Endless Mirrorless Paralysis Analysis - to leap or upgrade FF DSLR gear, that is the question

I think you need to try the Fuji. I am finding that a lot of Fuji owners are very biast towards Fuji and that nothing else beats it and they are the best of the best.

Users of both seem to have a better understanding of each and will give you good arguments for both.

Well, that might be just what I read lol
 
JJ! said:
I think you need to try the Fuji. I am finding that a lot of Fuji owners are very biast towards Fuji and that nothing else beats it and they are the best of the best.

Users of both seem to have a better understanding of each and will give you good arguments for both.

Well, that might be just what I read lol
Click to expand...
TBH I think most owners of any brand tend to be biased whether they care to admit it or not ;)
 
Simes123 said:
OK, so thanks all again for this feedback - it's been quite helpful. As I've sold least used stuff, and stuff I plan to upgrade, I've actually left myself in a reasonable place to be. I think my decision is...drum roll.....

A bit of Fuji, and a bit of do nothing.....while ring fencing the money I had for FF upgrades, and retaining the FF gear that would be retained if I stayed with the FF Canon set up.

So I'll buy a Fuji XT-2 and 18-55 for now, and see if I feel the love that everyone else seems to feel for the system.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the right decision. If you were professional I think you may have had a better case to stick with Canon, but considering there are pros using the X-T2 as their main kit the argument that it isn't suitable is not that strong. Someone mentioned weddings, I've read about a few pros shooting weddings exclusively with the X-T2 and X-Pro2, they seem very happy with their choice.

If you are not taking a lot of pictures with your current kit I'd say it's not working for you, buying the 5D IV would have you excited for a while taking more pics, but the novelty would wear off. From what I've read it's a good camera, but so is the 5D III, the difference is a step, it's not a leap and some say not even a jump especially if you are not interested in video. I'm guessing it would soon be sat there most days with you wondering what you need to do to get energised to take more pictures. In my opinion the answer is to make sure you have a camera with you most of the time. I just wonder if you'd see much difference upgrading to the IV, are the images going to be that different? Not from what I've read, if you are printing out large format and displaying them it would be a different consideration maybe, but if they mostly sit in Lightroom an upgrade would just be frustrating I reckon.

At least with a different system you will have something new to learn, to play with, images will look different. I think the route you've taken is the right one, I'm interested to know how you get on with it and what you eventually decide to do. When are you makin the purchase?
 
On the brand bias, I've never been a huge fan of Canon if I'm honest, despite having invested a lot in them over the years. There is no doubt the kit is great (5DIII is an excellent camera), but every time I've bought Canon gear, I haven't ever felt it amazing value; I've always felt quite frankly a little bit ripped off. (Especially at upgrade time when I realise how much it's going to cost me to upgrade for incremental improvements). Canon are masters of doing barely just enough within their upgrades. Nothing more, sometimes a bit less. I despise the business model that (rarely) adds features to the firmware of older kit; I completely get their business reasons, but I don't like it. I dislike that electronic features are omitted in the interests of market differentiation. (why the heck is the maximum shutter duration 30seconds still? It's digits in a register. It could be anything you like as but one example). I know software features aren't free - they have to be developed, but they've been making digital cameras for years now (and cameras with digital electronics inside for that matter), yet the software barely evolves beyond tweaks in each iteration - innovation is limited. It was partly Fuji's innovation and Kaisen approach to firmware updates for older superseded models that grabbed my attention. It slows obsolescence, encourages brand loyalty. Sure it might slow down the upgrade cycle, but in the longer term, keeps used values higher and loyalty stronger. Why not add retrospective features for users of older cameras - the model works very well for Apple too. One of the reasons I stick with them too. I'm looking forward to trying the Fuji system, and excited that what I buy will be an evolving product that hopefully will be even better than in a year or two than it was at launch through ongoing updates and improvements. Perhaps they'll become the Apple of the industry vs the Dells of Canikon.

NDevon - I think you have hit the nail on the head with your post above. I ordered the XT2 last night, so I'm in the queue! I'm at risk of going off-piste with the plan, and purchasing a prime or two to get the full experience. While I've not been able to try before I buy, I have downloaded a whole load of Fuji XT2 RAW files and have been playing with them in PS. So far, I've been impressed at resolution and noise levels in the shadows and overall IQ from what are only their mid range lenses. I'm looking forward to trying it for real and then deciding what I do with the money in the bank!
 
Simes123 said:
....It was partly Fuji's innovation and Kaisen approach to firmware updates for older superseded models that grabbed my attention. It slows obsolescence, encourages brand loyalty. Sure it might slow down the upgrade cycle, but in the longer term, keeps used values higher and loyalty stronger. Why not add retrospective features for users of older cameras - the model works very well for Apple too. One of the reasons I stick with them too. I'm looking forward to trying the Fuji system, and excited that what I buy will be an evolving product that hopefully will be even better than in a year or two than it was at launch through ongoing updates and improvements. Perhaps they'll become the Apple of the industry vs the Dells of Canikon.
Click to expand...

The firmware updates - both the frequency and the amount of features in an update - are what made me take notice of what Fuji are doing. Most firmware updates companies put out are for stability or security reasons, sometimes a small fix or update, but not usually whole feature-sets. Fuji are giving older cameras the same features as newer models with their firmware updates. I may well be wrong, I'm new to photography, but from what I know so far this is unique, certainly at the level Fuji do it. I don't think their product cycle is particularly slow, the X-T1 was launched January 2014, so around 2.5 years for the next model. The 5D III was launched March 2012, so 2 years longer on the product cycle. A 2.5 year cycle with regular firmware updates seems pretty quick. I'm not sure what Nikon's cycle is like.


Simes123 said:
NDevon - I think you have hit the nail on the head with your post above. I ordered the XT2 last night, so I'm in the queue! I'm at risk of going off-piste with the plan, and purchasing a prime or two to get the full experience. While I've not been able to try before Iuy, I have downloaded a whole load of Fuji XT2 RAW files and have been playing with them in PS. So far, I've been impressed at resolution andverall IQ from what are only their mid range lenses. I'm looking forward to trying it for real and then deciding what I do with the money in the bank!
Click to expand...

Do you know how long the wait is? For me I haven't committed to a system, but I started with a Canon 1300D and as much as enjoy using it I plan on going to Fuji. The initial outlay will be high but the lenses hold their value, I've tried a couple of Fuji cameras now and really liked using them. As for brand bias I've read so many people's stories about switching to Fuji, many did same as you and kepr their current system and run the two. Most people seem to forget about their older equipment once they kit the Fuji kit. I did read about one guy who got an XT2 but didn't get on with it. Reading it his reasons seemed a little strange, almost as if he hadn't researched the camera at all before he bought it.

I'm sure there will be many people who don't like it, but they always say people who are unhappy shout the loudest, and yet I don't hear much against it. People do say the camera can't compete with a DSLR system, it's too slow and has a way to go, but the people who give it a try think it works for them. For most people I guess it's more than good enough, as someone posted above they were in Austin Texas at the Grand Prix with an X-T2 and didn't have any bother. Those cars don't hang about!

I hope your camera doesn't take too long to arrive, I hate waiting for a delivery, far too impatient!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JRJ
Current ETA is unknown with WEX. I'm on the waiting list.

Another day, another flip/flop and indecision. Last night, I scored a good (perhaps unrepeatably good) deal on the reportedly excellent 50-140mm. But now have buyer's remorse (I can still cancel and return etc). Mainly because it's a large lens on a system whose concept is about smaller. It's smaller than my 70-200 2.8 II IS for sure and supposedly in the same territory for optical quality. It also commits me down the Fuji route definitively, because I would not want both that and the Canon; one would never get used. The bargain hunter in me is delighted. The gear head in me is delighted. The OCDness about having the best available is content. The pragmatist is saying you either want smaller lenses in the Fuji, or you don't. There is little point in building a Pro setup in the Fuji, when you have a potentially better pro setup in the Canon already. I need help. :) (or a lottery win to a level that means that investing in parallel systems when I have no need does not bother me). Arghhh :)
 
It sounds like you are following the advice to try the two systems....what's the problem? :)
 
No problem other than investing in the expansion of the Fuji system before I've committed to it isn't that sensible if it turns out to be a mistake :)

Interestingly (well, to me!), I tried a like for like weight comparison when the Canon L lenses are reduced to the F4 versions, to get a better idea of how a slimmed down Canon system might compete against the perceived Fuji advantage in this regard. (Canon 16-35 4, 24 105 II, and 70 200 f4 IS vs 10-24, 16-50 and 50-140). So pro lens against pro lens, like for like comparison on actual and effective apertures and focal lengths. The Fuji was a little ahead of the Canon system by 350-400g. However, if the grip was added to the Fuji to make battery life and handling with the longer lenses more comparable, there is about 40g in it to the Fuji's benefit. It was nowhere near the whitewash I'd imagined for the Fuji. Now, the Fuji can be slimmed down - lose the grip, lose the pro lenses etc. And arguably the same could be done with the Canon if I were prepared to compromise on the lenses. Inarguably, there are still volume differences. Anyway, it was another data point to inform decisions on this particular journey!
 
Simes123 said:
No problem other than investing in the expansion of the Fuji system before I've committed to it isn't that sensible if it turns out to be a mistake :)
Click to expand...
I get buyers remorse too, but it does pass. I've started buying second hand these days so if I do realise it's a mistake and move the gear on I won't lose too much.

Interestingly (well, to me!), I tried a like for like weight comparison when the Canon L lenses are reduced to the F4 versions, to get a better idea of how a slimmed down Canon system might compete against the perceived Fuji advantage in this regard. (Canon 16-35 4, 24 105 II, and 70 200 f4 IS vs 10-24, 16-50 and 50-140). So pro lens against pro lens, like for like comparison on actual and effective apertures and focal lengths. The Fuji was a little ahead of the Canon system by 350-400g. However, if the grip was added to the Fuji to make battery life and handling with the longer lenses more comparable, there is about 40g in it to the Fuji's benefit. It was nowhere near the whitewash I'd imagined for the Fuji. Now, the Fuji can be slimmed down - lose the grip, lose the pro lenses etc. And arguably the same could be done with the Canon if I were prepared to compromise on the lenses. Inarguably, there are still volume differences. Anyway, it was another data point to inform decisions on this particular journey!
Click to expand...
This is my 'issue' with mirrorless, if you want like for like then you're not saving any significant size/weight imo. Yes m4/3 can be significantly smaller and lighter but then you're still not comparing like for like as you're comparing a sensor that's 1/4 of the size. And as you say you can make FF DSLR a fairly light setup if you want also. Mirrorless are great if you're willing to make the compromise, or accept that if you want the best quality it's still going to be a big system.
 
snerkler said:
I get buyers remorse too, but it does pass. I've started buying second hand these days so if I do realise it's a mistake and move the gear on I won't lose too much.


This is my 'issue' with mirrorless, if you want like for like then you're not saving any significant size/weight imo. Yes m4/3 can be significantly smaller and lighter but then you're still not comparing like for like as you're comparing a sensor that's 1/4 of the size. And as you say you can make FF DSLR a fairly light setup if you want also. Mirrorless are great if you're willing to make the compromise, or accept that if you want the best quality it's still going to be a big system.
Click to expand...

I think the fuji system is a great system for primes and short zooms, but once you step in to fast longer zooms I think the Fuji system loses its 'size' advantage.
 
JJ! said:
I think the fuji system is a great system for primes and short zooms, but once you step in to fast longer zooms I think the Fuji system loses its 'size' advantage.
Click to expand...

That's always going to be the case is that the laws of physics determine the optics sizes, and when you get larger optics then they become the driving factor in the overall size of the package.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
That's always going to be the case is that the laws of physics determine the optics sizes, and when you get larger optics then they become the driving factor in the overall size of the package.
Click to expand...
Yep. I wonder if metalenses will make their way on to 'consumer' products in my lifetime ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top