- Messages
- 9,390
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- No
But they still quote the XT2 at £1230
That’s the graphite version. Which will all know takes better photos than the black version that they sell for £920.
But they still quote the XT2 at £1230
T3 at Panamoz £1160
Could it be Trump's embargo on Chinese goods is taking effect already?Apparently there's quite a shortage of XT3s atm, well in America anyhow.
That is why I m thinking of getting the silver one this tome. The images I got out of my black XT1 and XT2 were not that good [emoji6][emoji848]That’s the graphite version. Which will all know takes better photos than the black version that they sell for £920.
Does Fuji offer 2 year warranty on their X Cameras now? It says that on the WEX website.View attachment 134958
i do not compare with other cameras, that is a pointless exercise. some other cameras might be out 2/3 of a stop compared to Fuji, but others are the same as they use the same standard.
The problem for those who want to compare between them is that the differences produced by the two systems are not linear. so you get different results at different points on the scale.
What you can say is that one camera produces "better" and "cleaner" results in the same light conditions. ISO is a red herring.
The comparison was made, I never made it. To say Fuji is cleaner than all other apsc at the same exposure is not true.
Graphite is the way to go! The images I got out of my Graphite X-Pro 2 were, well, er, ... Oh, forget it.That is why I m thinking of getting the silver one this tome. The images I got out of my black XT1 and XT2 were not that good [emoji6][emoji848]
I dont think Id agree with that, Fujis ISO isnt measured the same way as the rest. The A6500 is the same when you take that into account, the D500 is actually the best.
AF is a big thing and will tempt people, thats the difference between me buying a camera or not.
Let's say below FF ML then
As for the AF, it doesn't matter so much to me, those who need the speed will buy it of course. But what was there before did them just fine.
Nope, its equal to the Sonys and the D500 whoops the Fujis.
Look at this.... the Fuji ISO is 2/3 to 1 stop out at this kind of ISO so this is pretty accurate.
View attachment 134969
. And the X-T2 was already about the best of the APSC world up to that point. So, even if it's a bit behind, it still remains better than the likes of the A6500, 80D, all M43, D7*** whatever. It didn't suddenly get worse because of it's new big bro
Afaik the D500 isn't ML, so what's your point? why are you showing a whole stop difference?
Do you not understand that Fujis exposure is darker at the same settings as most other manufacturers because of the ISO standard they use? To get the same exposure as the other brands with Fuji you have to bump the ISO.
Says who? show proof or you're just talking nonsense tbh.
Exactly
I still don't get your point? I don't even shoot Fuji atm, I'm failing here to understand what you're trying to convince me of? :/ I'm saying the T3 isn't any better than the T2, which was already very good at higher ISO ..
My point is that its NOT the best APSC sensor for noise as you said and you need to consider the ISO standard difference if you are to compare it against the other manufacturers.
It's the best APSC ML and I don't buy all that BS
You're starting to just look dumb now.
No, you're proving how dumb you are without doing any research.
See edit above, you're still just spamming, where's your evidence? I'm not the one claiming anything, why would I have to do the research? If you have some hard facts to back up your notions, then show it. I'm neutral, I'm not defensive over Fuji ... it's like you're trying to convince me of some BS you read online, when it's not going to matter to me either way
Why would you need to? You make bold statements without any research, thats a dumb thing to do.
Bold statement? no, it's MY opinion you fool. Jesus how old are you? and I mean mentally. You're spending way too much time in the bitter, gear head orientated Sony thread. Stop trying to ruin a good thread with your stupid BS. You haven't posted anything to back up your dim witted point yet, and you're accusing me of 'bold statements' ... lolz
Your opinion you put across as fact, thats odd.
Bitter, thats pretty funny, you're in every thread spamming. Im not ruining anything, just correcting your BS.
You haven't corrected anything though, where's this proof? I think it's you with the 'bold' statements. I think you'll find my posts are generally on topic, hence no spamming. You're mouthing about ISO variance without any links or proof of any kind, that IS spamming. And as I said, you're preaching to the wrong guy, my post was an opinion based on what I've seen in comparisons done by others. I didn't say 'fact' anywhere, I didn't need to as it's just my thoughts on it.
Okay, Im not here to argue with you, so its your opinion and NOT fact, thanks for clearing that up, have you shot a Fuji alongside another manufacturer with exactly the same exposure settings? Have you bothered to quickly google what Im talking about?
For a Fuji only user this makes no difference, its only when you compare against other manufacturers you realise you need to bump the brightness to meet the exposure you require.
It's not up to me to google, you're the one who requires back up evidence otherwise you're just spamming nonsense you heard somewhere. You're saying with a Fuji ISO 3200 for example, = 1600 on other systems? I would actually be interested in hard evidence on that, but i'm not the one bothered enough to go through a whirly-gig of googling to find out - I've also said it's my opinion twice now
No, its not what Ive heard, Ive used many Fuji cameras alongside other brands as it was my second system for a very long time, I KNOW the difference. At lower ISO its not quite 1 stop, its generally 2/3 stop difference. Its up to you to educate yourself.
If you say so, I'll just take the number for what they are. I don't shoot high ISO, so it doesn't matter to me either way. Whatever the setting is I require at the time is what I'll go by, no matter the camera. Otherwise I can only go by what image resource sites show me. Why don't they run comparisons with Fuji a stop higher?
You can do, because unless you're shooting 2 systems alongside or are used to certain conditions and wondering why the shots are a little darker or you need to bump ISO it shouldn't make any difference to you. Its just something to be aware of when comparing Fuji to other makes.
Its not like Fuji sucks, it just doesn't have that stop advantage vs the competition, they do however have excellent chroma noise suppression, you only really get proper ISO gains with a bigger sensor.