2 ms·
I like the images the Fuji cameras produce and was interested in the xt4 when it came out. But boy is that thing huge, especially with the faux-pentaprism bump.
by vladvasiliu 4y ago
I like the images the Fuji cameras produce and was interested in the xt4 when it came out. But boy is that thing huge, especially with the faux-pentaprism bump.
I currently own a pen-f, which is tiny. But I figure if I'm going to haul around a brick, might as well go for full-frame. Especially since Sony came out with the a7c. However, Sony doesn't seem to have small lenses and their tone rendition doesn't have the same effect on me.
Guess I'll just have to wait and hope for a pen-f mark 2...
> They also offer a pixel-combining mode now that shifts the sensor very small, precise amounts and then combines images to increase resolution up to 4x in the final result. You need a tripod and some time, but I'm looking forward to playing with it.
This is great. My pen-f has this, and the images it produces are wonderful. But there are some failure modes, like leaves moving, and the water has a high likelihood of looking weird.
- hotstickyballs 4y agoThe xt series might be as big as some full frame cameras, but there’s no cheating physics. Full frame glass is always going to scale in volume/weight faster than the increase in sensor size. Might want to consider a smaller apsc body instead?
- vladvasiliu 4y agoI haven't been convinced by other aps-c bodies, especially the smaller ones. The thing is that I want enough of an upgrade from my m43 (with which I'm happy enough) for it to make sense, and the xt4 and its lenses are too close to full frame to make it worth it. The current smaller Fuji bodies are still fairly bigger than a pen-f, and, for my use, a net downgrade (no in-body stabilization). The only line-up that compares is Sony's, with the rangefinder format. But as I've said above, their tonal rendering isn't exactly what I like.