwi · Posted

      I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
×
×
  • Create New...