everprentice
Senior Member
Remember I am comparing MILC systems so for me that number is still not a whole lot of options. Or should I say Fuji has relatively fewer options
And by the way, these are forums where we exchange ideas and opinions.
Is it a good choice - Mirrorless
- Thread starter Michael J.
- Start date
Remember I am comparing MILC systems so for me that number is still not a whole lot of options. Or should I say Fuji has relatively fewer options
And by the way, these are forums where we exchange ideas and opinions.
Michael J.
Senior Member
Oh that is great: http://www.fujivsfuji.com/best-xtrans-raw-converter/
AC016
Senior Member
Thats a good site Michael. That is the best way to get correct info on Fuji, go to a source that has used the system for a number of years. What some people don't realize, is that the X trans sensor has only been out a few years - the first X camera was the X100 with a regular bayer sensor. Adobe was far to slow to develop plugins to handle the x trans files. As of now, they have more or less caught up.
I have had almost every format and Love M4/3rds! It is not a good low light choice, but for everything else I love it. The new pro series of lenses is amazing and the basis of my switch from Nikon. The EM-1 is a fantastic body for my purposes, but I rarely go over an ISO of 1250. It all comes down to your needs.
I'm really going to go out on a limb here, and say I'd recommend the D610 or a D750 or even a D7100 instead of a mirrorless camera. I say this because I see you as often a wide angle shooter, and those FX cameras would serve you well I think! But even the D7100 would be a great upgrade from the D5100! But unless you want to upgrade regularly, I think the mirrorless might not be the best choice, since they are steadily changing trying to match DSLRsand then pass them. But it hasn't happened yet, in my opinion.
But they are fun and easy to carry, and even take very good photos! Eventually I believe they will be the best thing going, but I also believe it will be a good while before that is the case, while they milk every dollar out of us for all the models of both mirrored and mirrorless cameras the can produce until they have to put it all together! Lol
Well there is my two cents worth my friend! Lol
But they are fun and easy to carry, and even take very good photos! Eventually I believe they will be the best thing going, but I also believe it will be a good while before that is the case, while they milk every dollar out of us for all the models of both mirrored and mirrorless cameras the can produce until they have to put it all together! Lol
Well there is my two cents worth my friend! Lol
Michael J.
Senior Member
Bill, every input or idea is worth posted. It depends on the reader what they will do with those infos. I will read all infos again and than I will see what to do
sonicbuffalo_RIP
Senior Member
I'm really going to go out on a limb here, and say I'd recommend the D610 or a D750 or even a D7100 instead of a mirrorless camera. I say this because I see you as often a wide angle shooter, and those FX cameras would serve you well I think! But even the D7100 would be a great upgrade from the D5100! But unless you want to upgrade regularly, I think the mirrorless might not be the best choice, since they are steadily changing trying to match DSLRsand then pass them. But it hasn't happened yet, in my opinion.
But they are fun and easy to carry, and even take very good photos! Eventually I believe they will be the best thing going, but I also believe it will be a good while before that is the case, while they milk every dollar out of us for all the models of both mirrored and mirrorless cameras the can produce until they have to put it all together! Lol
Well there is my two cents worth my friend! Lol
In my case, Bill....I wanted a smaller footprint with my camera and lenses. I went mirrorless and do not regret it. I just didn't like the bulkiness and largesse of the FF DSLR stuff. They are great cameras, but not if you want to lug all of your lenses around with you. The mirrorless Sony I have and my lenses take up less than half of a backpack that barely held my lenses when the were FF DSLR. To each their own, and I am not saying one is better than the other, but if you want to shrink your camera equipment footprint and know that the quality won't suffer from it.....then go Sony FF Mirrorless.
I got into MILC when someone offered me a Nikon J2 with the 10-30mm lens for $200CDN. I thought why not. I ended up with a 18.5mm prime and then a 30-110mm both of which I find are very good lenses. Then I got the FT-1 adaptor and now I am able to use the rest of my Nikkor lenses with it too. With my 85mm f1.8, it translates to 230mm f1.8. Can't complain about that. The AF is also very fast on the Nikon 1 series. I'm happy with it. It's probably not as good as a Fuji or Sony but with the option of being able to use my other lenses is a big plus. At least for me.
everprentice
Senior Member
Oh yeah. I noticed that slap is so strong on the D700 I can feel it despite having a grip and a heavy telephoto on it. Never had problems with those on other cameras I used to own.
AC016
Senior Member
Last fall I hiked through Watkins Glen with all my Fx gear, D610 and a mid-size tripod. I had to brace the tripod with my weight for longer exposure HDR's, the mirror slap between the bracketed shots was too much. After a few miles I had enough, although I did get some awesome shots. Soon after I sold all of my Fx gear to go mirrorless.
I agree. If you are solving for weight then mirrorlesss is the way to go can't argue with that. But if you want a wide choice of reasonably priced lenses then you take a hit, there isn't the range you get with a DSLR.
I know some professionals have switched but its not mainstream yet just early adopters.
Having dipped my toe in the water a couple of years ago with the Nikon-1 , I now find myself hardly ever using it.
I will keep an open mind but for once will not be an early adopter and try to keep up with the changes which are happening so fast.
I never bought mine to be part of my mainstream gear,i did think about changing my opinion after handling it,if ime honest though its just a great light second camera when ime out with the birding kit,or a light weight image recorder for none photographic days out.
I have found all systems to have short comings. With that said, I think the most important advice is to do a lot of research. When changing from a mainstream system, you need to be very certain you will stick with it or be prepared to take a bath at resale.
One of the benefits of Nikon (or Canon) Fx and Dx is if I didn't like a lens, or frequently changed gear, I'd only lose about 30% when I sold it. This is not the case with any other system, you could lose 50% or more.
With that in mind, I had to be very dedicated to my decision to switch to Olympus. The new Holy Trinity of Oly glass will cost me about $4,000, much less than Nikon's, but with greater loss if I change my mind. I am very happy I switched, but some are not.
I'm trying not to give any fan-boy advice so I won't embellish the positives which would surely incite my Nikon friends
. Research everything!Sorry for my late reply and for causing a churn in this discussion.
To make it clear, Fuji does have a descent system and their prime lenses are also nice without a doubt. I only have a Fuji X10, so I guess that doesn't count much as a well-seasoned Fuji user such as yourself.
Re: Lens line-up. My statement holds true when comparing the Fuji lens line up compared to Nikon and Canon and I also stated that it is pretty good.
Fuji offers no advantages in size and weight from 50mm and above. Observe how quickly the lens size and weight grows as the focal length increases. It has reached the point where the Fuji lenses are about the same size and weight as the Nikkor DX lenses. This is true even with mirrorless fullframe such as the Sony A7 series. The primary advantage of a small and light system as implemented in the mirrorless cameras is lost once the focal length go past 50mm. The exception to this is the m4/3 system where light and compact is possible even beyond 50mm such as the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 and 35-100mm f2.8 zoom lenses.
The Fuji RAW file may have indeed improved but in my opinion is still no where close to the RAW files of the current D8xx or even D750 FX cameras as far as recovering shadows. If you are interested, I can send you a link of a under exposed RAW file taken by my D800E and manipulate it to bring it to proper exposure (from near dark image and removing the shadows). You can then compare the flexibility of that Nikon RAW file and compare it to your Fuji to get a first hand comparison.
To be clear, I am not putting down Fuji or any other system. You just so happen to prefer Fuji, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Of course, everything that I post is subjective and is open for further discussion.
Last edited:
Nikkon
Senior Member
How is the AF on those MILC's? Beside my D700 which has excellent AF accuracy and speed, I have a Fuji X100s, excellent camera but AF is slooooooow and in low light even impossible. I heard the D750 has even faster AF than the D700. Are there any MILC's with such AF? A friend of mine has a panasonic GM7 (besides his nikon stuff) and says it has fast AF. Don't know if that's true.
AF speed is beside IQ my biggest concern.
AF speed is beside IQ my biggest concern.