Fujifilm X-T100

[Guest]

The new Fujifilm camera looks like a nice budget/mid-range camera. I wonder how it would stack up to the Canon SL2. The Canon is 50 dollars cheaper, but is on sale now for the same price with a lens, but is the Fujifilm better for photos? I'd like to see Brandon do a video comparing the two midrange cameras.

[xQubeZx]

I’d personally get the Fuji without even thinking. In my mind a much better choice and their design really caters to the people buying the cheaper camera models. The wannabe instagram travel photographers. Who wants an ugly low tier plastic dslr when you can get a beautifully crafted compact hipster fuji that is great as a prop in photos? That is how people debating between these two cameras will think. 

 

The SL2 really got nothing going for them except the EF mount. The optical viewfinder is not even worth as a plus as it is so small and low quality compared to the modern and what it looks like, large EVF. 

[cc143]

18 hours ago, xQubeZx said:

I’d personally get the Fuji without even thinking. In my mind a much better choice and their design really caters to the people buying the cheaper camera models. The wannabe instagram travel photographers. Who wants an ugly low tier plastic dslr when you can get a beautifully crafted compact hipster fuji that is great as a prop in photos? That is how people debating between these two cameras will think. 

 

The SL2 really got nothing going for them except the EF mount. The optical viewfinder is not even worth as a plus as it is so small and low quality compared to the modern and what it looks like, large EVF. 

Actually, it does have dpaf as well, and battery will last longer because you can leave it on without draining it working the evf. 

 

Listen, its not my cup of tea, and I do own a fuji but it is convoluted at best to suggest that the sl2 has nothing going for it other than the EF system. Between the 2, if all someone wanted was a capable camera to strap round their neck when on holiday, the sl2 might actually be the better choice in the real world. I would still buy the fuji though.

[xQubeZx]

On 2018-05-25 at 4:17 PM, cc143 said:

Actually, it does have dpaf as well, and battery will last longer because you can leave it on without draining it working the evf. 

 

Listen, its not my cup of tea, and I do own a fuji but it is convoluted at best to suggest that the sl2 has nothing going for it other than the EF system. Between the 2, if all someone wanted was a capable camera to strap round their neck when on holiday, the sl2 might actually be the better choice in the real world. I would still buy the fuji though.

It might got some more points to it, i totally forgot that i probably has better battery. But still, in my mind there is very little that would push someone to get the SL2 over a X100 if we are looking at both specs and handeling. I don’t know if you tried one of the really low end cameras on Nikon or Canons side and I hate the way the handle. They lack so many controlls and basic software settings that are found in the cheaper mirrorless. They also feel very cheapish built with a lot of plastic. I think the fuji overcomes most these flaws. I have however not held it in my hand so i cant know for sure it feels better of course.

[cc143]

On 28/05/2018 at 6:20 AM, xQubeZx said:

It might got some more points to it, i totally forgot that i probably has better battery. But still, in my mind there is very little that would push someone to get the SL2 over a X100 if we are looking at both specs and handeling. I don’t know if you tried one of the really low end cameras on Nikon or Canons side and I hate the way the handle. They lack so many controlls and basic software settings that are found in the cheaper mirrorless. They also feel very cheapish built with a lot of plastic. I think the fuji overcomes most these flaws. I have however not held it in my hand so i cant know for sure it feels better of course.

The reason they may lack some features, like af-on buttons, aperture scrolls etc. is because they are too small to fit them effectively for someone who actually knows how to use them, therefore, since the user will in most cases rarely use them anyway, they just don't include them. Its why your typical car doesn't have carbon ceramic brakes. 

 

Also, yes I have and although they don't even compare to a professional body, they are miles ahead of most mirrorless cameras. The only one I've tried and am more content with is the x-t2, but I do think that is just ergnomic witchcraft or something. Materials don;t matter that much in the lower end after all, and lets not forget, they will still be more robust. 

[Equilibrium_FOOL]

The question really should be why is the low-tier dslr market so popular when most people will never go out of auto mode, change the lens, or actually need any of the features.  Most point and shoots for around the same price are more compact, lighter, and are more versatile, not to mention less daunting to learn on.  

I see so many travelers with the low end dlsrs, more than those with point and shoots, and it frustrates me every time-kit lens, and auto-mode.

 

In your case the XT-100 is the superior option, and yes the battery lasts not as long, however with some cheap aftermarket options it is almost negligible.  I recently tried out (almost) the entire Fujifilm lineup, and bought the XT-1, and I really like how easy it is to shoot in full manual with the dedicated dials.

[cc143]

33 minutes ago, Equilibrium_FOOL said:

The question really should be why is the low-tier dslr market so popular when most people will never go out of auto mode, change the lens, or actually need any of the features.  Most point and shoots for around the same price are more compact, lighter, and are more versatile, not to mention less daunting to learn on.  

I see so many travelers with the low end dlsrs, more than those with point and shoots, and it frustrates me every time-kit lens, and auto-mode.

 

In your case the XT-100 is the superior option, and yes the battery lasts not as long, however with some cheap aftermarket options it is almost negligible.  I recently tried out (almost) the entire Fujifilm lineup, and bought the XT-1, and I really like how easy it is to shoot in full manual with the dedicated dials.

You are aware the layout has changed to a more traditional command dial style on the xt100? That is one of the reasons why I'm not that drawn to it. You still have to carry them around and run the risk of losing a shot because you have to change battery, or even more common, (it happens to me a lot with the xt10), the camera just not coming out of standby or turning on quick enough. I can have my 5d strapped over my shoulder turned on for days and not worry about that, I know that once I put my finger on the shutter the camera responds immidiately. I seriously forget to turn that thing off sometimes. 

 

Most cheap point and shoots are not that much better than your average phone, which begs the question of why would someone buy and carry around a point and shoot when the device they already carry around in their pocket does the job adequately already? 

 

Also, Auto modes are Auto modes, but they are still more intelligent and capable on a dslr than on a point and shoot. I didn't always know how to use Manual mode, but back when I started using an slr (no d in it), I knew that the "running man" was to be used for sports for instance. You often don't have that much capability in your cheaper point and shoot. 

[Equilibrium_FOOL]

5 minutes ago, cc143 said:

You are aware the layout has changed to a more traditional command dial style on the xt100? That is one of the reasons why I'm not that drawn to it. You still have to carry them around and run the risk of losing a shot because you have to change battery, or even more common, (it happens to me a lot with the xt10), the camera just not coming out of standby or turning on quick enough. I can have my 5d strapped over my shoulder turned on for days and not worry about that, I know that once I put my finger on the shutter the camera responds immidiately. I seriously forget to turn that thing off sometimes. 

 

Most cheap point and shoots are not that much better than your average phone, which begs the question of why would someone buy and carry around a point and shoot when the device they already carry around in their pocket does the job adequately already? 

 

Also, Auto modes are Auto modes, but they are still more intelligent and capable on a dslr than on a point and shoot. I didn't always know how to use Manual mode, but back when I started using an slr (no d in it), I knew that the "running man" was to be used for sports for instance. You often don't have that much capability in your cheaper point and shoot. 

I didn't know exactly how the XT-100 has the dials set up, though even having the non dedicated seems better than the one scroll wheel on entry-level nikons. 

 

The always ready and battery are things that I really miss about my D750, though for me the smaller size and weight now is more important for me.  Also because I don't shoot professionally, I don't need my expensive full frame and lenses.  For my uses, and I imagine also for the majority of people, a more compact system is more versatile.

 

I agree completely, cheap point and shoots are also pointless, as most modern phones take better photos.  I was talking about $300-$1000 "point and shoots," that are more compact and have many (absolutely not all) of the same features of a similarly priced DSLR.

 

[cc143]

2 hours ago, Equilibrium_FOOL said:

I didn't know exactly how the XT-100 has the dials set up, though even having the non dedicated seems better than the one scroll wheel on entry-level nikons. 

 

The always ready and battery are things that I really miss about my D750, though for me the smaller size and weight now is more important for me.  Also because I don't shoot professionally, I don't need my expensive full frame and lenses.  For my uses, and I imagine also for the majority of people, a more compact system is more versatile.

 

I agree completely, cheap point and shoots are also pointless, as most modern phones take better photos.  I was talking about $300-$1000 "point and shoots," that are more compact and have many (absolutely not all) of the same features of a similarly priced DSLR.

 

No one's talking lenses here, for an APS-C system, the fuji lens collection is quite great, I don't think I'd need anything more than they already have (there's some idiots, who have large following in YT mind you that suggest f/1.8 glass is necessary for true equivalence to a FF system but that is BS). In fact I have long argued that the xt3 has the potential of being the perfect camera.

 

That said, I wouldn't give up my Canon just yet, even though its a pain to carry around when travelling, and I don't shoot professionally either. 

 

In my experience, anything under th class of an x100f is not worth it, and I might even recommend someone buy a dslr over a x100f anyway, unless weight and size are significant factors in their decision. Although this is getting a bit OT.  

[Equilibrium_FOOL]

1 hour ago, cc143 said:

No one's talking lenses here, for an APS-C system, the fuji lens collection is quite great, I don't think I'd need anything more than they already have (there's some idiots, who have large following in YT mind you that suggest f/1.8 glass is necessary for true equivalence to a FF system but that is BS). In fact I have long argued that the xt3 has the potential of being the perfect camera.

 

That said, I wouldn't give up my Canon just yet, even though its a pain to carry around when travelling, and I don't shoot professionally either. 

 

In my experience, anything under th class of an x100f is not worth it, and I might even recommend someone buy a dslr over a x100f anyway, unless weight and size are significant factors in their decision. Although this is getting a bit OT.  

The fuji lens range is actually quite amazing, I don't think they really produce a clear lemon like nikon or canon, even the kit lenses are nice, except maybe the 16-50, which I've heard doesn't live up to the quality of the rest of the range.  That does make the system more expensive though, and you certainly have a point that on a budget someone who wants to have a good variety of lenses shouldn't really choose fuji-nikon and canon have more budget options. 

 

I am not bashing the entry level dslr, I know semi-professionals who use them, sometimes as back-ups and sometimes as mains, they absolutely serve a purpose.  What I was talking about are the people that think you need an expensive camera or dslr to take good photos, when they will never expand their lens range or try practicing with their cameras.  And of course there is a camera for every need, some people like having a heavy bulky camera with presence, others like more compact. 

 

Even the X100f is hard to recommend for me, seeing as it was made as the true "photographer's" camera, not as a entry level. 

 

OP abandoned the thread, OT is about all it was for a while.  Speaking of that, why are there so many people who register an account, as a question, then never follow up?  I have seen that a few times since recently.