| Joined: | Wed Apr 18th, 2012 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4207 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
Eric,
I tend to look for supreme ergonomics these days. This is one of the reasons why I would not move to Sony.
Before the release of the Zf, the XT5 and before that the XT3, suited me really well as these Fuji cameras ergonomics were really intuitive. Yes there are difference and some sluggishness in the XT3 about focus lock and speed of acquisition of his lock. The XT5 has largely cured that but it does still have issues if you want it to focus out to infinity e.g. point at sky and focus. I just wont do it you need to find a horizon point and focus on that.
The Zf does not seem to suffer with this issue but it is heavier than the XT5 and the Nikon lenses are also bulkier and heavier for the same focal length range. Nikon 14-30, 24-120 f4 and 100-400mm versus Fuji 10-24, 16-80, 70-300mm.
As far as a travel kit goes I am no longer young and fit so I have decided that for my trip to Peru and hike up to Machu Picchu that I need a functional light camera kit. The XT5 fulfills this need. My preference for the Zf kit is overridden by the fact that its equivalence comes with x2 weight compared to the XT5 kit.
I feel that I compose fairly well but occasionally I do like to crop and image from within an image. The extra MP provides this. Also the XT5 has a panorama shooting feature which the Zf doesnt have. Yes I know I can shoot multiple images from a tripod and post process combine but whilst this is preferable from a quality perspective. However I think that the time taken for each panorama set will soon piss off the guides and fellow hikers as I drop further and further back during each day, whilst with the Fuji I can take a full pano in less than 20 seconds. Also I dont fancy carrying a tripod up the severe inclines!
There seems to be little noise difference between the 40MP APS-C XT5 and the 26MP FF Zf especially in good light but I am sure that in low light the Nikon would be superior.
Thx Jonathan
I’ve still got some Fuji bits and agree that they seem to have embraced the notion of lightweight mirrorless cameras AND lenses while other manufacturers flatter to deceive.
I don’t find the Sony unergonomic but the body and lenses are heavy. I am also a bit concerned about the A1 sensors performance in low light. It seems more noisey that previous cameras (Nikon and Fuji) making me work harder in the computer. It’s almost as though the 40MP even on FX work against you in low light. I looked back at my Sony A7 images with 24mp and somehow they seem less troubled with noise than the A1. (Granted the menu system was a nightmare)
All this has caused me to switch away from the iPad and Affinity photo for processing to seek better results.
Watch this space.
At the moment I am unconvinced that 40MP on this camera is a benefit rather than a potential hindrance. Don’t get me wrong, it’s capable of producing excellent sharp images, but not so cut and dry when there’s a need to crop high iso files.
In perfect lighting, any camera will do …..but in less favourable conditions I feel I am having to post process more with the Sony AI files than I did with the Sony A7 or Nikon 850.
I just miss the times when images out of the camera were good enough, except for a slight tweak of unsharp mask.
Last edited on Sat Dec 2nd, 2023 23:29 by
____________________
Eric