Weddings - Moving from Fuji to Sony

roc1 said:
Been shooting with 2 Fuji X-Pro2's for the last few years after selling my Canon gear which has been great, but can't help but notice what folk have been saying about the new Sony's (A9 / A7iii etc). The eye AF sounds great and their native lenses have come on leaps and bounds in the last year or so.

So wanted to ask who here has gone from Fuji to Sony recently and how they are finding it. Obvs it's taking a step back to having bigger lenses, but part of me has missed the full frame look.

The A9 also seems to be resistant to banding whilst using the electronic shutter which is also a big appeal to me as nearly everywhere now has led lighting.

A7iii is about £2k at the mo, or the A9 (which I had discounted due to the crazy £4k price tag) I've seen is £2,800 with Panamoz which would make it a contender.
Click to expand...
If you're in no rush then wait and see what Nikon has to offer with their upcoming full frame mirrorless. If it's any good there will be plenty of Sony gear in the classified to satisfy your GAS [emoji6] if you still want to go down the Sony route.
 
architectfadi said:
If you're in no rush then wait and see what Nikon has to offer with their upcoming full frame mirrorless. If it's any good there will be plenty of Sony gear in the classified to satisfy your GAS [emoji6] if you still want to go down the Sony route.
Click to expand...

The Nikon may be wonderful but there's the question of lenses. I doubt it'll launch will a full set of native lenses but there may well be an adapter. Whatever the case I think it'll take time to see what comes and evaluate the options. Perhaps this is a route for someone in no rush... but by the time everything becomes clear and available what'll Sony be offering? :D
 
Last edited:
I think Nikon's new mirrorless will mostly affect Sony higher end users. Those with the A7III upward. I mean affect, as in, make them wan to switch over as It'll be right in their ballpark. It's not going to affect APSC or M43 users, if they really wanted full frame mirrorless, well, they'd be shooting Sony. Have to say, it's often crossed my mind, go for the better IQ over the gimmicks, but then the gimmicks make things so cushy ... :D if the cheaper A7 bodies had decent IBIS and good enough touch screen, I'd already be there I think. Just gotten so used to those features.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I think Nikon's new mirrorless will mostly affect Sony higher end users. Those with the A7III upward. I mean affect, as in, make them wan to switch over as It'll be right in their ballpark. It's not going to affect APSC or M43 users, if they really wanted full frame mirrorless, well, they'd be shooting Sony. Have to say, it's often crossed my mind, go for the better IQ over the gimmicks, but then the gimmicks make things so cushy ... :D if the cheaper A7 bodies had decent IBIS and good enough touch screen, I'd already be there I think. Just gotten so used to those features.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. Sony's main problem is that they will always be competing with Nikon and Canon in the full frame market and even though Sony is three generations of cameras ahead of Nikon and Canon, I don't think Nikon and Canon with be worrying too much about the first two generations mainly the A7/A72, the sensors are great but everything else is awful from menus to EVFs and handling.
 
woof woof said:
The Nikon may be wonderful but there's the question of lenses. I doubt it'll launch will a full set of native lenses but there may well be an adapter. Whatever the case I think it'll take time to see what comes and evaluate the options. Perhaps this is a route for someone in no rush... but by the time everything becomes clear and available what'll Sony be offering? :D
Click to expand...
One thing I agree with you on, it's only a matter of time, in fact it's only 26 days now to find out how serious Nikon is with their mirrorless full frame offering.
 
Last edited:
architectfadi said:
I agree with you. Sony's main problem is that they will always be competing with Nikon and Canon in the full frame market and even though Sony is three generations of cameras ahead of Nikon and Canon, I don't think Nikon and Canon with be worrying too much about the first two generations mainly the A7/A72, the sensors are great but everything else is awful from menus to EVFs and handling.
Click to expand...

I have been using EVFs for a long time, I don't think I ever had a problem with them even the earlier ones. I wouldn't ever go back to OVF :p
The issue has always been Sony being the only FF option with EVF. Good to see canon and Nikon jumping in.
I am hoping Nikon will have good AF to match that of Sony's (especially the eyeAF). But I'm not keen on size of Nikon body from what it seems so far.
I am hoping canon with make a small--ish FF mirrorless like m5 without IBIS. They have been quite clever in making the Eos M protocols same as EF. So all DSLR lenses adapt rather nicely. Might just swap to canon if they come out with decent AF.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
I have been using EVFs for a long time, I don't think I ever had a problem with them even the earlier ones. I wouldn't ever go back to OVF [emoji14]
The issue has always been Sony being the only FF option with EVF. Good to see canon and Nikon jumping in.
I am hoping Nikon will have good AF to match that of Sony's (especially the eyeAF). But I'm not keen on size of Nikon body from what it seems so far.
I am hoping canon with make a small--ish FF mirrorless like m5 without IBIS. They have been quite clever in making the Eos M protocols same as EF. So all DSLR lenses adapt rather nicely. Might just swap to canon if they come out with decent AF.
Click to expand...
I love EVFs but I would still have an OVF over any awful EVF similar to the ones on the Sony A7 and Fuji Xpro1
 
Cagey75 said:
I think Nikon's new mirrorless will mostly affect Sony higher end users. Those with the A7III upward. I mean affect, as in, make them wan to switch over as It'll be right in their ballpark.
Click to expand...

What is it about the new Nikon that will tempt Sony A7III and up users over?

The fact that it is new technology from a company that struggles to release 100% reliable DSLRs still. My D810 had to be sent back to Nikon on the day I got it as it has the hot pixel / long exposure problem. I hadn't even taken a fricking photo with it, but it was on the recall list!

Or maybe Nikon's catalogue of old lenses that can only at best match what Sony has, but in a lot of cases cannot even come close.

The only draw I see from moving to Nikon is the long prime lenses and I really don't think most wildlife togs would have moved to Sony in the first place as the lenses have been limited up to this point.

Nikon has nothing to offer me.
 
Dave Semmens said:
What is it about the new Nikon that will tempt Sony A7III and up users over?

The fact that it is new technology from a company that struggles to release 100% reliable DSLRs still. My D810 had to be sent back to Nikon on the day I got it as it has the hot pixel / long exposure problem. I hadn't even taken a fricking photo with it, but it was on the recall list!

Or maybe Nikon's catalogue of old lenses that can only at best match what Sony has, but in a lot of cases cannot even come close.

The only draw I see from moving to Nikon is the long prime lenses and I really don't think most wildlife togs would have moved to Sony in the first place as the lenses have been limited up to this point.

Nikon has nothing to offer me.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes::eek:
 
Dave Semmens said:
What is it about the new Nikon that will tempt Sony A7III and up users over?

The fact that it is new technology from a company that struggles to release 100% reliable DSLRs still. My D810 had to be sent back to Nikon on the day I got it as it has the hot pixel / long exposure problem. I hadn't even taken a fricking photo with it, but it was on the recall list!

Or maybe Nikon's catalogue of old lenses that can only at best match what Sony has, but in a lot of cases cannot even come close.

The only draw I see from moving to Nikon is the long prime lenses and I really don't think most wildlife togs would have moved to Sony in the first place as the lenses have been limited up to this point.

Nikon has nothing to offer me.
Click to expand...

Nikon lost many customers to Sony who wanted a more compact full frame package and were attracted to mirrorless for various reasons - EVF, touch screen better video functions or whatever. They may well fancy returning if Nikon comes up with the shinies.
 
We got fed up of waiting for Nikons’s mirrorless entry so switched to Sony. Very happy we did as cane from a Nikon D750 and there’s absolutely no comparison between the two. Plus if we were still with Nikon and wanted mirrorless we’d still have to buy new lenses.
 
Just had a play with a A9 and the 35mm 1.4 and Batis 85mm 1.8. Man that AF is pretty impressive and camera feels well balanced and not a huge lump as I'd feared. Just got to sell a kidney now :)
 
roc1 said:
Just had a play with a A9 and the 35mm 1.4 and Batis 85mm 1.8. Man that AF is pretty impressive and camera feels well balanced and not a huge lump as I'd feared. Just got to sell a kidney now :)
Click to expand...

Jedi AF :D
 
Cagey75 said:
Nikon lost many customers to Sony who wanted a more compact full frame package and were attracted to mirrorless for various reasons - EVF, touch screen better video functions or whatever. They may well fancy returning if Nikon comes up with the shinies.
Click to expand...

I think they have lost the plot if that is their journey - adapting Nikon lenses to Sony is poor and the only real option is to sell up and buy native. So they will have changed complete systems from Nikon to Sony only to sell all their Sony gear to move back to Nikon within a year.

Now Canon shooters - that is a different story as adapting the lenses is well advanced and they may have retained all or some of their glass.
 
Dave Semmens said:
I think they have lost the plot if that is their journey - adapting Nikon lenses to Sony is poor and the only real option is to sell up and buy native. So they will have changed complete systems from Nikon to Sony only to sell all their Sony gear to move back to Nikon within a year.

Now Canon shooters - that is a different story as adapting the lenses is well advanced and they may have retained all or some of their glass.
Click to expand...


I've seen many sell up completely and make the switch, and they won't think twice about returning if there's better on offer. It wouldn't be me, anytime I have switched systems it's been on the lower end and I tend to break even when selling mostly, I buy used a lot, and sell on locally without loss. But I'm talking more the proper gear head, no issues with splashing cash types. The early adopters who just have to have the latest tech. It might only have one 'cool' feature over their current gear but they have to have it. Seems to be more of this type than ever before lately. I'm not knocking them either, it's their money, and they make the used markets more interesting.
 
imattersuk said:
Our photographer had Nikon D750's, my point is there's a line and when you go over it then it's a case of diminishing returns on investment. Don't forget the OP must have some Fuji glass too. Then there's the Sony menus to learn.
Click to expand...

I'm in the category of wedding photographer you mentioned (along with Ray) and recently switched to Sony from the D750. Here are my two cents regarding the change.

Bit of a long read, but in short, the menu system doesn't take long to get your head around. And for the general functioning of the camera, muscle memory forms quickly. It's not perfect but I've used nothing better than the A7III at anywhere near the price point for wedding photography.
 
Cagey75 said:
I never get the whole terrible AF thing, I had the old X-T1 and found it plenty good enough in low light, I did also have the Xpro1, that was a bit of a snail alright, lovely camera but forget it for anything serious. The X-T2 and certainly the XH1 are more than capable AF-wise for weddings. It's not like everyone's running about Usain Bolt speed!
Click to expand...

I guess it's all about how you shoot. I tried the X-T2 at a wedding and it just wasn't up to the task for me - I missed too many shots with it and the battery life was quite crap. The D750 and A7III are both much better (at least for my style). You could, of course, shoot weddings perfectly well with the XT2, I just think there are better options out there right now.

I've tried the XH1 briefly, but didn't get a chance to shoot a wedding with it. Great camera, but I felt it was a bit too weighty for a camera that wasn't packing an FF sensor.
 
decigallen said:
I guess it's all about how you shoot. I tried the X-T2 at a wedding and it just wasn't up to the task for me - I missed too many shots with it and the battery life was quite crap. The D750 and A7III are both much better (at least for my style). You could, of course, shoot weddings perfectly well with the XT2, I just think there are better options out there right now.

I've tried the XH1 briefly, but didn't get a chance to shoot a wedding with it. Great camera, but I felt it was a bit too weighty for a camera that wasn't packing an FF sensor.
Click to expand...

It almost always boils down to what suits the user most, there should never be any squabbling over 'this system is much better than that one' or 'LOL@what you use!" - as different shooters with different styles will know what they need, and they will hopefully get the best from their chosen gear for the job. I shot a full wedding start to finish with nothing but a Nikon D200, a Tamron 17-50 and an 85mm - the old D version of the 1.8. I was much braver then, not a hope I'd do it now, but I managed.
 
decigallen said:
I guess it's all about how you shoot. I tried the X-T2 at a wedding and it just wasn't up to the task for me - I missed too many shots with it and the battery life was quite crap. The D750 and A7III are both much better (at least for my style). You could, of course, shoot weddings perfectly well with the XT2, I just think there are better options out there right now.

I've tried the XH1 briefly, but didn't get a chance to shoot a wedding with it. Great camera, but I felt it was a bit too weighty for a camera that wasn't packing an FF sensor.
Click to expand...

I have always thought of the capabilities of the action or the actual motion of taking a photo like a window, an opening in a wall. The challenge of the shot is the object (like a meteor) that goes through it. This size of the opening is a combination of both the gear and the photographer, your talent and skill can accommodate, compensate, improve certain aspects where the camera falls short in order to make this opening large enough for the object (the photo) to fit through. The Sony just offers a bigger window out of the box, meaning as a photographer, I don't need as much skill, or makes my job easier. And when I am working that extra harder, it means the opening is even larger than ever before, meaning the challenge or difficulty of the photo is larger.

The Fuji offers a smaller opening, and if the objects that you want to put through it are always smaller than what it can do all the time then you will never find it limiting wouldn't need to upgrade. This is where how each photographer shoots comes in.
 
decigallen said:
I tried the X-T2 at a wedding and it just wasn't up to the task for me - I missed too many shots
Click to expand...

When you say 'missed too many shots' what do you mean exactly? AF not locking on? Camera too slow to wake up? OOF shots?

Just intrigued. I know Fuji cameras are particularly loved by pure documentary wedding photographers, and that would seem to me to be more reliant on speed than something a little more traditional.
 
ukaskew said:
When you say 'missed too many shots' what do you mean exactly? AF not locking on? Camera too slow to wake up? OOF shots?

Just intrigued. I know Fuji cameras are particularly loved by pure documentary wedding photographers, and that would seem to me to be more reliant on speed than something a little more traditional.
Click to expand...

I know 3 fuji shooters who've swapped to the a7iii already. From chatting to them, battery and AF are their main reasons.

I found AF hunted in situations where it wouldn't with the sony or nikon. Especially with movement involved. Also, image processing and shadow recovery aren't up to the Sony or nikon.

It's a great camera and I loved the smaller lenses, but if I needed something more compact now I'd shoot the a7iii with apc mode/lenses.
 
Some Sony A9 fun at weddings, 262 shots at 10 fps, all focussed on the bride and groom, even when zooming in and out again with the 16-35mm lens.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-JNyG0DBpI


There will be cameras where you need to resort to zone focus and narrower apertures, and not many cameras have a buffer that will hold out like this.

Or I could have taken the perfect photo of expression and confetti layout with one shot :D but then I wouldn't have enough to make a little video
 
Last edited:
architectfadi said:
I love EVFs but I would still have an OVF over any awful EVF similar to the ones on the Sony A7 and Fuji Xpro1
Click to expand...

Deep sigh... I think you need to take a look and the advantages and disadvantages and maybe take into account the experience too. For me coming from both an artistic and technical background and after shooting for something over 30 years with film before going digital with a DSLR for another 10 years or so I still made the transition from optical to digital VF very quickly and I just wouldn't go back willingly now as IMO a digital VF is more use as both a technical tool and an artistic aid so that just leaves the experience aspect and to be honest for me the EVF wins here too.

There will be some who will insist that the last DSLR with an OVF will have to be prised from their cold dead hand and these are possibly the same sort of people who said the same when every innovation came along... film in a cartridge, AF, digital... Not that that makes them wrong but it probably makes them niche users and in a small minority.
 
decigallen said:
I'm in the category of wedding photographer you mentioned (along with Ray) and recently switched to Sony from the D750. Here are my two cents regarding the change.

Bit of a long read, but in short, the menu system doesn't take long to get your head around. And for the general functioning of the camera, muscle memory forms quickly. It's not perfect but I've used nothing better than the A7III at anywhere near the price point for wedding photography.
Click to expand...
I am glad I am not the only one seriously annoyed by the SD card slots :D
 
dancook said:
Some Sony A9 fun at weddings, 262 shots at 10 fps, all focussed on the bride and groom, even when zooming in and out again with the 16-35mm lens.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-JNyG0DBpI


There will be cameras where you need to resort to zone focus and narrower apertures, and not many cameras have a buffer that will hold out like this.

Or I could have taken the perfect photo of expression and confetti layout with one shot :D but then I wouldn't have enough to make a little video
Click to expand...
And at £4.3k for the body alone it should be able to perform like that !!
 
I was just watching a vlog from Gareth Danks about his move from an X-H1 to the Sony A7III. He was on a landscape trip but he was saying that for his corporate, paying work, the X-H1 just wasn't reliable. He had 3 bodies and all had lockup issues.
(Link if you're interested:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djhe6wMkFKg
)

Some find Fuji's to be perfect for them, for others CaNikon, other Sony. If it's your business, then you need the most appropriate and cost effective tool to get your work done.
Will better (Eye-AF) AF give you more keepers? Will that with higher frames per second give you more RAW files to work with? Will that mean more work on culling/editing? Does high fps even matter to you?
It is about a tool for the job though. If you're not happy with the current "tool", then try another and see if things improve. Perhaps you should hire a Sony for a wedding to see if is a better tool for you.
It was only after second shooting with hired a Canon 5D2 that I decided to move to full frame Canon. Even if I had the budget, I would only switch to Sony if I could try it out properly beforehand.
 
ABTog said:
I was just watching a vlog from Gareth Danks about his move from an X-H1 to the Sony A7III. He was on a landscape trip but he was saying that for his corporate, paying work, the X-H1 just wasn't reliable. He had 3 bodies and all had lockup issues.
(Link if you're interested:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djhe6wMkFKg
)

Some find Fuji's to be perfect for them, for others CaNikon, other Sony. If it's your business, then you need the most appropriate and cost effective tool to get your work done.
Will better (Eye-AF) AF give you more keepers? Will that with higher frames per second give you more RAW files to work with? Will that mean more work on culling/editing? Does high fps even matter to you?
It is about a tool for the job though. If you're not happy with the current "tool", then try another and see if things improve. Perhaps you should hire a Sony for a wedding to see if is a better tool for you.
It was only after second shooting with hired a Canon 5D2 that I decided to move to full frame Canon. Even if I had the budget, I would only switch to Sony if I could try it out properly beforehand.
Click to expand...

Reliability is one reason why I still have my Canon, for all their shortcomings for not being the most technically innovative, you know you can rely on it come hell or high water.
 
ABTog said:
I was just watching a vlog from Gareth Danks about his move from an X-H1 to the Sony A7III. He was on a landscape trip but he was saying that for his corporate, paying work, the X-H1 just wasn't reliable. He had 3 bodies and all had lockup issues.
(Link if you're interested:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djhe6wMkFKg
)

Some find Fuji's to be perfect for them, for others CaNikon, other Sony. If it's your business, then you need the most appropriate and cost effective tool to get your work done.
Will better (Eye-AF) AF give you more keepers? Will that with higher frames per second give you more RAW files to work with? Will that mean more work on culling/editing? Does high fps even matter to you?
It is about a tool for the job though. If you're not happy with the current "tool", then try another and see if things improve. Perhaps you should hire a Sony for a wedding to see if is a better tool for you.
It was only after second shooting with hired a Canon 5D2 that I decided to move to full frame Canon. Even if I had the budget, I would only switch to Sony if I could try it out properly beforehand.
Click to expand...

"I love Fuji, I adore Fuji, I take my Fuji to bed, I love it, I love it, I love!!!!!" - but he doesn't really say why or what's so good about it ;)
 
nandbytes said:
"I love Fuji, I adore Fuji, I take my Fuji to bed, I love it, I love it, I love!!!!!" - but he doesn't really say why or what's so good about it ;)
Click to expand...
I think there's more chance of finding you in bed with a Sony than him with a Fuji :rolleyes::LOL:
 
imattersuk said:
I think there's more chance of finding you in bed with a Sony than him with a Fuji :rolleyes::LOL:
Click to expand...


lol
You don't need to look too deep in the A7 thread to see how much I love Sony. I am generally critical of everything.
 
jakeblu said:
What, better than Panasonics or Olympus? I've read Sony's is a little bit faffy.
Click to expand...

It must depend on what you read where. I've read Sony's is the best there is.

Maybe some users could say.
 
decigallen said:
I'm in the category of wedding photographer you mentioned (along with Ray) and recently switched to Sony from the D750. Here are my two cents regarding the change.

Bit of a long read, but in short, the menu system doesn't take long to get your head around. And for the general functioning of the camera, muscle memory forms quickly. It's not perfect but I've used nothing better than the A7III at anywhere near the price point for wedding photography.
Click to expand...

Good write up, I enjoyed it.
:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top